Talk:The T2K experiment

This is a really nice article. I have a few suggestions listed below to improve readability and sometimes provide additional context.

Scientific context: - Missing references to Homestake, SAGE, Gallex, Kamiokande, IMB, SNO, Kamland, K2K, MINOS.

Conceptual Design: - A lot of the symbols have a | afterwards, I am not sure if it is a mistake or something just rendered on my browser. - Equation 1 uses the mixing angles, without mentioning what they are. I would suggest to add a sentence to explain them. - Equation 2 has a missing open parenthesis. - It would help readability to move the paragraph "Neutrinos are electrically neutral and they interact.." to just before the "In T2K the beam at the production point..." paragraph

The T2K neutrino beam: - I would mention that the beam is pure in muon neutrinos in the first sentence. - The POT affair often confuses people outside of neutrino physics. It may be beneficial to mention here why we use POTs as a handle for how many neutrinos we produced.

The near detectors: - Usually, "cross section" (and all double barrel words) are written with a "-" when used as an adjective and without when used as a noun. For example: I measure a cross section, I make a cross-section measurement.

Analysis methods: - Missing parenthesis when mentioning QE interactions - The neutrino interaction simulation description could be improved, by mentioning nuclear effects (eg the movement of the nucleons inside the nucleus before the interaction happens), 2p2h-MEC, and FSI, that greatly complicate the picture of what we are trying to measure. - "Antineutrino" does not need a dash. - Readability could be improved if the paragraph starting with "In this analysis of νe appearance..." would be moved further up before a summary of the latest results.

T2K-II - I think the article should finish with the sensitivity expectation of T2K-II and it would provide a really nice uplifting conclusion.