Steve Biller, Oxford

Transcription

1 Steve Biller, Oxford

2 Who the hell are you?! No idea!

3 ν µ ν τ ν e ν µ,τ

4 14:00 GMT, 28 November, 2006 Detector high voltage was ramped down for the last time in Sudury as SNO ceases operation R.I.P.

5 = big tiny tiny tiny big small tiny very small big e b s d b s d i tb ts td cb cs cd ub us ud ' ' ' δ Mixing Matrix CKM Quark < = big big big big big big small big big e i e e e e? ? MNS NeutrinoMixing Matrix δ τ τ τ µ µ µ τ µ ν ν ν ν ν ν P

6 PMNS NeutrinoMixing Matrix ν e ν µ = ντ e1 µ 1 τ1 e2 µ 2 τ 2 i < 0.2e big big small? big big big big big big e3 µ 3 τ 3 δ ν1 ν 2 ν 3? GTs? See-Saw? IF θ 13 > 0.05 (sin 2 2θ 13 > 0.01) 13 Otherwise New symmetry? The relationship between neutrinos and quarks in GTs may be the source of the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the niverse (CP violation) CKM Quark d ' s' = b' big small tiny ud cd td 0.04 small big tiny Mixing Matrix us cs ts ub cb tb 0.003e d s b iδ very tiny tiny big Knowing the size of sinθ 13 is the next step and will set the roadmap for how to proceed

7 Off Axis ν Beams Take advantage of Lorentz Boost and 2-body decays Concentrate ν µ flux at one energy Lower NC and ν e backgrounds at that energy (3-body decays) ν µ ν e Appearance T2K & NOVA

8 SMRD T2K 280m Near Detector FGD s TPC s Tracker P0D ECAL

9 Oscillation Probability: P(ν µ ν e )=P 1 +P 2 +P 3 +P 4 where dependence in sin(2θ 23 ), sin(θ 23 ) 2 solutions dependence in sign( m 2 13 ) 2 solutions δ-cp phase + [0,2π] interval of solutions -

10 P(ν µ ν ε ) ½ (sin 2 2θ 13 1 / 10 sin2θ 13 sinδ) α º 5 x sin2θ 13 P(ν µ ν ε ) α 50 (α ½ sinδ) ( 0 < α ) < 2 0 < sinδ < 1

11 Reactor Neutrinos ν e ν e ν e Well understood, isotropic source of electron anti-neutrinos neutrinos E ν 8 MeV Oscillations observed as disappearance of ν e ν e ν e ν e 1.0 Probability ν e Survival Probability P(νe νe) =1 sin 2 2θ sin 2 (1.27 m 2 L / Eν ) O( m 122 / m 132 ) sin 2 2θ 13 Distance No θ 23 ambiquity; No δ CP effects; No matter effects; Minimal dependence on m 12 2

12 Gd-loaded scintillator ν e +p n p n e + n µ µ

13 Best current constraint: Chooz R = 1.01 ± 2.8%(stat)±2.7%(syst) ν e ν e (disappearance experiment) P th = 8.4 GW th, L = km, M = 5 t overburden: 300 mwe for m 2 atm = ev 2 ν e ν x sin 2 (2θ 13 ) < 0.2 (90% C.L) M. Apollonio et. al., Eur.Phys.J. C27 (2003)

14 Double Chooz Krasnoyarsk Braidwood Daya Bay Diablo Canyon Reno KASKA Angra

15 NSF (+ refugees) Double Chooz Krasnoyarsk Braidwood Daya Bay Diablo Canyon DOE Reno KASKA Angra

16 NSF (+ refugees) Double Chooz Krasnoyarsk Braidwood Daya Bay Diablo Canyon DOE Reno KASKA Angra

17 France Detector Mechanics Digitization/DAQ Near and Far Laboratory Infrastructure Technical Coordination and detector integration Germany Scintillators Purification and fluid handling systems Inner muon veto Level 1 trigger System K (Oxford & Sussex) PMT Concentrators LED Calibration System Japan PMTs Spain Inner detector Photo detection and mechanics Russia Simulation and Calibration Scintillator Development SA Front End Electronics Calibration system Slow control system Outer Muon Veto system

18 Site in Ardennes, France Chooz-far Type PWR Cores 2 Power 8.4 GWth Couplage 1996/1997 (%, in to 2000) 66, 57 Constructeur Framatome Opérateur EDF Chooz-near

19 Near detector Far detector

20 Far site Near site 40 m 40m ~250 m ~70-80 m.w.e 1000 events/day (preliminary) Start of integration 2006 Ø 4, 2m 3,5m (under the crane) DAPNIA 1.05 m 300 m.w.e 70 events/day Available end of 2008 DAPNIA Muon Veto Gamma Catcher Buffer Target

21 Detector layout Detector dimensions have been frozen Acrylic Gamma catcher vessel (Inner radius = 1,696m Inner H = 3,55 m t = 12mm) LS LS + 0,1%Gd Acrylic Target vessel (Inner radius =1,15m H = 2,474m t = 8mm) Muons VETO (shield) Inner radius = 3,471m Thickness = 170mm Stainless steel Buffer (Inner radius = 2,758m Inner H = 5,674m t = 3mm)

22 Gd*

23 Acquisition Glove box for calibration Integration of OTER VETO

24 Systematic Errors Chooz Double Chooz ν flux and σ 1.9 % <0.1 % Reactorinduced Reactor power Energy per fission 0.7 % 0.6 % <0.1 % <0.1 % Two identical detectors, Low bkg Solid angle 0.3 % <0.1 % Distance 10 cm + monitor core barycenter Volume 0.3 % 0.2 % Same weight sensor for both det. Detector - induced Density H/C ratio & Gd concentration 0.3 % 1.2 % <0.1 % <0.1 % Accurate T control (near/far) Same scintillator batch + Stability Spatial effects 1.0 % <0.1 % identical Target geometry & LS Live time few % 0.25 % Measured with several methods Analysis From 7 to 3 cuts 1.5 % % Total 2.7 % < 0.6 %

25

26

27

28 ± 25% of peak position

29 Provides a simple, adaptable system for non-intrusive, in situ calibration with elements fixed in a well-defined, stable geometry Continuously monitor detector stability Calibrate relative PMT timing Study optical characteristics at different wavelengths

30

31 Expected Milestones 90% C.L. for sin 2 (2θ)=0 m 2 atm = ev 2 (with 20% uncertainty) 2007: assembly of far detector on site 2008: data taking with far detector - Start of Near lab building 2009: assembly of near detector 2010: data taking with 2 detectors σ sys =2.5% σ sys =0.6% Excluded by CHOOZ Far Detector Only Near & Far Detectors Complementary with T2K, Noνa 5y