1 / 18

Comparing Large Underground Neutrino Detector Technologies: Liquid Argon, Liquid Scintillator, and Water Cherenkov

Comparing Large Underground Neutrino Detector Technologies: Liquid Argon, Liquid Scintillator, and Water Cherenkov. John G. Learned University of Hawaii at ANT09, Hawaii. A personal view, based upon experience with all three technologies.

les
Download Presentation

Comparing Large Underground Neutrino Detector Technologies: Liquid Argon, Liquid Scintillator, and Water Cherenkov

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Comparing Large Underground Neutrino Detector Technologies:Liquid Argon, Liquid Scintillator, and Water Cherenkov John G. Learned University of Hawaii at ANT09, Hawaii A personal view, based upon experience with all three technologies. Good source papers: “Report on the Depth Requirements for a Massive Detector at Homestake”, arXiv:0907.4183v2; Large underground, liquid based detectors for astro-particle physics in Europe: scientific case and prospects”, arXiv:0705.0116v2

  2. The three detectors in the LAGUNA study 1 vertical John Learned @ ANT09

  3. Material Properties All three media are readily available in industrial quantities. John Learned @ ANT09

  4. Water Cherenkov • Cheapest target medium (but not negligible with filtering and dopants) • Only route to megaton instruments • Well proven technology (IMB, Kam, SK) • Excellent for mu/e separation ~1 GeV. • Electron scattering for solar nus. • Threshold above ~4 MeV => no geonus or n-p captures. n detection needs Gd. • No complex event topologies. John Learned @ ANT09

  5. Liquid Scintillation Detectors • Hi resolution, low threshold (<MeV) • Technology well developed (50 years, plus Borexino, KamLAND and soon SNO+) • Excellent for anti-neutrino detection by inverse beta decay. • Liquid too expensive beyond ~100kT. • New recognition: GeV neutrino physics too. John Learned @ ANT09

  6. Liquid Argon TPC Detectors • Bubble chamber-like imaging, detailed event topology, with few mm resolution. • Developed over 30 years, and now being applied in 600 ton Icarus in Gran Sasso. • No free protons for nucleon decay or inverse beta studies. • Only detector for potential discrimination of e+ from e- at neutrino factory. John Learned @ ANT09

  7. Energy Range of Interest Large Underground Detectors Accelerator Neutrinos John Learned @ ANT09

  8. Liquid Treatment • All three require special facilities, all expensive and a bit hard to compare. • Lesson of past: do great job on first fill into superclean detector, have radon tight system, and do not have to recirculate much or at all. John Learned @ ANT09

  9. Muon Rates for 100 kiloton Detectors at Homestake John Learned @ ANT09

  10. Depth Requirements • All depends upon physics goals… • Also depends upon detector size… external backgrounds (eg. from muon showers in rock); worst for small instruments. Big detectors take hit near periphery. • Great depth only needed for MeV measurements (geonus, low end of solar). • PDK, accelerator studies, atm nus, SN, DSNB all can be done at much less depth… exact depth arguable depending upon technique and physics. John Learned @ ANT09

  11. Rough Graphical Representation of Depth Requirements Many caveats required, but trend is correct... jgl opinion Long Baseline ~1GeV ν’s Nucleon Decay Supernova ~No Background Reactors Diffuse SN Neutrinos Geo-Neutrinos John Learned @ ANT09

  12. Nucleon Decay Predictions John Learned @ ANT09

  13. Nucleon Decay L Ar LS H2O 43/2.25 1.0 x 1035 The e+π0 estimate for LENA is based upon new fitting methods. John Learned @ ANT09

  14. Supernova Rates John Learned @ ANT09

  15. Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background Better low energy atmospheric neutrino flux calculations needed. John Learned @ ANT09

  16. Physics Summary Comparison Chart John Learned @ ANT09

  17. LAGUNA Seems to be on the map! Who will win? Plus Japan (HyperK). How will DUSEL fit into this picture? John Learned @ ANT09

  18. Bottom Line • Each has strengths • Long range: LAr wins for detailed neutrino physics in LBL, tho nice anytime • Great sizes (megaton): H2O wins • Low energies: Liquid Scint wins (particularly for geonus) • Cost/vol hierarchy: LAr:LS:H2O • Readiness: LS & H2O > LAr • I like them all!! John Learned @ ANT09

More Related