Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Cost-effective Design Options for IsoDAR

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1210.4454 v1 pith:25KGKLVP submitted 2012-10-16 physics.acc-ph hep-exnucl-ex

A. Adelmann , J.R. Alonso , W. Barletta , R. Barlow , L. Bartoszek , A. Bungau , L. Calabretta , A. Calanna
show 13 more authors
D. Campo J.M. Conrad Z. Djurcic Y. Kamyshkov H. Owen M.H. Shaevitz I. Shimizu T. Smidt J. Spitz M. Toups M. Wascko L.A. Winslow J.J. Yang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-phhep-exnucl-ex
keywords designelectronisodarantineutrinocostenergyoptionsvalue
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

This whitepaper reviews design options for the IsoDAR electron antineutrino source. IsoDAR is designed to produce $2.6 \times 10^{22}$ electron antineutrinos per year with an average energy of 6.4 MeV, using isotope decay-at-rest. Aspects which must be balanced for cost-effectiveness include: overall cost; rate and energy distribution of the electron antineutrino flux and backgrounds; low technical risk; compactness; simplicity of underground construction and operation; reliability; value to future neutrino physics programs; and value to industry. We show that the baseline design outlined here is the most cost effective.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools