Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel ISS-detectors Introduction: working group plans, organization and aims of the meeting.

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel The output of the scoping study will be a report in which:  The physics case for the facility is defined;  A baseline design for the accelerator complex, or, for some subsystems, the programme required to arrive at a baseline design, is identified;  The baseline designs for the neutrino detection systems are identified; and  The research-and-development programme required to deliver the baseline design is described. In achieving its primary goal, the scoping study will have three objectives to:  Evaluate the physics case for a second-generation super-beam, a beta-beam facility and the Neutrino Factory and to present a critical comparison of their performance;  Evaluate the various options for the accelerator complex with a view to defining a baseline set of parameters for the sub-systems that can be taken forward in a subsequent conceptual-design phase; and to  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. the following was written in the proposal comments?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel The real aim: to prepare a funding request for three years of detector R&D leading to having substantially progressed in the performance of detectors that one could realistically propose at that date, in the direction that is most profitable for physics. $€£¥CHF NB the nice thing with neutrino beams is that one can have more than one detector on the same beam line!

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel Organization Detector ‘council’ (i.e. steering group) role: ensure basic organization, and monitors progress wrt objectives Interim group: Alain Blondel (Geneva) Alan Bross (Fermilab) Kenji Kaneyuki (ICRR) Paolo Strolin (INFN) Paul Soler (Glasgow) (was Dave Wark, but too busy for now) someone missing?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel Organization: II working groups working groups as of Paolo Strolin’s presentation at NUFACT05 Large Water Cherenkov detector (Working group exists: UNO+Frejus+HK) contacts: Kaneyuki, Campagne, Casper, Mc Grew.. Magnetized Iron detector old studies exist. Need revisiting in many ways. contacts: Mondal, Nelson, Cervera, Soler, Gomez-Cadenas, Camillieri Liquid Argon detector in fact there are two known cases -- Larg for Neutrino factory -- Larg for superbeam/beta-beam contacts: Rubbia, Finley, Battistoni, Para…. Emulsion detector contacts: Migliozzi, di Lellis, Nakamura.. Active Scintillator detector/Low Z calorimeter … … … need a contact person that organizes the practical basics of the work (Phone conferences, web page, edition of report, etc…)

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel More working groups: Near detectors and flux control (beam instrumentation) Blondel,Gschwendtner, Soler, Sala, A.Rubbia, Sanchez, Wark, Nakaya, McFarland, … others? (most are attending NUINT) technology group photodetectors, scintillators, etc… connection with physics group Mezetto something missing? Organization III

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel Next ISS meetings KEK January 2006, RAL April 2006 (TBC, associated with a BENE meeting) Irvine California August 2006 just before NUFACT06

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel Methodology not unique… we try to optimize physics reach/€$£¥. Is the following naive approach the right one? 1.start with detector that could realistically be undertaken today and of which cost is relatively well known (Water Cherenkov of the size of SuperK, MINOS, OPERA, ICARUS) 2. produce a cost model as a function of key physics-related design parameters (in the process identify those) possible ex for Water Cherenkov: number or size of phototubes total fiducial mass 3. identify the physics drivers (muon and electron threshold for ID and sign) and the cost drivers (number of channels, mass?) 4. proceed to optimize physics reach -- within a given cost envelope or cost for a given physics reach? 5. look at result. Is R&D needed, how long and how difficult. define a program that allows to extend reach in the desired direction. maybe the starting point is too constraining? should we start from the ‘ideal’ detector and go back down to earth?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel Other important jobs: --communicate with the physics group and get them to work for us by asking questions. ex. What would be the gain in physics reach if the detector could see muons down to 1.5 GeV. Would the optimization of the accelerator: baseline, muon energy etc… change? -- evaluate the need for simulation tools -- what exists, what more would be needed.

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel What we must achieve in this meeting: 1.agree on the working groups 2.identify one person who is in charge of assembling each W-group 3.make a preliminary definition of the tasks for the next meeting 4.begin a list of questions to the physics group