1. EUCARD WP3 -- NEU2012 EUROPEAN NEUTRINO STRATEGY FOR
LONG BASELINE NEUTRINO PHYSICS
EUCARD WP3 -- NEU2012
The programs and workshops
From recommandations from SPC panel + changes at CERN
3. Preparing the Town meeting

2. 2006
2012

3. Alain Blondel 4 March 2011 NEU2012 summary
History, References and Links
Prospective study of muon storage rings at CERN, ECFA-CERN CERN (1999)
First study group discussion of CP violation in neutrino oscillations
ECFA-CERN study of a Neutrino Factory Complex
Blondel et al., eds. CERN ECFA   March 2004.
First discussion of superbeam/beta-beam/neutrino factory road map
ISS reports
Accelerator design concept for future neutrino facilities JINST, 4:P07001, 2009
Detectors and flux instrumentation for future neutrino facilities. JINST 4:T05001,2009.
Physics at a future Neutrino Factory and super-beam facility
Rept.Prog. Phys., 72:106201, 2009.
Systematic performance comparison, first serious look into detector technologies
European Strategy for Future Neutrino Physics YELLOW REPORT CERN
Organized by CERN Oct as imput to SPC study (SPC document is given as appendix)
Kickoff at CERN March 2009
Neutrino detector studies and possible experiment at CERN PS
NEU Doing the best of existing infrastructures in Europe and at CERN
NUFACT11 at CERN/UNIGE
Alain Blondel 4 March 2011 NEU2012 summary

4. EURO superbeam (pion decay) Neutrino Factory (muon decay) Beta-beam
rad-ion decay
key question for CH groups:
can any of this be at CERN?

5. We have two main coherent and powerful ‘possibilities’
CHOICES
-- while we are asked to narrow down options, the devil keeps inventing new schemes!
-- high Q beta-beam
-- superbeam from PS2
-- low energy neutrino factory
most die quickly, but maybe one will live..?
We have two main coherent and powerful ‘possibilities’
A low energy superbeam + beta beam (6He 18Ne in SPS) aimed at a very large Water Cherenkov d = km (T and CP violation)
2. Neutrino Factory with >=20 GeV muons aimed at (2-5000&7000km) Magnetized Iron Neutrino Detector (MIND) + fine grained magnetized detector (TASD, LArg, MECC) for tau detection
Both require high-power SPL
Which is better/cheaper, competitive in time/performance?
Physicist can ~estimate performance but cost requires professional help!

6. sensitivity plot from the SPC panel report:
note that this includes work from EUROnu, Laguna, IDS-NF, DUSEL, T2KK etc…
Very prelim!

7. Changes since 2009
I. Following Chamonix Workshop in 2010 the path to LHC upgrade was reviewed
-- SPL maintained as R&D project
-- but emphasis on Booster (raise injection energy) and SPS bottlenecks
In addition idea to study eV2 oscillations was re-kindled
II. In 2011, first indications of large sin2213
This changes the picture and places a great emphasis on systematic errors

8. sind sin (Dm212 L/4E) sin q12 sin q13
near detector constraints for CP violation
Superbeam:
P(nmne) - P(nmne)
sind sin (Dm212 L/4E) sin q12 sin q13
= ACP a
P(nmne) +P(nmne)
sin2 q13 + solar term…
Near detector gives nm and nm diff. cross-section*detection-eff *flux
and ibid for bkg
BUT: need to know also ne, ne diff. cross-section* detection-eff
with small (relative) systematic errors.
knowledge of cross-sections (relative to each-other) required
knowledge of flux!
interchange role of ne and nm for betabeam or NUFACT

9. A. Blondel WP 4.7 LAGUNA_LBNO meeting 17-10-2011
CP asymmetry decreases as
sin2213 increases… Systematics!
Challenge of precision!
Flux and cross-sections must be known to <<5%
hadro production experiments + near detectors  cross-sections to 5%
if needed to measure cross-sections
to 1% precision  mini neutrino factory (first step muon storage ring)
A. Blondel WP 4.7 LAGUNA_LBNO meeting
TASD, LArg…

10. Main outcomes of final discussion
Concerning CERN PS proposal: recommends including it in a more ambitious
long term vision (doing this at PS is a 10 years project – should not be in the way!)
(NB will now be integrated in the North area study)
2. Concerning LAGUNA + EUROnu
Essentially endorsed LAGUNA-LBNO with long term perspective

11. ECFA review of IDS-NF and EUROnu (report is now out)
See report by F. Halzen at P-ECFA last week
-- important points:
-- noted the difficulties associated with 4MW beams and the fact that
the beta beam is a facility with cost and complexity that may approach the
neutrino factory
-- recommended end-to-end evaluation of superbeam and betabeam
-- noted that CERN to Frejus is not optimal
-- continue push towards new technologies!

14. STRATEGY UPDATE see T. Nakada’s presentation at PECFA

15. Neutrino preparations:
Collect input from various parts of the neutrino community.
2. Town meeting in Summer 2012
enough before Open Strategy meeting (September 2012)
still after the big neutrino meetings of 2012
-- neutrino 2012 in Kyoto
-- NUFACT12 in Virginia/JLAB (USA)
date chosen 30July - 1 August 2012

16. Self and co- appointed organizing committee:
Alain Blondel Self added member
Andre Rubbia
Andrea Donini
David Wark
Dominique Duchesneau
Elena Wildner
Ewa Rondio
Fanny Dufour
Ilias Efthymiopoulos
Jenny Thomas
Jukka Maalampi
Ken Long
Yury Kudenko
Marcos Dracos
Mauro Mezzetto
Rob Edgecock
Silvia Pascoli
Achim Stahl
Vittorio Palladino
Sergio Bertolucci <
In blue:
Local Organization
Just started!
Input and volunteers welcome

17. EUROPEAN NEUTRINO STRATEGY TOWN MEETING FRAMEWORK
1. Concentrate uniquely on
a) neutrino oscillation facility +
b) ancillary measurements (cross-section measurements, flux related measurements)
2.1. European strategy process is focused on next 5-6 years. Should come up with concrete description of plans for 5-6 next years in European neutrino physics. This plan should be well defined and lead to a facility of broad use with possibilities of development in the future – not a one-shot action which is a dead end.
2.2 Many consider that High Energy investigation should be reserved at CERN and the accelerator-based neutrinos go to Japan and Americas.
With this kind of reasoning LHC would never have been built.
We must make the best case for what we have to offer in Europe, and stress the uniqueness of it.
2.3 Should recall ESPP (European Strategy for Particle physics 2006) recommendations and discuss to which extent they have been followed – or not.

18. General panorama in 2012
-- EUROnu will be done in time and present feasibility performance and cost of Superbeam, betabeam, neutrino factory
-- there has been a review of the EUROnu and IDS-NF and the report is now out (November 2011)
-- the LAGUNA DS has been completed and given estimates for 7 sites for underground labs in Europe
-- LAGUNA-LBNO has now been approved and begun
-- a memorandum has been submitted to CERN for a PS neutrino beam (DLarg) to study principally large Dm^2 (LSND domain) oscillations – (this is likely to be
redirected to a single facility in the north area – my understanding)
Challenge is to use all this input to come to one or two coherent scenarios of incremental approach that are unique to Europe and very attractive in performance; if possible agree on priority.

19. CONCLUSIONS
1. Mark 30/7 – 01/ at CERN in your calendars
2. Information will be prepared and circulated to Neutrino community
in particular spokespersons and contactpersons of Neutrino experiments and R&Ds
-- how to register etc…
-- how to contribute
3. We must believe that Physics is going our way:
a Neutrino Facility in Europe with great discovery potential
will then become a real possibility.