OUTLINE The Chicago Involvement in CDF Early History

OUTLINE • The Chicago Involvement in CDF • Early History • Hardware: L 1, L 2, Fred, Trigger Systems; BBC, SVT • People- former students, postdocs- training… • Physics Analysis Topics • Run II Activities, Future Plans • Carla - Level 1 Care and Feeding • Run II Upgrades- Level 2, TDC, EM Timing • Physmon - Real-Time Feedback • Run II Analyses- top dileptons, taus (charged Higgs) , photons (GSMB); SM, Bj-E(6), ED, Monte Carlo tools (signature-based searches) • Phenomenology: Moscow, Durham, Fermilab • Instrumentation development- picosec TOF (Tim)

Fundamental Tenets (style) • Strength comes from working together • Common interests in hardware, physics • Build common analysis tools, datasets, computing infrastructure; share knowledge • Share (big) load of detector maintenance • Students, postdocs integrated into Eshop (and formerly, mechanical design) • Undergrads are colleagues

Historic UC Roles on CDF • Intellectually Challenging Detector System Design and Construction-new capabilities- need the strength to take on and maintain a major system – – – • Level 1, 2 trigger systems- CDF and CDFII SVT (with Pisa) Luminosity BBC system Central Physics Issues- leadership analyses – • D* recon(1989), Z mass, W width, W BR’s, top discovery, top mass, top to H+, GMSB (photons), ED, . . Many innovative analyses first done by UC Education/Training – – – • Undergrads – deep involvement in real work (e. g. Kopp, Incandela, Nelson, Onyisi, . . ) Graduate Students (e. g. Swartz, Roodman, Gerdes, Kopp, Incandela, Saltzberg, Somalwar, . . ) Postdocs (e. g. Campagnari, Eno, Sullivan, Campbell, Amidei, Liss, Knuteson, Ashmanskas, …. ) High School (Jocelyn Monroe, Tim Credo, Colliness Morris, …) Collaboration Leadership – – – Mel, Young-Kee –Spokespersons Many Physics Group Convenorships (EWK, Top Dilepton, Exotics, Trigger, etc… Now Steve coconvenor of Btag, Silicon Tools; Ivan B-Tools, Carla was recently Dilepton, …

Former CDF Postdocs now faculty/staff Myron Campbell- Michigan (Chair, even) Dan Amidei- Michigan Tony Liss- Illinois Claudio Campagnari- UCSB Sarah Eno- Maryland Greg Sullivan- Maryland Ray Culbertson (FNAL) Peter Wilson (FNAL) Tsuyoshi Nakaya (Kyoto) Bruce Knuteson- MIT Maria Spiropulu- CERN Kara Hoffman (1/2)- Maryland Taka Maruyama- Tsukuba

Intro: Fermi’s Yale Lectures of 1951 (Broad interpretation of the early Chicago involvement with CDF) “Electromagnetic and Yukawa Interaction Constants: ” “Perhaps future developments. . will enable us to understand the reasons for the existence and the strength of the various interactions. ”- Fermi

The Start of CDF • Jan 1977 - Jim Cronin heads Colliding Beam Dept. - • 2 Init. Designs: one magnetic, one not • Wilson decrees 10 M$ cap on detector cost (!) We say `sure’… • Oct. 78 - Wilson resigns- Lederman new Dir. • Oct. 79 - CDF Dept formed; Alvin Head of CDF. Roy joins later, + Dennis Theriot • 1981 - Technical Design Report

CDF Technical Design Report Author List 1981

Big Step- Technical Design Report HJF and HJ, eds.

Draft of Fig. 1 of TDR Rich Northrop- UC Remarkable in that it’s what we built!

CDF Trigger- Chicago TDR (1981!) : “ 8. 1 General Considerations The problem presented by the trigger is: at a 50 kilocycle interaction rate, with a typical multiplicity of 50 particles per event, in an environment with unmeasured backgrounds, to pick out the signatures of interesting events in a completely new energy domain. Two additional considerations are that the physics of interest may change during the lifetime of the detector, and that the detector will grow in capability by the now designing for gt addition of new detector technology” Note: 12 megacycle int. rate!

Universities had good mechanical engineering in The detector comes toand elec. those daysgood student training in mech life… 82 -85 Hans Kautsky (from UC, but by then at Fermilab, in the CDF arches and coil… Front plates for central calorimeter modules machined downstairs in our shop

Discovery Potential: The Tevatron Complex and CDF-II Note `goals’ are `Delivered; data points are ‘Published’.

HJF “group” Analysis interests (per request)- former students • Joe Incandela (1986)- Magnetic monopoles (not yet CDF) • Sunil Somalwar (88)- Magnetic monopoles (not yet CDF) • Yeong-Dong Tsai (89)- Dijet high-mass search • Rick Snider (1990)- Min Bias – particle prod • Paul Derwent (90)- W BR’s /W width • Sacha Kopp (94)- W BR’s/W width; direct W width measurement • David Saltzberg (94) W mass (80. 410) • Jim Romano (95) Top quark in dileptons • Marcus Hohlmann (97)- Top quark into tau’s, : charged Higgs • Dave Toback (97) - Diphotons and GMSB, signature-based • John Wahl (99)- W BR’s/ W width • Jeff Berryhill (2000)- Photon + lepton; GMSB, signature-based • Collin Wolfe (TBD)- Dilepton signatures- top+new particle search (Bj, ED) • Sasha Paramonov (TBD)- High Pt boson signatures- new particle search • Andrei Loginov (ITEP)- Photon + lepton; GMSB, signature-based

`Top’ Dileptons- 2 e or mu, met, jets (Carla as Dilepton Co-convenor)

`Top’ Dileptons- 2 e or mu, met, jets (Carla as Dilepton Co-convenor) Also to watch- by eye LH looks like CDF Run 1 at large met?

Searching for new physics in dileptons (Collin, Steve, Carla, Jason, HF) • Looking at 2 models of new physics specifically that would give multiple W, Z’s, giving dileptons • Comprehensive approach- 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, . . Jet; OS/SS, met/nomet; btag, and add tau’s • Name of game is acceptance- use likelihoods for particle ID, overall selection • Develop tools for systematic comparing SM expectations to data (with Boos, Dudko) • Run 1 dilepton data had some distinctly `un-top-like’ qualities (but onesies/twosies)- two neat examples- the top trilepton event, and the ttbar-gamma event, e. g (among other more difficult kinematic/other oddities)

Run 1 “dilepton” event- 182 Ge. V Electron 27 Ge. V Muon 24 Ge. V Electron 96 Ge. V Jet 116 Ge. V Met 3 isolated leptons- one of 182 Ge. V pt; 116 Ge. V of met; one jet of 96 Ge. V

Ttbar-gamma One expects gammas at some rate (Baur, Rainwater)this was in 100 pb-1… 8 fb-1? High_Pt photons are characteristic of GMSB, e. g.

High Pt Photons as New Physics Signature: (e. g. CDF Run 1 eegg, mmgg events) Are Run 1 anomalies real? Experiments see only upward fluctuations- can estimate factor of luminosity needed to get to the mean (though huge uncert. )

Collin, Carla, Steve, Jason’s dileptons (with tau’s, likelihoods, tags) Unblessed- not to leave `room‘ (please!) SS are signatures of (Majorana) gluinos, Servant RS model (multiple WZ bosons, e. g. , …) OS ee, mumu, emu +njets SS ee, mumu, emu +njets

Collin, Carla, Steve, Jason’s dileptons (with tau’s, likelihoods, B-tags) Unblessed- not to leave `room‘ (please!) OS ee, mumu, emu +njets+1 btag OS ee, mumu, emu +njets+ 2 btags

Likelihoods: e, mu, Tau Steve Levy- Tau likelihood (Tau in Red, Jet Blue) Idea: Different topologies have different background levels: be able to set rejection levels appropriate for sample, and increase acceptance for these low-rate channels. Bruce Knuteson developed e, mu and framework code: Sasha is working on the mu, Collin and Carla on e’s, and Steve Levy has updated the e’s, and is working on the tau’s. See’s 30% increase in effic. At same fake rate.

B-tagging Steve is Convenor of B-tag Group; also has made big contrib. on Layer 00 Using Layer 00 gives big improvement in effic Using Layer 00 gives improvement in overall tags

Electron Likelihood: Z mass (Bruce Knuteson, Steve Levy) Gain 20% (!) at same fake rate Run II Data: 234 pb-1 Red: Both Likelihood and Standard Cuts Blue: LIkel Only Green: Standard Only e+e- Mass:

SM Dilepton Predictions-Mad. Graph • Consistent SM sets • Allows ratio work (e. g W+njets/Z+njets • ME has gamma, Z poles (crucial) • Carries helicities, incl. to tau decay (ditto) • LO, however; no unified QED/QCD • Use for our dileptons • Developed CDF path through sim, prod, ntuple for whole collab

Sasha’s high-pt bosons Unblessed- not to leave `room‘ (please!) W-> mu nu trans mass (170 K events) Z-> mu mu Pt (13 K events) Bj E(6) and Servant/Agashe ED Models predict high pt W’s and Z’s (and Higgs, in Bj case!) Bj: QQ -> uu. WW, ud. WZ, ud. WH, dd. ZZ, dd. ZH, dd. HH N. B. Pt of the Z

Major Effort on Better SM predictions (with Tim Stelzer, Steve Mrenna, E. Boos, L. Dudko) Both Comp. Hep and Mad. Graph Wgg and Zgg; agree to within 5% (no tuning)

Andrei’s Gamma-Lepton+X Muon+photon+met Electron+photon+met Unblessed- not to leave `room‘ (please!) 2 very rare events in Run 1 Berryhill sample- eeggmet and mmggjj- also 2. 8 sigma excess (but looked like Wgamma kinematically. . )- 5 times data now. . GMSB signature, among. .

Running, Building, Monitoring • Upgrades- Level 2 Initiation (Ted Liu, Peter Wittich, Harold, Mircea, …!) • Upgrades- EM timing- Initiation, cute pickoff, Plug outputs (Toback!) • Upgrades- New TDC- sweet design, beautiful performance- unhappy ending (but will get used, we hope, by Wah, …) • Monitoring- Physmon, Carlamon (L 1)

Collin’s Physmon- Online Fast Feedback from the Express Line with full Production- monitor physics quantities Oops… Recent muon efficiencies

Ratio Wmu/We ; D-Kpi Mass Oops… Oops? … D-Kpi Mass W-munu/W-enu Need J/Psi triggers back into Stream A to regain muon monitoring we had…

L 1 Trigger Monitoring- Carla Yesterday’s– one channel has an intermittent one-bit discrepancy trigger-DAQ

The Future • I plan to exploit CDF until it’ s no longer the best game in town • Have a factor of (maybe) 20 more lum; would be 80 times Run. I • Am interested in instrumentation, accelerators, nonaccelerator fundamental measurements (Saltzberg’s stuff is fascinating) • Picosecond timing, low Et photons- so many things I don’t understand- should keep me busy for 5 years, and then I’ll see what’s most interesting (Nambu) • Much to be done on MC tools- closer collab with phenomenology- have started with Moscow State, Stelzer, Mrenna (Fermilab)- have been approached by Stirling for a more formal connection- better SM tools essential for LHC

Integral and Peak Luminosity Plans

W Mass Measurement Limited by Theoretical Issues? Ø Modelling requires NLO QCD and QED in same MC ØRecoil event modelling depends on W Pt at low Pt ØUnderlying event (uev) is 30 Me. V/tower/interaction in CDF- indicates scale of precision needed- must get all detector response to uev from data (i. e. not MC). Old idea (UA 2, CDF Run 1 a)- use Z sample to get detector response to recoil. E. g. (D. Saltzberg) for eachØ W from MC use measured recoil from a Z with the same Pt. Limiting factor for using Z’s was factor of 10 smaller s X BR. Q: Will future require measuring W and Z mass simultaneously by same technique? If so, need QCD/QED NLO, Z/g int. . , for Z. A. Focus on W and Z production and higher order differences

Error on W mass has scaled inversely with sqrt of luminosity so far – now at 59 Me. V. what are our expectations with 10 -20 X more data? Ø Modelling requires NLO QCD and QED in same MC ØUnderlying event is 30 Me. V/interaction in CDFneed to get from data ØRecoil event modelling depends on W Pt at low Pt- also need to get response from data

Jet energy scale is critical to top mass measurement B-jets contribute most to mass (don’t have W mass constraint)… Promising Idea: Balance photon and b-jets to calibrate response Un-Ki Yang, Adam Gibson Wish List Item: Answer to Q: What are theoretical limitations on the ratio of gamma-b(c)/gamma-jet balancing?

One of Hardest Problems is precise predictions of W, Z+Njets Each with at least on tag in this case- this from top crossection meas.

One of Hardest Problems is precise predictions of W, Z+Njets Lauren Beitler (undergraduate!) from datasets with CKKW matching made by Steve Mrenna– see S. Mrenna and P. Richardson, hepph/0312274

Testing the SM- systematically? Red- Zee+2 jets Blue- ttbar->ee Worked closely with E. Boos and L. Dudko on making Comp. Hep better suited for hadron colliders; has evolved into working on developing a theoretically well-grounded basis for distinguishing two processes- e. g. top dileptons from Zee+2 jets- collaboration in progress (some UC support)

Altera-Stratix 96 Channel TDC Harold Sanders, Mircea Bogdan, Sasha Paramonov, HF Sweet design- takes advantage of Altera. Sasha’s neat trigger design- XFT

Picosecond TOF (with Tim Credo (IMSA), Harold, Tang) • Aspen `future talk’ led to thinking about most-needed instrumentation • Particle ID (!) • Can one do picosecond (1 or less) TOF? • Started with Robert Schroll (theorist, champion mimic) as P 335 (course) project • Continued with Tim Credo (HS) student • Ongoing collab with Burle Industries

Picosecond Timing- II Idea is to `tile’ outer cylinder of magnet coil with MCP’s- not cheap though

Picosecond Timing- III

Picosecond Timing- IV Leading edge jitter 0. 6 psec Robert and Tim: Simulation of Cherenkov generation, transmission, photocathode, TTS, anode layout and summing

Conclusions – I’m hopeful: best thing that could happen to US HEP (and world HEP) is a discovery at Fermilab- it’s our main chance. • With luck (truly) we have a shot at exploring LOTS of channels, topics, opportunities • a large region of unexplored kinematic and signature space. • Big effort now on machine performance • Detectors working well enough- detailed calibrations still in progress • Enormous tasks of understanding detectors, SM predictions, at precision levels (new paradigms too)