1. Neutrinos from Stored Muons STORM physics with a μ storage ring

2. Outline  Historical context  Physics motivation  The facility  Physics potential  Project considerations  Moving forward and Conclusions 2 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

3. Historical Context

4. Introduction  For over 30 years physicists have been talking about doing experiments with s from  decay  Flavor content fully known  “Near Absolute” Flux Determination is possible in a storage ring  Beam current, polarization, beam divergence monitor,  p spectrometer  Overall, there is tremendous control of systematic uncertainties with a well designed system  Initially the motivation was high-energy interaction physics.  BUT, so far no experiment has ever been done! 4 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

5. 30 Years in the Making  First proposed in detail by David Neuffer in 1980 at the Telemark Wisconsin workshop on neutrino mass 5 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 The technology existed then & It certainly exists now

6. P-860 (1990)  A Search for Neutrino Oscillations Using the Fermilab Debuncher Slide from 1991 PAC Presentation Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 6

7. Muons in the Debuncher? Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 7

8. The Birth of the Neutrino Factory - 1998 TopCite 500+ “Renowned Paper” Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 8

9. physics with a μ storage ring 9 12 channels accessible if E  is above the  threshold Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 For the past decade+, the focus has been on oscillation physics

10. Neutrino Factory Studies  Study 1 (US-Fermilab) [2000]  Study 2 (US-BNL) [2001]  NuFact-J study [2001]  CERN NF study [2002]  Study 2a (APS Multidivisional Neutrino Study) [2004]  ISS (first international study; ISS group) [2006]  One finishing up  International Design Study for a NF  RDR ready by September 2013  But will supply input to Snowmass ‘13 10 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

11. International Design Study for a Neutrino Factory (IDS-NF)  The baseline NF in the 2011 IDS-NF Interim Design Report (IDR) is the high-energy (E  =25 GeV) machine, two-baseline facility:  Proton Driver  4 MW, 2 ns bunch  Target, Capture, Drift (π → μ) & Phase Rotation  Hg Jet  200 MHz train  Cooling  30  mm (  )  150  mm ( L )  Acceleration  103 MeV  25 GeV  Decay rings  7500 km L  4000 km L  Focused on reaching the highest possible sensitivity for very small  13 11 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Figure of Merit:  0.15  /pot @ end of cooling channel

12. The NF Goal was To Know what we “Don’t” Know 12 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 We do Now Is the NF Concept Still Relevant? O. Mena and S. Parke, Phys.Rev. D69 (2004)

13. NF in context of  13  9 o Current status of IDS-NF design  Simpler Facility – New IDS-NF baseline  Single baseline (2300- 2600 km)  Lower E  = 10 GeV (eliminate final acceleration stage)  Still gives best  cp coverage & precision  But is still quite expensive 13 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

14. YES  nuSTORM  It is a NEAR-TERM FACILITY  Because, technically, we can do it now  Addresses the SBL, large  m 2 oscillation regime  Provides beam for precision  interaction physics  Accelerator technology test bed  potential for intense low energy muon beam  Provides for  decay ring R&D (instrumentation) & technology demonstration platform  Provides a Detector Test Facility Is there an affordable  -based beam “First Step”? 14 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

15. 15 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 So, here is where we are with the NF This is the simplest implementation of the NF And DOES NOT Require the Development of ANY New Technology This is what we want to do near-term: Neutrinos from STORed Muons, STORM 3.8 GeV/c

16. Physics motivation & Theoretical Considerations Beyond the SM

17. Short-baseline oscillation studies  Sterile neutrinos arise naturally in many extensions of the Standard Model.  GUT models  Seesaw mechanism for mass  “Dark” sector  Usually heavy, but light not ruled out.  Experimental hints  LSND  MiniBooNE  GA  Reactor “anomaly” 17 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Kopp, Machado, Maltoni & Schwetz (work in progress) & arXiv:1103.4570". 3+1

18. 3 + 2 Models 18 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013  Models with 2 sterile neutrinos provide better fits to the data arXiv:1204.5379v1 3+2 1+3+1 arXiv:1103.4570 Kopp, Maltoni & Schwetz

19. 3 + 3 Model  A 3+3 model has recently been shown to better fit all available data 19 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 J.M. Conrad, C.M. Ignarra, G. Karagiorgi, M.H. Shaevitz, J. Spitz (arXiv:1207.4765v1)

20. From Kopp, Maltoni & Schwetz In conclusion, we have shown that a global fit to short baseline oscillation searches assuming two sterile neutrinos improves significantly when new predictions for the reactor neutrino flux are taken into account, although some tension remains in the fit. We are thus facing an intriguing accumulation of hints for the existence of sterile neutrinos at the eV scale, and a confirmation of these hints in the future would certainly be considered a major discovery. 20 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

21. Interaction Physics

22. Cross-section measurements  The next generation of LB experiments face some significant challenges  CP asymmetry decreases with increasing sin 2 2  13  Well…. I should say that the CP asymmetry IS small  Flux and cross-sections must be known to much better than 5%  Gaining a better understanding of x-sections may be crucial to these future experiments  The energy range of interest is roughly 1-3 GeV   storage rings provide the only way to get large sample of e and  interactions (both neutrino and anti-neutrino) in a single experiment and:  With  decay ring instrumentation we anticipate getting the flux uncertainty below 1% and  With a well designed suite of near detectors, x-sections can be measured to the few % level or less.  Great deal of ND work for LBNE, LBNO & IDS-NF  Reach an overall systematic uncertainly that is very difficult (impossible?) in conventional beams 22 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

23. Cross-section measurements  Cross-section measurements   storage ring presents only way to measure   &  e & ( ) x-sections in same experiment  Supports future long-baseline experiments 23 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Important to note that with θ 13 large, the asymmetry you’re trying to measure is small, so: – Need to know underlying ν/νbar flux & σ more precisely – Bkg content & uncertainties start to become more important

24. A detector for interaction physics One Example 24 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013  HiResM  Evolution of the NOMAD experiment  One of the concepts considered for ND for LBNE  Studied as ND for NF  Capabilities  High resolution spectrometer  Low density  PID & tracking  Nuclear targets Sanjib Mishra

25. Interaction Physics A partial sampling  e and e -bar x-section measurements   0 production in interactions  Coherent and quasi-exclusive single  0 production  Charged  & K production  Coherent and quasi-exclusive single  + production  Multi-nucleon final states  -e scattering  -Nucleon neutral current scattering  Measurement of NC to CC ratio  Charged and neutral current processes  Measurement of e induced resonance production  Nuclear effects  Semi-exclusive & exclusive processes  Measurement of K s 0,  -bar production  New physics & exotic processes  Test of   - e  universality  Heavy  eV-scale pseudo-scalar penetrating particles 25 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Over 60 topics (thesis) accessible at nuSTORM

26. The Facility

27. Baseline  100 kW Target Station  Assume 60-120 GeV proton  Fermilab PIP era  High-Z target  Optimization on-going  C  Horn collection after target  Li lens has also been explored  Collection/transport channel  Stochastic injection of   Decay ring  Large aperture FODO  Also considering RFFAG  Instrumentation  BCTs, mag-Spec in arc, polarimeter 27 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 3.8 GeV/c

28.  -base beam: Oscillation channels 28 8 out of 12 channels potentially accessible Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

29.  Production, Capture & Transport 29 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 In momentum range 4.5 < 5.0 < 5.5 Obtain  0.11  ± /pot with 60 GeV p & NuMI-style horn Heavy metal target Target/capture optimization ongoing Sergei Striganov Ao Liu Fermilab 80% Collection + Transport Efficiency L » 20m

30.  Transport & p beam absorber 30 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

31. Injection Concept  π’s are on an injection orbit  separated by chicane  μ’s are in ring circulating orbit  lower p ~3.8 GeV/c  ~30cm separation between 31 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013  Concept works for FODO lattice  Now detailed by Ao Liu  Work in progress for RFFAG David Neuffer’s original concept from 1980

32.  s at end of first straight 32 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Ao Liu Fermilab

33. FFAG Racetrack 33 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Low dispersion in straight Y. Mori & JB Lagrange Kyoto A. Sato Osaka

34. RFFAG Dynamic Aperture 34 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

35. FODO vs. RFFAG 35 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

36. E  spectra (  + stored) 36 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Integrated over the 150 m straight at a position 50m from the end of the straight with 3m diameter detector NOTE: The transport line and ring could be re-tuned for 2 GeV/c  and move these spectra lower by » a factor of two with some drop in  production efficiency

37. The Physics Reach Appearance (Golden) Channel for sterile(s) search

38. Assumptions  N  = (POT) X (  /POT) X  collection X  inj X (  ) X A dynamic X   10 21 POT in 5 years of running @ 60 GeV in Fermilab PIP era  0.1  /POT (FODO)   collection = 0.8 (collection off horn + decay in transfer line)   inj = 0.8   = 0.08 (  ct X  capture in  decay) [  decay in straight]  A dynamic = 0.75 (FODO)   = Straight/circumference ratio (0.43) (FODO)  This yields  1.7 X 10 18 useful  decays 38 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

39. E  spectra (  + stored) 39 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 e  -bar Event rates/100T at ND hall 50m from straight with  + stored

40. Experimental Layout 40 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Must reject the “wrong” sign  with great efficiency Appearance Channel: e   Golden Channel Why   e Appearance Ch. not possible 150 ~ 1500 m

41. Baseline Detector Super B Iron Neutrino Detector: SuperBIND  Magnetized Iron  1.3 kT  Following MINOS ND ME design  1-2 cm Fe plate  5-6 m diameter  Utilize superconducting transmission line for excitation  Developed 10 years ago for VLHC  Extruded scintillator +SiPM 41 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 20 cm hole For 8 turns of STL

42. Simulation –  appearance  Full GEANT4 Simulation  Extrapolation from ISS and IDS-NF studies for the MIND detector  Uses GENIE to generate the neutrino interactions.  Involves a flexible geometry that allows the dimensions of the detector to be altered easily (for optimization purposes, for example).  Does not yet have the detailed B field, but parameterized fit is very good  Event selection/cuts  Cuts-based analysis  Multivariate in development 42 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Ryan Bayes Glasgow

43. Event reconstruction efficiency 43 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Left: 1 cm plates, Right: 2 cm plates

44. Backgrounds 44 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Left: 1 cm plates Right: 2 cm plates

45. Raw Event Rates & Sensitivities 45 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 3+1 Assumption Appearance channels Chris Tunnell Oxford

46. e    appearance CPT invariant channel to MiniBooNE 46 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 2 cm plate Cuts-based Analysis

47. Multivariate Analysis CC-NC discrimination 47 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Ryan Bayes Steve Bramsiepe Glasgow  2 cm plates  Updated reconstruction  Tested 3 multi- variate methods  KNN  BDT  MLP  Goal to reduce threshold & increase eff.  BDT Best  Lower Bkgs. Clearly, raising our peak E by.5 to 1 GeV would help

48. Background rates 48 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

49. e    appearance CPT invariant channel to LSND/MiniBooNE 49 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 2 cm plate

50. e    appearance 50 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 3+1 Assumption 1% systematic 10% bkg uncertainty

51. Multivariate Analysis CC-NC discrimination – thinner plates 51 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 1.5 cm Fe plates

52. e    appearance CPT invariant channel to LSND/MiniBooNE 52 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

53. Systematics for Golden Channel in nuSTORM  Magnetic field uncertainties  If we do as well as MINOS (3%), no impact  Need high field, however. STL must work  Cross sections  Needs some more work  ND for disappearance ch (100T of SuperBIND) should minimize contribution to the uncertainties  Cosmic rays  Not an issue (we do need to distinguish between ­­­­­­­upward and downward going muons via timing).  Detector modeling (EM & Hadronic showering)  Experience from MINOS indicates we are OK, but this needs more work for SuperBIND  Atmospheric neutrinos  Negligible  Beam and rock muons  Active veto – no problem 53 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

54. ExperimentS:B LSND2:1 MiniBooNE1:1  1:2 ICARUS/NESSiE  1.5:1 / 1:4 LAr-LAr1:4 K + DAR  4:1 LSND Reloaded5:1 oscSNS3:1 nuSTORM11:1  20:1 S:B for Appearance Channel Past and Future(?) 54 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013  Note: There are a number of experiments with megaCi to petaCi sources next to large detectors that have an exquisite signature of steriles (# evts/unit length displays oscillatory behavior in large detector) and have large effective S:B  SNO+Cr, Ce-Land, LENS, Borexino, Daya Bay  IsoDAR  A number of very-short baseline reactor experiments

55. “Robustness” of appearance search 1.5 cm plate 55 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Bkg uncertainty: 10%  50%

56. Disappearance Experiments

57. Raw Event Rates 57 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 3+1 Assumption Appearance channels Tremendous Statistical Significance  dis. channels follow naturally from  appear. e channels will take more work

58. Disappearance channels But:  Need self-consistent two-detector simulation including (bin-to-bin) uncorrelated shape error ~ 10%  A challenge: there may be oscillations already in near detectors  Geometry important for  m 2 ~ 10 1 – 10 3 eV 2  Suitability (& optimization) of SuperBIND for e channels still needs to be studied 58 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Walter Winter Würzburg

59. Project Considerations

60. Siting Plan 60 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Steve Dixon Fermilab FESS

61. MI-40 Beam Absorber + Proton beam line 61 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Michael Geelhoed Fermilab

62. Far Detector Hall and Detector(s) 62 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Herman Cease Fermilab

63. Looking to the Energy Frontier 63 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Only 40% of  s decay in straight Need  absorber

64. Low Energy  beam 64 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 After 3.48m Fe, we have  10 10  /pulse in 100 < P(MeV/c) < 300 At end of straight we have a lot of  s, but also a lot of  s with 4.5 < P(GeV/c) < 5.5

65. Input beam for some future 6D  cooling experiment(s) 65 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

66. Costing

67. Costing model Basis of Estimation  Utilized data from the LBNE CD1 (95% CL estimate on TPC  $0.9B ) and extrapolated to nuSTORM components  Primary beam line  Target Station  Beam absorber  Conventional Facilities  Civil construction  Used FESS estimates from  2e CD1 review where appropriate  The above are, of course, fully loaded and escalated  Magnet Costs based on Strauss & Green model  Stored Energy  Added loading factor & escalation 67 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

68. Cost based on LBNE costs Fully loaded and escalated 68 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Sub SystemCost M$ 1 Primary Beam Line24 Target Station56 Transport Line14 Decay Ring82 Near Hall29 2 Far Detector24 3 Sub Total229 Project Office34 4 Total263 1 No allowances made for reuse of existing equipment 2 Near Hall sized for multiple experiments & ND for SBL oscillation physics 3 FD cost based on MINOS as-built & EUROnu costing for MIND + full burdening + escalation & no allowance for existing FD Hall 4 Assumes LBNE estimate of  15% (including contingency)

69. Moving Forward

70. The “Collaboration” P. Kyberd, 1 D.R. Smith, 1 L. Coney, 2 S. Pascoli, 3 C. Ankenbrandt, 4 D. Adey 4, S.J. Brice, 4 A.D. Bross, 4 H. Cease, 4 J. Kopp, 4 N. Mokhov, 4 J. Morfin, 4 D. Neufer, 4 M. Popovic, 4 P. Rubinov, 4 S. Striganov, 4 A. Blondel, 5 A. Bravar, 5 F. Dufour 5, Y. Karadhzov 5, A. Korzenev 5,E. Noah, 5 M. Ravonel 5, M. Rayner 5, R. Asfandiyarov 5, A. Haesler 5, C. Martin 5, E. Scantamburlo 5, F. Cadoux 5, R. Bayes, 6 F.J.P. Soler, 6 D. Colling 7, A. Dobbs, 7 J. Dobson 7, P. Dornan 7, K. Long, 7 J. Pasternak, 7 E. Santos, 7 J.K. Sedgbeer 7, M.O. Wascko, 7 Y. Uchida 7, S.K. Agarwalla, 8 S.A. Bogacz, 9 Y. Mori, 10 J.B. Lagrange, 10 A. de Gouvêa, 11 Y. Kuno, 12 A. Sato, 12 V. Blackmore, 13 J. Cobb, 13 C. D. Tunnell, 13 A. Webber 13, J.M. Link, 14 P. Huber, 14 and W. Winter 15, K.T. McDonald 16, R. Edgecock 17, W. Murray 17, S. Ricciardi 17, C. Rogers 17, C. Booth 18, M. Dracos 19, N. Vassilopoulos 19, J.J. Back 20, S.B. Boyd 20, P.F. Harrison 20 1 Brunel University, 2 University of California, Riverside, 3 Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology, Durham University 4 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, 5 University of Geneva 6 University of Glasgow, 7 Imperial College London, 8 Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, CSIC and Universidad de Valencia, 9 Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, 10 Kyoto University, 11 Northwestern University, 12 Osaka University, 13 Oxford University, Subdepartment of Particle Physics, 14 Center for Neutrino Physics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 15 Institut für theoretische Physik und Astrophysik, Universität Würzburg 16 Princeton University, 17 STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, 18 University of Sheffield, 19 IPHC, Universit´e de Strasbourg, 20 University of Warwick 70 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 LOI submitted to Fermilab PAC, June 2012 (P=1028) nuSTORM: input to the update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics, July 2012

71. Ongoing & future work  Facility  Targeting, capture/transport & Injection  Need to complete detailed design and simulation  Decay Ring optimization  Continued study of both RFFAG & FODO decay rings  Decay Ring Instrumentation  Define and simulate performance of BCT, polarimeter, Magnetic-spectrometer, etc.  Produce full G4Beamline simulation of all of the above to define flux (Fermilab PhD student - thesis)  And verify the precision to which it can be determined. 71 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

72. Ongoing & future work II  Detector simulation  For oscillation studies, continue MC study of backgrounds & systematics  Start study of disappearance channels  Look in detail at all sources of backgrounds: CR, atmospheric, etc.  Will lead to detector (FAR) optimization  In particular the event classification in the reconstruction needs optimization.  Move to Multivariate techniques. [Begun]  For cross-section (& general interaction physics) measurements need detector baseline design  Learn much from work for LBNE & IDS-NF (both detector & physics)  Increased emphasis on e interactions, however 72 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

73. Important steps to move forward  Two workshops are planned  CERN: March 26-27 (contact: Elena Wildner)  Virginia Tech: April 12-13 (contact: Jon Link  Aim:  Consolidate technical options  Define work-packages  Identify possible collaborative topics  Discussion on the collaborative EOI to CERN SPC (to be ready by April ‘13)  Ken Long, Elena Wildner  Produce Project Definition Report (PDR) through FESS  Production of Full Proposal to Fermilab ( June 2013 PAC & Snowmass) 73 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

74. nuSTORM: Conclusions The Physics case:  Initial simulation work indicates we can confirm/exclude at 10  (CPT invariant channel) the LSND/MiniBooNE result   and ( e ) disappearance experiments delivering at the <1% level look to be doable  Systematics need careful analysis  Detailed simulation work on these channels has not yet started  interaction physics studies with near detector(s) offer a unique opportunity & can be extended to cover 0.2<GeV< E < 4 GeV  Could be “transformational” w/r to interaction physics  For this physics, nuSTORM should really be thought of as a facility: A “light-source” is a good analogy  nuSTORM provides the beam & users will bring their detector to the near hall 74 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

75. Conclusions II The Facility:  Presents very manageable extrapolations from existing technology  But can explore new ideas regarding beam optics and instrumentation  Offers opportunities for extensions  Add RF for bunching/acceleration/phase space manipulation  Provide  source for 6D cooling experiment with intense pulsed beam  Utilizes existing Fermilab infrastructure very effectively 75 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

76. So… nuSTORM :  Delivers on the physics for the study of sterile  Offering a new approach to the production of beams setting a 10  benchmark to confirm/exclude LSND/MiniBooNE  Can add significantly to our knowledge of interactions, particularly for e  interaction Facility  Provides an accelerator technology test bed  Provides a powerful detector test facility 76 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

77. Advertisement  Interested? ® subscribe to NUSTORM mailing list on listserv.fnal.gov 77 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Thank You

78. Back Ups

79. Required  charge mis-ID rate needed for given sensitivity 79 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Chris Tunnell Oxford

80. MVA vs Cuts-based analysis 80 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

81.  collection # within p ± 10% 81 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Retune line (with some loss in efficiency) to cover 0.3<E <4 GeV & Resultant extension in L/E X2-2.5 from lattice considerations

82. FODO Decay ring 82 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013  3.8 GeV/c  10% momentum acceptance, circumference = 350 m Alex Bogacz JLAB

83. Detector Issues

84. Event Candidates in SuperBIND 84 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Hits R vs. Z

85. Detector Considerations  Other options  Totally Active Scintillator - TASD  LAr  Present opportunity to measure e appearance?  Must be Magnetized, however  A hybrid approach (external  spectrometer) is a possibility 85 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

86. 86 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Fine-Resolution Totally Active Segmented Detector (IDS-NF) Simulation of a Totally Active Scintillating Detector (TASD) using No a and Miner a concepts with Geant4 3 cm 1.5 cm 15 m u 3333 Modules (X and Y plane) u Each plane contains 1000 slabs u Total: 6.7M channels  Momenta between 100 MeV/c to 15 GeV/c  Magnetic field considered: 0.5 T  Reconstructed position resolution ~ 4.5 mm 15 m 150 m B = 0.5T 35 kT Total Mass

87. 87 Magnet- Concept for IDS-NF  VLHC SC Transmission Line  Technically proven  Affordable 1 m iron wall thickness. ~2.4 T peak field in the iron. Good field uniformity R&D to support concept Has not been funded Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

88. 88 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 TASD Performance  Event Reconstruction  Muon charge mis-ID rate Excellent  E

89. Detector Options Fid VolumeBReconCosting Model SuperBIND ☑☑☑☑ Mag-TASD ☑☑☑☑ Mag-LAr ☑☑☑☑ 89 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 ☑ Yes - OK ☑ Maybe ☑ Not Yet Technology check List

90. NF Physics & 3+n Models

91. NF Upgrade path 91 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 P. Coloma, P.Huber, J. Kopp, W. Winter, in preparation  2020 – T2K, NO A and Daya Bay  LBNE – 1300 km, 34 kt  0.7MW, 2 × 10 8 s (10 yrs)  LBNO – 2300 km, 100 kt  0.8MW, 1 × 10 8 s (10 yrs)  T2HK – 295 km, 560 kt  0.7MW, 1.2×10 8 s (10 yrs)  0.025 IDS-NF  700kW (5 yrs)  no cooling  2 × 10 8 s running time  10 kt detector  Still Very Expensive  LBNE (10kt, surface)

92. 3 + 3 Model II 92 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 All DataAppearance Data Lesson: Have access to as many channels as possible and cover as much of the parameter space as possible

93. L/E dependence 93 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013 Very different L/E dependencies for different models Experiments covering a wide range of L/E regions are required.

94. Civil Construction

95. Decay Ring 95 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013

96. Target Hall 96 Alan Bross Fermilab Colloquium February 27th, 2013