1 / 36

Impact of large q 13 on long-baseline measurements at PINGU

Impact of large q 13 on long-baseline measurements at PINGU. PINGU Workshop Erlangen university May 5, 2012 Walter Winter Universität Würzburg. TexPoint fonts used in EMF: A A A A A A A A. Contents. Introduction Oscillation physics using a core-crossing baseline

avari
Download Presentation

Impact of large q 13 on long-baseline measurements at PINGU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Impact of large q13 on long-baseline measurements at PINGU PINGU WorkshopErlangen university May 5, 2012Walter Winter Universität Würzburg TexPoint fonts used in EMF: AAAAAAAA

  2. Contents • Introduction • Oscillation physics using a core-crossing baseline • Neutrino beam to PINGU: Beams and detector parameterization • Detector requirements for large q13 • Matter density measurement? • Summary

  3. ( ) ( ) ( ) = x x Three flavor mixing • Use same parameterization as for CKM matrix Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata matrix Potential CP violation ~ q13 (sij = sin qij cij = cos qij)

  4. q13 discovery 2012 • First evidence from T2K, Double Chooz • Discovery (~ 5s) independently (?)by Daya Bay, RENO Daya Bay 3s 1s error bars (from arXiv:1204.1249)

  5. Three flavors: Summary • Three flavors: 6 params(3 angles, one phase; 2 x Dm2) • Describes solar and atmospheric neutrino anomalies, as well as reactor antineutrino disapp.! MH? Atmosphericoscillations:Amplitude:q23Frequency: Dm312 Solaroscillations:Amplitude:q12Frequency: Dm212 Coupling: q13 (Super-K, 1998;Chooz, 1999; SNO 2001+2002; KamLAND 2002;Daya Bay, RENO 2012) Suppressed effect: dCP

  6. Consequences Huber, Lindner, Schwetz, Winter, 2009 • Parameter space for dCP starts to become constrained; MH/CPV difficult (need to exclude dCP=0 and p) • Need new facility!

  7. Mass hierarchy measurement? • Mass hierarchy [sgn(Dm2)] discovery possible with atmospheric neutrinos? (liquid argon, HyperK, MEMPHYS, INO, PINGU?, LENA?, …) Barger et al, arXiv:1203.6012;Smirnov‘s talk! Perhaps differentfacilities for MH and CPVproposed/discussed? • However: also long-baseline proposals! (LBNO: superbeam ~ 2200 km – LAGUNA design study; CERN-SuperK ~ 8870 km – Agarwalla, Hernandez, arXiv:1204.4217)

  8. Oscillation physics using a core-crossing baseline

  9. Matter profile of the Earth… as seen by a neutrino Core (PREM: Preliminary Reference Earth Model) Innercore

  10. Beams to PINGU? • Labs and potential detector locations (stars) in “deep underground“ laboratories: (Agarwalla, Huber, Tang, Winter, 2010) FNAL-PINGU: 11620 kmCERN-PINGU: 11810 kmRAL-PINGU: 12020 kmJHF-PINGU: 11370 km NEW? All these baselines cross the Earth‘s outer core!

  11. Matter effect (MSW) (Wolfenstein, 1978; Mikheyev, Smirnov, 1985) • Ordinary matter: electrons, but no m, t • Coherent forward scattering in matter: Net effect on electron flavor • Hamiltonian in matter (matrix form, flavor space): Y: electron fraction ~ 0.5 (electrons per nucleon)

  12. Parameter mapping (two flavors) • Oscillation probabilities invacuum:matter: Matter resonance: In this case: - Effective mixing maximal- Effective osc. frequency minimal For nm appearance, Dm312:- r ~ 4.7 g/cm3 (Earth’s mantle): Eres ~ 7 GeV- r ~ 10.8 g/cm3 (Earth’s outer core): Eres ~ 3 GeV  MH Resonance energy:

  13. Mantle-core-mantle profile (Parametric enhancement: Akhmedov, 1998; Akhmedov, Lipari, Smirnov, 1998; Petcov, 1998) • Probability for CERN-PINGU (numerical) Coreresonanceenergy Challenge: Relative size of dCP-termssmaller forlonger L Mantleresonanceenergy Inter-ference Is thatpart useful? Thresholdeffects expected at: Beam energyand detector thresh. haveto pass these! 2 GeV 5 GeV 10 GeV

  14. Neutrino beam to PINGU? Beams and detector parameterization

  15. Possible neutrino sources There are three possibilities to artificially produce neutrinos • Beta decay: • Example: Nuclear reactors, Beta beams • Pion decay: • From accelerators: • Muon decay: • Muons produced by pion decays! Neutrino Factory Superbeam Muons,neutrinos Pions Neutrinos Protons Target Selection,focusing Decaytunnel Absorber

  16. Considered setups • Single baseline reference setups: • Idea: similar beam, but detector replaced by PINGU/MICA [need to cover ~ 2 – 5 GeV]: L [km] (for details: Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028, arXiv:1110.5908; Sec. 3)

  17. Oscillation channels Want to study ne-nm oscillations • Beta beams: • In principle best choice for PINGU (need muon flavor ID only) • Superbeams: • Need (clean) electron flavor sample. Difficult? • Neutrino factory: • Need charge identification of m+ and m- (normally)

  18. PINGU fiducial volume? • In principle: Mton-size detector in relevant ranges: • Unclear how that evolves with cuts for flavor-ID etc. (background reduction); MICA even larger? • Use effective detector parameterization to study requirements: Eth, Veff, Eres Eres (DE) = x E Veff Eth (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028; Veff somewhat smaller than Jason‘s current results)

  19. Detector paramet.: mis-ID misID: fraction of events of a specific channelmis-identified as signal misIDtracks << misID <~ 1 ? (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  20. Detector requirements for large q13

  21. Superbeam (misIDtracks = 0.01) • Mass hierarchy measurement very robust(even with largemisID and totalrates only possible) • Even with much smaller-scale beam? • Existing equipment, such as CNGS? NuMI? • CPV not promising (requires flavor mis-ID at the level of 1%, Veff > 5 Mt, Eres = 0.2 E or better) Fraction of dCP (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  22. NuMI-like beam to PINGU? • Difference to atmospherics: can even live without energy resolution and cascade ID (NC and nt added)(if some track ID and systematics controlled) PRELIMINARY NuMI

  23. Beta beam • Similar results for mass hierarchy measurement (easy) • CPV not so promising: long L, asymmetric beam energies (at least in CERN-SPS limited case g~656 for 8B and g=390 for 8Li) although moderate detector requirements (misID ~ 0.001, Eth=2 GeV, Eres=50% E, Veff=5 Mt) (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  24. Neutrino factory • No magnetic field, no charge identification • Need to disentangle Pem and Pmm by energy resolution: (from: Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028; for non-magnetized detectors, see Huber, Schwetz, Phys. Lett. B669 (2008) 294) )

  25. nt contamination • Challenge:Reconstructed at lower energies!(Indumathi, Sinha, PRD 80 (2009) 113012; Donini, Gomez Cadenas, Meloni, JHEP 1102 (2011) 095) • Choose low enough Em to avoid nt • Need event migration matrices (from detector simulation) for reliable predictions! (neutral currents etc) (sin22q13=0.1) (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  26. Precision measurements? … only if good enough energy resolution ~ 10% E and misID (cascades versus tracks) <~ 1% can be achieved! (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  27. The BONUS program: Matter density measurement of the Earth‘s core?

  28. Example: Superbeam • Precision ~ 0.5% (1s) • Highly competitive to seismic waves (seismic shear waves cannot propagate in the liquid core!) (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  29. Conclusions [my personal view] • Superbeams • Electron sample (cascades) probably contaminated by other flavors; therefore precision measurements unlikely • Interesting option: Use more or less existing equipment for a mass hierarchy measurement? (e.g. CNGS/MINOS with new beam line?) • Bonus: matter density measurement of Earth‘s core • Unique experiment as low-budget alternative to LBNE? • Neutrino factory • Energy resolution critical, since non-magnetized detector • Detector simulation needed to produce event migration matrices for reliable conclusions if Eres ~ 10% E achievable? • Beta beams • Intrinsically best-suited for PINGU/MICA: flavor-clean beam, requires muon neutrino flavor-ID • However: need high intensity, high energy 8B-8Li setups for reasonable sensitivities; there are better ways to build a beta beam for large q13 to do both MH+CPV

  30. Statement of PINGU collaboration needed now (or never)!?

  31. BACKUP

  32. Beams: Appearance channels (Cervera et al. 2000; Freund, Huber, Lindner, 2000; Akhmedov et al, 2004) • Antineutrinos: • Magic baseline:L~ 7500 km: Clean measurement of q13 (and mass hierarchy) for any energy, value of oscillation parameters!(Huber, Winter, 2003; Smirnov 2006)In combination with shorter baseline, a wide range of very long baseline will do! (Gandhi, Winter, 2006; Kopp, Ota, Winter, 2008)

  33. Quantification of performanceExample: CP violation discovery Best performanceclose to max. CPV (dCP = p/2 or 3p/2) Sensitive region as a function of trueq13 anddCP dCP values now stacked for each q13 No CPV discovery ifdCP too close to 0 or p No CPV discovery forall values of dCP 3s ~ Precision inquark sector! Read: If sin22q13=10-3, we expect a discovery for 80% of all values of dCP

  34. Effective volume • Difference Eth = 2 GeV, Veff=5 Mt to actual (energy-dependent) fiducial volume: (Tang, Winter, JHEP 1202 (2012) 028)

  35. VL baselines (1) Note: Pure baseline effect!A 1: Matter resonance Prop. To L2; compensated by flux prop. to 1/L2 (Factor 1)(Factor 2) (Factor 1)2 (Factor 2)2

  36. VL baselines (2) • Factor 1:Depends on energy; can be matter enhanced for long L; however: the longer L, the stronger change off the resonance • Factor 2:Always suppressed for longer L; zero at “magic baseline” (indep. of E, osc. Params) (Dm312 = 0.0025, r=4.3 g/cm3, normal hierarchy) • Factor 2 always suppresses CP and solar terms for very long baselines; note that these terms include 1/L2-dep.!

More Related