Charge for LCWS 06 F Richard for the

Charge for LCWS 06 F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore बगल र WWS 1

Outline • Preparation for the Detector Conceptual Report • WWS Panels • Meetings in 2006 WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 2

Main goals in 2006 • Get prepared for the Machine and Detector documents (with costing) end of 2006 with tight connections between the WWS and the GDE (e. g. Xangle, 2 IR and Te. V issues) • Maintain our political momentum e. g. WWS effort towards EPP 2010, CERN council SG WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 3

WWS DCR 200 p MDI Detector Costing ILCSC RDR 300 p BDS Machine Costing ILCSC GDE Documents Det. Env. LEP R&D Panels Reporting WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 4

Detector Conceptual Rep. • Purpose of the DCR: The DCR document is the physics/detector counterpart of the RDR, the GDE document due end of 2006 with costing. A condensed version of the DCR will be included in the RDR • For which audience? Similar to the TESLA TDR which had an executive summary for funding authorities and educated politicians while the content is aimed at the HEP community WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 5

Status of the DCR • Physics part has started • Detector part awaiting for outline documents from the 4 concepts: GLD LDC Si. D “ 4 th” (DREAM calorimetry) -> Delivery due at Bangalore • Only one cost will be public, obtained by ‘averaging’ on the concepts WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 6

Contents of the DCR • • Executive summary (wide audience) Physics section describing the primary goals with 3 x 2 editors for Exp+Th • Detector section (4 editors) describing: - what is needed to reach these goals (including LEP aspects, options) - examples of how this can be done (the concepts) including costing - ongoing and still needed R&D WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 7

Physics • Recall basic arguments and include recent developments • First meeting of physics editors has emphasized the need for realistic evaluation of performances • What is missing ? So far short (‘cheat’) cuts were applied: e. g. ECFA in Vienna for Pflow • We need to design an appropriate approach: hybrid full/fast for channels which require large samples of events, full for detailed studies of the detector responses (c-tag, pflow) • The Case for a Te. V upgrade needs to be updated (S. I. scenario with anomalous WW interactions) WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 8

The Scope Document Director's Corner http: //www. fnal. gov/directorate/icfa/LC_parameters. pdf 23 February 2006 F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore WWS 9

Role of the Concepts They have been formed to evaluate, in a coordinated way, the performances of a full detector, including costing They rely on inputs from Detector R&D (matrix approach) and are essential: • to design a consistent detector with a defined size and a set of sub-detectors • to test the performances of this detector on reference reactions with appropriate tools and will aspects (include LEP, machine backgrounds) • to identify critical aspects of R&D based on overall performance WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 10

Editors Physics: Expt Theory Europe: K. Moenig A. Djouadi, Asia: M. Yamaguchi Y. Okada Americas: M. Oreglia J. Lykken Detectors: J. Jaros A. Miyamoto T. Behnke R&D panel: C. Damerell WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 11

Detector R&D • A panel has been set under C. Damerell (see H. Weerts) and has produced a report • This report has already been instrumental to attract attention on insufficient resources in some countries • It will provide guidance/recommendations • Its future mission is under discussion WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 12

Some Conclusions • Overall investment should be X 2 in the next 4 years • Manpower needs an increase by 60% • The total ww needed effort represents 31 M$/year 75% being manpower • Hope that this panel could lead to expanded funds for detector R&D in USA as early as FY 2006 WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 13

Next steps ? • ‘Current composition of the Panel would not be appropriate’ to review individual proposals, appoint referees etc… • Chris thinks that the role of DRDC at CERN (E. Iarocci 1990/3) was very positive • Contrary to some claims DRDC did reject a number of proposals to focus R&D before the formation of the LHCC • Should we explore this possibility or is it too early or inadequate? WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 14

MDI • Our community wants to communicate effectively with the GDE guys. Why ? • We want to understand the reasons and implications of some choices which have direct impact on performances (noise on the 1 st VD layer, forward coverage, LEP etc…) -> An MDI-BDS panel has been formed WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 15

WWS-BDS Machine Detector Interface Panel • Need to reinforce GDE-WWS connections has been recognized and discussions took place at the London ILC-BDIR and Snowmass meetings • They resulted in a document defining the charge and the composition of this panel which was finalized at the GDE meeting in Frascati • H. Yamamoto was volunteered as chairman and acted in preparation of LCWS 06 -GDE WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 16

Charge of the panel • Encourage and review R&D on MDI topics (including cooperation with WWS R&D panel to maintain database of MDI-related projects) • Help prepare cases to be put to Change- Control for updates to the machine baseline which involve the detectors • Be the voice of the detector community within the GDE and organize joint meetings between machine and detector experts in concert with the regular WWS/GDE meetings • Report to the WWS and the BDS area group (and in some instances beyond this group) WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 17

Names • LEP Working Group (WWS): W. Lohmann, T. Omori, E. Torrence • BDS Area group (GDE): P. Bambade, W. Kozanecki, T. Markiewicz, A. Seryi • Concepts: P. Burrows, K. Busser, T. Tauchi • Chairman of the panel: H. Yamamoto WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 18

Meetings in 2006 • In conjunction with the GDE: - LCWS 06 Bangalore (March 9) - ALCPG in Vancouver (July 19) - ECFA in Valencia (November 6) • Additional specialized meetings (Colorado in January, Cambridge in April) to develop software tools needed for the DCR • Many others (Concepts, R&D…) WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 19

Conclusions • Progress achieved by the R&D panel, what comes next ? • The MDI panel has started and will be active for LCWS 06/GDE • An organization for the Detector Conceptual Report has been set. Large input expected at LCWS 06 • Links tightened between Detector and Machine activities WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 20

WE NEED YOUR EFFORT TO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 21

LCWS 06 WWS F. Richard for the WWS, LCWS 06 March 9 2006 Bangalore 22