1. 050923ISS Plenary#11 Physics Working Group Aim and tasks INTERNATIONAL NEUTRINO FACTORY AND SUPERBEAM SCOPING STUDY MEETING CERN - 22-24 September 2005 Y. Nagashima OSAKA UNIVERSITY CONTENTS Mission defined Past studies: SB, BB, NF Degeneracy problem Summary

2. 050923ISS Plenary#12 Convener: Yori Nagashima (Osaka U.) Council members: Debbie Harris (FNAL), Pilar Hernandez (U.Valencia), Manfred Lindner (Technical U. Muenchen), Ken Long (Imperial College London) Hitoshi Murayama (LBL), Lee Roberts (U. Boston), Osamu Yasuda (Tokyo Metropolitan U.) Subgroup convener Theoretical: TBC Phenomenological: O.Yasuda Experimental: K.Long Organization of Physics Working Group

3. 050923ISS Plenary#13 Three subgroups in the Physics working group Theoretical Phenomenological Experimental 1. MISSION DEFINED

4. 050923ISS Plenary#14 PHYSICS MOTIVATION Two directions beyond SM, toward Unification EW symmetry breaking, ★ HIGGS, GUT, SUSY, ED  LHC, ILC Clear theoretical guide exists: Top down approach Flavor Problem ★ Origin of generations, Mass Hierarchy, Flavor Symmetry No clear theory exists. Only experimental observations: Bottom up approach Neutrino mass: Only “ beyond SM evidence ” ! Cold Dark Matter and Dark Energy exist. Leptonic CP violation: The origin of the matter ?  Precision measurement of lepton mixing matrix and mass hierarchy  “ Neutrino Factory ” and other related facilities

5. 050923ISS Plenary#15 The neutrino mixing matrix: 3 angles and a phase  Normal Hierarchy or  m 2 23 = 2 10 -3 eV 2  m 2 12 = 8 10 -5 eV 2        m 2 23 = 2 10 -3 eV 2 Inverted Hierarchy Unknown or poorly known  13, phase , sign of  m 2 13  23  (atmospheric) = 45 0,  12  (solar) = 32 0,  13  (Chooz) < 13 0

6. 050923ISS Plenary#16 Muon Physics Similar plots for  e conversion with R  e - ranging between (10 -14 - 10 -17 ) (10 -14 - 10 -17 )PRISM sensitive down to sensitive down to 10 -18 10 -18 MuEGamma Goal 10 -14 Hisano et al., PL B391 (1997) 341 sensitive probe for SUSY

7. 050923ISS Plenary#17 Neutrino factory is comparable with LHC and ILC “In its scale”. Is the physics case equally strong?

8. 050923ISS Plenary#18 Mission of the theoretical subgroup Issue a message to global community Describe the impact of the neutrino and other related researches towards the understanding of the matter unification, the synergy of particle physics, astro-physics and cosmology. Draw a roadmap, paint a colorful picture! Win Other Scientists’ Support It is not enough to win arguments… one must win partners. The two are not the same. Robin Staffin, DOE, 2005 ILC Workshop at Snowmass

9. 050923ISS Plenary#19 Super Beam Courtesy Brian Foster NuFact02 Manfred Lindner ISSWS05 The neutrino opens the way to many new frontiers factory

10. 050923ISS Plenary#110 Critical review of physics performance of future options : Superbeam (SB) Beta beam (BB) Neutrino Factory (NF) Define strengths and weaknesses of each facility Perform critical comparison Step towards a consensus: Identify the need for complementary measurements Make a scenario w/wo staging approach to achieve scientific goals Mission of the phenomenogical and experimental subgroups

11. 050923ISS Plenary#111 Need to define: Assumptions on accelerator performance Assumptions on detector performance Definition of baseline tools used for analyses: e.g. Nuance/Globes. Neutrino cross sections: status and what will be assumed. For Experimental subgroup

12. 050923ISS Plenary#112 Goals of the plenary meeting #1 Establish list of parameters and things to do

13. 050923ISS Plenary#113 2. Past Studies Ongoing Experiments Super Beam Beta Beam Neutrino Factory What parameters do we want to decide? What are the list of “to do”?

14. 050923ISS Plenary#114 Ongoing Experiments “After 5 years

15. 050923ISS Plenary#115 Near Future (Super Beam) T2K (Japan) 295km C2GT (CNGS beam) ~1200km NO A (NUMI beam) 810km They all look for   ~ e oscillations

16. 050923ISS Plenary#116 Expect to measure  m 2 13 : 23%  10% MINOS  2% T2K, NOvA Find non-zero  13  sin 2 2  13 ~ 10 -2 Super-Beam < 1MW  ~4MW  m 2 13  1% sin 2 2  13  ~10 -3 mass-hierarchy up to sin 2 2  13 ~ 10 -2 for all value of  NOvA Search for CP violation Super Beam Phase II

17. 050923ISS Plenary#117 Near Future / ”next 10 yrs ” P.Huber et al., hep-ph/0403068 NO A  m 2 =2.0x10 -3 eV 2 Super Beam: opportunity Ｘ 1 ０ improvement over ongoing experiments

18. 050923ISS Plenary#118 Intermediate Future/ “ next 20 years ” Super Beam PhaseII Beta Beam

19. 050923ISS Plenary#119 Mass Hierarchy Super-NO A Long (L=810km) baseline enhances sensitivity to sgn{  m 2 31 } for sin 2 2  13 down to 0.02 New Long Baseline =1290km at Homestake NOvA (=NUE) phase II SB+ 2nd detector at the 2nd oscillation maximum 50 kton detector at 710 km. 30km off axis (second max.) 6 years (3  + 3 anti ) Fermilab Proton driver study report’ http://protondriver.fnal.gov/

20. 050923ISS Plenary#120 Store 18 Ne, 6 He to produce pure e and e beams _ Same detectors as Super Beam ! Detector at Frejus Beta-Beams

21. 050923ISS Plenary#121 Messier Nuact05 Beta beam offers clean low E e beams with no  backgrounds 1.1x10 18 He and 2.9x10 18 He decays/yr Detector at Frejus(L=130km) 1Mt water cherenkov ~x30 improvement

22. 050923ISS Plenary#122 E  =20-50GeV 10 21  ’s/yr 50kt detector Baseline 300,700,7000km Neutrino Factory Long Future/ “ next 30 years ”

23. 050923ISS Plenary#123 Neutrino Factory Provides clean intense e   channel (Golden) and e   channel (Silver) Provides disappearance channels    and e  e NF (golden+silver)+SB solves degeneracies down to sin 2 2  13 =10 -4 Still considered as the ultimate neutrino oscillation facility The question is cost consideration (1500M$+400M$*E/20 in Study II )

24. 050923ISS Plenary#124 Figures like this can help us develop the neutrino physics “road map” It would be good to develop an agreed on list of figures and experiments to be plotted, and timelines to be used. YEAR sin 2 2  13 S.Geer ISSWS05 Long Future/ “Next 30 years” Ability to resolve Mass hierarchy ambiguity

25. 050923ISS Plenary#125 Long Future / “Next 30 years” Ability to observe non-zero  13 versus time Fermilab Proton driver study report’ http://protondriver.fnal.gov/

26. 050923ISS Plenary#126 P.Huber et al., hep-ph/0412199 NF always outperforms SB except for very large values of sin 2 2  13 >0.01 (large uncertainties from matter effect)

27. 050923ISS Plenary#127 P.Huber et al., hep-ph/0412199 Indicator for risk minimization of CP precision measurement Sin 2 2  13 =10 -1 T2HK is better Sin 2 2  13 =10 -3 Synergy between T2HK and NF Sin 2 2  13 =10 -4 NF outperforms CP coverage is a range of fitted values of  CP

28. 050923ISS Plenary#128 P.Huber et al. hep-ph/0403068 Each experiment to measure at fixed suffers from correlation and degeneracy problem T2K CORRELATIONDEGENERACY SYSTEMATIC 3. DEGENERACY PROBLEM

29. 050923ISS Plenary#129 8-fold degeneracy P( e   )=Asin 2 2  13 +sin2  13 (Bcos  +Csin  )+D P( e   )=Asin 2 2  13 +sin2  13 (Bcos  -Csin  )+D Measurement of x=P( e   ) and y=P( e   ) at fixed E /L gives an elipse in x-y plane. __ __  13   ’ 13 gives a different ellipse.  2-fold    degeneracy      ambiguity  Mass hierarchy two-fold degeneracy: |  m 2 31 |=|-  m 2 31 |    degeneracy: sin 2 2  23 = sin 2 2(  ) 23

30. 050923ISS Plenary#130 How to solve correlation and degeneracy? Use combination of different E, L or Golden+Silver channel Many scenarios are proposed

31. 050923ISS Plenary#131 Determines mass hierarchy for all values of  down to sin 2 2  13 = 0.02 Measure at 2E ’s to solve correlation Example 1 Super-NOvA SB + 2nd detector at the 2nd oscillation maximum 50 kton detector at 710 km. 30km off axis (second max.) 6 years (3 + 3 anti )

32. 050923ISS Plenary#132 2 nd L at MB=Magic Base Line(7500km) Staged approach One detector first, if  /3 If not, 2nd detector at MB Region; Single measurement OK P.Huber et al., hep-ph/0412199 mass hierarchy removed Synergy of NuFact-II(300km)+T2HK Example 2: 2 L’s to resolve degeneracy

33. 050923ISS Plenary#133

34. 050923ISS Plenary#134 Step towards a consensus: Identify the need for complementary measurement Make a scenario w/wo staging approach to achieve scientific goals Establish the physics case for (or against! ) a NF S.Geer’s question Is a NF needed if sin 2 2  13 is large ? What is the minimum NF energy that will deliver the physics (cost issue)?

35. 050923ISS Plenary#135 Physics working group workshop #1 14-21 November 2005 Imperial College London Plenary Meetings #2 KEK; 23-25 January 2006 #3 RAL; 27-29 April 2006 #4 Irvine; 21-23 August 2006 (just before NuFact06) SHEDULE

36. 050923ISS Plenary#136 Time schedule: taken from An International Scoping Study of a Neutrino Factory and super-beam facility http://www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk /%7Elongkr/UKNF/Scoping-study /ISS-www-site/WG1-PhysPhen /Council/2005-08-29 /PhysPhen-council-2005 -08-29-WG1-plan.pdf

37. 050923ISS Plenary#137 Issue a message to win broad community’s support Review physics performance of future options for precision neutrino oscillation measurements: Define strengths and weaknesses of each facility Perform critical comparisons Identify the need for complementary measurements Make a scenario and/or staging approach to achieve scientific goals Establish the physics case for (or against!) a NF 4. Summary

38. 050923ISS Plenary#138 On Michael Turner’s door at NSF

39. 050923ISS Plenary#139

40. 050923ISS Plenary#140  23  (atmospheric) = 45 0,  12  (solar) = 32 0,  13  (Chooz) < 13 0 The neutrino mixing matrix: 3 angles and a phase  Normal Hierarchy or  m 2 23 = 2 10 -3 eV 2  m 2 12 = 8 10 -5 eV 2        m 2 23 = 2 10 -3 eV 2 Inverted Hierarchy Unknown or poorly known  13, phase , sign of  m 2 13

41. 050923ISS Plenary#141 JPARC- ~0.6GeV beam 0.75 MW 50 GeV PS (2008  ) Kamioka J-PARC SK: 22.5 kt Phase II: 4 MW upgrade Phase II HK: 1000 kt K2K ~1.2 GeV beam 0.01 MW 12 GeV PS (1999  2005) (1999  2005) T2K PhaseII

42. 050923ISS Plenary#142

43. 050923ISS Plenary#143

44. 050923ISS Plenary#144

45. 050923ISS Plenary#145

46. 050923ISS Plenary#146 Sensitivity depends on the true value of  m 2

47. 050923ISS Plenary#147 Beta-beam: sensitivity Mezzetto

48. 050923ISS Plenary#148 Comparison : BB/NF Huber

49. 050923ISS Plenary#149 Neutrino Oscillation Appearance Probability

50. 050923ISS Plenary#150

51. 050923ISS Plenary#151 NF operates at atmospheric distance optimum

52. 050923ISS Plenary#152 channel at neutrino factory High energy neutrinos at NuFact allow observation of  e   (wrong sign muons with missing energy and P  ). UNIQUE Liquid Argon or OPERA-like detector at 700 or 3000 km. Since the sin  dependence has opposite sign with the wrong sign muons, this solves ambiguities that will invariably appear if only wrong sign muons are used. ambiguities with only wrong sign muons (3500 km) equal event number curves muon vs taus associating taus to muons (no efficencies, but only OPERA mass) studies on-going A. Donini et al

53. 050923ISS Plenary#153 M.Lindner; hep-ph/0503101

54. 050923ISS Plenary#154 Wish-List for Study S.Geer ISSWS05 There have been a series of neutrino physics studies in Europe, Japan and the US, aimed at understanding future needs and options. Lots has been done, but there are still some questions to be nailed … for example: Is a NF needed if sin 2 2  13 is large ? What is the minimum NF energy that will deliver the physics (cost issue)? How do we best test the three-flavor framework and how do we quantify the test ? How can we best articulate the physics case for precision measurements of the neutrino parameters if sin 2  13 > O(0.01), & continuing the program if sin 2 2  13 < O(0.01) ?

55. 050923ISS Plenary#155 Minimal Standard Model (SM)- Baryon Number, Lepton Flavour & Lepton Number - conserved ! neutrinos massless - no oscillations ! Hence: processes such as  e ,  e,  eee, K 0 L  e, Z 0  e & -oscillations & 0  -decay are sensitive tools to probe physics beyond the Standard Model Discovery of -oscillations (Super-K) Discovery of -oscillations (Super-K) g-2 Results (BNL) g-2 Results (BNL) Evidence for 0  -decay (Heidelberg/Moscow) Evidence for 0  -decay (Heidelberg/Moscow) Proton Decay ??? (Kolar Goldfield) Proton Decay ??? (Kolar Goldfield) Extensions to SM -( with -oscillations) - Predict LFV rates too small to be observed Extensions beyond SM - Predict LFV & BNV at a measurable level (e.g. see Barbieri & Hall, Hisano et al.) Super Symmetry (SUSY-GUTs) Super Symmetry (SUSY-GUTs) SU    r(  e  )   SU    r(  e  )    SO    r(  e  )   !!! Just below Present Experimental Bound <1.2·10 -11 !!! !!! Just below Present Experimental Bound <1.2·10 -11 !!! Minimal Standard Model (SM)- Baryon Number, Lepton Flavour & Lepton Number - conserved ! neutrinos massless - no oscillations ! Hence: processes such as  e ,  e,  eee, K 0 L  e, Z 0  e & -oscillations & 0  -decay are sensitive tools to probe physics beyond the Standard Model Discovery of -oscillations (Super-K) Discovery of -oscillations (Super-K) g-2 Results (BNL) g-2 Results (BNL) Evidence for 0  -decay (Heidelberg/Moscow) Evidence for 0  -decay (Heidelberg/Moscow) Proton Decay ??? (Kolar Goldfield) Proton Decay ??? (Kolar Goldfield) Extensions to SM -( with -oscillations) - Predict LFV rates too small to be observed Extensions beyond SM - Predict LFV & BNV at a measurable level (e.g. see Barbieri & Hall, Hisano et al.) Super Symmetry (SUSY-GUTs) Super Symmetry (SUSY-GUTs) SU    r(  e  )   SU    r(  e  )    SO    r(  e  )   !!! Just below Present Experimental Bound <1.2·10 -11 !!! !!! Just below Present Experimental Bound <1.2·10 -11 !!!                e+   e+   e+   e+    e+   e+   e+   e+   N  e N N  e N N  e N N  e N 10 -9 10 -6 10 -13 10 -11 10 -15 ~10 -12 SUSY level Current Limit Process Further Stimulate the search for LFV in the charged Lepton Sector in the charged Lepton Sector } Physics Motivation

56. 050923ISS Plenary#156 Physics Motivation cont. e.g. Prediction Br (  e  ) vs. parameter space in SUSY SU(5) see J. Hisano et al. Phys. Lett. B391 (1997) 341 Similar plots for  e conversion with with R  e - ranging between ( 10 -14 - 10 -17 ) ( 10 -14 - 10 -17 ) over most of the parameter ranges MECO(BNL)-goal single event sensitivity of 2.10 -17 * tan(  ) - ratio of vac. expec. values of Higgs Fields *  - Higgs Fields mixing parameter MuEGamma Goal 10 -14

57. 050923ISS Plenary#157 Mega Limit Physics Motivation cont.  m 2 (eV 2 ) Br(  e  ) Possible solutions to solar - oscil. MSW large angle MSW small angle Vac MuEGamma Goal 10 -14 LFV and -oscillations From the model of: J. Hisano and D. Nomura Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) SU(5) grand unified model with heavy, right-handed neutrinos (Majorana) Solar - Results from Super-Kamiokande favour favour MSW Large-angle Mixing MSW Large-angle Mixing From the model of: J. Hisano and D. Nomura Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) SU(5) grand unified model with heavy, right-handed neutrinos (Majorana) Solar - Results from Super-Kamiokande favour favour MSW Large-angle Mixing MSW Large-angle Mixing

58. 050923ISS Plenary#158 MEG @ PSI Discovery Potential: 4 Events BR = 2 X 10 -13

59. 050923ISS Plenary#159