Post on 27-Dec-2015
ILC Detectors - concepts and R&D status/plans -
清華大学、北京、 Jan 12, 2009
Hitoshi Yamamoto
東北大学
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC running scenario
■ 1st stageEnergy 200-500 GeV, scannableepolarization > 80%500 fb-1in first 4 years
■ 2nd stageEnergy upgrade to ~1TeV1000 fb-1in 3-4 years
(http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/icfa/para-Nov20-final.pdf)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC options
■ Additional 500 fb-1 at 500 GeV CM in 2~3 years Depends on results from LHC, ILC phase I.
■ e+ polarization of 50% or more ~30% polarization is in the baseline
■ , e, ee colliders Photons generated by inverse Compton scattering of las
er
■ Giga-Z (running on Z-pole) 109 Z’s in a few months (esp. b-tagging & beam polariz
ation)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC Physics
Phase I Phase II Time
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC features
■ Well-defined initial state Known initial e+e- 4-momentum Known e- spin (e+ spin optional)
■ Clean environment Exploited to achieve good detector performance
sMomentum, vertexingJet reconstruction
■ → Pair creation of SUSY particles and Higgs-strahlung as just a few examples :
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Smuon detection- use of polarization (bkg rejection) -
■ Signal : + and nothing. Plot acoplanarity of e+e +.
■ Polarized e (R) can reduce W+ W background.
€
e+e− → ˜ μ R+ ˜ μ R
− , ˜ μ R → μ ˜ χ 10
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Masses of smuon and LSP- well-defined initial state -
■ Energy of smuon is known (= beam energy)
■ Use the endpoints of for simultaneous determination of and
■ Can also determine the spin by ang. dis. of ’s
€
e+e− → ˜ μ R+ ˜ μ R
− , ˜ μ R → μ ˜ χ 10
€
m( ˜ μ R )
€
m( ˜ χ 10)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
SUSY Lagrangian Reconstruction- use of polarization (interaction picker) -
■ Ecm = 500 GeV, 50 fb-1
■ Serves as a test of GUT relation (or other mechanism)
€
σ(e+eR− → ˜ e R
+ ˜ e R− )
€
σ(e+eR− → ˜ χ 1
+ ˜ χ 1−)
€
m( ˜ χ 1+)
€
m( ˜ χ 10)
€
(M1,tanβ,M2,μ)Fit to €
( ˜ W + , ˜ H u+ )
M 2 2mW cosβ
2mW sinβ μ
⎛
⎝ ⎜
⎞
⎠ ⎟
˜ W −
˜ H d−
⎛
⎝ ⎜
⎞
⎠ ⎟Wino-Higgsino mass term
With polarized e- beam
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Higgs-strahlung- well-defined initial state -
■ Tagged Higgs Factory 5σ detection : ~ 1yr at LHC, ~ 1 day at ILC Br(H→invisible) can also be measured
■ Momentum resolution ~ x10 better than LHC required
€
e+e− → Zh, Z → μμ ,ee
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Higgs Couplings- distinguish
models -
(By S. Yamashita)
SUSY (2 Higgs Doublet Model)
Extra dimension(Higgs-radion mixing)
■ Good b,c tagging by vertexing required
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Jet(quark) reconstruction
■ With , Z/Wjj can be reconstructed and separated
€
σE / E = 0.6 / E(GeV)
€
σE / E = 0.3/ E(GeV)
€
σE / E = 0.3/ E
Many important modes are multi-jet.
WW/ZZ separation
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC Detector Performances■ Vertexing: ~1/5 rbeampipe, <1/30 pixel size (wrt LHC)
■ Tracking: ~1/6 material, ~1/10 resolution (wrt LHC)
■ Jet reconstruction: ~1/2 resolution (wrt LHC)
€
σ ip = 5μm ⊕10μm / psin3 / 2 θ
€
σ(1/ p) = 5 ×10−5 /GeV
€
σE / E = 0.3/ E(GeV)
Required to realize the ILC’s physics potential (not a luxuary)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC Detector R&Ds
■ Challenging performances realized by Low-mass detectors Fine granularities Small beam size (vertexing closer to IP) Development of new detector elements
Pixel sensors, SiPM/MPPC, GEM/Micromegas, etc.
Optimized detector integration e.g. Jet reconstruction Assembly and installation, MDI issues
■ Intensive R&D efforts are on-going on all the above
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILC Management Structure
ILCSC
GDEGDE Director
Research DirectorateResearch Director
PAC
AAP IDAG
FALC
WWS
Accelerator Experimental program
AcceleratorAdvisoryPanel
InternationalDetectorAdvisoryGroup
FundingAgencies forLargeColliders
Sakue YamadaBarry Barish
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
WWS World-wide study of the physics and detectors for
future linear colliders ■ Established in 1998
■ Coordinated experimental efforts of LC/ILC Organized International LC workshops (LCWS) Management though Panels
MDI, R&D, physics benchmark, cost, …
■ WWS panels are superceded by those under the research directorate
■ WWS continues to represent wider community interested in ILC e.g. continues to organize LCWS
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Detector Timelinesynchronized with
machine■ Detector Design Phase I : ends 2010
Focus on critical R&Ds
Detector LOI validation by IDAG Update physics performance Prepare for LHC physics
■ Detector Design Phase II : ends 2012 Re-formulate physics program based on LHC re
sults Confirm physics performance Complete necessary R&Ds Complete technical designs with costing
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Why LOI Now?
■ Detector design effort should be in phase with that of machine. From the past experience, detectors take about the sam
e time for construction and assembly as the machine. In order to proceed, machine needs detector design (ex
p. MDI/IR region design).
■ The process of ILC detector group formation should be open to all. Give chance to all interested parties
■ Signing LOI does not indicate a formal commitment to the detector concept (This not a ‘collaboration’).
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Detector LOI Validation by IDAG
■ Call for LOI was made Oct, 2007
■ LOI submission deadline March 31, 2009
■ Time scale of validation ~ 1/2 year (fall 2009)
■ Validation NOT a down-selection to two detectors at this tim
e.
(ILC will have two detectors in push-pull)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Validation means:■ Are the physics goals convincing ?
■ Is the detector concept suited and powerful enough for them?
■ Does push-pull work OK ?
■ Is the detector feasible ? Are the necessary R&Ds progressing fast enough ? Is the cost estimation reasonable ?
■ Is the group powerful enough for the design phase ?
If the answers are all ‘yes’, then the LOI is ‘validated.’’
LOI process helps to identify and organize critical R&Ds.
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
LOI Groups
■ So far, 3 groups submitted EOIs to ILCSC
4th
SiD
GLD
LDC
ILD
+ (2007
summer)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Jet Reconstruction Methods
■ PFA (particle flow algorithm) Measure charged particles with trackers Measure neutrals with calorimeters Remove over-counting (e.g. charged hadron showers) Requires fine granularity and sophisticated logic
■ Compensating calorimetry Measure EM and hadronic shower components separately Re-weight them to obtain jet energy
Two approaches
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Detector Concepts
ILD SiD 4th
TrackerTPC + Si-stri
p Si-strip TPC or Si-strip or DC
Calorimetry PFA PFA compensating
B 3.5 T 5 T 3.5 T
ECAL Rin 1.84 m 1.27 m 1.5 m
Rout 6.6 m 6.45 m 5.5 m
Zout 6.7 m 6.45 m 6.4 m
• ECAL/HCAL inside solenoid• All uses some pixel vertexing
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
4th■ Dual-readout calorimeters (comp
ensation, not PFA) Scint+Cerenkov
■ Iron-less double solenoid (no return yoke) Light Good muon tracking
■ Subdetector choices Pixel vertexing Tracking
Clucou (cluster-counting): DC
And/or Si-strip Or TPC
Dream cal test
solenoid
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILD■ Cambridge ILD meeting (Sep11-13/08)
ILD reference parameters defined B = 3.5 T ECAL Rin = 185 cm etc.
GLD and LDC are truly unified! Some options are clearly open and w
ill be in LOI ECAL technologies (schint. Si) VTX configurations etc.
Agreed to use a single software framework managed jointly.
Mostly based on MOKKA/Marlin With good parts of Jupiter/Satellit
e
■ Seoul ILD meeting (Feb16-18/09) Last workshop before LOI submission
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
ILD■ Vertex
5-6 layers Technology - open
■ Si-strip tracker 2 barrel + 7 forward disks outer TPC, end TPC
■ TPC GEM or MicroMEGAS (or Si-pix
el)
■ ECAL Si-W or Scint-strip
■ HCAL Scint-tile (or digital HCAL)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
SiD
■ Vertex 5 barrel lyrs, 4 disks Technology - open
■ Si-strip tracker 5 lyrs barrel, 5 lyrs f
orward
■ EMCAL Si-W, 30 lyrs, pixel (4
mm)2
■ HCAL Scint-tile or digital H
CAL, 38 lyrs
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
SiD
■ Boulder SiD meeting (Sep16-19/08) Engineering workshop
By the SiD engineering group Beam tube, ECAL, HCAL designs etc.
SiD workshop Geared toward LOI planning Benchmarking, PFA, optimization Subdetector groups charged to answer IDAG questions
Detailed schedule made for LOI
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
LOI groups and R&D groups
by Yasuhiro Sugimoto
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
WWS R&D Panel Reviews■ Goal
Improved communications → enhanced R&Ds
■ Reviewers R&D panel members, external experts, funding a
gency reps. Chair: C. Damerell
■ Had 3 reviews: Feb 07, Beijing : Tracking Jun 07 DESY : Calorimetry Oct 07 Fermilab : Vertexing
■ Reports http://physics.uoregon.edu/~lc/wwstudy/detrdrev.ht
ml
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Vertexing Review
■ Challenge: (20m)2 pixel over 1 ms bunch train→occupancy too high Solutions:
Bunch id (ideal), time-slice a train (~20), small pixel
■ ~10 technologies reviewed Bunch id: Chronopixels, SOI/3D Time-slice: CPCCD, MAPS, deep N-well, CAP, DEPFET, ISI
S Small pixel: FPCCD
■ Review: ‘All options hold promise, unable to eliminate any of
them.’ ‘2~4 technologies at start-up, others for upgrades’ ‘Some have applications in other fields’
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Tracking Review
■ 3 basic technologies reviewed Silicon strip (SiLC, SiD tracking) TPC (LC-TPC) Drift chamber (CLUCOU)
■ Review: ‘Extremely impressed’ ‘Currently far from goals for all options’ ‘Forward tracking’ : ‘achieved in practice?’ A large prototype (R=1m) in B=3~5 T recommended
Expensive! (not part of review)
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
TPC Large Prototype■ Large prototype collaboratio
n Close connections to
LCTPC collaboration Field cage + read out
EUDET End plate from Cornell
■ Parameters R ~ 38 cm B ~ 1 T (PCMAG from KEK) Test :
Field uniformityGEM, MicroMEGASSi pixel readout
■ Beam test Feb. 2009
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Calorimetry Review
■ Luminosity measurement, hermeticity, beam diagnostics
FCAL collaboration (15 groups)
■ Review: ‘BEAMCAL can benefit from hadro
n machines (LHC)’ ‘Needs funding for the US part
(even before FY07 disaster)’
IP
5mrad
~40mrad
~150mr
ad
Forward calorimetry
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Calorimetry Review
■ PFA-based CALICE collaboration (41 groups) SiD-CAL (17 groups, some in CALICE)
■ Compensating DREAM collaboration (8 groups) Fermilab group
■ Review: ‘PFA and compensation may both be needed’
‘Esp. Forward region’
PFA : ‘Extremely promising, but simulation alone cannot be trusted.’ ‘Use a large-scale physics prototypes’ Expensive ! (not part of review)
Compensating ‘Needs more people’ ‘The approach could be the outright winner par
ticularly in the … forward region’
General Calorimetry
26%E-1/2 achieved on Z poleFull simulationNo cheating
ILD
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
CALICE Beam Test
Muon trigger
Data recorded:
• 2006 – DESY/CERN• 2007 - CERN• 2008 – Fermilab MTBF
• e 1-50 GeV• (mainly for calibration)
• 2-180 GeV• Large amount of data accumulated and being analysed.
ECAL/HCAL/TCMT
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Is Push-pull Possible?
■ Switching scheme Every ~ 1 month
Not enough for significant data
Switching time Short enough to minimize deadtime Needs to include alignment/calib.
■ Easier if detectors are self shielding
■ With or W/O platform? Both schemes are under study Structural estimations on-going
■ Question is still open
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
CLIC-ILC Collaboration
■ CLIC-ILC working groups established. CFS, BDS, Cost&schedule, Beam dynamics Detectors
Conveners: L. Linssen, D. Schlatter (CERN)F. Richard, S. Yamada (ILC research directorate)
Frequent contacts after Feb. 2008. CLIC can use the large accumulation of ILC s
oftware (e.g. jet reconstruction - done) Common subdetector R&Ds
H. Yamamoto, Beijing, Jan, 2009
Summary
■ The physics case for ILC remains strong as ever.
■ Unprecedented detector performances are needed to realize the physics potential of ILC.
■ 3 LOI groups (detector concept groups) are now working to submit LOI by March 31 ‘09 to be reviewed by IDAG.
■ Detector R&D groups and LOI groups are moving forward together to achieve the extremely-challenging detector performance goals. (Matrix reloaded and will be re-loaded again and again - fluid and lots of chances to join)