The LAGUNA design study- towards giant liquid based underground detectors for neutrino physics and astrophysics and proton decay searches

Angus, D.A.; Ariga, A.; Autiero, D.; Apostu, A.; Badertscher, A.; Bennet, T.; Bertola, G.; Bertola, P. F.; Besida, O.; Bettini, A.; Booth, C.N.; Borne, J.L.; Brâncuş, I.M.; W.Bujakowsky,; Campagne, Jean-Eric; Danil, G. Cata; Chipesiu, F.; Chorowski, M.; Cripps, J.; Curioni, A.; Davidson, Sacha; Déclais, Y.; Drost, U.; Duliu, Octavian G.; Dumarchez, J.; Enqvist, T.; Ereditato, A.; Feilitzsch, F. von; Fynbo, H. O. U.; Gamble, T.; Galvanin, G.; Gendotti, A.; Gizicki, Wojciech; Göger‐Neff, M.; Grasslin, U.; Gurney, D.; Hakala, Mikko; Hannestad, Steen; Haworth, M.; Horikawa, S.; Jipa, A.; Juget, F.; Kalliokoski, T.; Katsanevas, S.; Keen, M.; Kisiel, J.; Kreslo, I.; Kudryastev, V.; Kuusiniemi, P.; Labarga, L.; Lachenmaier, T.; Lanfranchi, J.‐C.; Lazanu, I.; Lewke, T.; Loo, Kai; Lightfoot, P. K.; Lindner, M.; Longhin, A.; Maalampi, J.; Marafini, M.; Marchionni, A.; Margineanu, R. M.; Markiewicz, A.; Marrodan-Undagoita, T.; Marteau, J.; Matikainen, R.; Meindl, Q.; Messina, M.; Mietelski, J. W.; Mitrica, B.; Mordasini, A.; Mosca, L.; Moser, U.; Nuijten, G.; Oberauer, L.; Oprina, A.; Paling, S. M.; Pascoli, Silvia; Patzak, T.; Pectu, M.; Pilecki, Z.; Piquemal, F.; Potzel, W.; Pytel, W.; Raczynski, M.; G.Rafflet,; Ristaino, G.; Robinson, M.; Rogers, R. D.; Roinisto, J.; Romana, M.; Rondio, E.; Rossi, B.; Rubbia, A.; Sadecki, Z.; Sáenz, C.; Sǎftoiu, A.; Salmelainen, J.; Sima, O.; Slizowski, J.; K.Slizowski,; Sobczyk, J.; Spooner, N. J. C.; Stoica, S.; Suhonen, J.; Sulej, R.; Szarska, M.; Szegłowski, T.; Temussi, M.; Thompson, Joshua; Thompson, L. F.; Trzaska, W. H.; Tippmann, M.; Tonazzo, A.; Urbanczyk, K.; Vasseur, G.; Williams, A.; Winter, J.; Wojutszewska, K.; Wurm, M.; Zalewska, A.; Zampaolo, M.; Zito, M.

doi:10.48550/arxiv.1001.0077

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the HE option, the neutrino flux labeled as "650 km" in Ref. [96] is used, being one of the configurations considered within the LAGUNA design study [97]. This flux has a broad peak between ∼1 and ∼2 GeV, with a non-negligible tail extending well above 3 GeV; see Fig.…”

Section: A Considered Experimental Setupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the calorimetric and kinematic methods of neutrino energy reconstruction in disappearance experiments

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To be able to achieve their physics goals, future neutrino-oscillation experiments will need to reconstruct the neutrino energy with very high accuracy. In this work, we analyze how the energy reconstruction may be affected by realistic detection capabilities, such as energy resolutions, efficiencies, and thresholds. This allows us to estimate how well the detector performance needs to be determined a priori in order to avoid a sizable bias in the measurement of the relevant oscillation parameters. We compare the kinematic and calorimetric methods of energy reconstruction in the context of two νµ → νµ disappearance experiments operating in different energy regimes. For the calorimetric reconstruction method, we find that the detector performance has to be estimated with a O(10%) accuracy to avoid a significant bias in the extracted oscillation parameters. On the other hand, in the case of kinematic energy reconstruction, we observe that the results exhibit less sensitivity to an overestimation of the detector capabilities.

show abstract

Section: A Considered Experimental Setupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the calorimetric and kinematic methods of neutrino energy reconstruction in disappearance experiments

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the current ∼ 60 km configuration, the knowledge of |∆m 2 32 | enters through the penalty term in Eq. (5). Therefore, in order for knowledge of |∆m 2 32 | to have a significant impact to the determination of MH, the ∆ 32 ± φ in ν µ channel should also be measured to a fraction of ∆m 2 eeφ − ∆m 2 µµφ level, which is well beyond the reach of T2K [34] and NOνA [35] ν µ disappearance measurements 4 .…”

Section: Challenges Of the Energy Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…sin 2 2θ 13 is determined to be 0.092 ± 0.016 (stat) ± 0.005 (sys). The large value of sin 2 2θ 13 is now important input to the design of next-generation neutrino oscillation experiments [4,5] aimed toward determining the mass hierarchy (MH) and CP phase.…”

Section: Introduction and Degeneracy Caused By The Uncertainty In ∆M ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass hierarchy resolution in reactor anti-neutrino experiments: Parameter degeneracies and detector energy response

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determination of the neutrino mass hierarchy using a reactor neutrino experiment at ∼60 km is analyzed. Such a measurement is challenging due to the finite detector resolution, the absolute energy scale calibration, as well as the degeneracies caused by current experimental uncertainty of |∆m 2 32 |. The standard χ 2 method is compared with a proposed Fourier transformation method. In addition, we show that for such a measurement to succeed, one must understand the non-linearity of the detector energy scale at the level of a few tenths of percent.

show abstract

“…Several super-beams have been proposed over the world in recent years. We will present results for a subset of them: the LBNE proposal [33]; the SPL super-beam from CERN to a water Čerenkov detector at Fréjus [16,[34][35][36]; a longer baseline option from CERN to a Liquid Argon detector placed at Pyhasälmi [37] (C2P); and the T2HK proposal [38][39][40]. Note that our simulation of the T2HK setup follows the original proposal [38,39].…”

Section: Setupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision on leptonic mixing parameters at future neutrino oscillation experiments

Coloma

Donini

Fernández‐Martínez

et al. 2012

J. High Energ. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We perform a comparison of the different future neutrino oscillation experiments based on the achievable precision in the determination of the fundamental parameters θ 13 and the CP phase, δ, assuming that θ 13 is in the range indicated by the recent Daya Bay measurement. We study the non-trivial dependence of the error on δ on its true value. When matter effects are small, the largest error is found at the points where CP violation is maximal, and the smallest at the CP conserving points. The situation is different when matter effects are sizable. As a result of this effect, the comparison of the physics reach of different experiments on the basis of the CP discovery potential, as usually done, can be misleading. We have compared various proposed super-beam, beta-beam and neutrino factory setups on the basis of the relative precision of θ 13 and the error on δ. Neutrino factories, both high-energy or low-energy, outperform alternative beam technologies. An ultimate precision on θ 13 below 3% and an error on δ of ≤ 7• at 1σ (1 d.o.f.) can be obtained at a neutrino factory.

show abstract

The LAGUNA design study- towards giant liquid based underground detectors for neutrino physics and astrophysics and proton decay searches

Cited by 11 publications

References 2 publications

Comparison of the calorimetric and kinematic methods of neutrino energy reconstruction in disappearance experiments

Comparison of the calorimetric and kinematic methods of neutrino energy reconstruction in disappearance experiments

Mass hierarchy resolution in reactor anti-neutrino experiments: Parameter degeneracies and detector energy response

Precision on leptonic mixing parameters at future neutrino oscillation experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About