Establishing large international research facilities: the HEP case 1st ASEPS Summit Tsukuba March 25, 2010 Sergio Bertolucci CERN LHC

Prologue Is HEP still the reference case for a global scientific enterprise? ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 2

Largest scientific instrument ever built, 27km of circumference people involved in its design and construction The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN

ATLAS, > 20 years of efforts of the worldwide ATLAS scientific community, supported by Funding Agencies and Governments Albany, Alberta, NIKHEF Amsterdam, Ankara, LAPP Annecy, Argonne NL, Arizona, UT Arlington, Athens, NTU Athens, Baku, IFAE Barcelona, Belgrade, Bergen, Berkeley LBL and UC, HU Berlin, Bern, Birmingham, UAN Bogota, Bologna, Bonn, Boston, Brandeis, Brasil Cluster, Bratislava/SAS Kosice, Brookhaven NL, Buenos Aires, Bucharest, Cambridge, Carleton, CERN, Chinese Cluster, Chicago, Chile, Clermont-Ferrand, Columbia, NBI Copenhagen, Cosenza, AGH UST Cracow, IFJ PAN Cracow, SMU Dallas, UT Dallas, DESY, Dortmund, TU Dresden, JINR Dubna, Duke, Edinburgh, Frascati, Freiburg, Geneva, Genoa, Giessen, Glasgow, Göttingen, LPSC Grenoble, Technion Haifa, Hampton, Harvard, Heidelberg, Hiroshima IT, Indiana, Innsbruck, Iowa SU, Iowa, UC Irvine, Istanbul Bogazici, KEK, Kobe, Kyoto, Kyoto UE, Lancaster, UN La Plata, Lecce, Lisbon LIP, Liverpool, Ljubljana, QMW London, RHBNC London, UC London, Lund, UA Madrid, Mainz, Manchester, CPPM Marseille, Massachusetts, MIT, Melbourne, Michigan, Michigan SU, Milano, Minsk NAS, Minsk NCPHEP, Montreal, McGill Montreal, RUPHE Morocco, FIAN Moscow, ITEP Moscow, MEPhI Moscow, MSU Moscow, Munich LMU, MPI Munich, Nagasaki IAS, Nagoya, Naples, New Mexico, New York, Nijmegen, BINP Novosibirsk, Ohio SU, Okayama, Oklahoma, Oklahoma SU, Olomouc, Oregon, LAL Orsay, Osaka, Oslo, Oxford, Paris VI and VII, Pavia, Pennsylvania, Pisa, Pittsburgh, CAS Prague, CU Prague, TU Prague, IHEP Protvino, Regina, Rome I, Rome II, Rome III, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, DAPNIA Saclay, Santa Cruz UC, Sheffield, Shinshu, Siegen, Simon Fraser Burnaby, SLAC, NPI Petersburg, Stockholm, KTH Stockholm, Stony Brook, Sydney, Sussex, AS Taipei, Tbilisi, Tel Aviv, Thessaloniki, Tokyo ICEPP, Tokyo MU, Tokyo Tech, Toronto, TRIUMF, Tsukuba, Tufts, Udine/ICTP, Uppsala, UI Urbana, Valencia, UBC Vancouver, Victoria, Waseda, Washington, Weizmann Rehovot, FH Wiener Neustadt, Wisconsin, Wuppertal, Würzburg, Yale, Yerevan ~ 2900 scientists (~1000 students), 172 Institutions, 37 countries

CERN: global partnership

: deciding years Experimental data will take the floor to drive the field to the next steps: LHC results  13 (T2K, DChooz, etc..) masses (Cuore, Gerda, Nemo…) Dark Matter searches ……. ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 6

A look back to the Seventies 1975 New Orleans: Topical seminar to discuss facilities which could only be realised on world scale i.e. a world machine  International study group set up but LEP initiated by CERN before results from the study group were available.... ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 7... need was seen but no strategy developed

Examples of well established world cooperations/collaborations:  Experiments  WLCG  Communication  Detector R&D  Accelerator R&D  Accelerator construction (or the path to global projects): HERA / LHC  GDE 8 ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba Facts today

 facilities for HEP (and other sciences) becoming larger and expensive  Funding is not increasing  fewer facilities are realisable  time scales are becoming longer  laboratories are changing missions  more coordination/collaboration is required 9 ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba Facts today

We need ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 10 - to maintain expertise in all regions national – regional – global projects - long term stability and support in all three regions - to engage all countries with HEP communities - to integrate HEP emerging countries (regions) - A global forum for funding agencies - a closer link among particle and astroparticle physics

An example: the Global Accelerator Network Follows major detector collaboration in particle physics Partners contribute in full responsibility through components or subsystems Facility is common property Responsibility, cost are shared Remote operation ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 11

The Global Accelerator Network project should have a minimal administrative structure, with mainly management oversight functions well defined roles and obligations of all partners coherent and transparent process for reaching decisions (consensus) inside collaboration financial stability combined with necessary flexibility not an international permanent institution but an international project of limited duration ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 12

The Global Accelerator Network make best use of world-wide competence, ideas, resources make projects part of the national programs of the participating countries create a visible presence of activities in all participating countries keep culture of accelerator development (scientific and technical) alive in laboratories and universities and be attractive for young scientists ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 13

Remote operation will very likely be of key importance for the future operation of large facilities. Key issues: social aspects technical aspects Tests in these area s are ongoing or planned ICFA will sponsor future GAN workshops and has set up a group to deal with this matter GAN 2002 goes far beyond particle physics

From Global Projects to Global Programs How to engage the world in a commonly coordinated and supported particle physics program? The ultimate step: World laboratory or sustained partnership World Laboratory == ‘International’ CERN Global Laboratory == Long -Term Partnership ? ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 15

CERN and the Globalization Process ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 16 - to maintain expertise in all regions national – regional – global projects - long term stability and support in all three regions  example: CERN Council - to engage all countries with HEP communities  CERN Council Working Group being set up and CERN Coordinator for External Relations established - to integrate HEP emerging countries (regions) CERN Council Working Group / ICFA CERN Coordinator for External Relations - global view from funding agencies FALC (modified) as a first step ? - a closer link among particle and astroparticle physics Europe: CERN, CERN Council, ASPERA ICFA ? …….-

CERN and the Globalization Process Council working groups at work since more than a year on: Geographic Enlargement Scientific Enlargement Global Projects ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 17

Scientific and Geographic Enlargement Outcome of March 2010 Council Session:  White Paper on “Geographical Enlargement”: general concept accepted  prepare Green Paper for June Council Session approved  Green paper on “Global Projects” approved  Green paper on “Scientific Enlargement”: some minor changes before submission for approval in June Council Session

Geographical Enlargement Key issues:  Beyond “Europe”;  a single entry point: Associate Membership;  a specific Membership path within the Associate Membership  All States are henceforth eligible to apply for Membership Associate Membership for all States improved  Create an Associate Membership status for all States based on an improved balance of rights and obligations Membership path replaces the Candidate for Accession to Membership obligatory pre-stage  The Membership path of the Associate Membership status replaces the Candidate for Accession to Membership status as the obligatory pre-stage to Membership for all States applying for Membership  Path to Membership o Fast track or regular track

Global Projects (Green Paper approved) Key issues:  Global scientific collaboration (already at work)  Global economic effort and governance model  CERN is prepared to new governance structures o join partners in discussions about new governance structures for future global accelerator projects; Project Governing Board o provide an institutional framework  “Project Governing Board” could direct a global accelerator project. governance structure for future upgrades of the LHC project  CERN should explore a governance structure for future upgrades of the LHC project  CERN is willing to hosting o consider hosting a future global accelerator project; o coordinateEuropean participation hosted elsewhere o coordinate broad European participation in a future global accelerator project hosted elsewhere.

Scientific Enlargement Proposal for approval in June: European Strategy Session of Councilupdate 2012  Scientific enlargement to be further developed in European Strategy Session of Council  update of European Strategy in 2012  Include discussion of role of National Laboratories and European Commission (MoU between CERN and EC signed in July 2009) Key issues: extending the “CERN site”  Sites of accelerator based research  extending the “CERN site”  Fields of research extended within a common general framework of scientific questions  Fields of research extended within a common general framework of scientific questions  synergy in physics goals and technologies

In summary By year 2013, experimental results will be dictating the agenda of the field. Early discoveries will greatly accelerate the case for the construction of the next facilities (Linear Collider, -factory, SLHC…) No time to idle: a lot of work has to be done in the meantime ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 22

In summary We will need Flexibility Preparedness Visionary global policies ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 23

ASEPS 2010, Tsukuba 24 ! LHC ring: 27 km circumference CMSCMS ALICEALICE LHCbLHCb ATLASATLAS Very exciting years are ahead of us