Why does beam-dump geometry optimization differ depending on the specific new-physics model?

The key insight is that different new-physics models produce particles with different angular distributions and decay patterns, so the geometric layout that maximizes your sensitivity depends on which particles you're actually hunting for [AG-2026.01-1312].

Why geometry matters per model

In a beam-dump experiment, you smash a high-energy beam into a target, hoping to produce exotic particles that then decay in your detector. The geometry—where you place detectors, how far from the dump, what shielding you use—determines which decay products you can catch.

Different new-physics scenarios generate particles moving in different directions. For example, a heavy neutral lepton produced by neutrino upscattering in the beam dump itself has different kinematics than one created in the dirt (shielding material) upstream [AG-2025.01-1235]. The dump scenario favors events with specific kinematical signatures that are easier to separate from background if your detector is positioned to catch them.

Similarly, when searching for axion-like particles via photon couplings, the production mechanism and angular spread of the particles depend on whether you're using a fixed target with an optical dump (Compton backscattering) versus a conventional proton beam [AG-2025.03-1693]. A geometry optimized for one might be suboptimal for the other because the particles emerge at different angles relative to the beam axis.

The optimization challenge

The LUXE-NPOD collaboration demonstrates this concretely: they studied how to optimize their apparatus to search for spin-0 particles produced by photons [AG-2025.07-1520]. Their realistic full-apparatus calculation differed from simplified models because the actual detector geometry, shielding, and existing components create different acceptance curves for different particle momenta and angles. The optimization had to account for those specifics rather than assuming a generic setup.

At NA62 (and future beam-dump facilities), the same principle applies: "the geometric setup is particularly relevant for the specific new-physics scenario under study, since different production mechanisms can generate different angular distributions" [AG-2026.01-1312]. A compact detector layout works well for prompt decays (high coupling, heavier mediators) but might miss delayed decays or forward-going particles that a more extended geometry would catch.

In short: geometry optimization is not universal because production angles, decay lengths, and backgrounds are all model-dependent. You must tailor the layout to where your signal lives in phase space.