Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

ISS-detectors

Introduction: working group plans, organization and aims of the meeting.

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

The output of the scoping study will be a report in which:The physics case for the facility is defined;A baseline design for the accelerator complex, or, for some subsystems, the programmerequired to arrive at a baseline design, is identified;

The baseline designs for the neutrino detection systems are identified; andThe research-and-development programme required to deliver the baseline design is described.

In achieving its primary goal, the scoping study will have three objectives to:Evaluate the physics case for a second-generation super-beam, a beta-beam facility andthe Neutrino Factory and to present a critical comparison of their performance;Evaluate the various options for the accelerator complex with a view to defining a baselineset of parameters for the sub-systems that can be taken forward in a subsequentconceptual-design phase; and toEvaluate the options for the neutrino detection systems with a view to defining a baseline set of detection systems to be taken forward in a subsequent conceptual-design phase.

the following was written in the proposal comments?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

The real aim:

to prepare a funding request for three years of detector R&D 2007-2010

leading to having substantially progressed in the performance of detectors that one could realistically propose at that date,

in the direction that is most profitable for physics.

$€£¥CHF

NB the nice thing with neutrino beams is that one can have more than one detector on the same beam line!

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

Organization

Detector ‘council’ (i.e. steering group) role: ensure basic organization, and monitors progress wrt objectives

Interim group: Alain Blondel (Geneva)Alan Bross (Fermilab)Kenji Kaneyuki (ICRR)Paolo Strolin (INFN)Paul Soler (Glasgow) (was Dave Wark, but too busy for now) someone missing?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

Organization: II working groups

working groups as of Paolo Strolin’s presentation at NUFACT05

Large Water Cherenkov detector (Working group exists: UNO+Frejus+HK) contacts: Kaneyuki, Campagne, Casper, Mc Grew..

Magnetized Iron detector old studies exist. Need revisiting in many ways. contacts: Mondal, Nelson, Cervera, Soler, Gomez-Cadenas, Camillieri

Liquid Argon detectorin fact there are two known cases -- Larg for Neutrino factory -- Larg for superbeam/beta-beam contacts: Rubbia, Finley, Battistoni, Para….

Emulsion detectorcontacts: Migliozzi, di Lellis, Nakamura ..

Active Scintillator detector/Low Z calorimeter… … …

need a contact person that organizes the practical basics of the work(Phone conferences, web page, edition of report, etc…)

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

More working groups:

Near detectors and flux control (beam instrumentation)Blondel,Gschwendtner, Soler, Sala, A.Rubbia, Sanchez, Wark, Nakaya, McFarland, … others?(most are attending NUINT)

technology groupphotodetectors, scintillators, etc…

connection with physics group Mezetto

something missing?

Organization III

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

Next ISS meetings

KEK 23-25 January 2006, RAL 27-29 April 2006 (TBC, associated with a BENE meeting) Irvine California 21-23 August 2006 just before NUFACT06

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

Methodology

not unique… we try to optimize physics reach/€$£¥. Is the following naive approach the right one?

1. start with detector that could realistically be undertaken today and of which cost is relatively well known(Water Cherenkov of the size of SuperK, MINOS, OPERA, ICARUS)

2. produce a cost model as a function of key physics-related design parameters(in the process identify those)possible ex for Water Cherenkov: number or size of phototubes total fiducial mass 3. identify the physics drivers (muon and electron threshold for ID and sign) and the cost drivers (number of channels, mass?)

4. proceed to optimize physics reach -- within a given cost envelope or cost for a given physics reach?

5. look at result. Is R&D needed, how long and how difficult. define a program that allows to extend reach in the desired direction.

maybe the starting point is too constraining? should we start from the ‘ideal’ detector and go back down to earth?

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

Other important jobs:

--communicate with the physics group and get them to work for us by asking questions.

ex. What would be the gain in physics reach if the detectorcould see muons down to 1.5 GeV. Would the optimization ofthe accelerator: baseline, muon energy etc… change?

-- evaluate the need for simulation tools -- what exists , what more would be needed.

Scoping study p-ECFA Alain Blondel

What we must achieve in this meeting:

1. agree on the working groups2. identify one person who is in charge of assembling each W-group3. make a preliminary definition of the tasks for the next meeting4. begin a list of questions to the physics group