- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Layout optimization for the LUXE-NPOD experiment

Melissa Almanza Soto1, Oleksandr Borysov2, Torben Ferber3, Shan Huang1, Adrián Irles1, Markus Klute3, Jesús P. Márquez Hernández1, Josep Pérez Segura1, Raquel Quishpe3 et al.

Yotam Soreq4, Noam Tal Hod2, and Nicolò Trevisani3

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 112014 – Published 16 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/n2nh-7v5b

Abstract

Beam dump experiments represent an effective way to probe new physics in a parameter space, where new particles have feeble couplings to the Standard Model sector and masses below the GeV scale. The LUXE experiment, designed primarily to study strong-field quantum electrodynamics, can be used also as a photon beam dump experiment with a unique reach for new spin-0 particles in the 10–350 MeV mass and 10−6–10−3  GeV−1 couplings to photons ranges. This is achieved via the “new physics search with optical dump” (NPOD) concept. While prior estimations were obtained with a simplified model of the experimental setup, in this work we present a systematic study of the new physics reach in the full, realistic experimental apparatus, including an existing detector to be used in the LUXE NPOD context. We furthermore investigate updated scenarios of LUXE’s experimental plan and confirm that our results are in agreement with the original estimations of a background-free operation.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (68)

  1. J. D. Bjorken, S. Ecklund, W. R. Nelson, A. Abashian, C. Church, B. Lu, L. W. Mo, T. A. Nunamaker, and P. Rassmann, Search for neutral metastable penetrating particles produced in the SLAC beam dump, Phys. Rev. D 38, 3375 (1988).
  2. J. Blümlein et al., Limits on neutral light scalar and pseudoscalar particles in a proton beam dump experiment, Z. Phys. C 51, 341 (1991).
  3. J. Beacham et al., Physics beyond colliders at CERN: Beyond the standard model working group report, J. Phys. G 47, 010501 (2019).
  4. H. Abramowicz et al., Technical design report for the LUXE experiment, Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 233, 1709 (2024).
  5. M. Altarelli et al., XFEL: The European X-ray Free-Electron Laser, Technical design report, 2006, .
  6. Z. Bai et al., New physics searches with an optical dump at LUXE, Phys. Rev. D 106, 115034 (2022).
  7. D. J. E. Marsh and J. C. Niemeyer, Strong constraints on fuzzy dark matterfrom ultrafaint dwarf galaxy Eridanus II, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 051103 (2019).
  8. P. W. Graham, I. G. Irastorza, S. K. Lamoreaux, A. Lindner, and K. A. van Bibber, Experimental searches for the axion and axion-like particles, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 65, 485 (2015).
  9. A. Hook, TASI Lectures on the strong CP problem and axions, Proc. Sci. TASI2018 (2019) 004 [arXiv:1812.02669].
  10. I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, New experimental approaches in the search for axion-like particles, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 102, 89 (2018).
  11. K. Choi, S. H. Im, and C. S. Shin, Recent progress in the physics of axions and axion-like particles, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71, 225 (2021).
  12. TowerJazz, An electron beamline at the European-XFEL, European Commission, 2025, 10.3030/101130174, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101130174.
  13. K. Kawagoe et al., Beam test performance of the highly granular SiW-ECAL technological prototype for the ILC, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 950, 162969 (2020).
  14. D. Breton, A. Irles, J. Jeglot, J. Maalmi, R. Pöschl, and D. Zerwas, CALICE SiW ECAL—Development and performance of a highly compact digital readout system, J. Instrum. 15, C05074 (2020).
  15. D. Aloni, C. Fanelli, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams, Photoproduction of axionlike particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 071801 (2019).
  16. Y. S. Tsai, Axion bremsstrahlung by an electron beam, Phys. Rev. D 34, 1326 (1986).
  17. T. G. Blackburn, B. King, and S. Tang, Simulations of laser-driven strong-field QED with Ptarmigan: Resolving wavelength-scale interference and γ-ray polarization, Phys. Plasmas 30, 093903 (2023).
  18. T. G. Blackburn, A. J. MacLeod, and B. King, From local to nonlocal: Higher fidelity simulations of photon emission in intense laser pulses, New J. Phys. 23, 085008 (2021).
  19. Helmholtz-Institute Jena, JETI40 Laser, https://www.hi-jena.de/en/helmholtz-institute-jena/about-the-institute/experimental-facilities/local/jeti40-laser.
  20. J. Alwall, M. Herquet, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, and T. Stelzer, MadGraph 5: Going beyond, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2011) 128.
  21. C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer, and T. Reiter, UFO—The Universal FeynRules Output, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1201 (2012).
  22. C.-Y. Chen, M. Pospelov, and Y.-M. Zhong, Muon beam experiments to probe the dark sector, Phys. Rev. D 95, 115005 (2017).
  23. Y.-S. Tsai, Pair production and bremsstrahlung of charged leptons, Rev. Mod. Phys. 46, 815 (1974).
  24. J. D. Bjorken, R. Essig, P. Schuster, and N. Toro, New fixed-target experiments to search for dark gauge forces, Phys. Rev. D 80, 075018 (2009).
  25. D. Banerjee et al., Search for axionlike and scalar particles with the NA64 Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 081801 (2020).
  26. S. Knapen, T. Lin, H. K. Lou, and T. Melia, Searching for axionlike particles with ultraperipheral heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 171801 (2017).
  27. F. Abudinén et al., Search for axionlike particles produced in e+e–collisions at Belle II, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 161806 (2020).
  28. M. Ablikim et al., Search for an axion-like particle in radiative J/ψ decays, Phys. Lett. B 838, 137698 (2023).
  29. M. Ablikim et al., Search for diphoton decays of an axionlike particle in radiative J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. D 110, L031101 (2024).
  30. F. Bergsma et al., Search for axion-like particle production in 400 GeV protoncopper interactions, Phys. Lett. 157B, 458 (1985).
  31. E. M. Riordan et al., Search for short-lived axions in an electron-beam-dump experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 755 (1987).
  32. M. J. Dolan, T. Ferber, C. Hearty, F. Kahlhoefer, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, Revised constraints and Belle II sensitivity for visible and invisible axion-like particles, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2017) 094.
  33. B. Döbrich, J. Jaeckel, and T. Spadaro, Light in the beam dump. Axion-like particle production from decay photons in proton beam-dumps, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2019) 213.
  34. F. Capozzi, B. Dutta, G. Gurung, W. Jang, I. M. Shoemaker, A. Thompson, and J. Yu, New constraints on ALP couplings to electrons and photons from ArgoNeuT and the MiniBooNE beam dump, Phys. Rev. D 108, 075019 (2023).
  35. FASER Collaboration, Shining light on the dark sector: Search for axion-like particles and other new physics in photonic final states with FASER, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2025) 199.
  36. S. Agostinelli et al., Geant4—A simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 506, 250 (2003).
  37. J. Allison et al., Recent developments in geant4, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 835, 186 (2016).
  38. J. Allison et al., geant4 developments and applications, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53, 270 (2006).
  39. J. van Elp, Low-energy spherical grating monochromator, resolution and flux comparison with normal incidence monochromator, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 390, 403 (1997).
  40. R. March and R. McCracken, Design of magnetic beam dump for hyperon beams, Report No. FERMILAB-TM-0330, 1971, https://lss.fnal.gov/archive/test-tm/0000/fermilab-tm-0330.pdf.
  41. CALICE WebHome, Accessed: 2023-09-09, https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CALICE/WebHome.
  42. M. Aleksa et al., DRD 6: Calorimetry, 2024, , https://cds.cern.ch/record/2886494.
  43. T. Suehara et al., Performance study of SKIROC2/A ASIC for ILD Si-W ECAL, J. Instrum. 13, C03015 (2018).
  44. Y. Okugawa, Analysis of test beam data using a technological prototype of a highly granular calorimeter and study of light quark production at a future linear collider, Ph.D. dissertation, Laboratoire de Physique des 2 Infinis Ir‘ene Joliot- Curie, France, Department of Physics [Sendai], France, University of Paris-Saclay, Tohoku Univeristy, 2024, https://theses.hal.science/tel-04505588.
  45. M. Frank, F. Gaede, C. Grefe, and P. Mato, DD4hep: A detector description toolkit for high energy physics experiments, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 513, 022010 (2014).
  46. F. Gaede, M. Frank, M. Petric, and A. Sailer, DD4hep a community driven detector description for HEP, EPJ Web Conf. 245, 02004 (2020).
  47. F. Gaede, Marlin and LCCD—Software tools for the ILC, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 559, 177 (2006).
  48. O. Wendt, F. Gaede, and T. Krämer, Event reconstruction with MarlinReco at the International Linear Collider, Pramana 69, 1109 (2007).
  49. F. Gaede, Computing in high energy physics, 2007, https://www.desy.de/f/students/lectures2007/gaede.pdf.
  50. F. Siklér, Study of clustering methods to improve primary vertex finding for collider detectors, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 621, 526 (2010).
  51. D. Jeans, J. C. Brient, and M. Reinhard, GARLIC: GAmma Reconstruction at a LInear Collider experiment, J. Instrum. 7, P06003 (2012).
  52. M. Ruan, Arbor, a new approach of the particle flow algorithm, arXiv:1403.4784.
  53. H. Zhao, C. Fu, D. Yu, Z. Wang, T. Hu, and M. Ruan, Particle flow oriented electromagnetic calorimeter optimization for the circular electron positron collider, J. Instrum. 13, P03010 (2018).
  54. K. Shpak, Separation of two electromagnetic or electromagnetic—hadronic showers in CALICE SiW ECAL and ILD, arXiv:1802.00672.
  55. T. Murata and T. Suehara, Development of particle flow algorithm with GNN for Higgs factories, EPJ Web Conf. 315, 03009 (2024).
  56. P. Wahlen and T. Suehara, Particle-flow reconstruction with Transformer, EPJ Web Conf. 315, 03010 (2024).
  57. O. Borysov, S. Huang, K. Zembaczynśki, and A. F. Żarnecki, Longitudinal structure optimization for a high density electromagnetic calorimeter, EPJ Web Conf. 315, 03006 (2024).
  58. ALICE Collaboration, Technical Design Report of the ALICE Forward Calorimeter (FoCal), Report No. CERN-LHCC-2024-004, ALICE-TDR-022, 2024, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2890281.
  59. B. P. Roe, H.-J. Yang, J. Zhu, Y. Liu, I. Stancu, and G. McGregor, Boosted decision trees as an alternative to artificial neural networks for particle identification, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 543, 577 (2005).
  60. T. Suehara and T. Tanabe, LCFIPlus: A framework for jet analysis in linear collider studies, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 808, 109 (2016).
  61. CALICE Collaboration, Particle identification using boosted decision trees in the semidigital hadronic calorimeter prototype, J. Instrum. 15, P10009 (2020).
  62. J. P. Márquez Hernández, Study of electromagnetic shower events with high granularity calorimeter prototypes and search of new physics involving heavy quark final states in future lepton colliders, Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat de Val‘encia, Valencia, Spain, 2025, https://hdl.handle.net/10550/108985.
  63. P. Speckmayer, A. Höcker, J. Stelzer, and H. Voss, The toolkit for multivariate data analysis, TMVA 4, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 219, 032057 (2010).
  64. J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimization, in Proceedings of ICNN’95—International Conference on Neural Networks, Ser. ICNN-95, Vol. 4 (IEEE, Perth, Australia, 1995), pp. 1942–1948, 10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968.
  65. J. Pybus et al., Search for axion-like particles through nuclear Primakoff production using the GlueX detector, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138790 (2024).
  66. R. R. Dusaev, D. V. Kirpichnikov, and M. M. Kirsanov, Photoproduction of axionlike particles in the NA64 experiment, Phys. Rev. D 102, 055018 (2020).
  67. R. Albanese et al., BDF/SHiP at the ECN3 high-intensity beam facility, CERN, Geneva, Tech. Rep., 2023, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2878604.
  68. J. L. Feng, I. Galon, F. Kling, and S. Trojanowski, Axionlike particles at FASER: The LHC as a photon beam dump, Phys. Rev. D 98, 055021 (2018).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 112014– Published 16 December, 2025
  • Received 28 July 2025
  • Accepted 13 November 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation