A next-generation liquid xenon observatory for dark matter and neutrino physics

The nature of dark matter and properties of neutrinos are among the most pressing issues in contemporary particle physics. The dual-phase xenon time-projection chamber is the leading technology to cover the available parameter space for weakly interacting massive particles, while featuring extensive sensitivity to many alternative dark matter candidates. These detectors can also study neutrinos through neutrinoless double-beta decay and through a variety of astrophysical sources. A next-generation xenon-based detector will therefore be a true multi-purpose observatory to significantly advance particle physics, nuclear physics, astrophysics, solar physics, and cosmology. This review article presents the science cases for such a detector

Results and perspectives of the solar axion search with the CAST experiment

The status of the solar axion search with the CERN Axion Solar Telescope (CAST) will be presented. Recent results obtained by the use of 3He as a buffer gas has allowed us to extend our sensitivity to higher axion masses than our previous measurements with 4He. With about 1 h of data taking at each of 252 different pressure settings we have scanned the axion mass range 0.39 eV 64ma 64 0.64 eV. From the absence of an excess of x rays when the magnet was pointing to the Sun we set a typical upper limit on the axion-photon coupling of ga\u3b3 642.3 710 1210 GeV 121 at 95% C.L., the exact value depending on the pressure setting. CAST published results represent the best experimental limit on the photon couplings to axions and other similar exotic particles dubbed WISPs (Weakly Interacting Slim Particles) in the considered mass range and for the first time the limit enters the region favored by QCD axion models. Preliminary sensitivities for axion masses up to 1.16 eV will also be shown reaching mean upper limits on the axion-photon coupling of ga\u3b3 643.5 710 1210 GeV 121 at 95% C.L. Expected sensibilities for the extension of the CAST program up to 2014 will be presented. Moreover long term options for a new helioscope experiment will be evoked

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2) : a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86-1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91-1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable