IFAE 2007 pp 231-235 | Cite as

Accelerator Neutrino Physics: Status and Perspectives in Europe

  • Francesco Terranova
Conference paper


The occurrence of oscillations among three active neutrino flavors during their propagation in free space and in matter is extremely sold from the experimental point of view [1]. In spite of this, the most straightforward test of such phenomenon is still lacking. In particular, the direct appearance of a new flavor b (bν e , ν μ , ν τ ) from a pure source of a given flavor ab has never been observed. This is due to a very special conspiracy of theoretical and experimental facts. All sources that we have in our disposal and that could exhibit oscillations at the solar scale are made up of electronic neutrinos whose energy is well below the kinematic threshold for muon production. Hence a direct test of new flavor appearance through the observation of charged current events is unfeasible. On the other hand, oscillations at the atmospheric scale for baseline O(103)km occurs for energies of about 1GeV. Still, the peculiar structure of the leptonic mixing matrix suppress ν μ ν e oscillations at this scale while the observation of ν τ CC events in ν μ ν τ transitions is extremely challenging from the experimental point of view. Such observation, together with the determination of the overall size of the subdominant ν μ ν e oscillations at the atmospheric scale (size of the θ 13 angle) are the particularly well suited for long-baseline (LBL) accelerator neutrino experiments and are the main aim of the the current and, probably, next generation of LBL programs in Europe [2].


Nuclear Emulsion Neutrino Interaction Active Neutrino Electromagnetic Shower Beta Beam 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W.-M. Yao et al. [Particle Data Group]: J. Phys. G 33, 1 (2006)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Guglielmi, M. Mezzetto, P. Migliozzi and F. Terranova: arXiv:hepph/0508034 in D. Bettoni et al.: Phys. Rept. 434, 47 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Guler et al. [OPERA Coll.]: CERN-SPSC-2000-028.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Acquafredda et al. [OPERA Collaboration]: New J. Phys. 8, 303 (2006)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Amerio et al.: Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 527, 329 (2004)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Tonazzo, these proceedings, see p. 237Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. Itow et al., [T2K Collaboration]: arXiv:hep-ex/0106019. Y. Hayato [T2K Collaboration]: Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 143, 269 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D.S. Ayres et al. [NOvA Collaboration]: arXiv:hep-ex/0503053.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. Baibussinov et al.: arXiv:0704.1422 [hep-ph]Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Zucchelli: Phys. Lett. B 532, 166 (2002).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Geer: Phys. Rev. D 57, 6989 (1998) [Erratum-ibid. D 59, 039903 (1999)]CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Burguet-Castell, D. Casper, J.J. Gomez-Cadenas, P. Hernandez and F. Sanchez: Nucl. Phys. B 695, 217 (2004); A. Donini, E. Fernandez-Martinez, P. Migliozzi, S. Rigolin, L. Scotto Lavina, T. Tabarelli de Fatis and F. Terranova: Eur. Phys. J. C 48, 787 (2006); A. Donini et al.: arXiv:hep-ph/0703209CrossRefADSMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Rubbia, A. Ferrari, Y. Kadi and V. Vlachoudis: Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 568, 475 (2006)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Terranova
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati dell’INFNFrascati (RM)Italy

Personalised recommendations