280 likes | 422 Views
Neutrino Program at Rochester. Kevin McFarland 23 July 2003. Outline. Personnel, etc. NuTeV Next generation oscillation experiments Neutrino cross-sections Phenomenology MINERvA. Timeline. Neutrino program at Rochester is currently between major construction commitments
E N D
Neutrino Program at Rochester Kevin McFarland 23 July 2003
Outline • Personnel, etc. • NuTeV • Next generation oscillation experiments • Neutrino cross-sections • Phenomenology • MINERvA Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Timeline • Neutrino program at Rochester is currently between major construction commitments • Ramp up to future projects well suited to dovetail into end of Run 2 Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Personnel • No one is currently full-time • Group (mostly senior) currently planning future. • this will have to change soon… Senior PhysicistsStudentsCollaborators Prof. Arie Bodek (25%) Mr. Brian Anderson Prof. Steve Manly (DOE-nucl) Dr. Howard Budd (25%)Mr. Paul Conrow (RET) Prof. Frank Wolfs (NSF-nucl) Prof. Kevin McFarland (25%) Ms. Aimee Slaughter (REU) [Dr. Willis Sakumoto] [Dr. Sergey Avvakumov] [Dr. Pawel deBarbaro] [Dr. Un-Ki Yang] (were ~25% NuTeV) (were 100% CCFR/NuTeV) Senior Research Assoc.UndergraduatesSecondary Teachers Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Recent Recognition for Work • Prof. Arie Bodek is an acknowledged expert on neutrino cross-section modeling • gave recent NUINT02 summary talk • Prof. Kevin McFarland has given 25 invited seminars and conference presentations on recent NuTeV electroweak result • Thesis awards for our students • Un-Ki Yang FNAL URA Thesis award 2002 (CCFR/NuTeV) • Geralyn Zeller 2003 APS Tanaka prize (NuTeV)(NWU student, de facto advised by McFarland) Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
NuTeV: Electroweak Analysis • Recent three s anomaly in NuTeV sin2qW continues to be a puzzle of interest to community • McFarland (EW Analysis leader), [Zeller, thesis] • McFarland continues activity ininvestigating possible solutions • e.g., recent collaboration withSven-Olaf Moch (DESY) oncalculation of NLO QCD effects(shown to be small, hep-ph/0306052) MW = 80.136 0.084 GeV from Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
NuTeV Students • Avvakumov (Bodek) • first precise measurement ofw/o assuming CP/CPT • test of LSND CPT hypothesis • Yang (Bodek) • CCFR cross-sections, QCDe.g., test of F2 universality • URA thesis award (2002) Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Status of Neutrino Oscillations • Atmospheric (Super-K) and Solar (SNO, KAMLAND) neutrino oscillation signatures are well established SNO Kamiokande Soudan-2 Super-K MACRO sin22θ> 0.92 Δm2=(1.6 – 3.9)×10-3eV2 Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Oscillation Phenomenology • Lepton Mixing Matrix has a very different structure than CKM matrix • Big elements (B) are numerically 0.3-0.7 • “?” Element, Ue3, is less than 0.2 • CHOOZ reactor experiment bounds • Theory “bet” is that Ue3 is just around the corner Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
So what about this Ue3? • If Ue3 is non-zero, then phenomenology of neutrino oscillations becomes more rich • CP violation in oscillations à la CKM matrix • Observe matter effects in nmbeam • Sensitive to the hierarchy of neutrino masses instead of just mass-squared differences • If Ue3 is near zero, this is very odd • Will have big impact on GUT models Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Sign of dm23 d |Ue3| The Importance of Precision P(nm→ne) at Superbeams • Conventional “superbeams” and reactors will be our next windows into Ue3 • Studying this transition in neutrinos and anti-neutrinos gives us magnitude and phase information on Ue3 as well as sign of dm23 • Reactors only measure magnitude of Ue3 Non-trivial phase, d → CP violation Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
How can this be done with Conventional Beams? • Appearance signal is difficult to extract • beam backgrounds • high energy “feed-down” (neutral currents) • Off-axis beam technique makes it possible • Beam becomes monochromatic • Less feed-down • Fewer electron neutrinos Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
J-PARC Neutrino • JAERI 50 GeV PS • 0.77MW initially • 4MW upgrade planned • Extraction point for n beam is being built • Off-axis beam to Super-K detector, near Seoul • At Super-K, L/E~295km/0.7GeV • LOI favorably reviewed by J-PARC PAC • Proposal submitted to Monkasho soon • Actively encouraging non-Japanese collaborators • Physics start date 2008 or 2009? Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
NUMI Off-Axis • NUMI (on-axis) experiment for nm disappearance will commence 2005 • 0.25-0.4 MW proton power • Run 10 km off axis at L/E~700km/2GeV? Other? • LOI submitted to PAC • Proposal to PAC in fall Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Cross-Sections and Modeling Quasi-elasticsnmn→m-p (x=1, W=Mp) Resonance Region e.g., nmn→m-pp0 (low Q2, W) Deep Inelastic ScatteringnmN→m-X (low Q2, W) • Plausible models exist to describe some aspects of data in each region • Transitions between regions? • A dependence, final-state interactions, etc. Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
n–p0 nn+ Status of Cross-Sections • Not well-known at 1-few GeV • Knowledge of exclusive final states particularly poor • Understanding of backgrounds requires differential cross-sections for these processes! • A dependence? Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
JHF->SK, 0.8MW-yr, 1ring FC m-like (JHFnu LOI) Reconstructed En (MeV) Where do Cross-Sections matter? • nm→nm, dm223, q23 • Signal is suppression in 600-800 MeV bin (peak of beam) • Dominated by non-QE background • 20% uncertainty in non-QE is comparable to statistical error • Non-QE background feeds down from En>Epeak • Quantitatively different for MINOS, NUMI-OA Oscillation with Dm2=3×10-3 sin22q=1.0 Non-QE No oscillation Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
sin22qme=0.05 (sin22qme0.5sin22q13) NUMI 0.7° OA, No NC/ne discrimination (detector indep.) (plot courtesy D. Harris) Where do Cross-Sections matter? • nm→ne, q13 • Shown at right is most optimistic q13; we may instead be fighting against background • NC p0 and beam ne background both in play • NC p0 cross-section poorly known • We can model sCC(ne)/sCC(nm). Is it right? • Precision measurement is the endgame Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
nm nm 50×nm 5×nm Where do Cross-Sections matter? NUMI 0.7° OA, 3.8E20 POT • nm→ne vs nm→ne, d • Cross-sections very different in two modes • “Wrong sign” background only relevant in anti-neutrino • Crucial systematic in comparing neutrino to anti-neutrino • Need sCC(n)/sCC(n) in sub- to few-GeV region Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Q2= 0.22 GeV2 Q2= 0.07 GeV2 Q2= 1. 4 GeV2 Q2= 0.85 GeV2 Q2= 3 GeV2 Q2= 9 GeV2 Phenomenology I: Bodek-Yang Duality • The problem: transition between DIS and resonance region • High precision neutrino DIS data (e.g., CCFR & NuTeV) is available • Precise low Q2 charged lepton data (JLab, SLAC) in resonance region • Quark-Hadron Duality? • “When you get near a resonance, it sucks you in.” • Bodek and Yang have shown that charged lepton resonance data can be described “on average” with a DIS-like cross-section • Currently being implemented in standard n generators • NUANCE (Super-K, IMB), NUGEN (MINOS) Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Phenomenology II: Revisiting Quasi-Elastics • Strategy: • charged lepton data (lots of it) used to determine vector form factors • small amount of neutrino quasi-elastic data used to measure axial form-factors within dipole model • previous neutrino analyses used too simple a cross-section model cross-section ratio, before and after Bodek-Budd-Arrington • Bodek, Budd and Arrington (Argonne) have re-analyzed old neutrino data with more sophisticated vector form factors • result is a large shift in the effective axial mass • this has solved a major problem for K2K Q2 distributions • again, being implemented in standard generators Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Rochester Involvement inJ-PARC neutrino • We have begun an involvement in the J-PARC neutrino project • McFarland has served on International Board since 2002 • McFarland is 280m (near) detector co-convenor • Our primary interest is in construction of near detectors to measure flux and neutrino cross-sections • plays well into our CDF/CMS/NuTeV detector strengths • leading the field in cross-section modeling (Bodek, Budd, Yang) • Current activities • tests of aqueous liquid scintillator for cross-section on Oxygen(Conrow, Slaughter, McFarland, Wolfs) • detector simulation/optimization (Anderson, McFarland) Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
MINERvA: Main INjector ExpeRiment n-A • The J-PARC neutrino beam may not achieve operating intensity until 2009 • but NUMI beamline available ~2005 • beamline off and on-axis allows for a broad range of neutrino energies accessible in existing NUMI tunnels on-axis 5m off-axis NUMI ME NUMI LE 10m 5m off-axis 15m on-axis 15m 10m event rate per unit detector mass as a function of neutrino energy Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
MINERvA Detector • Want a fully active detector to see, e.g., recoil protons from mn–p • Segmented scintillator strips with WLS readout for the basis of the detector • heavy FNAL investment in this technology • lots of Rochester experience! (CDF plug, CMS HCAL) • Cost driver may be photosensors • evaluating MAPMTs, APDs, Image Intensifiers/CCDs Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
n MINERvA Detector • Modular design • Construct above ground piecewise • Can add detector or target material as another layer Active/passive frame around target Active scintillator strip target Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Next Steps for MINERvA • Two EOIs submitted to FNAL PAC in 2002 • one to sit in on-axis and one in off-axis beams • merger is MINERvA, initially to run on-axis(C. Keppel, McFarland, J. Morfin scientific coordinators) • Will submit a proposal to fall 2003 PAC • physics case, detector conceptual design, cost estimate Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Collaborations with Nuclear Physics • Neutrino cross-sections and oscillations are also of interest to the nuclear physics community • Prof. Steve Manly (DOE nucl) • proposals at JLab to study inclusive and exclusive resonance cross-sections on nuclei • crucial input for neutrino cross-sections • Bodek, McFarland signed on as collaborators • collaborator on MINERvA • Prof. Frank Wolfs (NSF nucl.) • development of Aqueous scintillator Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester
Conclusions • Current successes in analysis (NuTeV) and phenomenology • as well as detector building skills at Rochester • We want to build on these strengths to seed a new generation of neutrino oscillation andcross-section experiments • we see a unique role for Rochester in developing, building and analyzing near detector data, ultimately to be applied to neutrino oscillations • next step: MINERvA • Bridge between particle and nuclear physics Kevin McFarland, Neutrinos at Rochester