Confronting Neutrino-Nucleus
Interactions at Eν~1 GeV with the
NuPRISM Detector
Mark Hartz
Kavli IPMU (WPI), University of Tokyo and TRIUMF

J-PARC Seminar
August 20, 2015

N
u
P
R
I
S
M

Outline•Long baseline neutrino experiments•

Challenges in neutrino interaction modeling•

The NuPRISM detector•

Application to muon neutrino disappearance•Electron neutrino cross section modelling•

Short baseline oscillations at NuPRISM•

Other measurements at NuPRISM

J-PARC Seminar

2

NuPRISMNeutrino Mixing & Oscillations
Flavour and mass states
related by a unitary mixing
matrix.

All three angles have now beenmeasured and we are beginning toconstrain the CP phase.

θ13 = 8.9º±0.4ºθ23 = 46.6º±3.2ºθ12 = 33.4º±0.9º

Oscillations depend on the
mixing angles and mass squared
differences.

|Δm232| = 2.44±0.06x10-3 eV2Δm221 = 7.5±0.2x10-5 eV2J-PARC Seminar

3

NuPRISMLong Baseline Experiments (T2K & HK)
30 GeV
proton beam
Decay volume
p

π,K

0m

µ-mon

Off-axis far detector at 295 km:
SK (50 kton) or HK (1 megaton)
water Cherenkov detector
measures oscillated flux

MUMON measuresmuons from pion
decay

off-axis
on-axis

νμ→νμ
νμ→νe
2.5o

120m 280m

295 kmOff-axis = narrow band beam

Beam on graphitetarget3 magnetic horns
focus positively
charged hadrons

J-PARC Seminar

Off-axis near detector:
ND280 detector measuresspectra for various neutrino
interactions

4

NuPRISMOscillation Probabilities

CP violation enters here, sign flips for antineutrinos
This is what we ultimately want to measure
J-PARC Seminar

5

NuPRISMNeutrino Interactions
In T2K and Hyper-K, the signal are charged
current quasi-elastic (CCQE) candidates
Only a single visible ring the the water
Cherenkov detector

Oscillations depend on the neutrino energy
The beam is wide enough that we don’t know the incident neutrino’s energy
Neutrino interaction model:
observed final state lepton kinematics

neutrino energy

Use reconstructed energy variable:

J-PARC Seminar

6

NuPRISMThe CCQE Cross Section Puzzle•

MiniBooNE published a measurement of the CCQE
cross section that seem to prefer a large axial mass(consistent with K2K) of 1.35 GeV•

Why does MiniBooNE MA deviate from the value
measured in neutrino-deuterium interactions and πelectroproduction?

Solution:

PRD 81 092005, 2010

M. Martini NuFact 2015

Not detected in awater Cherenkov
detector
J-PARC Seminar

7

NuPRISM

Significant Work on np-nh in Recent Years
M. Martini NuFact 2015

J-PARC Seminar

8

NuPRISMDiﬀerence in Models•

The np-nh contributions vary by more than afactor of 2 in the energy range of interest•

Both the Martini et al. and Nieves et al.
calculations are consistent with MiniBooNE
data within the MiniBooNE flux uncertainties•

The super scaling model of Amaro et al. is
missing MEC in the axial and vector-axial
interference terms

M. Martini NuFact 2015
J-PARC Seminar

9

NuPRISMThe CCQE Energy Reconstruction Problem•

MiniBooNE CCQE puzzle solved by a large contribution of np-nh to the cross section•

But the reconstructed energy for the np-nh contribution is different from CCQE

CCQE
np-nh

np-nh introduces a large tail of
events with reconstructedenergy less than the true energy

M. Martini, M. Ericson, G. Chanfray, Phys. Rev. D 85 093012 (2012)•

Modelling this is critical since neutrino oscillations depend on the energy•

Calculations on the market can vary by a factor 2 in predicting the np-nh contribution•

Are we saved by using near detector data?

J-PARC Seminar

10

NuPRISMNear Detector Constraints
Oscillations → different flux at near and far detectors
140

×103

120
100
80

Multinucleon Feed-down on Oscillated Flux

Flux*EνFlux*Eν•SK Oscillated Flux
Eν→Erec Smearing(Eν=0.8 GeV)

40

1000

ND280 Flux
Eν→Erec Smearing(Eν=0.8 GeV)

800

(b)

400
200

20
0
0

Multinucleon Feed-down, ND280 Flux

600

(a)

60

×109

0.5

1

1.5

0
0

2
Eν (GeV)

0.5

1

1.5

2
Eν (GeV)•

Energy smear that may be a large effect in the far detector (a) may be
a relatively small effect in the near detector (b)•Mis-modelling can lead to large systematic effects in the extraction ofoscillation parameters

J-PARC Seminar

11

NuPRISMT2K np-nh Mis-modelling Study•T2K study of bias induced by np-nh mis-modelling•

Generate toy data with np-nh models (Nieves et al. and “ad-hoc” model thatlooks similar to Martini et al.) for both near and SK detector•

Far detector toy data has oscillations applied•

Fit the near and far detector toy data with the model in NEUT 5.1.4.2•

Evaluate the bias on the oscillation parameters• sin2θ23 biased by 3% with uncertainty on bias

Mean = -0.013
RMS = 0.015

of 3%
•

Would assign a systematic error of 4.2%•

But this is only the comparison of 2 models!

J-PARC Seminar

12

NuPRISMT2K/HK sin2θ23 Sensitivity•

Does the ~4% uncertainty on sin2θ23 matter?

•3 cases: T2K full exposure, T2K x3 exposure, Hyper-K exposure

T2K

Hyper-K

PTEP (2015) 053C02

PTEP (2015) 043C01~10% Statistical Error
J-PARC Seminar

Expect ~6% statisticalerror for 3x T2K exposure
13~1% Statistical Error
NuPRISM

Solving the Energy Reconstruction Problem••

Produce mono-energetic neutrino beams•

Measure the charged lepton response foreach neutrino energy (or 4 momentum
transfer)

Difficult to make a high intensity monochromatic neutrino beam from pion decays
But we can take advantage of the off-axis
effect
•

•

6
5
4
3
2

Energy dependence of flux with off-axis
angle is governed by the pion decay
kinematics

10
0Used by T2K on-axis INGRID detector

J-PARC Seminar

×1018
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2

Arb. Norm.

•

The best way to solve the energy
reconstruction problem:

Off-axis Angle (°)

•

14

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5
3
Ei (GeV)

NuPRISMSubtracting Flux TailsEν (GeV)Eν (GeV)

Measurements at just 3 off-axis angles can be used to produce a narrow
band spectra by subtracting the low and high energy tails
J-PARC Seminar

15

NuPRISMThe NuPRISM Detector•

How do we build a detector to take advantage of the off-axis fluxes?

•

NuPRISM is a water Cherenkov detector located ~1 km from the target•

50 m tall detector excavated from ground level downward covers an off-axis
range of 1-4 degrees (~70 m to go on-axis)•

Beam is pointed downward by 3.6 degrees
100 m
Ground level
50 m
Average neutrino direction

1000 mJ-PARC Seminar

16

NuPRISMMore NuPRISM Details•

Baseline from T2K target is ~1 km••

50 m tall extending from ground level downward.
••

Pile-up rate is low enough, beam is more point-like

1-4 degrees off-axis

10 m diameter•

Up to ~1.5 GeV/c muon acceptance depending on outerdetector design•

Water Cherenkov detector = same nuclear target as SK/HK•

Optimization of PMT size, photo-coverage and out detector
is ongoing•

Initial design if NuPRISM: 10 m tall inner-detector framethat can be move to different positions in the pit

J-PARC Seminar

17

NuPRISMArb. Norm.

×1015

4.0° Off-axis Flux30

The NuPRISM Spectra

25
20
15
10

Each interaction in
NuPRISM has areconstructed offaxis angle based on
its position in thedetector

5

Arb. Norm.

0
0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)×1015
35

2.5° Off-axis Flux

30
25
20
15
10
5

Arb. Norm.

0
0

30

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Hence, eachinteraction has acorresponding
neutrino spectrum
predicted by the flux
model

3

3.5
Ei (GeV)×1015

1.5° Off-axis Flux

25
20
15
10
5

Arb. Norm.

0
0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)The neutrino
spectra are peaked
from 400-1000 MeV

×1015

1.0° Off-axis Flux

25
20
15
10
5
0
0

0.5

1

J-PARC Seminar

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)18

NuPRISMEvent Rates in NuPRISM••

We simulated events rates for single electron or muon ring selections in NuPRISM•

Assuming 20 inch PMTs (not optimal) and 40% photo-coverage•

8m diameter ID•

4.5e20 protons on target for each NuPRISM light position

Large CC νe samples with high purity at larger off-axis angles•

Expect even higher purity with finer granularity of PMTs and optimization of innerdetector size

J-PARC Seminar

19

NuPRISM

Using NuPRISM Data•

We start by treating the off-axis fluxes as a set of basis functions•

Then we find a linear combination of the off-axis fluxes that gives a function ofinterest:
NuPRISM flux ineach off-axis
angle bin•

Here F can be a narrow Gaussian at some energy or a flux with oscillation
probabilities applied••

Finding the ci depends on accurate prior knowledge of the neutrino flux

The sum over observed event rates gives the expected event rate for the F flux
NuPRISM observed
event rates in each
off-axis angle bin

J-PARC Seminar

20

NuPRISMArb. Norm.

Linear Combination Example
×1015

4.0° Off-axis Flux

30
25
20

+0.4

15
10
5

Arb. Norm.

0
0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)×1015
35

Observed muon
kinematic
distributions

Spectra at at
each off-axis bin

2.5° Off-axis Flux

30
25
20

-1.0

15
10
5

Arb. Norm.

0
0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)×1015

1.0° Off-axis Flux

25
20

+0.8

15
10
5
0
0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3
3.5
Ei (GeV)

Linear combinations reproduce theoscillated flux, and predict muon kinematic
distributions for the oscillated flux

J-PARC Seminar

21

NuPRISM••

Using the flux model, we find coefficients for theoff-axis fluxes that give a narrow spectrum peakedat 900 MeV
The high and low energy tails are removed fromthe spectrum•

RMS of 110 MeV is less than fermi momentum→ can probe nuclear effects

Next we apply those coefficients to reconstructed
events binned in Erec

0.2
0

-0.4
1

The narrow spectrum (red) is significantly narrower
than the off-axis flux peaked at the same energy
•

0.4

-0.2

Arb. Norm.

•

Coefficient Value

Mono-energetic Flux Example

20

22

2

2.5

3

3.5
4
θOA (°)

×109
Linear Combination
1.7° Off-axis Flux

15

Gaussian: Mean=0.9, RMS=0.11 GeV

10
5
0
0

J-PARC Seminar

1.5

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5
3
Eν (GeV)
NuPRISMMeasuring the Reconstructed Energy
Events/50 MeV

Linear Combination, 0.9 GeV Mean
1 Ring µ Event Spectrum

6000

Absolute Flux Error
Shape Flux Error
Statistical Error

4000

NEUT QE
NEUT Non-QE

2000

0
0

1

2

3
Erec (GeV)•

Simulated reconstructed energy distribution for single muon candidates after
applying the 900 MeV linear coefficients•

Separation between the quasi-elastic peak and the non-quasi-elastic tail•Even when accounting for flux systematic uncertainties and statisticaluncertainties

J-PARC Seminar

23

NuPRISMEnergy, Momentum Transfer Variables
Linear combination give narrow neutrino energy band•

Neutrino direction is know based on decay region and reconstructed vertex indetector•

Lepton momentum is measured•

We can measure the interaction rate as a function of the energy and 3
momentum transfer
Events/(0.1 GeV ⋅ 4.5×1020 POT)•

Single µ Ring Candidates
Flux Model Uncertainty

300

True Quasi-elastic
True Non-quasi-elastic

0.7<q2<0.9 GeV2/c 2

200

100

0
0

0.5

1
ω (GeV)

J-PARC Seminar

24

NuPRISMMuon Neutrino Disappearance•

Instead of finding a linear combination to produce a mono-chromatic beam, canwe find one to produce an oscillated flux?

•

Yes, we can reproduce theoscillated flux between ~400 MeV
and 2 GeV•For each oscillation hypothesis wewant to test, we find a linear
combination of the NuPRISM offaxis fluxes to give the oscillated
spectrum

J-PARC Seminar

25

NuPRISMReproducing the Oscillated Flux
sin2θ23=0.61, ∆m232=2.56e-3 eV2

sin2θ23=0.41, ∆m232=2.26e-3 eV2•Between 400 and 1500 MeV the flux can be reproduced for any choice ofoscillation parameters•

Outside that range, we rely on the model•

Still much better than usual ND flux that very different from the oscillated flux

J-PARC Seminar

26

NuPRISMPredicted the Far Detector Response•

The leptonic response at the far detector is derived from the linear combinationof observed events at NuPRISM:•

Small corrections are applied for efficiency and acceptance differences,imperfect reproduction of the oscillated flux and background subtraction.

•

Model dependent corrections are
small → NuPRISM predicts the leptonic
response at the far detector
accurately in a largely cross-section
model independent way.

J-PARC Seminar

27

NuPRISMReproducing T2K Bias Study
T2K Result

sin2θ23 uncertainty from mis-•

Recall the T2K study ofmodeling the np-nh part of the cross section found abias of at least 3%•

The same study is carried out with NuPRISM andrealistic exposure in the T2K beam using the same
systematic error model as T2K.

•

The SK event rate is accurately predictedeven when additional np-nh interactions
are added to the toy data.

•

The sin2θ23 bias and uncertainty are

T2K with
NuPRISM result

reduced to ~1% with the NuPRISM
measurement.

J-PARC Seminar

Mean = -0.013
RMS = 0.015

28

NuPRISM

Flux Uncertainties
We rely on the flux model to predict the off-axis angle dependence of the neutrino
spectra - are the uncertainties small enough?

•We apply T2K flux systematic variations to the NuPRISM and SK fluxes to see how
well NuPRISM linear combination reproduces the change to the SK flux
Pion Multiplicity Throw
1.15

1.1
1.05

SK Prediction Ratio

SK Prediction Ratio•

SK MC (Random Throw)/Nominal
ν PRISM Linear Comb. (Random Throw)/Nominal

1

Proton Beam -1 mm Y Shift
1.15

1.1

νPRISM Linear Comb. (1σ Change)/Nominal

1.05
1

0.95

0.95

0.9

0.9

0.85

0.5

1

1.5

2

0.85

2.5
3
Eν (GeV)

Changes from the hadron production
model are reproduced in the NuPRISM
prediction.

J-PARC Seminar

SK MC (1σ Change)/Nominal

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5
3
Eν (GeV)

Dominant systematic comes from changes
that affect the observed off-axis angle.

29

NuPRISMElectron Neutrino Appearance•

Energy reconstruction is important for the muon neutrino disappearance analysis••

We need NuPRISM to control the related systematic error

What about the electron (anti)neutrino appearance measurement?
•

The energy reconstruction is also important•

But most important systematic effect may be the uncertainty on theelectron (anti)neutrino cross section•

We measure the rates of muon (anti)neutrinos in our near detectors•

To predict the electron (anti)neutrino appearance rate at the far detector we must•

Model the change in the flux spectrum due to oscillations•

Model the change in the cross section due to the change from muon toelectron (anti)neutrinos

J-PARC Seminar

30

NuPRISMνe and νe Cross Section Uncertainties•

Sources of theoretical uncertainty are consider by
Day & McFarland (Phys.Rev. D86 (2012) 053003)•

Inclusion of second class currents can change
the cross section ratio by 2% at the flux peak•

The kinematically allowed region is different••

Effect is significant at the maximum Q2 forneutrinos

Radiative corrections - should be calculated

J-PARC Seminar

31

NuPRISMImpact for CP Violation Measurement•

To measure CP violation, we measure the asymmetry:•

Most important uncertainties are those that affect the electron neutrino
and antineutrino rates differently•

The important uncertainty is on the double ratios of cross sections:

J-PARC Seminar

32

NuPRISMνe,νe Cross Section Sensitivity Impact (HK)• Perform sensitivity study where the νe and νe cross sections are assigned two uncorrelated

normalization systematic parameters• The uncertainties on the normalization parameters are varied and the impact on the CPV

sensitivity is studied.

1%
3%• The systematic uncertainty should be controlled to <1-2% to minimize the impact on the CPV

discovery sensitivity
J-PARC Seminar

33

NuPRISMDirect measure of νe,νe Cross Sections•

Ideal place for measurement would be nuSTORM, but can we measure the crosssections in our conventional beam?

•

The beam includes an intrinsic electron neutrino component from muon and kaon
decays (0.5% at the peak)Can increase νe purity by
going further off-axis

Oﬀ-axis angle (º)νe Flux0.3-0.9 GeV

νμ Flux
0.3-5.0 GeV

Ratio νe/νμ2.5

1.24E+15

2.46E+170.507%

3.0

1.14E+15

1.90E+170.600%

3.5

1.00E+15

1.47E+170.679%

4.0

8.65E+14

1.14E+170.760%

At 2.5º, SK has 77%
purity in the absence ofoscillations
J-PARC Seminar

34

NuPRISMνe,νe Cross Section Precision

Ratio

•

We estimated flux model and statistical errors for a
NuPRISM1.3
1.2

σν e/ σν µ (NEUT 5.1.4.2)
nuPRISM Ne/Nµ Stat. Unc.
nuPRISM Ne/Nµ Flux Unc.
nuPRISM Ne/Nµ Flux Unc. (1/2 × Hadron Unc.)

1.1

measurement in

Flux
Error

Hadron
x1/2

Stat.
Error

300-600
MeV

3.2%

1.7%

2.9%

600-900
MeV

5.2%

3.4%

2.7%

1
0.9
400

600

800

1000

1200 1400
Eν (MeV)•

Preliminary study suggests that a 3% measurement or better is plausible.

•

Further studies are ongoing.

J-PARC Seminar

35

NuPRISM•The kinematic limit difference between
muon and electron neutrinos = potential
source of uncertainty•

Q2max (GeV2)

Phase Space Diﬀerence
0.8
0.6
0.4

Error on the cross section in the extra
kinematically allowed space forelectron neutrinos?

0.2
0

•

For energies of interest, Q2 region of
0.35 to 0.5 GeV2 is important

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6
Eν (GeV)

Systematic Variation of RPA Correction

Fractional Change

•

νe
νμ

There are potential sources of
uncertainty in this Q2 region including
the correction for long-range
correlations in the nuclear model (RPA)

F. Sanchez
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0

Nominal RPA Correction
-1σ
+1σ

0.5

1

1.5
Q2 (GeV2)

J-PARC Seminar

36

NuPRISMProbing the Kinematic Limit
With NuPRISM mono-energetic beams, we can measure the response to the four
momentum transfer at a each neutrino energy
q2 (GeV2/c2)•

1.5

1 Ring µ, Eν =1 GeV

10.5
Quasielastic
Non-quasielastic

0

0

0.5

1
ω (GeV)•Can probe the region above the kinematic limit with muon neutrinos by increasing theneutrino energy•

Studies on how this can reduce the electron neutrino cross section uncertainty are
ongoing

J-PARC Seminar

37

NuPRISMShort baseline Oscillations•

To measure the νe cross section, we
should confirm that there is noevidence of short baseline νeoscillations•

At 1 km baseline, ~1 GeV energy,
NuPRISM is ideal for probing shortbaseline oscillations through sterile
neutrinos in the νe appearance
channel, consistent with MiniBooNE &LSND anomalies.

Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 161801
J-PARC Seminar

38

NuPRISMUnique to NuPRISM
Short Baseline Osc. Prob. and νPRISM Fluxes

0.005
0.004

Pν µ →ν e(sin22θµe=3e-3,∆ m241=1.2 eV2)
θOA=1.0° ν Fluxµ

θOA=2.5° ν Flux
µ

0.003

θOA=4.0° ν Flux
µ

0.002
0.001
0
0

1

2

3
Eν (GeV)•The flux varies across NuPRISM giving it unique capabilities:•

Can directly probe the energy dependence of the oscillations without relying
on reconstructed energy.

•

NC or CC backgrounds that feed-down in reconstructed energy will effectdifferent off-axis slices differently

J-PARC Seminar

39

NuPRISMAnalysis Method•

We simulate the νe oscillation signal by reweighting our νe background flux
to the oscillated νe flux in the 3+1 model•

Expected oscillation signal candidates in 4.5e20 proton on target exposure:

Almost half of the
background is neutral current
or misidentified muons significant room for
improvement!

•

T2K based flux and interaction model uncertainties are applied•

The data are binned in 10x10 bins of reconstructed energy and off-axis angle•

A simultaneous fit to muon candidates reduces the systematic uncertainties

J-PARC Seminar

40

NuPRISM

Signal & Background vs. Oﬀ-axis Angle•

The predicted signal
and background varydifferently with off-axis
angle

•

More on-axis bins are
dominated by NC
backgrounds•

More off-axis bins are
dominated by intrinsic
beam electron neutrino
background

J-PARC Seminar

J. Vo

41

NuPRISMExclusion Sensitivity Contours

J. Vo

4.5e20 POT
Neutrino beam

30% reduction of
NC background•Exclusion regions are promising for 4.5e20 POT (1/3 HK exposure)•

Expected improvements: x3 stats for HK exposure, combination with ND280, betterνe selection after PMT optimization, measurement with antineutrino data

J-PARC Seminar

42

NuPRISMOther Physics•

The NuPRISM mono-energetic beams provide a method to study the energy
dependence of NC interactions•

Precision measurements of sub-GeV neutrino cross sections are critical
inputs for atmospheric neutrino analyses•••

There can be a statistically significant CP effect in the sub-GeV
atmospheric neutrino samples, but it is currently washed out by systematic
uncertainties

Loading NuPRISM with Gd allows for the detection of neutron captures•

Can measure the neutron multiplicities from (anti)neutrino interactions•

Important inputs to proton decay or atmospheric neutrino analyses that willused neutron captures on Gd

Can measure the rates for important backgrounds to proton decay
measurements (CCπ0 and kaon production)

J-PARC Seminar

43

NuPRISMBuilding NuPRISM•

At a 1 km baseline, NuPRISM is off of the J-PARC site: would need toacquire land.

•

NuPRISM is designed with proven technologies so no significant R&D isnecessary.

•

Cost drivers are PMTs/electronics, civil construction of 50 m deep pit and new
surface building.

•

PMT costs can be minimized by using a movable frame and only partiallyinstrumenting the pit. (~$3 million USD for 8 inch PMTs)•

At 10 m diameter, caisson methods maybe used for the pit excavation,
reducing the cost.

••

Companies have calculated costs as low as $6 million + α•

α is the unknown cost of unexpected problems during the excavation

Total cost is in the ~$15-20 million. Will depend on detailed survey for
excavation

J-PARC Seminar

44

NuPRISMNuPRISM in the J-PARC Neutrino Program•

NuPRISM can provide a bridge for the the Japanese neutrino program
between T2K and Hyper-K (along with extended T2K running)•

Provide valuable inputs to the T2K measurements with the ultimate
T2K exposure (or T2K x3 exposure)•

Introduces a new project with new (short base-line) physics potentialthat collaborators can join while Hyper-K is being built•

Can proved a test-bed for technologies that will be used in Hyper-K
with a tank depth similar to what will be used in Hyper-K•

Can be upgraded with more instrumentation for Hyper-K

J-PARC Seminar

45

NuPRISMThe Status of NuPRISM•

Have produced a letter of intent with 50
authors•

It is now uploaded to the arXiv:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1412.3086v2.pdf•

We have submitted an experiment
proposal at the most rcent J-PARC PAC
meeting•

We are forming the NuPRISM collaboration•

If you are interested, now is the time tojoin!!

J-PARC Seminar

46

NuPRISM

Conclusion•

Achieving the systematic error requirements for current and future long
baseline neutrino experiments is a major challenge•

Of particular concerning is the modelling of neutrino interactions•

NuPRISM takes advantage of the off-axis effect in a conventional neutrino
beam to measure neutrino interactions in a novel way•

We have shown NuPRISM’s benefits with mono-chromatic beams, in themuon neutrino disappearance measurement and in short baseline
oscillations•

More studies of the physics potential are in the pipeline•

NuPRISM is an exciting project that can provide a bridge from T2K toHyper-K•

If you are interested, please join us!!

J-PARC Seminar

47

NuPRISM

Thank you.

J-PARC Seminar

48

NuPRISM