The International Reactor q13 Working Group

1

• The International Reactor q13 Working Group

2
Or Three Meetings and a White Paper

• April 2003 University of Alabama
• October 2003 Munich TUM (Technische Universitat
  Munchen)
• March 2004, Niigata, Japan

3
Workshop Participants

• Alabama 26
• Munich 58
• Niigata 61
• Total at any workshop or on author list
• 200

4
International Working Group

• Kurchatov
• Tohoku
• Niigata
• Tokyo Institute Technology
• Tokyo Metropolitan U
• IHEP Beijing
• Academia Sinica

• Munich TUM
• MPI-Heidelberg
• MPI-Munich
• SISSA
• College de France
• CEA/Saclay
• INFN Bologna
• INFN Trieste
• Brasileiro
• Campinas
• Rio

• Alabama
• Argonne
• Berkeley
• Cal Tech
• Chicago
• Columbia
• Fermilab
• IIT
• Kansas State
• LSU
• Michigan
• Minnesota
• Northwestern
• Stony Brook
• Tennesee
• Texas
• Virginia Tech
• Washington

5
125 authors from 40 institutions 9 countries 30
people provided contributions Another 10-15
provided comments
6
Outline of White Paper

• Other physics
• Tunnel/Shaft
• Safety
• Outreach
• Angra
• (Double) CHOOZ
• Daya Bay
• Diable Canyon
• Illinois
• KASKA
• KR2DET

1. Introduction
2. Opportunity/Motivation
3. Optimize Baseline
4. Previous Experiments
5. Detector Design
6. Calibration
7. Backgrounds/Overburden
8. Systematics
9. Sites

7
TheoryMotivationfor Q13 ?
8
A year of Reactor n Meetings

• Besides 3 IWG meetings
• APS study kickoff/final meetings Dec/June
• 2 APS Reactor Working Group meetings Feb/May
• US Meeting for a Future Neutrino Observatory at
  Reactors at San Luis Obispo March
• US/UK meeting June
• 2 hour meeting at n 2004 June
• 2 workshops in China Nov/Jan
• Collaboration meetings of midwest group, CHOOZ,
  etc.
• The meeting I didnt know about?

9
Future of the International Working Group

• We didnt need a 1.5 day meeting in Paris this
  June.
• It isnt really one group. Its several
  collaborations
• Assuming more than one collaboration forms,
  continued meetings are useful,
• But not more than once per year.

10
Promote the Concept
June 2004 CERN Courier
11
My viewConclusion at Niigata Workshop

• We need Double CHq13q13Z
• Its a good opportunity to get going quickly and
  wed be crazy not to take it.
• We need more than Double CHq13q13Z
• It doesnt cover the reasonably accessible range
  of parameter space.

12
A Thought on Future International Cooperation in
Reactor n experiments

• May be naïve

• National Experiments
• Braidwood
• CHOOZ
• Diablo Canyon
• KASKA

• International
• Angra
• Daya Bay
• Krasnoyarsk
• more difficult

13
Conclusion

• The International Working Group isnt alive and
  it isnt dead.
• Its there and could be put to use for a good
  purpose.