I N IO NI Prospects of INO IO with Neutrino Beams N I ...ino/Talks/panjab_sanjib.pdf · Sanjib...

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Prospects of INO

with Neutrino Beams

Sanjib Kumar [email protected]

Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad, India

S. K. Agarwalla Panjab University, Chandigarh, India 29th February, 08– p.1/56

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Panjab University

!!! Thanks to all of you !!!


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

PLAN


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

PLAN

Present Status & Missing Links

Game Plan : ν Roadmap


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

PLAN



“Golden Channel”, Peµ

“Eight-fold” degeneracy

“Magic Baseline”


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

PLAN






India-Based Neutrino Observatory (INO)

β-beam and ν-factory


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

PLAN






India-Based Neutrino Observatory (INO)

β-beam and ν-factory

Results

Conclusions


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Then and Now

Then (1930): Pauli

I have hit upon a desperate remedy to save the

exchange theorem and the conservation of energy.

Namely, the possibility that there could exist

electrically neutral spin 12 particles of small mass . . . .


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Then and Now

Then (1930): Pauli

I have hit upon a desperate remedy to save the

exchange theorem and the conservation of energy.

Namely, the possibility that there could exist

electrically neutral spin 12 particles of small mass . . . .

Now (2004): APS Neutrino Study Group

Much of what we know about neutrinos we have

learned in the last six years. . . . . We have so many

new questions, . . . We are most certain of one thing :

neutrinos will continue to surprise us . . . .


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Past and Present

Neutrino physice, a bit player on the physics stage

in yesteryears, has now donned a central role


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Past and Present



↓Neutrino oscillations : Firmly established by

solar, atmospheric, reactor and accelerator expts

↓!!! We are now in precision regime !!!


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Past and Present



↓Neutrino oscillations : Firmly established by

solar, atmospheric, reactor and accelerator expts

↓!!! We are now in precision regime !!!

↓Next generation experiments : planned/proposed

world-wide to further pin down the values of the

oscillation parameters


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Present Status

Parameter Best fit 3σ (1 d.o.f)

∆m221 [10−5 eV 2] 7.6 7.1–8.3

|∆m231| [10−3 eV 2] 2.4 2.0–2.8

sin2 θ12 0.32 0.26–0.40

sin2 θ23 0.50 0.34–0.67

sin2 θ13 0.007 ≤ 0.050

M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M.A. Tortola, J.W.F. Valle, hep-ph/0405172v6

Best-fit values under 3 flavour scheme

Data from Solar + Atmospheric +

Reactor (KamLAND and CHOOZ) +

Accelerator (K2K and MINOS) expts


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Unsolved Issues

The sign of ∆m231 (m2

3 −m21) is not known.

Neutrino mass spectrum can be normal or

inverted hierarchical

∆m2

∆m2

∆m

2

12

3

3

12solar {

} solar

atm

osp

he

ric

ma

ss

νe νµ τν

NORMAL INVERTEDHIERARCHYHIERARCHY


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Unsolved Issues (Continued..)

Only an upper limit on

sin2 2θ13 (< 0.17 at 3σ) exists


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Unsolved Issues (Continued..)

The Dirac CP phase (δCP)

is unconstrained

We will focus on the first two issues. . .


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN


1st Step : Transition Era ⇒ Ongoing : 2005-2010 (phase-0)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Aim

Improve the precision on the atmospheric

parameters looking at νµ disappearance

Study νµ → ντ to ascertain atm. osc

and first see νµ → νe


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Aim

Improve the precision on the atmospheric

parameters looking at νµ disappearance

Study νµ → ντ to ascertain atm. osc

and first see νµ → νe

Candidates (Conventional Beam Expts)

K2K (terminated)

MINOS, OPERA (running)

ICARUS (starting soon)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN


2nd Step : 1-3 mixing Era ⇒ Approved/Proposed : 2008-2015 (phase-1)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Aim

Substantiate visibility of θ13 driven

transitions : νµ → νe, νe → νe

Penetrate sin2 2θ13 down to 0.01 (today < 0.17)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Aim

Substantiate visibility of θ13 driven

transitions : νµ → νe, νe → νe

Penetrate sin2 2θ13 down to 0.01 (today < 0.17)

Candidates (Superbeam & Reactor Expts)

T2K [Superbeam] (Approved : Starting in 2009)

Noνa [Superbeam] (Proposed : Expected in 2012)

Double Chooz, Daya Bay, Reno, Angra, KASKA, ... [Reactor]


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN


3rd Step : Precision Era ⇒ To be prepared : 2015-2025 (phase-2)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



sin2 2θ13 > 0.01 ← Known by 2012 → sin2 2θ13 < 0.01


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN




sin2 2θ13 > 0.01

We can probe it by

existing facilities

...Keep in mind...

Very small sensitivity to

δCP and neutrino mass

ordering


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN




sin2 2θ13 > 0.01

We can probe it by

existing facilities

...Keep in mind...

Very small sensitivity to

δCP and neutrino mass

ordering

sin2 2θ13 < 0.01

Beyond the reach of on-

going expts at that time

Pure and more intense

beams with precisely

known spectrum

Larger detectors with

good energy resolution,

granularity, ...


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Beta Beam

OR

Neutrino Factory

Do not forget SPL, T2HK, WBB, ...


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Beta Beam

OR

Neutrino Factory


They can penetrate sin2 2θ13 down to 0.0001

Excellent sensitivity to δCP and Sgn(∆m231)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN



Beta Beam

OR

Neutrino Factory


They can penetrate sin2 2θ13 down to 0.0001

Excellent sensitivity to δCP and Sgn(∆m231)

But journey from 0.01 to 0.0001

!!! Very Tough Ask !!!


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Golden Channel (Peµ)

The appearance probability (νe → νµ) in matter, upto second

order in the small parameters α ≡ ∆m2

21/∆m2

31and sin 2θ13,

Peµ ≃ sin2 2θ13 sin2 θ23

sin2[(1− A)∆]

(1− A)2

+ α sin 2θ13 ξ sin δCP sin(∆)sin(A∆)

A

sin[(1− A)∆]

(1− A)

+ α sin 2θ13 ξ cos δCP cos(∆)sin(A∆)

A

sin[(1− A)∆]

(1− A)

+ α2 cos2 θ23 sin2 2θ12

sin2(A∆)

A2;

where ∆ ≡ ∆m2

31L/(4E), ξ ≡ cos θ13 sin 2θ21 sin 2θ23,

and A ≡ ±(2√

2GF neE)/∆m2

31

Cervera et al., hep-ph/0002108

Freund, Huber, Lindner, hep-ph/0105071


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Eight-fold Degeneracy

(θ13, δCP ) intrinsic degeneracy

Burguet-Castell, Gavela, Gomez-Cadenas, Hernandez, Mena,

hep-ph/0103258

(sgn(∆m231), δCP ) degeneracy

Minakata, Nunokawa, hep-ph/0108085

(θ23, π/2− θ23) degeneracy

Fogli, Lisi, hep-ph/9604415

Severely deteriorates the sensitivity


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Problem & Solution

Degeneracies create “Clone” Solutions

Barger, Marfatia, Whisnant, hep-ph/0112119


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Problem & Solution

Degeneracies create “Clone” Solutions


Pµe ⇒ SuperBeam

Peµ ⇒ Beta Beam

Peµ ⇒ Neutrino Factory

Need smart ideas to play with these channels


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Solutions

Combine data from appearance expts at

different L and/or different E



Burguet-Castell et al, hep-ph/0103258

Huber, Lindner, Winter, hep-ph/0211300

Mena and Parke, hep-ph/0408070

and there are others also ...


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Solutions

Add data from different channels

The Silver Channel, Peτ

Autiero et al, hep-ph/0305185

Donini, Meloni, Migliozzi, hep-ph/0206034

The Disappearance Channel, Pµµ

Donini, Fernandez-Martinez, Meloni, Rigolin, hep-ph/0512038

Donini, Fernandez-Martinez, Rigolin, hep-ph/0411402

Adding reactor antineutrino data

Huber, Lindner, Schwetz, Winter, hep-ph/0303232


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Solutions

Adding atmospheric neutrino data

Huber, Maltoni, Schwetz, hep-ph/0501037

Campagne, Maltoni, Mezzetto, Schwetz, hep-ph/0603172

@@@@ One of the most elegant ideas @@@@

Kill the “Clones” at the “Magic” Baseline

Huber, Winter, hep-ph/0301257

Smirnov, hep-ph/0610198


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Magic Baseline


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Magic Baseline

If one chooses : sin(A∆) = 0

The δCP dependence disappears from Peµ

Golden channel enables a clean determination of

θ13 and sgn(∆m231)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Magic Baseline

If one chooses : sin(A∆) = 0

The δCP dependence disappears from Peµ

Golden channel enables a clean determination of

θ13 and sgn(∆m231)

First non-trivial solution:√

2GF neL = 2π (indep of E)

Isoscalar medium of constant density ρ :

Lmagic[km] ≈ 32725/ρ[gm/cm3]

According to PREM, the “Magic Baseline”

Lmagic = 7600 km


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Resonance in matter effect

The very long CERN - INO baseline provides an

excellent avenue to pin-down matter induced

contributions

In particular, a resonance occurs at

Eres ≡ |∆m2

31| cos 2θ13

2√

2GF Ne

= 7.45 GeV

with |∆m231| = 2.5× 10−3 eV2, sin2 2θ13 = 0.1 and

ρav = 4.17 gm/cc (PREM) for the baseline of 7152 km


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Transition Probability Peµ

1 3 5 7 9 11Energy (GeV)

0

0.25

0.5

P eµ

NHIH

0.00

0.25

0.50

P eµ

L=1000 km L=4000 km

L=10000 kmL=7500 km

1 3 5 7 9 11Energy (GeV)

Agarwalla, Choubey, Raychaudhuri, hep-ph/0610333

Normal .vs. Inverted hierarchy sin2 2θ13 = 0.1


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Transition Probability Peµ

1 3 5 7 9 11Energy (GeV)

0

0.25

0.5

P eµ

sin22θ13=0.1

sin22θ13=0.05

0.00

0.25

0.50

P eµ

L=1000 km L=4000 km

L=10000 kmL=7500 km

1 3 5 7 9 11Energy (GeV)


Two different values of sin2 2θ13 Normal hierarchy


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Neutrino Observatories

i

Location of main neutrino-related observatories


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

INO

The India-based NeutrinoObservatory

The INO/ICAL will be the world’sfirst magnetized large mass iron

calorimeter with interleaved GlassRPC detectors

Funding considerations in final stage


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Location of INO

http://www.imsc.res.in/∼ino/


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

ICAL Design

Spokesperson: Prof. N.K. Mondal, TIFR


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

INO : 2nd Phase

3.4−4.0

2.6−2.9

12.71−13.1

9.9 − 12.15

4.4−5.6

(11300)FERMI LAB

(7145)CERN

PUSHEP Rammam

JHF(4828)

CERN(6871)

FERMI LAB(10480)

(6556)JHF

Artificial Source

Beta Beam ?

Neutrino Factory ?

Lmagic = 7600 km


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

INO

A magnetized Iron calorimeter (ICAL) detector

with excellent efficiency of charge identification

(∼ 95%) and good energy determination

Preferred location is Singara (PUSHEP) in the

Nilgiris (near Bangalore), 7152 km from CERN

A (50+50) Kton Iron detector

Oscillation signal is the muon track

(νe → νµ channel)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Detector assumptions

Total Mass 50 kton

Energy threshold 1 GeV

Detection Efficiency (ǫ) 80%

Charge Identification Efficiency (fID) 95%

Detector characteristics used in the simulations

All studies assume a Gaussian energy resolution

function with σ = 0.15E


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

β-beam vs. ν-factory

Schematic Lay-out


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN


Ultimate choice depends on future R&D


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN


β-beam

Origin85B → 8

4Be + e+ + νe83Li → 8

4Be + e− + νe

CID (Mag Field)

Not Mandatory

Lumi (useful decays)

1.1× 1018/yr (ν)

2.9× 1018/yr (ν)

Parameters

Boost, γ (50 to 650)

Baseline, L

ν-factory

Origin

µ+ → e+νeνµ

µ− → e−νeνµ

CID (Mag Field)

Mandatory (ICAL)

Lumi (useful decays)

1.2× 1020/yr (1 MW)

4.8× 1020/yr (4 MW)

Parameters

Eµ (20 to 50 GeV)

Baseline, L

! They will draw the punch line in this business !


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

What is Beta Beam?

A pure, intense, collimated beam of νe or νe,

essentially background free

P. Zucchelli, Phys. Lett. B 532 (2002) 166

Beta decay of completely ionized, radioactive ions

circulating in a storage ring. No contamination of

other types of neutrinos


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Beta Beam : Ion sources

Ion τ (s) E0 (MeV) f Decay fraction Beam

18

10Ne 2.41 3.92 820.37 92.1% νe

6

2He 1.17 4.02 934.53 100% νe

8

5B 1.11 14.43 600684.26 100% νe

8

3Li 1.20 13.47 425355.16 100% νe

Comparison of different source ions

Low-γ design, useful decays in case of anti-neutrinos

can be 2.9× 1018/year and for neutrinos

1.1× 1018/year

Larger total end-point energy, E0 is preferred


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

β-beam flux at INO-ICAL

Flu

xy

r−

11

05

−2

mM

eV

−1

() ν

e 8B

250

350

500

650

CERN − INO

7152 Km

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Energy (GeV)

Flu

xy

r−

11

05

−2

mM

eV

−1

() ν

e 8Li

250

350

CERN − INO

500

650

7152 Km

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Energy (GeV)


Boosted on-axis spectrum of νe and νe

at the INO-ICAL assuming no oscillation


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Event Rates in INO-ICAL

sin2θ132

500 & NH500 & IH350 & NH350 & IH250 & NH250 & IH

8B Neutrino Beam

CERN − INO

0

50

100

150

200

250

0.001 0.01 0.1 0.5

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

sin2θ132

500 & IH500 & NH350 & IH350 & NH250 & IH250 & NH

8Li Anti−neutrino beam

CERN − INO

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0.001 0.01 0.1 0.5

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars


Event rates sharply depend on mass ordering and θ13


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

See the “Magic”

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

yea

rs

CERN − INO

B8 & IH

Li8 & NH

B8 & NH

Li8 & IH

sin22θ13 = 0.01

δCP

= 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

γ

Magic Baselinesin 13

22θ = 0.01

sin 1322θ = 0.05

L (km)

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

Normal hierarchy

γ= 500

8B

��

��

��

��

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 100 0

Agarwalla, Choubey, Raychaudhuri, 0711.1459

Event rates sharply depend on mass ordering and θ13

Effect of δCP is negligible at magic baseline


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Iso-event curves

100007152

732

4000

8B & NHγ 350=

sin2θ2

13

(deg

ree)

CP

δInputs

sin22

13

CPδ = 0

0.043=θ

10(−2

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0

400010000

732

Inputs

sin22

13

CPδ = 0

0.043=θ8Li & IH

γ = 350

(deg

ree)

CP

δ

sin2θ2

13

7152

10( )−2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5


At CERN-INO distance, the effect of δCP

on the measurement of θ13 is less


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Results

Measurement of sin2 2θ13

Full marginalization over

hierarchy

all oscillation parameters

the normalization factor of the Earth matter

density distribution


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Measurement of sin2 2θ13

−4

+ Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

+ )Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

/1.67)

CERN − INO

3σ

−3

−2

−1sin

θ22

13

θ

13 sensitivity

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

γ

10

10

10

10

sin

θ2

13

2

−4

−3

−2

−1

(tru

e)

+ Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

+ )Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

/1.67)

CERN − INO

3σ

θ

13 discovery

Conservative

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

γ

10

10

10

10


Left panel shows the 3σ sensitivity limit for sin2 2θ13

Right panel shows the 3σ discovery reach for sin2 2θ13


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

β-beam Optimization

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

1

3

5

7

9

11

Energ

yHGe

VL

18 Ne+6 He, No correlations

GLoBES 2008

10-3.4

10-3.8

10-4

.210-4

.6L�Γ=0

.8

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

1

3

5

7

9

11

Energ

yHGe

VL

18 Ne+6 He, Corrs+Degs

L�Γ=0

.8

10-3.4

10-4.2

10-3.8

GLoBES 2008

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

200

400

600

800

1000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Energ

yHGe

VL

8 B+8 Li, No correlations

GLoBES 2008

L�Γ=2

.6

10-2.4

10-2.8

10-3

.2

10-3

.6

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

200

400

600

800

1000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Energ

yHGe

VL

8 B+8 Li, Corrs+Degs

GLoBES 2008

10-2.4

10-2.8

Agarwalla, Choubey, Raychaudhuri, Winter, 0802.3621

sin22θ13 sensitivity at 3σ as a function of L and Boost factor γ


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

ν-factory Optimization

2000 4000 6000 8000L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

E Μ@G

eVD

Correlations

GLoBES 2006

2000 4000 6000 8000L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

E Μ@G

eVD

Degeneracies

GLoBES 2006

2000 4000 6000 8000L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

E Μ@G

eVD

Statistics

GLoBES 2006

0.5

1

2

5

10

2000 4000 6000 8000L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

E Μ@G

eVD

Systematics

GLoBES 2006

Huber, Lindner, Rolinec, Winter, hep-ph/0606119

sin22θ13 sensitivity at 5σ, Eµ = 30 GeV , L = 7500 km (Optimal choice)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Results

Sensitivity to Sgn(∆m231)

Full marginalization over

all oscillation parameters

the normalization factor of the Earth matter

density distribution


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Measurement of Sgn(∆m231)

sin

θ2

13

2

−4

+ Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

+ )Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

/1.67)

−2

−3

−1(t

ru

e)

NH : TRUE

Mass ordering

CERN − INO

3σ

δCP

(true) = 0

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

γ

10

10

10

10

−4

−2

−3

−1

sin

θ2

13

2(t

ru

e)

IH : TRUE

+ Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

+ )Li8 (γ)B

8 (γ

/1.67)

Mass ordering

CERN − INO

3σ

δCP

(true) = 0

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 10

10

10

10

γ


Minimum value of sin2 2θ13(true) for which the

the wrong hierarchy can be ruled out at the 3σ C.L.


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

β-beam Optimization

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

1

3

5

7

9

11

Energ

yHGe

VL

18 Ne+6 He, ∆CP HtrueL=Π�2

GLoBES 2008

10-4

10-3.610-3.2

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

1

3

5

7

9

11

Energ

yHGe

VL

18 Ne+6 He, ∆CP HtrueL=3Π�2

GLoBES 2008

10-4

10-3

.6

10-3

.2

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

200

400

600

800

1000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Energ

yHGe

VL

8 B+8 Li, ∆CP HtrueL=Π�2

GLoBES 2008

10-2.4

10-2.8

10-3.2

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000L HkmL

200

400

600

800

1000

Boos

tfacto

rHΓL

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Energ

yHGe

VL

8 B+8 Li, ∆CP HtrueL=3Π�2

GLoBES 2008

10-2

.4

10-2

.8

10-3

.2

Agarwalla, Choubey, Raychaudhuri, Winter, 0802.3621

Sensitivity to normal mass ordering at 3σ as a function of L and γ


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

ν-factory Optimization

2000 4000 6000 8000

L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

EΜ@G

eVD

∆CP=0

GL

oB

ES

20

06

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3.5

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

2.5

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

2

2000 4000 6000 8000

L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

EΜ@G

eVD

∆CP=Π�2

GL

oB

ES

20

06

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

4

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3.5

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

2.5

2000 4000 6000 8000

L @kmD

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

EΜ@G

eVD

∆CP=3Π�2

GL

oB

ES

20

06

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3.5

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

3

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

2.5

sin

22Θ

13<

10-

2

Huber, Lindner, Rolinec, Winter, hep-ph/0606119

Sensitivity to NH (true) at 3σ, Eµ = 20 to 40 GeV , L = 7500 km (Best)


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

An ask : New PhysicsCan upcoming neutrino experiments probe

non-standard interactions (NSI) like 6Rsupersymmetry?

Can they become fatal in attempts to further

sharpen the neutrino properties?

A possible experiment

CERN based β-beam neutrino source

+

The proposed India-based Neutrino Observatory

(INO)

A baseline of ∼ 7152 Km

ν interacts with earth matter ⇒ a possible ground

for NSIS. K. Agarwalla Panjab University, Chandigarh, India 29th February, 08– p.48/56

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Extracting θ13 & sgn(∆m231)

Normal hierarchy

Standard Model

sin2θ2

13

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18

ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

Inverted hierarchy

Standard Model

sin22

θ13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18

ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

Adhikari, Agarwalla, Raychaudhuri, hep-ph/0608034

Muon events .vs. sin2 2θ13 for NH and IH. The solid lines

correspond to the SM. The shaded area is covered if the

λ′ couplings are varied over their entire allowed range


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Constraining λ′

0.165

0.095

0.043

Solid & Thin Lines : λ/

λ/

Broken & Thick Lines : 331

λ/

|

0.011

|

Normal hierarchy

2m1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

ev

en

ts i

n 5

yea

rs

0.011

λ/

||

0.165

0.095

Inverted hierarchy

0.043

331

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

Adhikari, Agarwalla, Raychaudhuri, hep-ph/0608034

Event rates .vs. |λ′|, present singly, for NH and IH. The

thick (thin) lines are for |λ′

331| (|λ′

2m1|, m =2,3). The

chosen sin2 2θ13 are indicated next to the curvesS. K. Agarwalla Panjab University, Chandigarh, India 29th February, 08– p.50/56

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Long Range Forces at ICAL

Can upcoming long baseline neutrino ex-

periments probe flavor dependent long

range (LR) leptonic forces, mediated by the

Le − Lµ or Le − Lτ gauge bosons?

Can ICAL play an important role

along this direction?


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Extracting θ13 & sgn(∆m231)

Le

− Lµ= 500γ

B8

NH

sin θ22 13

−2−3−4 −1 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350SM

SM + 5.5e−54

SM + 5.5e−53

10 10 10 10

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

yea

rs

SM + 1.1e−53

SM + 1.1e−52

Le

− Lµ= 500γ

B8

IH

sin θ22 13

−2−3−4 −1 0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14SM

SM + 5.5e−54

SM + 5.5e−53

10 10 10 10

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

ye

ars

SM + 1.1e−52

SM + 1.1e−53

Coming soon → Agarwalla, Joshipura, Mohanty

Event rates for the normal and inverted mass

hierarchies in the presence of Le − Lµ symmetry with

γ = 500 and neutrino run


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

Constraining Long Range Forces

αeµ

Le

− Lµ= 500γ

B8

NH

0.165

0.095

0.043

0.011

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1e−54 1e−53 1e−52 5.5e−52

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

yea

rs

αeµ

Le

− Lµ= 500γ

B8

IH

0.165

0.095

0.043

0.011

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1e−54 1e−53 1e−52 5.5e−52

Ev

en

ts i

n 5

yea

rs

Coming soon → Agarwalla, Joshipura, Mohanty

Events vs. αeµ for the NH (left panel) and IH (right

panel) with Le − Lµ symmetry with γ = 500 and ν run.

Chosen sin2 2θ13 are indicated next to the curveS. K. Agarwalla Panjab University, Chandigarh, India 29th February, 08– p.53/56

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

References

D. Choudhury, A. Datta,

JHEP 0507:058,2005, hep-ph/0410266

S. K. Agarwalla, A. Raychaudhuri, A. Samanta,

Phys.Lett.B629:33-40,2005, hep-ph/0505015

P. Huber, M. Lindner, M. Rolinec, W. Winter,

Phys.Rev.D74:073003,2006, hep-ph/0606119

R. Adhikari, S. K. Agarwalla, A. Raychaudhuri,

Phys.Lett.B642:111-118,2006, hep-ph/0608034

S. K. Agarwalla, S. Choubey, A. Raychaudhuri,

Nuclear Physics B 771 (2007) 1, hep-ph/0610333

R. Gandhi, W. Winter,

Phys.Rev.D75:053002,2007, hep-ph/0612158


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

References (Continued...)


0711.1459


Walter Winter

0802.3621

S. K. Agarwalla, Anjan S. Joshipura, S.

Mohanty

In preparation


I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

I

NO

IN

ConclusionsLong baseline neutrino oscillation experiments

using neutrino factories and β-beams hold

promise of refining our knowledge of θ13, δ, and

the sign of ∆m231

! They will draw the punch line in this business !

ICAL at INO will be an admirable choice as a

far detector for a very long baseline experiment,

with a source either in CERN, or in JHF, or

even in Fermilab

A magnetized iron calorimeter detector like INO

is essential for Neutrino Factory and its

performance with Beta Beam is quite impressive


I N IO NI Prospects of INO IO with Neutrino Beams N I ...ino/Talks/panjab_sanjib.pdf · Sanjib...

Documents

Transcript of I N IO NI Prospects of INO IO with Neutrino Beams N I ...ino/Talks/panjab_sanjib.pdf · Sanjib...