SuperB

SuperBUS Participation in theINFN Super Flavor Factory

David Hitlin P5 Meeting - SLAC

February 21, 2008

The physics objectives of SuperB

• To study rare , b and c decays with sufficientsensitivity to isolate evidence for physicsbeyond the Standard Model– Find charged lepton flavor violation in decays and study it

– Search for CP violation in production and decay andmeasure the anomalous magnetic moment

– Precisely measure CP-violating asymmetries in penguin-

dominated B decays to search for new physics effects

– Measure x and y in mixing, and search for CP violation

– Search for new physics effects on branching fractions and kinematic distributions in rare decay processes

2

0 0D D

David Hitlin P5 Meeting - SLAC February 21, 2008

There are, of course, a very large number of other measurements in weak decay flavor physics and in QCD that can be made for the first time or greatly improved

Requires a polarized electron beam

2

David Hitlin P5 Meeting - SLAC February 21, 2008 3

A conversation between SuperB, LHC and ILC

• When evidence is found for New Physics at the LHC, attention will turn to understanding the details– Is it SUSY? What type of symmetry breaking?

– Is it extra dimensions? Are they warped?

• The ILC will eventually sharpen the picture by, for example, measuring slepton masses

• SuperB will be crucial to an understanding of the flavor sector of any type of new physics– Is there charged lepton flavor violation?

– Are there new CP phases ?

– Is there a charged Higgs ?

– Is there minimal flavor violation in the (s)quark sector?

4David Hitlin P5 Meeting - SLAC February 21, 2008

Lepton flavor violation (LFV)

• Lepton flavor violation is unobservably small in the Standard Model

• Neutrino mixing proves that there is neutral LFV

• The next natural question is whether there ischarged LFV?

• Will the neutrino pattern be repeated?

– If so, then LFV will be largest in 32 transitions

• Best bets:


6

l

Charged lepton flavor violation in decays

SuperBsensitivityFor 75 ab-1


Sensitivity to models of LFV


Goto, et al. arXiv:0711.2935v2

8

t -¬ t -

¬

t -®

t -¬ t -

¬

Flipping the helicity of the polarizedelectron beam allows us todetermine the chiral structureof dimension 6 four fermionlepton flavor-violating couplings

Dassinger, Feldmann, Mannel, and Turczyk JHEP 0710:039,2007;

[See also Matsuzaki and SandaarXiv:0711.0792 [hep-ph]

Polarized ’s can probe the chiral structure of LFV

David Hitlin SLUO Meeting February 7, 2008

Polarization at SuperB

• The SuperB design includes a polarized electron beam– SuperKEKB does not, and cannot, have a polarized beam

• Spins must be vertical in the ring spin rotators at the IP– Solenoid spin rotators appear best– 36.6 Tesla-meters for 90 spin rotation in the LER

e.g. 2.5 Tesla x14.66 meters with 30x106 ampere-turns• Expected longitudinal polarization at the IP:

87%(injection) x 97%(ring)=85%(effective)



LHC

SuperB

squark mass matrix (d sector)

10

g

b d,s,b s

~

b u,c,t s b u,c,t s b u,c,t s

W- H- - 0

~ ~ ~ ~~ ~

g,

New CP-violating phases in penguin modes

Sensitivity extends to high mass scales


s

~

New Physics contribution (2-3 transition)

In this case the mainconstraints are bs

ACP(bs)

23Re d

LR

23Im d

LR

ACP magentaB(s) greenB(sll) cyanAll constr. blue

MSSM + generic softSUSY breaking terms

23| |LR

1 10

1

10-1

10-2

(TeV)gluinom

In the red regions the are measured with a

significance >3 away from zero

23| |LR

Arg(23)LR=(44.5± 2.6)o

= (0.026 ± 0.005)

1 TeV

g

b b s~ ~

LRd

23

12

Model Bd Unitarity

Time-dep. CPV

Rare B decay

Other signals

mSUGRA(moderate tan)

- - - -

mSUGRA(large tan )

Bd mixing - B → (D)*b → s + −

Bs → Bs mixing

SUSY GUT with R -B → KS

B → K∗-

Bs mixing LFV, n EDM

Effective SUSY Bd mixing B → KS ACP (b→s) b → s + −

Bs mixing

KK graviton exchange

- -b → s + − -

Split fermions in large extra dimensions

Bd mixing - b → s + − mixing mixing

Bulk fermions in warped extra dimensions

Bd mixing B → KS b → s + − Bs mixingmixing

Universal extra dimensions - -

b → s + −

b → sK →

K0 K 0

0 0D D

D0 D0

The pattern of deviations from SM values is diagnostic


How do you gather the data sample?

• Access to new physics effects in the flavor sector requires a datasample 100x the total existing BABAR + Belle sample and therefore an asymmetric e+e- collider with ~100x current luminosity

• There are at least two different approaches:– Increase the current and number of bunches: SuperPEP-II, SuperKEKB

• High bunch charge, small , coherent synchrotron radiation, heating, background and total power issues

– Decrease the emittance and beam size at the IP: SuperB• Low emittance rings, à la ILC damping rings,with collisions of strongly

focused beams at the IP with a large Piwinski angle


y

• Low emittance rings, à la ILC damping rings• Focus the beams strongly at the IP with a large Piwinski angle• Beam current and wallplug power < PEP-II• Ultra-low emittance – achieved at ATF2• Very small and spot sizes at the IP – demag achieved at FFTB• Large crossing angle – achieved at KEKB• “Crab Waist” scheme – being tested at DANE now

•Small collision area•Can achieve lower•No parasitic crossings•Reduce effect of synchrobetatron resonances due to crossing angle

The SuperB approach to high luminosity – P. Raimondi


15

Comparison of SuperB and SuperKEKBCircumference (m) 1800 3016

Energy (GeV) (LER/HER)

4/7 3.5/8

Current (A)/beam 2. 9.4/4.1

No. bunches 1342 5018

No. part/bunches 5.5x1010 12/5x1010

(rad) 2x24 2x15 (0 cc)

x (nm-rad) (LER/HER) 2.8/1.6 24

y (pm-rad) (LER/HER) 7/4 180

y* (mm) (LER/HER) 0.22/0.39 3

x* (mm) (LER/HER) 35/20 200

y* (m) (LER/HER) 0.039 1

x* (m) (LER/HER) 10/6 50

z (mm) 5 3

Power (MW) 17 60 (RF only)

L (cm-2s-1) 1.x1036 4.x1035


IP beam distributions for SuperKEKB

IP beam distributions for SuperB

SuperB luminosity profile

Peak

Integrated

160 ab-1 in ten years ~100 x combinedBABAR+Belle data sample

Peak luminosity can beupgraded to 2.5x1036

(conservatively)


An upgrade of BABAR works well at SuperB


Since currents are in the PEP-II range, a detector upgrade is straightforward - R&D on SuperB upgrade components is underway

DANE


SuperB footprint at Tor Vergata

19

SuperB Ring ( circumference 1800m)

SPARX FEL

Roman Villa

100m

SuperB Injector (~ 400m)

SuperB Main

Building


SuperB uses many PEP-II components


Quadrupoles

Lmag (m) 0.56 0.73 0.43 0.7 0.4

PEP HER 202 82 - - -

PEP LER - - 353 - -

SuperB HER 165 108 - 2 2

SuperB LER 88 108 165 2 2

SuperB Total 253 216 165 4 4

Needed 51 134 0 4 4

Dipoles Lmag (m) 0.45 5.4

PEP HER - 194

PEP LER 194 -

SuperB HER - 130

SuperB LER 224 18

SuperB Total 224 148

Needed 30 0

+ RF (cavities, klystrons, .....) + vacuum components + accelerator expertise

+ BABAR as the foundation of an upgraded detector

How much will SuperB cost?

Value of reusable itemsfrom PEP-II and BABAR

Disassembly, crating, refurbishment andshipping costs areincluded in project costs

*In the SuperB CDR costs were presented “ILC-style”, with labor in man-months, M&S in €. This table translates costs into US accounting and converts to $.

From the SuperB CDR*

21

EDIA Labor M&S Total Net replacement value [M$] M$ M$ M$ M$

Accelerator 68 29 278 375 184 Site (Lazio region) 18 14 154 186 - Detector 42 16 59 117 68 Total 128 59 187 678 252


The level of US participation in SuperB

• The US program has a unique opportunity, in a time of scarceresources, to make a highly leveraged investment in an important new project and thus to take a very significant role

• There are both accelerator and detector/physics aspects– Accelerator

• SLAC’s expertise in high current, high luminosity colliders is crucial– Detector/Physics:

• 30 Pi’s from 18 US and 4 Canadian institutions have expressedinterest in SuperB in a letter to the SLAC PPA Division

• We expect this interest to grow• In the TDR phase: 50-75 people, including postdocs/students• In the construction and physics phase: ~150 people• The SuperB meeting in Elba (May 31-June 3) will initiate

collaboration-forming activities


What does US SuperB involvement entail?

• The SuperB design uses many PEP-II components– Recognizing that there is internal competition for some of these items,

a DOE HEP contribution of PEP-II magnets, RF and vacuum components, as well as of BABAR, as the basis for a detector upgrade, to SuperB would give the US a central position in a new high quality, high visibility project, for very little additional capital investment

• SLAC would then be the natural center for US SuperB activities, in a role that only a national lab can play– Accelerator design and some component construction– Detector design and system construction– Physics: computing and analysis

• There are different possible levels of participation


US Project Costs FY08 M$ Total

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Minimal role Accelerator 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 23 Detector 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 11 Total 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 34

Fair share role

Accelerator 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 51 Detector 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 26 Total 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.4 77

Leadership role

Accelerator 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 104 Detector 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 36 Total 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 140

US participation levels


Why isn’t the SuperB crew interested in SuperKEKB?

• This question is often asked; let’s address it directly

• It is universally accepted that an e+e- data sample of 75ab-1 or more is required to confront the issue of New Physics effects in B, D and decay

– SuperB produces, at 1036, 15ab-1/Snowmass year, starting in ~2015

– SuperKEKB produces, at 2 (or 1) x1035, 1ab-1/running year, starting in ~2014, with an upgrade path that reaches 8 (or 4?) x1035 in 2027

– SuperB, with a polarized electron beam, produces polarized leptons, opening an entirely new realm of exploration in lepton flavor physics

– The SuperB low emittance, low current, design presents tractable detector and background problems, and affordable operating costs

• These factors have convinced us that SuperB presents the most viable e+e- option to confront the question of flavor physics in the LHC era


But it’s a green field site

• Building SuperB at an existing laboratory would certainly be easier

– SLAC: upgrade PEP-II

– FNAL: in the Tevatron tunnel, morphing into the ILC damping rings

– KEK: see previous slide

– CERN: ISR tunnel circumference is too small

– DESY: PETRA tunnel

• Building SuperB at Tor Vergata, as an international enterprise, is feasible and even exciting

– Proximity to Frascati - INFN is in the process of establishing aSuperB Project Office at Frascati

– Participation of accelerator experts from other labs is crucial to success

– The Lazio regional government appears interested in funding the tunnel

– The innovative collider design uses many PEP-II components

– Tunneling for the SPARX FEL on the site will begin within months


Conclusions

• SuperB presents an exciting opportunity for the US program– A broad and deep physics program: results will be crucial to

understanding new physics uncovered at the LHC– Leverage: in a time of shortage of investment capital, gives the US

a major role in a European project for a relatively small investment– Timing:

• SuperB provides an opportunity to retain the impressive capability of the US accelerator community by having them

contribute to an innovative new e+e- collider

• SuperB provides an opportunity for the very productive BABAR-CLEO-BES community to participate in a state-of-the art detector upgrade that will be producing physics in the middle of the next decade


Backup slides


29

Four year construction,preceded by 2-3 yearsof design and prototyping,which overlaps organizational and funding activities

Schedule



30


31

32

Crab crossing experience at KEKB• Lower bunch current product

makes luminosity twice of the crossing-angle collision.

• However, slope of the specific luminosity is NOT understood well.

• If the reason is an electron cloud, no problem after upgrade.

• If luminosity is limited by something else, we must investigate it. ◆ Synchro-beta resonance ?◆ Other nonlinear effects ?

Onishi at Atami Workshop

Crab crossing3.06 spnb=1548

Crab crossing49 spnb=50

22 mrad crossing3.5 spnb=1388

1.7x1035

Lsp L

III is bunch current.

what is a slope ?

9.4/4.1 Anb=5018

x=24 nm


Split fermions in large extra dimensions

Universal extra dimensions

Universal extra dimensionsKK graviton exchange

mSUGRA (moderate tan )b

mSUGRA ( large tan )b

SU(5) SUSY GUT with nR

Effective SUSY

Bd unitarity

Time-dependent violationCP

Rare decaysB

Other signals

A Super B Factory is a DNA chip for New Physics



Project X flavor physics

to e conversion

Re< 2x10-17

in a generation12 transition

MECO/Mu2e are large,expensive experiments

Sensitivity with respect to e?Is this more or lessinteresting than 23 ?

Signers of SuperB letter to PPA – 10/07


David HitlinCaltech

Soeren A. PrellIowa State University

John M. LoSeccoUniversity of Notre Dame

Frank PorterCaltech

Eli I. RosenbergIowa State University

Klaus HonscheidOhio State University

David KirkbyUC Irvine

David N. BrownLBNL

Richard KassOhio State University

Owen LongUC Riverside

David N. BrownUniversity of Louisville

James OlsenPrinceton University

David AsnerCarleton University

Hassan JawaheryUniversity of Maryland

A.J. Stewart SmithPrinceton University

Brian MeadowsUniversity of Cincinnati

Carlo DallapiccolaUniversity of Massachusetts, Amherst

Milind PurohitUniversity of South Carolina

Michael SokoloffUniversity of Cincinnati

Gabriella SciollaMIT

Stefan M. SpanierUniversity of Tennessee

William T. FordUniversity of Colorado

Popat PatelMcGill University

Jack L. RitchieUniversity of Texas, Austin

James G. SmithUniversity of Colorado

Steven RobertsonMcGill University

Robert KowalewskiUniversity of Victoria

Masahiro MoriiHarvard University

Paul TarasUniversité de Montreal

J. Michael RoneyUniversity of Victoria

Fermilab Steering Group report – Appendix E


Date post:	30-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	chase-woodward
View:	25 times
Download:	2 times

SuperB

Documents