1

Snowmass2005 report

2005/09/26

H. Matsunaga

GLDCAL meeting

2

Snowmass05

• A joint workshop– Second ILC workshop (Accelerator)– ALCPG workshop (Physics and Detector)

• American regional -> World-wide

– http://alcpg2005.colorado.edu/

• Snowmass, Colorado– Altitude ~2500 m

• Two weeks: 8/14 ~8/27– Sort of “real” workshop

• ~600 participants– 60 persons from Japan

3

Snowmass

4

Sessions• Many plenary and parallel sessions

– Accelerator– Detector– Physics– Education & Outreach– (Private communication/discussion)

• Detector sessions– Detector components

• CAL, SIM, MDI, MUON/PID, PFA, Test beams, TRK, VTX

– Concept studies• GLD, LDC, SID

5

Special sessions etc.

• Accelerator Seminars/Tutorials• Physics Benchmarks• Industrial Forum• Special Evening Forum : “Challenges for Realizing the I

LC : Funding, Regionalism, and the International Collaboration”– Views from ICFA, HEPAP, DOE, NSF, Asia, FALC, Europe,…

• Public Lectures (Y-K. Kim, H. Murayama)• Concepts Groups meet with WWS R&D panel• Case for 2 Detectors• Cosmology and ILC• LHC-ILC

6

Accelerator part

• Working Groups (WG 1, 2, 3a, 3b, 4, 5, 6)

• Formed Global Groups (GG 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)

• BCD (Baseline Configuration Document) by the end of 2005

• Good summary by Yokoya-san at the recent JPS

7

Fourth Concept• Fourth concept was propose

d– John Hauptman, Richard Wig

mans et al.

• Compensating CAL; not PFA-directed– 20%/√E for e, hadron and eve

n jets– Dual fiber readout : Scintillatio

n & Cherenkov• Correct EM fraction event-by-eve

nt

– How to construct 4 detector ?

8

Detector session

• Main focus on PFA (Particle Flow Algorithms)– PFA plenary session– No group has achieved the goal of 30%/√E f

or jets• Still need a lot of work to obtain definite answer

• Next four pages are taken from Jean-Claude Brient’s talk– May need more detailed study (tracking etc.)

9

EJ= a√EJ ⊕ bEJ + c

a b c (GeV)

ALEPHMethod quasi-PFA 0.59 0 0.6

ATLAS 0.6 0.03 0

H1 0.5 0.05 0

PFLOW-ILCPFLOW-ILC 0.30.3 0 0 0.50.5

* * NIM A360 (1994),480 NIM A360 (1994),480

the Angular Dependence !! the Angular Dependence !! ALEPH , a=0.8 in end-cap ALEPH , a=0.8 in end-cap ATLAS , a=1.2 in end-cap ATLAS , a=1.2 in end-cap etc…etc…

the energy resolution the energy resolution

Essentially alreadygiven by A.Rasperezaon LDC

Why the value of b is so important !! Why the value of b is so important !! (and why a calorimetric approach is not the solution)

10

H1 H1 ATLASATLAS

ALEPHALEPH

Goal for PFA-ILC

EE

jet

jet (

GeV

) (

GeV

)

EEjetjet ( GeV) ( GeV) * * NIM A360 (1994),480 NIM A360 (1994),480

JCBJCB

?

Depends on Depends on GranularityGranularityandandPhysics processPhysics process(jet mul., (jet mul., √√s…)s…)

Real dataReal data

confusion

threshold

11

Distance in cmDistance in cm

Fra

cti

oFra

cti

onn

1.5 x the pad size 1.5 x the pad size

Fraction of the photon(s) energy per event , closer to a charged track than some distance

1.5 x pad size is needed for photon reconstruction

12

MeasurementMeasurementDirectly relatedDirectly relatedTo the TOTAL WIDTH To the TOTAL WIDTH Of the Higgs !!!Of the Higgs !!!

8 to 10% 8 to 10% of the energy !!of the energy !!

Region forRegion forLDC, SiDLDC, SiD

13

Pad size is more important than Moliere radius

• 1x1 mm2 pad size• 21 and 17 GeV at 1.

2cm apart• For tau decays, gra

nularity may be most important than quark/gluon jets

By H. Videau (and J-C. Brient)

14

Granularity Study

Default segmentation

- Different granularity is tested.

- So far, no gain with finer segmentation. (under study)

By T. Yoshioka

This results are due to production on Z-pole ?

15

CAL session

• Three concepts + fourth (“DREAM”) by R. Wigmans

• Still many proposals• Comparison session

– Silicon-based ECAL– Sci.-based ECAL– RPC-based HCAL– GEM-based HCAL– Sci.-based HCAL

16

CALICE Tile-HCAL

• Talk by Felix Sefkow

• Scintillator Tile + SiPM

• Already used in their Minical

• Construct HCAL module for testbeam– Using thousand SiPM– Established mass production and quality cont

rol scheme– Frontend electronics

17

Misc.

• Need to validate the feasibility of orthogonal strip readout

• Discussed with Patrick le Du for Front-end electronics• Detector outline document due end of February 2006• Detector CDR due end of 2006• Testbeam around 2007?• http://www.linearcollider.org/cms/• Upcoming meeting etc.

– ECFA ILC workshop, Vienna, Austria, 14-17 November 2005– LCWS 2006, Bangalore, India, 9-15 March 2006