SciPost logo

SciPost Submission Page

Status of DUNE

by A. Tonazzo for the DUNE Collaboration

This is not the latest submitted version.

This Submission thread is now published as

Submission summary

Authors (as registered SciPost users): Alessandra Tonazzo
Submission information
Preprint Link: scipost_201810_00004v1  (pdf)
Date submitted: 2018-10-29 01:00
Submitted by: Tonazzo, Alessandra
Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings
Proceedings issue: The 15th International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics (Amsterdam, 2018-09)
Ontological classification
Academic field: Physics
  • High-Energy Physics - Experiment
Approach: Experimental


The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) is a next-generation underground observatory, to be located in the USA, aiming at precise measure- ment of long-baseline neutrino oscillations over a 1300 km baseline, detection of supernova neutrinos and search for nucleon decay and other physics beyond the Standard Model. The far detector, a very large liquid argon time projec- tion chamber, requires a dedicated prototyping effort (ProtoDUNE), currently ongoing at CERN.

Current status:
Has been resubmitted

Submission & Refereeing History

Resubmission scipost_201810_00004v2 on 3 December 2018

You are currently on this page

Submission scipost_201810_00004v1 on 29 October 2018

Reports on this Submission

Anonymous Report 1 on 2018-11-29 (Invited Report)

  • Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_201810_00004v1, delivered 2018-11-29, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.683


Good and comprehensive report on the status of DUNE. A few language comments have been suggested to the author and waiting for feedback. For reference they are summarised below:

aiming at precise measurement -> aiming at precise measurements

Both of them require a dedicated -> Bot of them require dedicated

Chapter 2
Comment: You refer to deep-learning based event selection at the end of the first paragraph. Can you be a bit more precise and refer to some example?
Comment: You mention lifetimes of > 10^33. Is this really larger than or smaller then? Do you also have a reference to the mentioned SUSY models?

Chapter 3
- towards the end you mention SiPM. While it’s clear to me what this abbreviation means it might not be clear to everyone. Could you please spell it out once?

Chapter 4
- you use ktonne and kt. Could you change it to a consistent notation?

Chapter 5
- you use standard model and Standard Model. Could you change this to a consistent notation?
- are being tested at CERN -> are tested at CERN
- ready ready -> ready
- physics physics -> physics
- with the mean -> with beam

  • validity: -
  • significance: -
  • originality: -
  • clarity: -
  • formatting: -
  • grammar: -

Login to report or comment