1. 1 SciBooNE PAC Outline Section - Presenter (Author)

2. 2 SciBooNE PAC Outline -1 Introduction - TN –Basics of neutrino oscillations (TN) As in ICFA talk –K2K has shown or published (TN) –(Show that we have seen many surprises in recent data) –CCQE: low Q 2 anomaly, favors higher M A –CC Coherent pi+ –More? –MB has shown (MOW) –CCQE: low Q 2 anomaly –CCpi+: low Q 2, 25% reduced cross section –NCpi0: lower coherent fraction Oscillation goals for next gen. exps - TN (TN) –Motivate importance of good cross section measurements Is  23 =45  ? What is  13 ? Mass hierarchy? CP violation???

3. 3 SciBooNE PAC Outline - 2 Low E cross sections - state of field - TN –Lipari plot/Flux comparison (TN) –Stress that flux is not contaminated by high energy tails –Relevance for oscillations (TN) Describe which cross sections contribute to signal and backgrounds –Table of what’s covered/what’s going on (TN) SciBooNE Description - TN –SciBar Detector (TN) Detector configuration, MRD physics optimization –BNB (MOW) HARP, E910 Proton plan (MOW) –Site optimization

4. 4 SciBooNE PAC Outline - 3 SciBooNE Measurements - MOW –SciBooNE Only (MOW) Radiative Delta Decay NCpi0 energy dependence –T2K (TN) NCpi0 BG CCpi+ –MiniBooNE (MOW) WS BGs Intrinsic nues

5. 5 SciBooNE PAC Outline - 4 Logistics - MOW (MOW) –Outline general ideas MRD materials –Costs Include labor, money –Schedule –Collaboration –Students Conclusions - MOW (MOW) –Can be important part of neutrino program at FNAL –Complementary to MINERvA (not competition) –Bring neutrino physicists to FNAL

6. 6 Thoughts on  Signal and BG  s Oscillation expts use CCQE events on nuclear targets for signal –Nuclear targeta provide more interactions, better statistics –Simple kinematics  good energy reconstruction e Appearance –Need to distinguish e from  in detector –BG = processes that fake e oscillation signals (flavor BG) Intrinsic e NC  0 NC  decay –Affect counting experiment  Disappearance –Need to distinguish CCQE from other CC processes –BG = processes that fake QE signal ( -interaction BG) CC1  + –Affect energy fitting experiment (poor energy resolution) Note: CCQE BG processes also affect e searches!

7. 7 Past Cross Section Uncertainty Table TypeCross Sec.E<1 GeV1<E<3 GeVE>3 GeV  CCQE ~10%(Bubble chambers) etc.  CC1  + (res) etc.  CC1  + (coh)  NC1  0 (res)  NC1  0 (coh)  CCQENo data!  CC1  + (res) No data!  CC1  + (coh) No data!  NC1  0 (res) No data!  NC1  0 (coh) No data!

8. 8 Future Cross Section Uncertainty Table TypeCross Sec.E<1 GeV1<E<3 GeVE>3 GeV  CCQE SciBooNE-n% MINERvA-m% M - m%  CC1  + (res) SB - n% M - m%  CC1  + (coh) SB - n% M - m%  NC1  0 (res) SB - n% M - m%  NC1  0 (coh) SB - n% M - m%  CCQESB - n%??  CC1  + (res) SB - n%??  CC1  + (coh) SB - n%??  NC1  0 (res) SB - n%??  NC1  0 (coh) SB - n%??

9. 9 SciBooNE (P-954) Proposal SciBooNe SciBooNE (P-954) Proposal K2K SciBar detector at FNAL Booster Neutrinos T. Nakaya (Kyoto) and M. Wascko (LSU) Dec. 8, 2005 @FNAL PAC

10. 10 Collaboration Members BarcelonaBarcelona ColoradoColorado ColumbiaColumbia FNALFNAL ICRRICRR KEKKEK KyotoKyoto LANLLANL LSULSU RomeRome ValenciaValencia 11 institutes, 45 people F. Sanchez, J. Alcaraz, S. Andringa, X. Espinal, G. Jover, T. Lux, F. Nova, A. Y. Rodriguez M. Wilking, E.D. Zimmerman J. Conrad, M. Shaevitz, K. B. M. Mahn, G. P. Zeller S. J. Brice, B.C. Brown, D. Finley, T. Kobilarcik, R. Stefanski Y. Hayato T. Ishii T. Nakaya, M. Yokoyama, H. Tanaka, K. Hiraide, Y. Kurimoto, K. Matsuoka, M. Taguchi, Y. Kurosawa W.C. Louis, R. Van de Water W. Metcalf, M. O. Wascko L. Ludovici, U. Dore, P. F. Loverre, C. Mariani J. J. Gomez-Cadenas, A. Cervera, M. Sorel, A. Tornero, J. Catala, P. Novella, E. Couce, J. Martin-Albo (*) Potential Ph.D. thesis students, Institute representative

11. 11 Outline of this presentation (<40 pages) 1.Highlights (1page) 2.Introduction (8page) 1.Neutrino Physics 2.Neutrino Cross Sections 3.SciBooNE Experiment (10 page) 1.Physics Motivation 2.FNAL Booster Neutrinos 3.SciBar Detector 4.SciBooNE Physics (10page) 1.Anti-neutrinos 2.Neutrino Cross Sections for T2K 3.Measurements for MiniBooNE 4.Others 5.Logistics (5page) 6.Conclusion (1page)

12. 12 1. Highlight Anti-neutrinos –Unexplored object. Non quasi-elastic interactions –Precise knowledge on cross sections is necessary for T2K. MiniBooNE near detector. –Confirmation and Redundancy for a mysterious (LSND) phenomena. Decay region 50 m MiniBooNE Detector SciBar MiniBooNE beamline 100 m 1 2 E (GeV) T2K K2K SciBar at BooNE Flux (normalized by area)

13. 13 39m 41.4m 2. Introduction 2 1 3  m 2 23  m 2 12   e Super-K K2K Neutrino Oscillations (1998-2005) SNO KamLAND Neutrino masses Neutrino masses (  m 12 2,  m 23 2 ) Mixing Angles Mixing Angles (  12,  23 )  13 ➾ 

14. 14 Next Step (2006-2015) Discover the last oscillation channel –  13 CP violation in the lepton sector –  Test of the standard oscillation scenario (U MNS ) –Precise measurements of oscillations (  m 23 2,  23 )   e 1 3 2 atmospheric Cross Mixing solarT2K NO A

15. 15 protons Strategy of accelerator oscillation experiments.   MiniBooNE K2K-ND SciBooNE MINER A  proton  HARP MIPP  (E)   Intense beam Gigantic detector  (E)   near (E) ↔  (E)   far (E)

16. 16 Unexplored Area of Neutrino Physics MINOS, NuMI K2K, NOvA MiniBooNE, T2K, SciBooNE Super-K atmospheric DIS  in this E range interesting: Data from old experiments ( 1970~1980 ) Low statistics Systematic Uncertainties Nuclear effects (  p/n absorption/scattering, shadowing, low Q 2 region) Not well-modeled New data from MiniBooNE & K2K shedding light on this More data at 1GeV with fine grained resolution will advance Neutrino Physics. QE 11

17. 17 Recent K2K results on the neutrino cross sections. Will be updated soon.

18. 18 Recent MiniBooNE results on the neutrino cross sections. Will be updated soon.

19. 19 3. SciBooNE Experiment A fine-segmented tracking detector with an intense low energy neutrino beam. SciBar Detector –Well-working detector (2003.9- at K2K) –Fine granularity (2.5  1.3cm 2 ) and Fully-Active –PID capability FNAL-BNB –An intense and low energy (~1GeV) beam. ≤ 1 year data taking is sufficient. –Both neutrinos and anti-neutrinos. –The beam is well-understood from the CERN HARP measurements. An ideal marriage of the detector and the beam for a precision neutrino interaction experiment. (A new experimental team from K2K and MiniBooNE) e+e-e+e- e+e-e+e- K2K Data

20. 20 We are here MiniBooNE is here NuMi is here SciBooNE will be here Fermilab Accelerator Complex and BNB (Booster Neutrino Beam)

21. 21 FNAL BNB （ 2E20 protons for SciBooNE ）  ,K + p  ,K - Relative neutrino fluxes    e Log scale E  (GeV) Directorate recommends planning on 1-2E20 POT/year From BNL-E910 New HARP data are available soon. p Be   +X Cross Section p beam 6.7E20 POT/3 years 0 3 6 Beam Simulation

22. 22 Expected  flux   spectra At z=100m At ground level Same energy point Several detector locations: A~H Very low Energy statistics ~1/10 An ideal location of the detector A B C D E F G H deep Far from the target Here is BEST

23. 23 Detector Component SciBar Detector –From KEK, Japan Electron CalorimeterElectron Calorimeter –From KEK, Japan –European collaborators have the responsibility. Muon Range Detector –Will be built at FNAL from the parts of an old experiment (FNAL-E6xx). –The material exists and the detailed design is on-going. beam SciBar EC MRD

24. 24 SciBar Detector Extruded scintillator (15t) Multi-anode PMT (64 ch.) Wave-length shifting fiber EM calorimeter 1.7m 3m Extruded scintillators with WLS fiber readout The scintillators are the neutrino target 2.5 x 1.3 x 300 cm 3 cell ~15000 channels Detect short tracks (>8cm) Distinguish a proton from a pion by dE/dx Total 15 tons  High track finding efficiency (>99%)  Clear identification of ν interaction process Constructed in summer 2003

25. 25 SciBar Components 64 charge info. 2 timing info. VME board Extruded Scintillator (1.3×2.5×300cm 3 ) ・ made by FNAL (same as MINOS) Wave length shifting fiber (1.5mmΦ) ・ Long attenuation length (~350cm)  Light Yield : 18.9p.e./cm/MIP Multi-Anode PMT ・ 2×2mm 2 pixel (3% cross talk @1.5mmΦ) ・ Gain Uniformity (20% RMS) ・ Good linearity (~200p.e. @6×10 5 ) Readout electronics with VA/TA ADC for all 14,400 channels TDC for 450 sets (32 channels-OR) Top View

26. 26 4 cm 8 cm 262 cm Readout Cell Beam Fibers “spaghetti” calorimeter re-used from CHORUS 1mm diameter fibers in the grooves of lead foils 4x4cm 2 cell read out from both ends 2 planes ( 11X 0 ) Horizontal: 30 modules Vertical : 32 modules Expected resolution 14%√E Linearity: better than 10% Electron Catcher

27. 27 Event Display (K2K- Data) p  CCQE candidate ( +n  +p) 3track event CC-1  (  +p+  ) candidate Large energy deposit in Electron Catcher e CCQE candidate proton electron The neutrino events are well observed with a fine resolution.

28. 28 MiniBooNE Cross Section Results

29. 29 MiniBooNE CCQE  on CH 2 Muon AngleMomentum Transfer Deficit of events at low Q2 Corresponds to forward angle muons (good angular resolution) Indicates some new physics?

30. 30 MiniBooNE CCQE  on CH 2 Shape at higher Q 2 disagrees Corresponds to large angle muons (good angular resolution) Indicates higher M A ? Momentum TransferMuon Angle

31. 31 ( 10 -36 cm 2 ) MiniBooNE CC1  +  on CH 2 systematic errors due to cross sections (~15%), photon atten. and scatt. lengths in oil (~20%), energy scale (~10%) MiniBooNE result lower than NUANCE prediction More consistent with ANL result than BNL result

32. 32 ( 10 -36 cm 2 ) systematic errors due to cross sections (~15%), photon atten. and scatt. lengths in oil (~20%), energy scale (~10%) MiniBooNE result lower than Monte Carlo predictions More consistent with ANL result than BNL result MiniBooNE CC1  +  on CH 2

33. 33 MiniBooNE NC1  0  on CH 2 systematic errors: cross section uncertainties (~15%, 20%) energy scale (5%) MiniBooNE coherent fraction well below Rein-Sehgal and Marteau

34. 34 Conclusions from MB  results Nuclear targets seem to have unpredicted effects on neutrino event kinematics Cross sections (i.e., event rates) differ from predictions –Different rates of signal and BG events Flavor BGs and -interaction BGs What other surprises are there??

35. 35 Booster Neutrino Beam

36. 36  run (Cross Section) –CC-1  cross section with M A. –CCQE M A measurement –NC  0 measurement –Search for CC coherent  –Search for NC coherent  0 –Search for the radiative Delta decay ( +N  +N’+  ) –Beam e flux for MiniBooNE   e  appearance search –    for MiniBooNE     disappearance search Study interaction to improve MC modeling of those interactions 7. Physics of SciBar at BNB Comparison of  flux spectra at K2K, T2K and BooNE Flux (normalized by area) 0 1 2 E (GeV) T2K K2K SciBar at BooNE

37. 37 Neutrino B.G. (~35%) Anti- run –CCQE measurement. Negligible BG from. Energy Dependence  and M A can be measured –CC-1  cross section with M A. –NC  0 measurement Also +p  +p+  0 exclusive final-state search –Search for CC coherent  –Search for NC coherent  0 –Hyperon production in anti- mode – contamination for MiniBooNE anti- measurements.

38. 38 Neutrino run (0.5  10 20 POT) # of interactions in 10 ton Fiducial Volume  ~78,000  e ~ 700 cf. K2K-SciBar (0.2  10 20 POT) : ~25,000  The well-developed analysis and MC simulation software in K2K are used for these studies. Further Improvements are also expected and promising.

39. 39 Event Selection with MRD matching (P ,  ) CC-QE CC-1  CC-coh.  CC-multi  1 track 2 track QE 2 track non-QE ~13,500 events QE~67% ~1,970 events QE~76% ~2,360 events CC-1  ~49% PPPP PPPP PPPP   

40. 40 CC-1  + measurement Physics motivation for T2K –Dominant background to  disappearance in T2K –The uncertainty of nonQE/QE needs to be known to ~5% The  disappearance measurement error (90%CL) (sin 2 2) (m2)(m2) stat. only (nQE/QE)= 5% (nQE/QE)=20%

41. 41 CC-1  + measurement (cont’d)p  p     p SciBar has an ability to separate the final state Sensitive to the nuclear effect Final state ,p, ,n, No pion (nucl. effect)   E distribution for CC-1 + Clear event-by-event final-state tagging!

42. 42 CC-1  + measurement (cont’d) Selection criteria #(CC-1  + ) [events] PurityEfficiency Generated in FV13,892-------100% CC inclusive sample (SciBar+EC+MRD) 8,97724.1%64.6% # of tracks =22,70532.6%19.5% 2 nd track = MIP-like1,35546.8%9.8% Additional vertex activity can separate +p  +p+ + from +n  +n+ ++p  +p+ + from +n  +n+ + CC-1 + signature: 2-track, both are MIP-like Statistics will allow a 5% measurement  + detection efficiency as a function of P +  + efficiency Emitted  +

43. 43 NC-1  0 measurement Physics motivation for T2K –Dominant background to e appearance in T2K –Need to be known to 10% level 0 0   2-ring merged to 1-ring in Cherenkov detector 200~700MeV/c  0 s 1 2 3 4 5 Exposure /(22.5kt x yr) 10 -2 - stat. only - BG=10% - BG=20% sin 2 2 13 sensitivity

44. 44 NC-1  0 measurement (cont’d)  0 detection efficiency as a function of P 0 NC-1 0 event display Good efficiency for Good efficiency for high-momentum  0 high-momentum  0 Reconstructed  0 Reconstructed  0 ~800events ~800events  0 efficiency Emitted  0  0 s are detected as two shower-like tracks in SciBar Additional vertex activity can separate +p +p+ 0 from +n +n+ 0

45. 45 E distribution of NC-1  0 interaction Normalized by the entries up to 5GeV T2K neutrinos with a  0 for e background (after e selection) SciBooNE neutrinos with a  0 K2K measurement

46. 46 NC-1  0 measurement (cont’d) Projected SciBar at K2K Projected SciBar at BooNE (+p +p+ 0 ) 10% measurement Map out energy dependence at point where cross section turns over

47. 47 Anti-neutrino run (1.5  10 20 POT) # of interactions in FV  ~40,000  ~22,000

48. 48 MRD matching sample (P ,  ) w/ vertex activity cut CC-QE CC-1  CC-coh.  CC-multi   BG 1 track 2 track QE 2 track non-QE ~9,300 events QE~80%  BG=7% ~910 events  BG~80% ~1,700 events  BG~56% CC-1  ~21% CC -coh.  ~15% PPPP PPPP PPPP   

49. 49 Reconstructed E Anti- QE: ~80% WS BG: ~7% WS CCQE: ~80% +n  - +p +p  + +n Can see the proton ➾ see neutrino background in anti- beam

50. 50 Anti-neutrino CCQE measurement Physics motivation The first anti-neutrino CCQE  measurement below 1GeV It is important for T2K phase-II CC-QE:  + p   + + n 1-track Detected as a 1-track event in SciBar Can reconstruct neutrino energy No data   n (p ,   )

51. 51 CC-coherent  measurement +A   +A+ CC-coherent  : +A   +A+  Physics motivation –SciBar observed no CC-coherent  production in the K2K beam (hep-ex/0506008) –It will be a good check by using both neutrino and anti- neutrino beam

52. 52 CC-coherent  measurement (cont’d) Neutrino Run(0.5x10 20 POT) Anti-neutrino Run(1.5x10 20 POT) #(coherent )~160events Efficiency = 0.11 Purity = 0.44 #(coherent )~240events Efficiency = 0.11 Purity = 0.49 Rec. Q 2 distribution of final sample We can measure in both neutrino and anti-neutrino beam Rec. Q 2 (GeV/c) 2 0.1 300 0 Rec. Q 2 (GeV/c) 2 0.1 0 200

53. 53 Backup

54. 54 E spectra of NC-1  0 interaction =1.2GeV @BNB =1.5GeV @K2K Neutrinos which produce  0 at BNB (assuming  0 detection efficiency is flat) Normalized by the entries up to 5GeV

55. 55 NC-1  0 efficiency as a function of neutrino energy Estimated by eye-scan of event display # of events NC-1  0 interaction generated in FV Events with two shower-like tracks NOTE: black histogram includes the events that  0 is not emitted due to nuclear effect

56. 56 Why do the neutrino cross section help future experiments, like T2K? Observables ∝ Flux(  )     efficiency (  )   E (GeV) K2K-ND ☺ ☺ (HAR P) Some results Well- understood 1.3 MiniBooNE ☺ ☺ (HAR P) Under Progress Under calibration & tuning 0.7 SciBar@BN B ☺ ☺ (HAR P) Will be good Well- understood 0.7 T2K-ND280 ☻ ?? ----- need some time 0.7 MINER A ☺ ☺ (MIPP ) ----- ??2~5? ☺ ☺ ☺

57. 57 SciBar Installation (1)

58. 58 SciBar Installation (2)

59. 59 SciBar Installation – complete !

60. 60 Calculating the BNB  primary p Be   + X interactions: Sanford-Wang parameterization fit to E910 hadron production data, 6 and 12 GeV Parametrization allows extrapolation from various data sets (different p beam ) allows interpolation of cross section tables between existing experimental data E910 publication in preparation HARP will nail down production at 8 GeV with small errors (use E910 fit as cross check) Size of JAM error at our P beam GFLUKA prediction (no error shown) 12.3 GeV/c E910 beryllium Data Y. Cho et al., Phys. Rev. D4, 1967 (1971) J.Link, Columbia

61. 61 BNB Proton Delivery Directorate recommends planning on 1-2E20 POT We assume 2E20 POT in a one year run –0.5E20 POT in mode, 1.5E20 in  mode –This is consistent with FNAL Proton Plan

62. 62 HARP Beryllium Thin Target Results Preliminary Preliminary double differential  + production cross sections from the Be 5% target are available 0.75 < p  < 5 GeV/c 30 <   < 210 mrad Momentum and Angular distribution of pions decaying to neutrinos that pass through the MB detector. p   (GeV/c)    (mrad) Dave Schmitz – Columbia University

63. 63 Total: 8.7% 4.7% For HARP p Al    X Similar systematics expected for Be HARP data taken with thick targets will measure K fluxes

64. 64 Neutrino fluxes at different locations Study neutrino flux, event rates at various locations Consider physics potential at each location –Total flux, energy spectrum,  /K fractions, WS BGs, cost Overwhelming conclusion: –On-Axis Location at 100 m is the best choice

65. 65 A B C D E F G H Expected neutrino flux At z=100m At ground levelSame energy point Several detector locations: A~H Very low Energy statistics ~1/10

66. 66 Conclusions from detector location study On-axis is the best position. At location B (z=100m, y=300cm), neutrino energy is slightly lower and the total event rate is ~half the on-axis position. At locations C~G –neutrino energy is too low to be of interest to next generation oscillation searches –Intriguing wrong sign and  /K mixes negated by low statistics At location H, neutrino energy is same as that of on-axis position, but statistics ~10  smaller.