Detector Working Group Summary

1
Detector Working Group Summary

• Alan Bross
• International Scoping Study of a Neutrino Factory
  Super-beam Facility
• CERN, September 22-25, 2005

2
ISS Charge to the Detector Group

• Evaluate the options for the neutrino detection
  systems with a view to defining a baseline set of
  detection systems to be taken forward in a
  subsequent conceptual-design phase.
• Provide a research-and-development program
  required to deliver the baseline design.
• Funding request for three years of detector RD
  2007-2010
• Some difficult choices will have to be made in
  order to most efficiently utilize the RD
  resources that might become available

3
Detector WG Goals For This Meeting

• Agree on the working subgroups
• Identify one person who will coordinate the
  activities of each W-subgroup
• Make a preliminary definition of the tasks for
  the next meeting
• Begin a list of questions to the physics group
• Prepare a mailing list for the group
• Dont let anyone get away

4
Detector Working Groups

• Water Cerenkov Detectors
• Kenji Kaneyuki
• Liquid Argon TPC
• TBD
• Magnetic Sampling Detectors
• Jeff Nelson
• Emulsion Detectors
• Pasquale Migliozzi
• Near Detectors
• Paul Soler

5
Detector Concepts

• A quick review of existing, planned and
  forward-looking concepts for neutrino detectors
  yields an enormous number of exciting potential
  options for future neutrino experiments of all
  kinds
• Question How do we proceed in order to answer
  the ISS charge regarding the detectors?
• The many technology choices coupled with the a
  host of physics issues and an equally varied set
  of technology choices for the accelerator complex
  yields what at first glance presents a rather
  complex phase space of options
• However a recent BBC documentary helped me see
  how we might proceed.
• One minute of it.

6
A Difficult Task
7
Detector Reach

• Yesterday Mauro showed
• However, the validity of this table depends on
  what you actual believe about the reality
  Technical-Extrapolation Cost/performance of the
  various detector technologies
• This is what we must understand in detail
• So I will give a quick review of our discussions

8
Magnetic Sampling Detectors

• For b Beam scenarios the Magnetic can be dropped

9
Large Magnetic Calorimeters
in a Nufact
Anselmo Cervera Villanueva
University of Geneva (Switzerland)
Scoping study (CERN, 22/9/2005)
10
Overview

• Wrong-sign muon analysis
• Detector requirements
• The Monolith and LMD detectors
• Ingredients
• Muon identification
• Charge reconstruction
• Hadronic backgrounds
• Sensitivity to q13
• Improvements to be considered
• Questions

11
Golden signature  wrong sign muons
detector

• Stored m

50
50
Backgrounds
not detected
Charge misidentification
Hadron decay
CC
in the final state
charge misidentified
no other lepton
NC
12
Detector requirements

• Large statistics Large mass 40 KTons
• Muon identification from range
• Charge identification B1 Tesla
• Kinematic quantities (for background rejection)
• From the muon 3-momentum
• Hadron shower energy and angle

m
nm
qhad
Ehad

1. Reasonable number of spatial measurements every
   5-10 cm
2. Reasonable transverse resolution 1 cm

13
Existing studies
Monolith
LMD
A. Cervera F. Dydak J.J. Gomez-Cadenas
M. Selvi M. Garbini H. Menghetti

• Fast simulation and reconstruction based on MINOS
  smearing
• Muon identification
• Charge identification
• Study of background rejection power and
  efficiencies
• Variation of smearing parameters

• Full simulation and reconstruction
• Careful study of the hadronic angular
  resolution, including test beam
• Charge identification

14
The MONOLITH Detector

• Monolith was invented for the detection of
  atmospheric neutrinos
• Horizontal measurement planes parallel to
  neutrino beam direction
• A test beam was carried out with perpendicular
  planes

Large mass 35
kton Magnetized Fe spectrometer B 1.3 Tesla
(toroidal) Space resolution 1
cm (3cm pitch in x and y) Time resolution
1 ns (for up/down
discrimination in atmospherics) Momentum
resolution (dp/p) 20 from track
curvature for outgoing muons
6 from range for
stopping muons Hadron E resolution (dEh /Eh)
90/?Eh? 30
Glass Spark Counters (RPCs with glass electrodes
B
B
14.5 m
13.1 m
Fe
n beam
2.2 cm
Fe
8 cm
30 m
15
The Large Magnetic Detector
Simulation
20 m
8xMINOS (5.4 KT)
20 m
n beam
20 m
40KT
B1 T
iron (4 cm)
scintillators (1cm)
1cm transverse resolution

• Geant3 simulation
• Multiple scattering and energy loss
• Decays
• Nuclear interactions
• Full reconstruction is not practical since one
  has to simulate 107 events for each setting
• Smearing according to the MINOS proposal

16
Ideal detector

• Longitudinal segmentation
• Large density of measurement planes needed for
  charge identification
• At least 1 every 5 cm 10-5 effect for pgt2.5 GeV
• This could be improved either with a stronger B
  field (default 1T) or with iron free regions
• Transverse resolution
• Not important for the charge (dominated by ms)
• Important for rejection of right-sign-muons from
  D decays
• At least 1 cm transverse resolution
• Hadronic angular resolution
• Depends on the previous parameters
• 5cm and 1cm respectively gives better resolution
  that the one assumed by LMD, as demonstrated by
  the Monolith test-beam.
• This would reduce by a factor of 3 the hadronic
  backgrounds obtained in the LMD study.
• Hadron energy resolution
• Depends on longitudinal segmentation mainly.
• This is important for the reconstruction of the
  neutrino energy
• The shape of the ws-muon spectrum as a function
  of the neutrino energy is crucial for a
  simultaneous measurement of q13 and dcp
• The neutrino energy resolution has not being
  studied yet

17
Iron free regions ?

• A muon of 1 GeV will traverse at least 1
  iron-free module
• One has to design the detector such that the muon
  traverses at least one iron-free module after the
  extinction of the hadronic shower, to facilitate
  pattern recognition.
• The measurement of the momentum and the charge is
  considerably improved in the iron-free region.
• One can probably reduce the number of active
  planes in the iron region
• Less hadronic energy/angle resolution. Find a
  compromise.

1m
Iron (4cm) active (1cm)
air active (1cm)
muon
hadron shower
This full structure is repeated
18
Questions

• Is it possible to have a longitudinal
  segmentation better than 5 cm at a reasonable
  cost ?
• Is it possible to have a magnetic field stronger
  than 1 tesla in such a large structure?
• What is the best scheme for producing the
  magnetic field ?
• Would it be enough to have a magnetic field in
  the iron-free regions ?
• What is the impact of the iron-free regions in
  the development of the hadronic shower ?
• I havent thought much about that, but if we are
  interested in low energy neutrinos, is still
  50GeV/c the preferred momentum for the stored
  muons?

19
Summary

• There are many questions to be addressed
• The current knowledge is a good starting point
  for future studies
• Simulations
• Sensitivity for other detector configurations
  with the new physics requirements
• Revisit the different strategies taking into
  account the existence of degeneracies and the
  possibility of combining several baselines and
  golden-silver channels
• Hardware tests
• Study the detector resolution with small
  prototypes.
• Tests with magnetic fields
• Cost estimates

20
INDIA-BASED NEUTRINO OBSERVATORY (INO) STATUS
REPORT
Naba K Mondal Tata Institute of Fundamental
Research Mumbai, India
NUFACT Scoping Study Meeting at CERN, 22-24
September, 2005
21
India-based Neutrino Observatory initiative
Goal A large mass detector with charge
identification capability

• Two phase approach

R D and Construction Phase I Physics
studies, Detector R D, Site survey, Human
resource development Phase II Construction of
the detector
Operation of the Detector Phase I Physics with
Atmospheric Neutrinos Phase II Physics with
Neutrino beam from a factory
22
Physics with Neutrino beam from NUFACT Phase II

• Determination of q13
• Sign of Dm223
• Probing CP violation in leptonic sector
• Matter effect in nm ? nt oscillation

23
Role of Phase I as a test detector for the
factory era

• Currently we only have experience of running
  magnetised iron detector of up to 5 kton. No
  experience of running a large mass magnetised
  detector.
• So during phase I of the operation of the INO
  detector while we do interesting physics using
  atmospheric neutrinos, it can also be used as a
  test detector for the factory era and to improve
  upon it .
• The modular nature of this detector can even
  allow us to try out more than one options for the
  active elements like RPC, scintillators
• While we have a supporting funding agency in
  India we need international support and
  collaboration to achieve this.

24

• A Magnetic Tracking Calorimeter for a Neutrino
  Factory - Ideas Issues
• Jeff Nelson
• William Mary
• Williamsburg, Virginia
• 1st Meeting, Detector Working Group
  International Neutrino Factory Super-beam
  Scoping Study  
• CERN
• 22, September 2005

25
Outline

• Preamble
• Some history
• Studies of sampling trackers for super beams
• Reminder comments from my nufact05 talk
• Making a large device
• Ideas from MINOS, NOvA MINERvA
• A concept I think we can build as a starting
  point
• Thoughts for moving forward

26
What Should It be Able to Do?

• Goal map the oscillations down to the 2nd dip
• Down to 2 GeV neutrinos
• Want to get
• Good muon charge ID
• Good hadronic calorimetry for neutrino energy
• Harder as Ehad goes down
• Can get
• Good electron counting (without charge ID)
• Is this useful?
• What resolution is useful?
• Can we get do tau ID/counting like NOMAD?
• How pure is useful?

27
Making a Bigger Torus

• FEA by R. Wands (Fermilab) J.K. Nelson
• No inherent limitations in current
• I 40kA (r/10m)
• Recall MINOS ND is 40kA
• Perfectly feasible

28
Readout Options

• RPC vs Solid Scintillator
• Costs are indiscernible
• NOvA 11/03 proposal appendix PAC presentation
  from 11/03 (next slide)
• Solid vs Liquid
• Active components 33 cheaper for liquid

29
50kt NOvA Sampling Detector
The sampling design had 400m2 and 1000 samples
Not fully loaded costs only to show relative
scaling Use absolute costs from NOvA Proposal
(summary in a later slide)
Solid PMT Solid APD Liquid APD
Scintillator 22.3 27.3 14.2
optical fibers 12.0 12.0 12.0
Scintillator Assembly 25.7 21.4 13.5
Photodetector 7.5 1.7 1.7
Electronics (not DAQ) 15.3 8.4 8.4
Sum 82.8 70.8 49.8
(M)
30
MINOS has too much light( works too hard to get
it!)

• APDs vs PMTs
• Cost dramatically lower per channel
• 8 quantum efficiency of a M16/M64 PMT
• APD relaxes the light yield requirements
• Allows longer cells
• Allows smaller fibers

31
NOvA Far Detector

• Liquid scintillator cells
• 1984 planes of cells
• Cell walls
• Extruded rigid PVC
• 3 mm outer 2 mm inner
• Readout
• U-shaped 0.8 mm WLS fiber
• Acts like a prefect mirror
• APDs (80 QE)

0.8 mm looped fiber
15.7 m
32
MINERvA Optics (Pioneered by DØ Preshower)
Particle

• Significantly enhance position resolution for
  wider strips
• Could make the same cell geometry for liquid
  cells too

33
A Strawman Concept for a Nufact Iron Tracker
Detector

• 15m diameter polygon
• 4 piece laminate
• Can be thin if planes interconnected
• e.g. down to 1cm
• Idea from 1st NOVA Proposal
• 60kA-turn central coil
• 0.5m x 0.5m
• Average field of 1.5T
• Extrapolation of MINOS

• Triangular liquid scintillator cells
• Structure based on NOvA using MINERvA-like shapes
• 4cm x 6cm cells (starting point)
• 3mm thick PVC walls
• Looped WLS fibers APDs
• A sample would look like
• 1 cm Fe
• 0.7 cm PVC
• 3.3 cm LS
• 2/3rds Fe ? 2
• Based on 175M for 90kt

34
Summary

• Detector is feasible
• Large area toroidal fields can by directly
  extrapolated from MINOS design
• Can now make an affordable large are scintillator
  readout with NOvA APD technology
• Enhanced position resolution with MINERvA-like
  triangles
• Costs are all from 2004/2005
• Optimize sampling to get lower tracking threshold
  for charge ID
• Would also give good electron counting
• Come up with parameterization of resolutions,
  efficiency/fake rate, costs for optimization

35
A Magnetized Nova
Leslie Camillieri

• Basically the NOvA detector.
• Planes of plastic tubes filled with liquid
  scintillator.
• Fully active Good for electron
  identification
• Total mass 30 kilotons. 150m long, 15.7m x
  15.7 m.
• Surrounded by coils providing a magnetic field.
• Use the ATLAS toroid coils as examples.
• The advantage over a magnetic iron detector is
  that it also gives us a handle on the momentum
  and charge of the hadrons as well as those of the
  muons.
• NOMAD was a successful magnetic detector that
  used this principle.

36
Detector concept End view
Leslie Camillieri
Return yoke
Nova-Like Detector
Coil
Coil
37
Detector concept Side view
10 coils per side
38
More details

• ATLAS has 8 rectangular coils each 25m x 5m.
  Superconducting.
• 120 turns per coil
• 20.5 kA
• Field at centre 0.41 T
• Cost is 75 MCHF
• NOvA is 15m high, so letss modify the coil to
  15m x 15m ? same circumference
• NOvA is 150m long, so we would need 10 coils on
  either side ? 20 coils
• We dont need such a big field for the charge
  drop it to 0.15T.
• Reduce the number of turns/coil.
• Does the decrease in number of turns compensate
  the increase in number of coils?
• Do we need a superconducting setup?
• With such a small field and with iron saturating
  at about 1.8T, the cross section of the
• return yoke need only be 25m x (15m x
  0.15/1.8) 25m x 0.75m per coil pair

39
Performance

• Each tube 15.7m long, 3.8cm transverse to the
  beam, 6cm along the beam.
• Precision per coordinate 3.8 / (12)1/2 1.2 cm.
• Track length given by muon range, but taken to be
  maximum of 50m.

Momentum(GeV/c) Range(m) Curvature(1/R) m-1 Stand. dev
2 10.4 0.06 5.6
6 29.7 0.02 10.0
10 48.2 0.012 13.0
20 92.6 0.006 13.0
30 135.7 0.004 13.0
50 219.2 0.0024 13.0
40
Liquid Argon TPC

• Two Approaches

41
Giant Liquid Argon Charge Imaging Experiment
A. Rubbia
42
LAr Physics Reach
43
Glacier
44
Glacier with Magnet
45
Magnetized LAr TPC Tests
46
Future Magnetized LAr Prototype
47
US LAr TPC RD
48
US LAr Collaboration
49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
Water Cerenkov
53
Water Cerenkov
Jean-Eric Campagne

• Major Issues
• Extremely Large Detectors
• Excavation/Cavern issues
• Photodetector
• How can you cover such large area
• Production Issues
• Hand-blown tubes still
• Magnetized WC has been mentioned, but no serious
  scenarios exits at present and extrapolation to
  future is difficult

54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
(No Transcript)
58
Hybrid Emulsion Detectors
59
Hybrid emulsion detector for the neutrino factory

• Giovanni De Lellis
• University of NaplesFederico II

• Recall the physics case
• The detector technology
• Future prospects

60
Recalling the physics case

• Study the CP violation in the leptonic sector ?e
  ? ?µ the most sensitive (golden) channel
• In the (?13,?) measurement, ambiguities arise
• Intrinsic degeneracy Nucl. Phys. B608 (2001)
  301
• ?m2 sign degeneracy JHEP 0110 (2001) 1
• ?23, ?/2 -?23 symmetry Phys. Rev. D65 073023
  (2002)
• The silver channel (?e ? ?? and ? ? µ) is one
  way of solving the intrinsic degeneracy at the
  neutrino factory
• A. Donini et al., Nucl. Phys. B646 (2002) 321.
• An hybrid emulsion detector is considered
• D. Autiero et al., Euro. Phys. J. C33 (2004) 243

61
Golden and silver channels
ambiguities
Solving the ambiguities
62
A hybrid emulsion detector

• Target based on the Emulsion Cloud Chamber (ECC)
  concept
• Emulsion films (trackers) interleaved by lead
  plates (passive)
• At the same time capable of large mass (kton)
  and high spatial resolution (lt1mm) in a modular
  structure

The basic unit the  brick 

• ECC topological and kinematical measurements
• Neutrino interaction vertex and decay topology
• reconstruction
• Measurement of hadron momenta by Multiple
  scattering
• dE/dx for ?/µ separation at the end of their
  range
• Electron identification and energy measurement
• Visual inspection at microscope replaced
• by kinematical measurements in emulsion

10.2 x 12.7 x 7.5 cm3
ECC technique successfully used in cosmic rays
(X-particle discovery in 1971) and by DONUT for
the ?? direct observation
8 GeV
63
Electronic detector task

• trigger and location of neutrino interactions
• muon identification and momentum/charge
  measurement

ECC emulsion analysis Vertex, decay kink e/g
ID, multiple scattering, kinematics
Electronic detectors
Target Trackers Pb/Em. target
Spectrometer
supermodule
Link to muon ID, Candidate event
Pb/Em. brick
Basic cell
Pb
1 mm
Emulsion
Extract selected brick  
Brick finding, muon ID, charge and p
?p/p lt 20
64
Emulsion Detector for Future Neutrino Research
Possibility of the Technology

• NAKAMURA M.
• (NAGOYA Univ.)

65
OPERA ECC Brick
8kg Portable Unit for 210kton detectors
66
Particle ID by dE/dx Measurement
KEK Beam Test Preliminary
dE/dx (MeVcm2/g)
P

• VPH

K
p
e
P andp
Momentum(GeV/c)
Using 5 6 films. VPH, measured by the system,
is propotional to dE/dX. Error bar is 1sof the
distribution. At 2 GeV/c , proton and pion
are not separated in 5 or 6 OPERA films. VPH of
proton below 0.6GeV/c is saturated.
67
Electron energy measurement
Test exp. _at_ CERN
MC
Data
Energy determination by calorimetric method ( in
study)
_at_ a few GeV
68
Emulsion in Magnetic Field

• Charge Sign determination
• increase sensitivity
• increase BG-rejection power
• o scanning load (mention later)
• o cost??
• We have experience
• in CHORUS/ET(Emulsion Tracker)

69
Structure for MC study
DONUT/OPERA type target Emulsion spectrometer
mu
B
Air Gap
Stainless steel or Lead
Film
3Xo 10Xo
Assumption accuracy of film by film alignment
10 micron
(conservative). (Ex. 20mm gap structure gives
0.5mrad angular resolution.)
70
Charge determination (0.5T) MC
gt30mm Gap
20mm Gap
10mm Gap
71
Evolution of the Scanning Power
CHORUS
DONUT
OPERA
Our code name (device technology)
72
Expected evolution of the Scanning Power in near
future

• Enlarge a Field of View (1.25)2
• reduce objective mag. 50 -gt 40
• Speed up Image data taking 4
• Ultra High Speed Camera 3kfps-gt12kfps.
• 400cm2/hours/system.
• (1m2/day/system)

73
How many events?

• Scanning Power
• 1 m2/day/system 100events/day/system
• ( OPERA like ECC
  1event/brick 100cm2/event)
• 25,000events/year/
  system
• Normally one lab has 10 system
• 250,000
  events/year/lab.

Events in Neutrino Factory 160,000
events/kton (L3000km,1021mu decays)
74
Near Detector Issues
75
Preliminary Ideas for a Near Detector at a
Neutrino Factory
Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting 23
September 2005 Paul Soler University of
Glasgow/RAL
76
1. Near detector aims

• Long baseline neutrino oscillation systematics
• Flux control and measurement for the long
  baseline search.
• Neutrino beam angle and divergence
• Beam energy and spread
• Control of muon polarization
• Near detector neutrino physics
• Cross-section measurements DIS, QES, RES
  scattering
• sin2?W - ?sin2?W 0.0001
• Parton Distribution Functions, nuclear shadowing
• ?S from xF3 - ??S0.003
• Charm production Vcd and Vcs, D0/ D0 mixing
• Polarised structure functions
• L polarization
• Beyond SM searches

General Purpose Detector(s)!!
77

2. Flux normalisation (cont.)

• Neutrino beams from decay of muons

Polarisation dependence
Need to measure polarization!!
Pm1 gone!
Spectra at Production (e.g. 50 GeV)
Number CC interactions
78

2. Flux normalisation (cont.)

• Rates
• Em 50 GeV
• L 100 m, d 30 m
• Muon decays per year 1020
• Divergence 0.1 mm/Em
• Radius R50 cm

E.g. at 25 GeV, number neutrino interactions per
year is 20 x 106 in 100 g per cm2 area.
High granularity in inner region that subtends
to far detector.
Yearly event rates
79


7. Near detector technologies

• High granularity in inner region that subtends to
  far detector.
• Very good spatial resolution charm detection
• Low Z, large Xo
• Electron ID
• Does the detector have to be of same/similar
  technology as far detector?

• Possibilities
• silicon or fibre tracker in a magnet with
  calorimetry, electron and muon ID (eg.
  NOMAD-STAR??)
• Liquid argon calorimeter

• Does not need to be very big (eg. R50-100 cm)

80

7.1 Vertex detector with spectrometer

• RD in NOMAD for short baseline nt detector based
  on silicon
• NOMAD-STAR

• Does not need to be very big (eg. R50-100 cm)

81
Why do we believe that the neutrino fluxes can
be determined to - 10-3 at a Neutrino
Factory? Alain Blondel
Flux Control and Resulting Constraints on the
Decay Ring Design
source M. Apollonio et al, OSCILLATION PHYSICS
WITH A NEUTRINO FACTORY arXivhep-ph/0210192 v1
13 Oct 2002
82
Muon Polarization
muon polarization is too small to be very useful
for physics (AB, Campanelli) but it must be
monitored. In addition it is precious for energy
calibration (RajaTollestrup, AB)
a muon polarimeter would perform the momentum
analysis of the decay electrons at the end of a
straight section. Because of parity violation in
muon decay the ratio of high energy to low
energy electrons is a good polarization monitor.
83
muon polarization
here is the ratio of positons with E in
0.6-0.8 Em to number of muons in the ring. ?
There is no RF in the ring. spin precession and
depolarization are clearly visible This is the
Fourier Transform of the muon energy
spectrum (AB) amplitudegt polarization frequency
gt energy decay gt energy spread.
?DE/E and sE/E to 10-6 ?polarization to a few
percent.
Raja Tollestrup, AB
84
Conclusions I
Main parameters to
MONITOR 1. Total number of muons circulating
in the ring, BCT, near
detector for purely leptonic processes 2. muon
beam polarisation,
polarimeter 3. muon beam energy and energy
spread, race-track or
triangle. NO BOW-TIE!
polarimeter 4. muon beam angle and angular
divergence. straight section
design beam divergence
monitors e.g. Cerenkov 5. Theory of m decay,
including radiative effects OK Yes, we believe
that the neutrino flux can be monitored to 10-3
IF design of accelerator foresees
sufficient diagnostics. quite a lot of
work to do to design and simulate these
diagnostics.
85
Conclusions II and the Beta-beam?
Main parameters to MONITOR 1. Total number of
ions circulating in the ring,
BCT, near detector for purely leptonic
processes there is no inverse muon decay, must
rely on neutral current. Some model dependence?
2. ion beam polarisation, NO they are spin 0!?
no problem 3. ion beam energy and energy
spread, no polarization -- need
magnetic field measurement.
precision required a few 10-4 (evt. rate goes
like E3) 4. ion beam angle and angular
divergence. beam divergence
monitor e.g. Cerenkov ?? 5. Theory of ion
decay, including radiative effects
To be done neutrino flux can probably
be monitored to a few 10-3 somewhat
more difficult than for muons, but not
impossible. provided design of
accelerator foresees sufficient diagnostics.
quite a lot of work to do to design and
simulate these diagnostics and near detector
86
Underlying Detector Technology EffortsPlastic
Scintillator Anna Pla

• Plastic Scintillator extrusion facility at
  Fermilab
• Lost-cost scintillator
• Extrapolations to 5-10X the size of MINOS possible

87
Underlying Detector Technology EffortsHybrid
Photodetector Christian Joram
88
A half-scale prototype
208 mm (8-inch)
Al coating 2 rings
Development in collaboration with Photonis-DEP,
C. Fontaine et al.
89
Principle of neutrino detection by Cherenkov
effect in C2GT (CERN To Gulf of Taranto)
A. Ball et al., C2GT, Memorandum,
CERN-SPSC-2004-025, SPSC-M-723 A. Ball et al.,
Proc. of the RICH2004 conference, subm. to NIM A
The wall is made of 600 mechanical modules (10 x
10 m2), each carrying 49 optical modules.
(En below threshold for t production)
Cherenkov light
ne, nm, nt
e, m
42
CC reactions in H2O
Cherenkov light
10 m
50 m
segmented photosensitive wall about 250 250
m2 Fiducial detector volume 1.5 Mt
90
Back to Detector WG Goals

• Tasks
• Understand in detail the detection efficiency,
  sign determination capability, and background
  discrimination for
• Muons
• Electrons
• Taus
• And this should include data in bins of neutrino
  and lepton E
• We will have to define a framework for all to
  follow
• Quantify the detectors
• NC/CC discrimination
• Hadronic energy resolution
• Setup GLOBE files each of the detector
  technologies
• Allow credible extrapolation of the feasible
  detector performance
• First Iteration on cost
• To allow Honest (equal-footing) performance
  comparisons
• Request to the theorists
• Review the issue of interactions on nuclei

91
Conclusions

• So as you have seen, there is a rich body of work
  to draw upon for future neutrino detectors.
• How to limit the scope for detailed RD leading
  to a conceptual design for 1 or 2 detectors will
  be an iterative process and will require input
  (Direction!) from the Physics and Accelerator
  Facility WGs, an open mind and tremendous
  discipline.
• We should not be afraid to investigate aggressive
  approaches to technologies, but must remain
  Earth Bound
• A focused Detector RD based on this type of
  optimization study will have an enormously large
  impact on future neutrino experiments regardless
  of whether they are at a Neutrino Factory, bBeam
  Facility, Super Beam, or even a Not-So Super Beam
• Likely to even extend beyond Neutrino Physics
  Experimental Astrophysics, for example.
• A good time is likely to be had by All