Conseil Europèenne pour la Recherche Nucléaire Where it is ? What is it ? How is it managed ? International Cooperation for the Large Hadron Collider Conclusions INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AT CERN Luciano MAIANI. CERN Geneva Snowmass, July 18, 2001

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation2 1. Aerial view

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation3 2. The first proposal (Louis De Broglie, 1949) “...a laboratory or institution where it would be possible to do scientific work, but somehow beyond the framework of the different participating states. …this body could be endowed with more resources than national laboratories and could, consequently, undertake tasks…beyond their scope…” Collaboration could be easier due to the “true nature of science”... This kind of cooperation would serve also other disciplines

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation4 The European Nuclear Research Council Established in 1954, by 14 European countries From Art. 2 of the Convention: "The Organization shall provide for collaboration among European States in nuclear research of a pure scientific and fundamental character, and in research essentially related thereto. The Organization shall have no concern with work for military requirements and the results of its experimental and theoretical work shall be published… The Organization shall… confine its activities to… the construction of one or more international laboratories for research on high energy particles, including work in the field of cosmic rays;…"

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation5 CERN Member States Distribution of CERN users, May 1, P, low energy Nuclear physics P, high energy P-P, very high energy Cold anti-P

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation6 Strongly based in universities 20 members, ~270 institutes, ~4600 users Studentships, fellowships, etc. Annual throughput of ~400 engineers and ~500 physicists CERN’s network The CERN network in Europe …and in the World

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation7 CERN has integrated Central Europe countries about 10 years ago… Excellence assessed by independent peer review Research knows no borders Have to integrate candidate countries into world-class research These countries have a lot to offer We are very happy with the results: a great addition of intellectual and material resources ! ! Barrel Yoke (CMS) from Czeck Republic Industrial Exibition: CERN, 2000

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation8 Mobility Getting the new researchers to the infrastructure Getting the staff of the lab to the new nations Schools The Joint CERN- Dubna School

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation9 Agreement between CERN and USSR On the extreme left Dr. G. Funke, President of the CERN Council watches CERN’s Director-General, Professor B. Gregory (centre) and Professor A. Petrosiants sign the agreement

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation10 Visiting JINR From left to right: CERN Director-General V. Weisskopf, Professor V. P. Dzhelepov, and Academician B. M. Pontecorvo, a colleague of the Italian scientist E. Fermi, in JINR’s Laboratory of Nuclear Problems, Dubna, 1963.

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation11 Sending detectors from CERN to Serpukov The Antonov 22 transporter at Geneva airport in The Antonov’s pilot with the local press.

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation12 Beyond the EU candidate countries The LHC dipole n. 360 from Novosibirsk CMS feet from Pakistan LHC corrector magnet from India The win-win situation Excellent researchers are not limited to EU-15 countries, nor even to greater Europe People often very well-educated and highly motivated If we can find the right specialities, everyone can become a major winner Raw materials, heavy engineering, assembly of one-off sub- detectors, software components, are all things that can be spread around imaginatively…..

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation13 Institutes participating to CMS Access It may be tempting to make “ access to large facilities ” dependent on “membership”, but particle physicists has been able to follow a different approach Experiments running on our facilities tend to be based on very large ( person) collaborations This allows people from economically weaker countries to join with those from stronger regions So we tend not to look at the passport of the people making proposals But (in general) we expect people who have not funded the lab infrastructure to contribute more than their “fair share” to the cost of the experiment But the contribution can take many forms, such as assembly effort, software, … Look for the “win-win”.

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation14 3. How is CERN managed Council is the supreme body Formal resolutions; Committee of Council (CC): –Receives proposals from DG –Prepares work for Council after advice from SPC & FC –No formal vote. C & CC: discussion at a political level, general steering of LHC project Cooperative attitude of Member States has been vital for success !!!

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation15 Institutional aspects In Council: one country-one vote Contributions according to GDP No just-return clause but: – Finance Committee recommends to Council important financial decisions (Budget…) only with a majority of 70% of contributions; – specific rules (alignment) facilitate the equilibration of the industrial return of each country, which is closely monitored.

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation16 CERN COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE DIRECTOR-GENERAL DIRECTORS RESEARCH BOARD MANAGEMENT BOARD OBSERVER STATES DIVISION LEADERS OBSERVER STATES ASSOCIATED TO LHC PROJECT (US, Japan, Russia) SCIENTIFIC POLICY COMMITTEE CERN STRUCTURE

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation17 The LHC formal framework 1994: Council approves LHC construction with: –Final energy (7 TeV) in year 2008 if no external contribution –Special Host State (FR & CH) contribution : external support given by US, Japan, Russia, Canada, India, to speed up LHC construction and to share accelerator technology US, Japan and Russia have Observer Status participate to Comm. of Council for LHC issues; LHC managing discussed in several common bodies (LHC-Board; LHC-Resource Review Boards…) Participation to experiment has been never in question !!

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation18 4. International Collaboration for LHC construction Gross NMS contributions US:200M$ Russia:100MCHF Japan:170MCHF Canada: 30MCHF India: 25M$ Cost sharing for LHC (BCHF): MS, Material:2.1 MS, Personnel:1.1 (approx.) Host States:0.2 NMS (net):0.6 (≈15%) 4.0

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation19

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation20

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation21

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation22 US Institutions Participating in the LHC experiments (updated to 1999)

L. Maiani 19/07/2001Snowmass presentation23 5. CONCLUSIONS Status of CERN as an International Organisation is often seen as a nuisance...but it is functional to: –attract best people & establish excellence of the Lab; –make Member States feel CERN is THEIR Laboratory; –bring in new Countries and resources. LHC has set a new precedent in International Cooperation. Fully supported by one region, but open to other regions: –to make it more effective (i.e. shorter construction time); –to share new technology. LHC experiments: a very diffused construction –good for technology transfer; –provides a basis of support for the Laboratory. WILL THE NEXT MACHINE BE ALSO DONE THIS WAY ??