Higher and smaller detectors for the beta beams Strength and weakness of the baseline (“low gamma”) energy option for the Beta Beam: a critical appraisal Prospects for a higher energy beta beam: ● A medium gamma beta beam at CERN or Fermilab with a 40kt scale detector ● A very high gamma beta beam through the LHC with a 3kt size detector Conclusions F. Terranova, INFN- Frascati Many thanks to G.Fogli, J.J.Gomez-Cadenas, M.Lindroos, M.Mezzetto, P.Migliozzi, A.Rubbia, F.Ronga, M.Spinetti and many others contributing to the discussion on the high-beta-beams
Transcript
Higher and smaller detectors for the beta beams
Strength and weakness of the baseline (“low gamma”) energy option for the Beta Beam: a critical appraisal
Prospects for a higher energy beta beam:
● A medium gamma beta beam at CERN or Fermilab
with a 40kt scale detector
● A very high gamma beta beam through the LHC
with a 3kt size detector
Conclusions
F. Terranova, INFN-Frascati
Many thanks to G.Fogli, J.J.Gomez-Cadenas, M.Lindroos, M.Mezzetto, P.Migliozzi, A.Rubbia, F.Ronga, M.Spinetti and many others contributing to the discussion on the high- beta-beams
Why Beta beams and not just Neutrino Factories?Easier: technology for radioactive ion boosting has evolved enormously
Cheaper: particularly at CERN, most of the acceleration facilities exists
Cleaner: only e in final state; the e topology is experimentally much easier than e (an enormous advantage compared with superbeam) and we do not need sign identification (no strong E cut as in NF)
Most of these advantages are spoiled by the need for an UNO like detector which is difficult (site construction and PM production), expensive (kind of 500 M$) and intrinsically coarse (Fermi motion at sub GeV scale)
It has additional physics items (see tomorrow's talks) but it brings the time-schedule ~2020
BUT
The root of this weakness Beta beams are evolution of radioactive ion facilities for nuclear studies (small E per nucleon) and not of heavy ion machines for dense nuclear matter (quark-gluon plasma: high E per nucleon)
Energy optimisation should follow the same logic as for NF
At fixed L/E, if we increase E:
Flux increases as 2 and decrease as L-2
Cross sectionGrows like E
The higher gamma the better (linear gain of sensitivity) until matter effects spoil CP violation (as NF)
Higher gamma setupsSeveral are (in principle) available (all gammas refer to 6He): SPS at its maximum rigidity =150 the LHC =2488
Could be available during the luminosity/energy upgrade of LHC: the 1 TeV SPS (useful both for lumi =350
and E upgrade) the present LHC (coexists with the new =2488
HE-LHC ring in the same tunnel after dipole upgrade)
In the US (see talk of S.Geer and APS meeting @ Snowmass, 28-30 Jun 04):
What happens to the decay ring?What happens to the intensity(integrated decay per year)?Can we imagine an affordable scenario for machine sharing?
What you (re)gain from them? We gain statistics (~E) We gain energy resolution (multi-GeV range): help solving ambiguities We gain sensitivity to matter
Fully exploitation of the detector technology: e.g. LAr – see A. Rubbia @ HIF04 (to appear in the Proceedings)
The most extreme case (LHC: >1000 and E>5GeV)
Signal: an excess of horizontal muons in the rock in coincidence with the
beam spill
Number of unoscillated events: increase linearly with E
Range of muons: increase linearly with E as well. The effective volume
of rock contributing to the statistics increase linearly with E
The cost of the detector increase with the surface and not with the volume
We gain a quadratic increase of the sensitivity if we increase gamma and we reduce the detector cost by order of magnitudes!
We loose the possibility to fully reconstruct the events
This consideration holds in general: for a BB detector located at the peak of the oscillation probability, off the peak (see later), and even for neutrino factories (if the detector is magnetized). However you get best value at BB, where the detector costs more than the machine.
F.T., A. Marotta et al., hep-ph/0405081
RockHall
A specific case: CERN - to Gran Sasso
A deep, existing (!), well equipped laboratory at a baseline of L=732 km (= 350/580 i.e. E=1-2 GeV)
Too small for 40 kton of WC or LAr
Energy slightly too small for effective use of iron detectors
BUT
What happens for > 350/580 (off the peak of the oscillation maximum) ?
O1 (leading term)
O2 (~ sin )
O3 (~ cos )
O4 (suppressed by
If increases beyond the golden value 350/580:
The oscillation probability decreases as -2
The flux increases as 2
The cross section and the effective rock volume increase both as
A specific case: CERN - to Gran Sasso
Leading term: signal rate suppressed
Matter effects cancel out at leading order even if the baseline is large
We recover the quadratic increase of sensitivity but we test now CP-even terms and no matter effects
P(e ) sinsinsincos
Beam related background:
Pion punch-through deep hadron plugEarly /K decays in flight energy cut (charge id)Charm background only for the highest , energy cut
(charge id)
Beam unrelated background:
Atm. neutrinos energy cut (beam timing)Cosmics angular cut (huge slant depth near
the horizon)
Can we handle background with such a rough detector?
Beam unrelated background is so small that we can release by two order of magnitudes the request on the bunch length
of the beta-beamAn enormous technical simplification
Event rate
13=0 (only the O4 term survives)
Instrumented surface: 15x15 m2 (one LNGS Hall)Iron detector interleaved with active trackers (about 3kton)2 GeV energy cut in a 20 deg cone 1.1 1018 decays per year of 18Ne ; 2.9 1018 decays per year of 6He
100 % oscillated events per year: 6.5 104 (e @ =2500)1.3 104 (anti e @ =1500)5.7 105 (e @ =4158)1.4 105 (anti e @ =2488)
Sensitivity
A killer application to test 13 values on the range 10-3-10-4
solve ambiguities in combination with an on-peak facility
Machine issues: decay ringMain cost is civil engineering
Low gamma: 6.8km, 5T, useful decay fraction 37%
Higher gammas:Use the acceleration ring also for storage and build a small straight section pointing toward the detector and a curved section to reconnect (very high gamma 3km straight section, 9T, 8km curved)
Pros: cost of civil engineering higher but not prohibitive
Cons: full occupancy of the machine (interference with the LHC)useful decay fraction 10%: can be easily recovered instrumenting more than one LNGS hall
Intermediate gammas:Both possibilities can be consideredfor a dedicated decay ring=350, 11km, 9T, useful decay fraction is 22%
The actual cost mainly depends on the outcome of the R&D for the energy upgrade of the LHC or the VLHC (maximum field available)
Machine issues: occupancy Not a problem for an intermediate gamma with dedicated decay ring
(LHC/S-SPS used only in the accelerating phase)
Not a problem for a very high gamma BB (VHG) if postponed to the energy upgrade of the LHC (two rings coexisting in the same tunnel and sharing the same cryogenics)
Very unlikely for a VHG unless we can store >> 1014 ions
Machine issues: intensity Intermediate gamma: reduction of a factor of 5 of the decays per second
can be recovered by a faster PS and ion collection time
VHG: reduction of a factor of 25-41 but no need of asymmetric merging(no background from atm): multibunch stacking in the LHC before
acceleration or re-optimise the choice of the isotope (fast PS!)
Conclusions
An increase of the energy of the beta beam will surely imply an increase of their physics potential:
On peak with 40kton detectors: CP violation, matter effect, improved sensitivity to 13
Off-peak with <10kt detector: outstanding sensitivity to 13 and different pattern of oscillations (ambiguity solver)
The combination of the two (possible only if a machine scenario for the LHC can be foreseen) is a killer application for the determination of the PMNS
An increase of the energy of the beta beam could also imply a strong reduction of the costs (no massive detectors). But a complete machine scenario is not available, yet.
None of these studies is more than 6-month old
Neutrino factory Low Beta beam
High Beta beam
Exploiting the CC topology at the Beta-Beams?
QE dominance: strong contamination from atm sub-GeV (WC/LAr)
Transition region between QE and non-QE dominance
DIS dominanceIron detectors
Multi GeV CC events can be:
Fully reconstructed by an iron detector(like MONOLITH but without a magnetic field)
Partially reconstructed by an instrumented surface (do you remember the through-going muons of MACRO?) Interaction
