Äîêóìåíò âçÿò èç êýøà ïîèñêîâîé ìàøèíû. Àäðåñ îðèãèíàëüíîãî äîêóìåíòà : http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~uochep/talks/talks08/brau09-08.pdf Äàòà èçìåíåíèÿ: Wed Jan 21 23:02:12 2009 Äàòà èíäåêñèðîâàíèÿ: Tue Oct 2 11:14:01 2012 Êîäèðîâêà: Ïîèñêîâûå ñëîâà: http www.astronomy.com


SLUO Annual Meeting September 18, 2008


SLUO Annual Meeting

September 18, 2008


Scientific Vision for SLAC
* Strong Photon Science program
­ World leading on site facilities ld

DRELL

* Strong Particle Physics and Astrophysics
­ Focus on energy frontier and cosmological frontier on frontier

* Accelerator science
­ Core competency of the laboratory ­ Key tools for discovery in many scientific areas


Particle Physics Today
­ ­ ­ ­ Opening of TeV frontier ti Mystery of neutrino masses and mixing Dark Energy Dark Matter

DRELL

* The most exciting time scientifically in my career lifetime

* Healthy particle physics program very important to US going forward
­ Priority for SLAC


New Paradigm for the US

DRELL

* The frontier of accelerator based particle physics is off shore for the next decade th * Particle physics will thrive in the next decade
­ Will the US continue to play a leadership role?

* How can national laboratories help support the user community to be effective participants
­ At accelerators abroad? ­ In non accelerator based experiments?


SLAC Support for Users Going Forward * Highest priority for the field is energy frontier
­ SLAC will support users at LHC

DRELL

* Exploration of the `Dark Universe'
­ New models of user support by national labs ti
· GLAST now · LSST, JDEM future


Electron Accelerator Science at SLAC * Core competency of the laboratory

DRELL

­ Essential to future science strategy of the lab and the field

* Our future science strategy depends on advances in electron accelerators * Both Photon Science and Particle Physics rely on advances in electron accelerator science


Summary
* SLAC is transforming to optimize for its future * Particle physics program high priority for lab going forward

DRELL

­ Strong user support role essential to health and viability of lth particle physics at SLAC ­ Still working to optimize our role for the user community in this new era


Steve Kahn


Mike Holland, OMB Examiner OMB
· No slides
­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ Quarks to Cosmos and Quantum Universe What would US lose if it did not do HEP? ld US HEP? 2,4,6,8 years matter, not 20 NLC R&D contribution to SNS good R&D to SNS HEP benefited from historical role of leaders as advisors in DC in DC Politician do want to support "discovery science" Be careful with your message Training of people matter - may need professional help in describing this EPP2010


DUSEL Physics Experiments

DEHMER

· The aforementioned questions are addressed at DUSEL via a variety of experimental probes: of experimental
­ Direct Detection of Dark Matter ­ Neutrino-less Double-Beta Decay ­ Nuclear Astrophysics
· Accelerator-based cross-section measurements measurements

­ Solar Neutrinos ­ Long Baseline Experiment, Proton Decay, and Supernovae y, Remnants (Mega-Detector)
DUSEL MREFC funding would support the construction of forefront experiments in nuclear- and astro-physics, and in particle physics using the Fermilab accelerator as a high intensity neutrino source.


DEHMER


DEHMER


DEHMER


Department of Energy

Status of U.S. HEP
HEP is at a productive and exciting period today Significant discoveries anticipated over the next decade · at the energy frontier · at the intensity frontier · at the particle astrophysics frontier But current circumstances for the U.S. program are challenging Competition for federal funding is fierce for is fierce · HEP is not a priority of the Administration or Congress · HEP funding has eroded over the last decade · "Why does the U.S. have to be a leader in HEP (particle physics)?" · "What is particle physics"? Reductions in FY 2008 funding resulted in loss of · HEP's scientific productivity and workforce · Momentum on planned activities (NOvA, SRF infrastructure, ILC R&D) · U.S. credibility as an interagency/international collaborator (BaBar, ILC) A realistic strategic plan for a world-class program that deals with · the increase in cost and the delay in possible start of an ILC · energy frontier moving to Europe in FY 2009 & closure of Tevatron ti FY · Fermilab's role in the future has been (is being) developed that needs to accepted and implemented!

Office of Science

KOVAR


Need for a Realistic Strategic Plan
Guidance Sought from the Community

Department of Energy

Office of Science

DOE/NSF Charge to HEPAP (P5) (November 2007/revised January 2008) Identify and evaluate the scientific opportunities and options that can be pursued at different funding levels for mounting a world-class, vigorous and productive national particle physics science program. Understand and evaluate the role Fermilab will play in the national and worldwide context of particle physics over the next two decades. Recommendations on the priorities for an optimized high energy physics program over the next ten years (FY 2009-2018), under the following four funding profile scenarios: · · · · Constant effort at the FY 2008 (Omnibus) funding level Constant effort at the FY 2007 funding level Doubling of funding starting in FY 2007 Additional funding above the previous level, in priority order, associated with specific activities needed to mount a leadership program that addresses the scientific opportunities identified in the National Academy ("EPP2010") report.

Report was submitted in June 2008

KOVAR


HEPAP (P5) Report
Major Findings

Department of Energy

Office of Science

· Progress in achieving the goals of particle physics requires advancements at the: · Energy Frontier · Intensity (or precision) Frontier it ti · Cosmic (or particle astrophysics) Frontier (each provides a unique window for insight about the fundamental forces/particles of nature) · LHC offers an outstanding opportunity for discoveries at the Energy Frontier · Resources will be needed to support the extraction of the science by U.S. scientists · Resources will be needed for planned accelerator and detector upgrades · An · · · opportunity exists for the U.S. to become a world leader at the Intensity Frontier Central is an intense neutrino beam and large underground long-based line detector Building on infrastructure at Fermilab and partnering with NSF on inf astructure at ermilab and Develops infrastructure that positions the U.S. to regain Energy Frontier (Muon Collider)

· Promising opportunities for advancing particle physics identified at Cosmic Frontier pp · Requires partnering with NASA, NSF, etc. · HEP at its core is an accelerator based experimental science · Accelerator R&D develops technologies needed by the field and that benefit the nation

KOVAR


HEPAP (P5) Report
My Comments
· P5 · · · seriously addressed the charge given by DOE/NSF: to examine the scientific opportunities and options for mounting a world class particle physics program at different funding levels

Department of Energy

Office of Science

· Grappled with the issue of how to mount a world-class ith ld program that addresses the highest priority scientific opportunities identified with the funding available · Result is a realistic vision whose priorities are consistent with the major findings - that is robust and that should produce outcomes that justify the investment · Lays out what the nation will get with different investments · Scenario B (FY 2007 level w/COL) - productive, world-class research program at all three frontiers - minor player in next generation Tevascale facility · Scenario A (FY 2008 level w/COL) ­ not adequate to mount productive, world-class programs at all three frontiers - not part of next generation Tevascale facility ­ U.S. leadership is significantly diminished · Scenario C (FY 2007 ACI level) ­ Scenario B, but faster, cheaper and better! · Scenario D (additional above C) ­ the funding needed to host next generation Tevascale facility

KOVAR


Information from all Scientific Campaigns needed to achieve the Ultimate Goal

Department of Energy

Office of Science

Campaigns Target Unification Scales. Sensitive to other scales.

KOVAR


Possible Opportunities with a proposed Fermilab "Project X"

Department of Energy

Office of Science

Neutrinos: Oscillation
(International Collaboration)

Energy Frontier ILC Muon Collider

Muons
e, g-2 g-2

Kaons
K+ KL + 0

Project X
Charm
Mixing, CP

Antiprotons
Hyperon CP Antihydrogen CPT EWK

's

Neutrino Factory KOVAR


P5 Executive Summary: Enabling Technologies

Department of Energy

Office of Science

"The panel recommends a broad strategic program in accelerator R&D, including work on ILC technologies, superconducting rf, high-gradient normal-conducting hi ti accelerators, neutrino factories and muon colliders, plasma and laser acceleration, and other enabling technologies, along with support of basic accelerator science."

"The panel recommends for the near future a broad accelerator and detector R&D program for lepton colliders that includes continued R&D on ILC at roughly the proposed FY 2009 level in support of the international effort. This will allow a significant role for the US in the ILC wherever it is built. The panel also recommends R&D for alternative accelerator technologies, to permit an informed choice when the lepton collider is established."

KOVAR


Department of Energy

Office of Science

Budgets


SC Request vs. Appropriation History
(FY 2008$)

Department of Energy

Office of Science

KOVAR


Department of Energy

BES

FES

Office of Science

HEP

ASCR

NP

BER
KOVAR


DOE HEP Budget Realities Funding Trends Are Austere
U.S. HEP funding has been eroded by inflation : FY 2007/FY 1996 ~ - 16% U.S. HEP has closed Facilities: BNL/AGS (FY 1999): SLAC/B-Factory (FY 2008)

Department of Energy

Office of Science

HEP FY 2008 funding was a -8.5% reduction from FY 2007: FY 2008/FY1996 ~ -23% FY di 5% FY (Partially mitigated by emergency supplement providing $32M to HEP)
1000 900 800 700 600 Millions 500 400 300 200 100 0
1 99 6 1997 1 99 8 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 20 06 2007 20 08

Suppl.

Actual Dollars FY 2008 Dollars (OMB Inflators)

Fiscal Y e ar

KOVAR


Department of Energy

FY 2008 Budget/Program
FY 2008 Appropriations ($689M 8.4% reduction compared to FY 2007)

Office of Science

· A Productive Program · Tevatron is running well ­ CDF/D0, MINOS, MiniBooNE · B-Factory completed successful four month run · LHC circulating beam and ATLAS/CMS ready · GLAST collecting data · Many projects are underway: Minerva, T2K, Daya Bay, EXO, DES, CDMS · DOE/NASA planning to proceed on JDEM · DOE/NSF discussing participation in LHC Phase I upgrade · DOE review for Advanced Plasma Acceleration Facility (APAF) · 10 OJI awards in FY 2008 (increased $500k $750K) · ~22 awards (out of 69) Dark Energy R&D (~$3.8M) · There have been significant impacts · Staff reductions at SLAC and Fermilab · Work on NOvA stopped · ILC & SRF R&D supported at a minimal level FY 2008 Supplemental · $32M for HEP ($29.5M for Fermilab, $2.5M for SLAC)

KOVAR


Department of Energy

FY 2009 President's Budget Request
Office of Science

·

The DOE SC Budget Request is $ 4,721 Million
· · It is a +21% (+$819 Million) increase compared to FY 2008 Appropriations It is a +24% (+$909 Million) increase compared to FY 2007 Appropriations Million) increase Appropriations

·

The DOE SC HEP Budget Request is $ 805 Million
· · It is a +11.6% (+$83.1 Million) increase compared to FY 2008 Appropriations (plus supplement) It is a + 7.1% (+$53.1 Million) increase compared to comparable FY 2007 Appropriations

·

There are a number of significant program shift
· · · · · · B-Factory run completed begin ramp-down and D&D. Data analysis will continue for a few years Tevatron running full-out either discovery or significant limits on New Physics in advance of LHC NOvA project proceeds one year delay in schedule and increase in cost year dela increase in cost U.S. researchers playing leading roles at LHC increased funding to support efforts Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM) R&D ramping up to complete conceptual design and select a mission concept in FY 2009 Accelerator R&D efforts modified in light of ILC developments to address near-term, mid-term and long-term opportunities

KOVAR


FY 2009 Budget Request ILC and Accelerator R&D
A central challenge for the U.S. and international HEP community has been to define and execute a balanced scientific program that includes a next generation collider at the energy frontier. The International Linear Collider (ILC) is widely viewed as that collider, but: The ILC physics case and some design parameters depend on results from the LHC ILC case and parameters from the It is a complex, challenging, multi-billion $ investment that requires international commitments This will take some time

Department of Energy

Office of Science

FY 2009 Budget Request: Continues support for a U.S. role in the global ILC R&D effort, but focused on areas where the U.S. is the acknowledged leader Maintains a balanced scientific program that will preserve options for U.S. leadership in targeted areas, both in the LHC era and whatever comes next Supports overall strategy for accelerator technology R&D has both short-, medium- and long-term components to provide options for the U.S. program over the next decade

KOVAR


Department of Energy

FY 2009 & FY 2010
Office of Science

FY 2009 Budget Request ($805M

+$115M over FY 2008 ($689M))

· However, expectation of six month Continuing Resolution (CR) · Tevatron plans to run six months into FY 2009 · LHC program will be supported (but no growth) · Some projects will be delayed · Still plan to proceed with JDEM selection ith ti · Continue discussions on participation in LHC Phase I upgrade · APAF project will be delayed higher priority programs are · Across program ­ the higher priority programs are supported · If · · · year-long CR the impacts will RIFs of 175-200 at labs and Tevatron Tevatron Operations will be NOvA project cancelled and be significant ~80 (PhDs/students) at universities terminated at end of six months terminated of six other projects delayed or canceled

· Appropriation is pivotal · Future of HEP Program will depend upon level of FY 2009 Appropriation · HEPAP (P5) Report viewed as important for determining funding level FY 2010 Budget Request to be submitted by new administration · DOE is developing plans for programs at different funding levels · HEP are using HEPAP (P5) findings/recommendations in it plans

KOVAR


Department of Energy

Summary
HEP is in an exciting period · Near term future has incredible potential

Office of Science

A pivot point in the U.S. for the HEP program (and physical sciences basic research) · There is support for research and development ­ but there is a debate about how much should go for short-term, mid-term and long-term (basic) research · The Administration has strongly supported long-term basic research · FY 2009 Budget Request provides funding for doubling funding for SC · However, expect a Continuing Resolution (funding at previous level) for 6 months (f di l) · President will not submit a FY 2010 Budget Request HEPAP (P5) has presented a vision for the U.S. program (P5) th · It appears to be realistic and robust · It has been (is being) used in the development of the DOE OHEP strategic plan and budgets budgets OHEP will use this vision as basis for requesting funding · To try to change the direction of the U.S. HEP program that was implied in the FY 2008 Omnibus Bill (and has been the trend over the last decade) · To ensure a strong, productive world-class program with resources available

KOVAR


Michael Peskin


PESKIN


Summary
­ Solid programs with significant effort

RAUBENHEIMER

* SLAC is engaged in LHC, Super B, and Project-X R&D * P5 noted that a future lepton collider will be a necessary complement to the LHC
­ A linear collider can provide this capability

* Many options for the next-generation collider with different levels of development, risk and costs
­ ­ ­ ­ ILC: most developed, lowest risk but high cost X-band klystron: medium risk but significant cost savings X-band Two-beam: higher risk but probably greater savings Dielectric or Plasma acceleration: much higher risk but potential for much lower costs

* SLAC infrastructure can support critical HEP accelerator R&D


What should ILC detector be able to do ?
Identify ALL of the constituents that we know & can be produced in ILC collisions & precisely measure them. ll ( reconstruct the complete final state)

u,d,s jets; no ID c, b jets with ID t final states; jets + Ws states; W's 's: missing energy; no ID e, : yes through decays ID & measure gluon jets, no ID W,Z leptonic & hadronic
Use this to measure/identify the NEW physics

WEERTS
H. Weerts SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


Main Detector Design Criteria
Requirement for ILC for · Impact parameter resolution Compared to best performance to date to date · Need factor 3 better than SLD

r rz 510/( psin 3/ 2 )
· Momentum resolution ·

r = 7.7 33/( psin 3/ 2 )
Need factor 10 (3) better than LEP (CMS) 1 6 â10-4 (GeV -1) p T Need factor 2 better than ZEUS

1 5â10-5 (GeV -1) p T
· Jet energy resolution goal energy resolution goal ·


·

E

E

=

30% E



E

E

=3- 4%
·


Detector Need Need Need Need

E

E

=

Detector implications: Calorimeter granularity Pixel size size Material budget, central Material budget, forward Observation:

implications: factor ~200 better than LHC factor ~20 smaller than LHC than LHC factor ~10 less than LHC factor ~ >100 less than LHC

60% E

Need substantial improvement in precision

WEERTS

H. Weerts

SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


Performance requirements/Physics requirements LC Physics calls for Jet Energy Resolution E/E = 3-4% calls Jet (factor of 2X better than today's state of the art to resolve W's/Z's) Particle Flow Algorithms (PFAs) promise the needed gain in jet energy resolution PFA Calorimetry · Measure charged energy in tracker · Measure photon energy using photon energy using electromagnetic calorimeter · Measure neutral hadron energy in hadronic calorimeter · Avoid confusion from charged tracks Measure the energy of every particle, not the energy deposited in calorimeter

WEERTS
H. Weerts SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


SiD Design Concept
· ·

( starting point)

·

"Jet Energy measurement =PFA" is the starting point in Energy measurement starting point the SiD design SiD Premises at the basis of concept: Particle flow calorimetry will deliver the fl ill li muon system best possible performance Si/W is the best approach for the ECAL solenoid and digital calorimetry for HCAL Limit calorimeter radius to constrain the costs HCAL Boost B-field (5T)to maintain BR2 Use Si tracking system for best momentum resolution and lowest mass (5 layers) lowest mass (5 layers) Use pixel Vertex detector for best pattern recognition (5 layers) Keep track of costs of costs Detector is a single fully integrated Robust in ILC operations system, not just a collection of different (beam losses) subdetectors Compact: 12m x 12m x 12 m
muon system n HCAL

WEERTS

H. Weerts

SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


PFAs call for new types of calorimeters and readout... Si/W ECAL Highly Segmented HCAL
RPC

Calorimetry: ECAL & HCAL

GEM

Mega

Sensor + KPiX 13 mm2 pixels Readout 1k pixels per Si sensor (KPiX)
H. Weerts

Example of R&D

WEERTS

SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


Machine-Detector Interface
The first step is to translate the parameters in an engineering model, th formulating technical solutions, clearances and components integration
4000 mm Fwd Shielding Bcal Mask QD0

5620 mm QDF

BeamPipe

2000 mm

QD0 cryoline

QD0 Cryostat

WEERTS
H. Weerts SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


Why do this now ?
Close coupling between machine

and not later

Accelerator

Experiment

detector

(=one piece)
B.Barish

"Critical for machine design" hi

Physics simulation = physics performance of "complex" can only be done with a machine & detector concept

Detector concepts develop frameworks to do this

Physics requirements drive detector concepts, which guide/define R&D R&D to meet detector performance takes long time

Detector concept & development integral part of any LC.

WEERTS
H. Weerts SLAC SLUO meeting; Sept 18, 2008


Panel Discussion Di
· · · · · · · · Barry Barish Jonathan Dorfan (Moderator) Gil Gilchriese Patric Muggli li Michael Peskin Blair Ratcliff Tor Raubenheimer Raubenheimer Harry Weerts