P07 –Trigger Jeffrey Berryhill, L2 Manager, September 17, Director's Review -- Trigger Overview J. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 Conceptual Design  Project Organization and Management  ES&H  Schedule  Cost  Summary 2 Outline Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 Fermilab Scientist II  Working on CMS since 2006  International PM for LS1 upgrade of calorimeter trigger  Managing a team of 20, reporting to CMS L1 trigger  Firmware, software, installation, commissioning  Operational now!  Technical Work:  HLT menu manager for electron/photon triggers 2011  Developer for Run 1 trigger monitoring software  Firmware for physics algorithms of LS1 calorimeter trigger upgrade  Management Experience: Standard Model Physics Convener  Upper manager with a sub-manager team of 20, workforce of 200  Oversaw three dozen CMS publications 3 Trigger L2 Manager – Jeffrey Berryhill Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Conceptual Design 4 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

L1 Trigger Full CMS Scope Tracker HB/EB/HGC TPG DT/CSC/ RPC/GEM TPG L1 Calo. Clustering L1 Muon Track Finding L1 Track Trigger Global Reconstruction “Track Correlator” Global Trigger Decision Phase 2 “Level 1 Trigger” system Complete replacement of the Phase 1 system Incorporation of Track Trigger output in global reconstruction Newly formatted “Trigger Primitive” input from muons and calorimetry Input from EB at single crystal level L1 accept rate up to 750kHz 12.5  sec latency HLT output 7.5 kHz Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 5

Ph. 2 L1 Trigger Components  Calorimeter Trigger  Process individual readout granularity cells to be optimally matched with track trigger information.  Data processed by input Layer 1 and then final Layer 2 providing the output. Similar to current calorimeter trigger, essentially scaled to higher number of channels involved.  Endcap Muon Trigger  Covering |  | from 1.6 to 2.5: rebuilt to incorporate additional chambers in endcap and to provide input to the tracking correlator.  Overlap & Barrel Muon Triggers  Modifications of existing muon triggers covering the barrel and overlap regions to provide the input to tracking correlator.  Track Trigger Correlator  L1 Track Finding is contained within the Tracker, with L1 Trigger performing correlation of produced track with muon and calorimeter trigger information.  Logic is based on adaptation of Particle Flow ideas to L1 Trigger.  Input trigger data is processed by an input Layer 1 and then final Layer 2 providing output.  Global Trigger  Will need to process more information than Phase 1 from many more objects with additional Tracking Trigger load. Design scales by ratio of data volume from phase 1 upgrade. Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 5

Ph. 2 Trigger Components (US)  Calorimeter Trigger  Previous Run 1 and Phase 1 involvement shared ~50/50 with UK  Ph. 2: Board and algorithm R&D+design+install, 50% CORE for boards/fibers/crates  Endcap Muon Trigger  Previous Run 1 and Phase 1 involvement at 100% level  Ph. 2: Board and algorithm R&D+design+install, 100% CORE for boards/fibers/crates  Track Trigger Correlator  Totally new subproject of larger scope than Phase 1 global reconstruction layer  Strong interest from several US groups targeting 50% level involvement  Ph. 2: Board and algorithm R&D+design+install, 50% CORE for boards/fibers/crates  Board R&D/design strongly overlaps between sub-projects (and L1 track trigger)  High Level Trigger  A CPU farm similar to Tier 0 offline reconstruction  Reducing 750 kHz L1 output to 7.5 kHz with hundreds of specialized algorithms  US has strong previous involvement in leadership, physics algorithms, and operations  No current commitment to Ph. 2 CPU farm construction or engineering/tech. support (i.e. 0% CORE)  Nominal travel/COLA allocation for active physicists only Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 6

Crate BCrate CCrate A HCALECAL Processor Track Correlator …… Layer 1: 135 boards Layer 2: 45 boards Model for L1 Cal. Trigger Hardware 8 (Next Slide) Base processors on existing CMS Virtex7 trigger processor cards cluster ECAL using fine granularity information for e/γ candidates for track matching/veto + track isolation, and use wider H clusters behind for veto, etc. Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 HGC HCALECAL HGC HCALECAL HGC 18 crates 32k fibers

Crate BCrate CCrate A Processor Global Trigger MUONCAL TRACK MUONCAL TRACK MUONCAL TRACK … Layer 1: 63 boards Layer 2: 21 boards Model for Track Correlation 9 Distribution of L1 Cal, Mu, Track Trigger Objects Using tracks to find primary vertex Associating tracks with the primary vertex Associating tracks with calorimeter objects Use tracks to calculate isolation of cal. and muon objects Emulating PF ideas in the L1 Trigger Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 9 crates 15k fibers

36 Tx and Rx Frontpanel Optical 10G links on CXP Modules 31 Rx and 12 Tx Frontpanel Optical 10G links on MiniPODs 13 GTH Back- plane Tx/Rx links Virtex-7 `690T ZYNQ `045 Starting Point: CTP7 used for Phase 1/LS 1 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 10

P5 Installation of CTP7 crates for Phase 1 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 11

 Muon Track Finder processors (1 layer of ~20)  Optimized for maximum input from muon detectors (84 input links, 28 output links)  Dual card with large capacity for RAM (~1GB) to be used for p T assignment in track finding  Revisit: expand the MTF7 with an AM chip?  Adding GEM, RPC to “workhorse” CSC hits Muon Trigger Hardware: MTF7 12 Back: Core FPGA card with P T LUT mezzanine Front: Optics card Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 Reduce 40 MHz detector output to 750 kHz with 12.5  sec latency, preserving efficiency for mission-critical physics on the margin (precision Higgs, low-lying SUSY scenarios, vector boson scattering) 13 L1 Trigger Requirements Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17  Calorimeter Trigger:  Process individual crystal energies instead of present 5x5 towers  Higher resolution matching to tracks: ΔR <  Improvement in stand-alone electron trigger efficiency + rate→  Plots here and following from TP.

14 Muon and tau trigger Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 Maintain muon efficiency and sharpen L1 PT and angular resolution to achieve high matching efficiency with track trigger Calorimeter- and track-seeded approach to taus can maintain ~ 50 kHz trigger rate with ~ 50% efficiency for VBF H →ττ

Track Trig. Correlator: photons  Track-based isolation excludes tracks from conversions  For thresholds of ~ 18,10 GeV on leading, subleading legs, the rate can be reduced by a factor of > 6 ↑Trk.-based Iso H→γγ H→γγ Single γ MB Bkg. E T > Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Phase 2 Trigger R&D Goals  Challenges:  Large increase in trigger input data o e.g. present EB 5x5 trigger towers vs. full xtal granularity – a x25 increase.  Large increase in processing complexity o Tracking information o Fine grain calorimeter information o Fitting Muon and Tracking data together o More complex objects, conditions and algorithms  Phases:  Establish algorithms, techniques and feasibility  Decide on a hardware framework  Build prototypes to test functionality  Build individual parts of the system  Construct demonstrators  Connect to detector prototypes to validate designs Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Phase 2 Trigger Algorithm R&D  Goal:  Allow development of calorimeter, muon, tracking trigger electronics – specify: o Planned Algorithms o Necessary trigger primitives o Link counts and formats  Plan:  Initial definition of trigger algorithms, primitive objects and inter- layer objects (TP.L1.1) – 2Q2016  Baseline definition of trigger algorithms, primitive objects and interchange requirements with subdetectors. (TP.L1.3) – 2Q2017  Detailed Software emulator demonstrates implementation of core phase 2 trigger menu with baseline objects (TP.L1.4) – 4Q2017 o Used to inform the final implementation of the trigger hardware. Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Phase 2 Trigger Hardware R&D - I  Major R&D activities:  Calorimeter Trigger Processor  Track Correlator Processor  Muon Trigger Processor  Hardware R&D Milestones - I  Initial demonstration of key implementation technologies (TP.L1.2) – 4Q2016 o e.g. 40 Gb data links, general applicability across Phase 2 o Construct and test initial prototypes for demonstration of feasibility of trigger design, leads to:  Definition of hardware technology implementation baseline (TP.L1.5) – 1Q2018 o Testing and revisions of prototypes. o Used with algorithm and emulation baseline to define what is needed for → Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 Strong overlap between them in technologies to test (and with L1 track trigger)

Phase 2 Trigger Hardware R&D - II  Hardware R&D Milestones – II  Full-function prototypes produced which allow local comparison with emulator (TP.L1.6) – 4Q2018 o First boards which have sufficient channels, processing capability and bandwidth optical links to meet the requirements of the final boards o These boards will cover only a portion of the trigger processing logic, however, and only local comparisons will be possible between hardware behavior and the emulator.  Demonstrator system shows integration and scaling, global/full-chain comparison with emulator (TP.L1.7) – 4Q2019 o End-to-end comparisons over a slice of the detector which include multiple full- capability prototype boards and the prototype full-capability infrastructure o Goal of demonstrating a prototype system with its infrastructure and testing environment capable of being connected to its front end detector for test-beam validation to follow.  Final Milestone:  Phase 2 Trigger TDR (TP.L1.8) – 1Q2020 o Based on results from Trigger Demonstrators. Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Project Organization 20 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Organization Chart to L3 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September Trigger J. Berryhill (FNAL) Calorimeter TBD Muon TBD Track Correlator TBD HLT TBD US project organization began in August; L3 managers yet to be determined

 Key people with significant previous roles in L1 trigger/HLT  Wesley Smith (UW), Run 1 trigger coordinator  Darin Acosta (UF), current deputy L1 PM  Tulika Bose (BU), Trigger Studies Group coordinator  Paul Padley (Rice), US CMS trigger operations  Institutions involved Wisconsin/UIC/Fermilab/Iowa/MIT: Calorimeter, Correlator UF/Rice/TAMU/NEU: EMUTF, Correlator Boston/CalTech: HLT, Correlator, Blade13 for DAQ Northwestern, Cornell, tOSU: TBD(Correlator) 22 Management and Project Team Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 No hazardous materials required; no special conditions for labor.  Safety: follows procedures in CMS-doc-11587, FESHM  L2 Manager (W.S.) responsible for applying ISM to trigger upgrade (Under direction of US CMS Project Management)  Modules similar to others built before, of small size and no high voltage  Integrated into existing well-tested and long-term performing safety system  All activities and personnel at CERN regulated by CERN Safety Rules (e.g. safety training courses required of all personnel) 23 Environmental protection, health and safety Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 US was heavily involved in trigger studies for the recent CMS Technical Proposal  Trigger Performance and Strategy Working Group (W. Smith)  Track Trigger Integration (A. Ryd)  International project organization is just beginning  No Int’l Phase 2 L1 trigger project management at present  No explicit agreement yet on division of CORE costs. This is our proposal based on our previous Phase 1 stake and proven capabilities.  Initial organizing Int’l workshop 2 nd week of November. 24 International Context and Coordination Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

 Change in formatting of L1 input data from detector groups (HGC)  Change in DAQ output bandwidth implies more severe L1 performance requirements to compensate.  Computing capacity of available FPGAs or transmission speed of links at production phase may constrain choice of architecture and algorithms  Uncertain division of responsibility internationally (including L1 track trigger). Upon organizing, coordination of hardware and firmware production. 25 Dependencies Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Schedule 26 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Pre- produ ction Prototyping and demonstrator Production 27 Construction Schedule Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17 FY25 FY24 FY23FY22FY21FY20 FY19FY18 FY17 CD4 CD1 CD2 CD3 CD0 Specifications and Technology R&D TDR Installation L1 Trigger LS 2 LS 3 Physics LHC Schedule CDR PDR CD3A FDR ESR Test Installation and Commissioning

Cost 28 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

29 Cost Cost = AY $M (No Contingency) L3 AreaM&SLaborTotalR&D Calorimeter Muon Track Correlator Total J. Berryhill, 2015 September 17Director's Review -- Trigger Overview CMS TP L1 trigger CORE cost estimated at 7.3MCHF. US estimate is 3.4MCHF (46%) Currently allocated 100% to NSF; may be rebalanced based on FNAL engineering involvement (TBD)

30 Cost Profile Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

31 Labor FTE Profile Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Summary 32 Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17

Summary The L1 trigger project is essential to realize most of the physics goals of CMS during HL-LHC (precision Higgs, VBS, all but the highest mass BSM), as well as realizing the full potential of other upgrades US institutions plan to continue as the leading participants in L1 trigger R&D and production, with a proposed CORE contribution ~50%. A model of the US involvement has been developed with cost estimates in line with the CMS technical proposal, with appropriate level of detail entering the R&D phase of the project. Estimated NSF+DOE construction cost of calo/muon/correlator = 7.5M$ Director's Review -- Trigger OverviewJ. Berryhill, 2015 September 17