CHIC, Charme et QGP –quarkonia suppression in A+A – –J/  experimental highlights – – CHIC physics motivations– –CHIC experimental aspects– Frédéric Fleuret - LLR26/01/ SUBATECH1

Deconfined matter – In the universe Big bang: from plasma to confined matter – High temperature : K – s Neutron stars: from confined matter to plasma – Star collapse – High density of matter (5 to 10 times standard nuclear density) – In the lab: heavy ion collisions CMS energy:  s SPS <  s RHIC <  s LHC Energy density:  SPS <  RHIC <  LHC Temperature:T SPS < T RHIC < T LHC – QGP features Very high density : jet quenching Collective motion : elliptic flow High temperature : thermal photons Color screening : quarkonia  finding transition to QGP Quark Gluon Plasma 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR2

26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR3 quarkonia suppression in A+A collisions

Motivations – Quarkonia suppression is a prediction of lattice QCD calculations, for instance : Experimental setups SPS/CERN – NA38, NA50, NA60 (  s NN = 17 – 30 GeV): fixed target experiments  Statistic : ’s J/   Data sets : p+A w/ A=p, d, Be, Al, Cu, Ag, W, Pb; S+U, In+In, Pb+Pb  Small rapidity coverage (typically y  [0,1]) RHIC/BNL Phenix experiment (  s NN = 200 GeV): collider experiments  Statistic : 1000’s J/  (10000’s since 2007)  Data sets : p+p, d+Au, Cu+Cu, Au+Au  Large rapidity coverage (y  [-0.5,0.5], y  [-2.2,-1.2] and y  [1.2,2.2]) LHC/CERN experiments (  s NN = 5,5 TeV): collider experiments  Collider experiments  Statistic : ’s J/   Data sets : p+p, Pb+Pb, p+Pb  Large rapidity coverage (|y|<2.5 ATLAS/CMS, |y|<0.9 and -4.0 < y < -2.5 ALICE) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR4 H. Satz, J. Phys. G 32 (2006)

Sequential suppression in a QGP 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR5 1 T  ’ > T c T  > T  ’ > T c T J/  > T  > T  ’ > T c ~0.9 ~0.6 ~0 Sequential suppression Temperature H. Satz, J. Phys. G 32 (2006) inclusive J/  yield ~ 60% direct J/  + 30%  c  J/  +  + 10%  ’  J/  + X Charmonium temperatures of dissociation T LHC-CERN > T RHIC-BNL > T SPS-CERN quarkonia suppression in A+A collisions J/  production (a.u.)

quarkonia suppression in A+A collisions Recombination in a QGP 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR6 If QGP at work  c and c quarks can combine to form a J/   (require a large number of cc pairs  RHIC ? LHC ?) 1 T  ’ > T c T  > T  ’ > T c T J/  > T  > T  ’ > T c ~0.9 ~0.6 ~0 Sequential suppression Recombination J/  production (a.u.) T LHC-CERN > T RHIC-BNL > T SPS-CERN Temperature

Suppression by comovers (Alternative scenario) – Suppression by comovers: quarkonia can be broken by interaction with comoving hadrons 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR7 (Eur.Phys.J.C58: ,2008) 1 T  ’ > T c T  > T  ’ > T c T J/  > T  > T  ’ > T c ~0.9 ~0.6 ~0 Sequential suppression Recombination Hadron density N co Interaction cross section  co Two parameters Suppression by comovers quarkonia suppression in A+A collisions Temperature J/  production (a.u.)

Observable : Nuclear modification factor R AA – dN AA = yield in A+A collisions – = average number of nucleon-nucleon collisions in A+A collisions – dN PP = yield in p+p collisions  yield in one nucleon-nucleon collision Centrality of the nucleus-nucleus collision – N part = number of participant nucleons  interacting nucleons – N coll (L)= number of binary collisions  nucleon-nucleon collisions – dN ch /dy= produced charged particles density  energy density Frédéric Fleuret - LLR8 If no nuclear effet, R AA = 1 b Number of Collisions Participants Spectators quarkonia suppression in A+A collisions 26/01/ SUBATECH

Two major results : 1.Observation of Cold Nuclear Matter effects : Absorption by nuclear matter Suppression observed from p+p to peripheral Pb+Pb J/  survival probability : Fit to data:  abs =4.18  0.35 mb 2.Observation of Anomalous suppression in Pb+Pb (NA50) central collisions when compared with Cold Nuclear Matter effects. J/  experimental highlights SPS (17 GeV): NA38, NA51, NA50, NA60 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR9 J/J/ L J/  nuclear absorption centralperipheralmid collisions NA50, EPJ C39 (2005) 335 NA60, PRL99 (2007)

J/  experimental highlights RHIC (200 GeV).vs. SPS (17 GeV) 1.Hot and dense matter effects Measure J/  in Au+Au (RHIC) Pb+Pb (SPS) Compare at same rapidity (same y ~ same x F ) – 0<y<1 at SPS (NA50/NA60) – |y|<0.35 at RHIC (PHENIX) Expected larger suppression at RHIC due to larger energy density observe SIMILAR SUPPRESSION at mid rapidity Observe LARGER SUPPRESSION at forward rapidity 2.Cold Nuclear Matter effects at RHIC Measure J/  production in d+Au collisions Observe LARGER SUPPRESSION at forward rapidity (small x 2 ) Pattern still not fully understood Difference forward.vs.mid rapidity may explain larger suppression observed in forward Au+Au 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR10

J/  experimental highlights RHIC (200 GeV).vs. LHC (2.76 TeV) at forward rapidity – Compare PHENIX vs ALICE 1.2 < |y| < 2.2 at RHIC/PHENIX 2.5 < y < 4 at LHC/ALICE – LESS SUPPRESSION at LHC.vs. RHIC – Could be due to recombination effects RHIC (200 GeV).vs. LHC (2.76 TeV) at mid-rapidity – Compare PHENIX, STAR vs CMS |y|<0.35 at RHIC/PHENIX |y|<1 at RHIC/STAR |y|<1 at LHC/CMS – MORE SUPPRESSION at LHC.vs. RHIC p T >6.5 GeV/c  in principle no recombination applies larger suppression due to QGP effects ? – Hint of sequential suppression ? (J/  melting) Caution : Need CNM effects comparison 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR11 PHENIX CMS

quarkonia suppression in A+A Overall possible J/  (simplified) picture 1.Similar suppression at SPS.vs.RHIC 2.Larger suppression at LHC outside recombination regime CMS results Hint of sequential suppression ? (assuming CNM effects are the same or smaller) 3.Smaller suppression at LHC inside recombination regime ALICE results Hint of recombination? (assuming CNM effects are the same of larger) Next fondamental questions to answer : – Are CNM effects playing an important role at LHC ? p+Pb run – Is recombination mechanism at work ? J/  at mid-rapidity at low p T – Is sequential suppression at work ? measure  c in A+A  not accessible  CHIC 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR12 LHC low p T (ALICE) LHC high p T (CMS) Sequential suppression Recombination SPS/RHIC

CHIC – Physics motivations Benchmark 1: Measure  c in A+A at SPS Physics goal : test charmonium sequential suppression scenario How  c is suppressed relative to J/  ? What is the dependence with y, p T, centrality,… ? Mandatory to draw the whole picture (SPS.vs. RHIC.vs. LHC) Why at SPS ? Lowest energy density where anomalous suppression has been seen. Appropriate range of energy density to investigate full sequential suppression :  ’,  c and J/  No recombination at SPS Why a fixed target experiment ? Precise control of normal suppression (CNM effects) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR13 Eur.Phys.J.C49: ,2007

CHIC – Physics motivations Quarkonia suppression At SPS 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR14 p+A L (fm)  (GeV/fm 3 ) 60% direct J/  + 30%  c  J/  +  + 10%  ’  J/  + X Inclusive J/  yield S+U Pb+Pb Eur.Phys.J.C49: ,2007 Two possible scenarios: sequential suppression (QGP) comovers (no QGP) Temperature of dissociation Binding energy

CHIC – Physics motivations Two possible scenarios 1.QGP (sequential suppression) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR15 p+A L (fm)  (GeV/fm 3 ) S+U Because  E (  ’) ~50 MeV  ’ easily suppressed by comovers Because  E(  c )~200 MeV and  E(J/  )~600 MeV  c  and  J  hardly suppressed by comovers Measuring  c suppression pattern will (in)validate this If  c suppressed by QGP,  c slope strongly steeper than J/  and  ’ Eur.Phys.J.C49: ,2007 ’’ cc Inclusive J/  Pb+Pb Note that direct J/  can be experimentally estimated Yield incl.J/  – Yield  c  J/  +  – Yield  ’ ~ Yield direct J/ 

CHIC – Physics motivations Two possible scenarios 2.No QGP (full comovers) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR16 p+A L (fm)  (GeV/fm 3 ) S+U Because  J/  -co    c-co    ’-co  ’ slope slightly steeper than  c  c slope slightly steeper than J/  Measuring  c suppression pattern will (in)validate this Eur.Phys.J.C49: ,2007 ’’ direct J/  cc Note that direct J/  can be experimentally estimated Yield incl.J/  – Yield  c  J/  +  – Yield  ’ ~ Yield direct J/  Pb+Pb

CHIC – Physics motivations Conclusion : measure  c in A+A at SPS 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR17 p+A L (fm)  (GeV/fm 3 ) S+U measuring  ’,  J  and  c suppression pattern will answer the question QGP no QGP Eur.Phys.J.C49: ,2007 QGP  c No QGP  c Note that direct J/  can be experimentally estimated Yield incl.J/  – Yield  c  J/  +  – Yield  ’ ~ Yield direct J/  Pb+Pb

CHIC – Physics motivations Benchmark 2: Measure charmonium in p+A at SPS 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR18 Euro. Phys. J. C48 (2006) 329. J/  and  ’ suppression in p+A collisions as a function of L  Measuring different charmonium states gives key information on Cold Nuclear Matter and production mechanism. J/  rapidity distribution in p+A collisions (asymetry wrt y cm =0)  Measuring charmonium in a wide x F range is important to identify possible (anti)shadowing effects NA50 ’’ J/ 

CHIC – Physics motivations Measure charmonium in p+A at SPS 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR19 Possible to access large x F if measuring charmonia at rapidity up to y CMS ~2 With M=3.1 GeV/c² and  s=17.2 GeV (158 GeV) x F = 1  y CMS = 1.7 With M=3.1 GeV/c² and  s=29.1 GeV (450 GeV) x F = 1  y CMS = 2.2 Y CMS =2  x F = 0.8 E866, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, (2000)  Measuring charmonium in a wide x F range is important to estimate possible (anti)shadowing effects

CHIC – Physics motivations 1.Measure  c production in A+A How  c is suppressed relative to J/  ? What is the dependence with y, p T, N part,… ? Mandatory to draw the whole picture (SPS.vs. RHIC.vs. LHC) Benchmark 1 : Measure  c production within y CMS  [-0.5, 0.5] 2.Measure charmonia production in p+A what is the dependence of charmonia suppression with rapidity ? Crucial to understand effects due to cold nuclear matter Benchmark 2 : Measure charmonium states within y CMS  [-0.5, 2] 3.Other physics subjects Open charm, low mass resonances, Drell-Yan,… 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR20

CHIC – Expected yields Need high intensity p and Pb beams (~ 10 7 Pb/sec) NA50/NA60 beam line not available (NA62) H2 beam line occupied by NA61 H4 and H8 available but need shielding for HI NA50: European Physical Journal C39 (2005) 335 New measurement of J/  suppression in Pb+Pb at 158 GeV/nucleon 35 days of data taking in 2000 ~ Pb/s over 5s bursts every 20s 4 mm thick Pb target (10% I ) ~ J/    +  - within y CMS  [0,1] (on disk) Expect fair amount of  c : N J/  ~ 60% direct + ~30% from  c + ~10% from  ’ Same conditions as NA50 setup  ~  c expected within y CMS  [-0.5,0.5] Expect more with thicker target (1cm for instance) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR21 North Area Beamlines

CHIC – detector design Past experiments 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR22 Target  absorber  spectrometer  muID Target  telescope 1st generation: NA38,NA50,NA51 Measure dimuons 2nd generation: NA60 Measure dimuons and open charm vertex

CHIC – detector design 3rd generation: CHIC – Measure dimuons and photons Must place the calorimeter in front of the absorber Must separate photon/electron  tracking in front of the calorimeter. 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR23 Dipole field Muon Filter (absorber) target vertex tracking MuID Beam EMCal Target  vertex  spectrometer  calorimeter  absorber  muID

The NA60 example 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR24 Pixel detector 16 planes – 96 chips total 32 x 256 pixels / chip Pixel size = 425 × 50  m² Magnetic field = 2.5 T × 40 cm Pixel detector 16 planes – 96 chips total 32 x 256 pixels / chip Pixel size = 425 × 50  m² Magnetic field = 2.5 T × 40 cm Momentum  mass (typical p  ~ 15 GeV/c) (R. S. priv. Comm.) CHIC – tracking

The NA60 pixel detector The CHIC pixel detector 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR25 ~40 cm ~100 cm L = 0.4 m L = 1 m

CHIC – tracking Size, position, resolution : tentative design – toy example 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR26  NA60 6 plane r min = 0.5 cm  z min (  *=0.5)~7.5 cm 6 planes from z=8 cm to z=18 cm 6 plane r min = 0.5 cm  z min (  *=0.5)~7.5 cm 6 planes from z=8 cm to z=18 cm  =-0.5  =0.5  =1 11 plane z max = 120 cm  r max (  *=-0.5)~22 cm 11 planes from z=20 cm to z = 120 cm 11 plane z max = 120 cm  r max (  *=-0.5)~22 cm 11 planes from z=20 cm to z = 120 cm  =-0.5  =0.5  CHIC Track particles within  *  [-0.5 ; 1]

CHIC – tracking Size, position, resolution : tentative design - toy yexample 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR27  NA60 6 plane r min = 0.5 cm  z min (  *=0.5)~7.5 cm 6 planes from z=8 cm to z=18 cm 6 plane r min = 0.5 cm  z min (  *=0.5)~7.5 cm 6 planes from z=8 cm to z=18 cm  =-0.5  =0.5  CHIC 7.5 Track particles within  *  [0.5 ; 2] 11 plane z max = 120 cm  r max (  *=-0.5)~22 cm 11 planes from z=100 cm to z = 200 cm 11 plane z max = 120 cm  r max (  *=-0.5)~22 cm 11 planes from z=100 cm to z = 200 cm  =0.5  =2 22

CHIC – tentative design 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR28 20 cm 40 cm 60 cm 80 cm 100 cm 120 cm 1 m3 m4 m5 m6 m2 m Vertex detector : R min = 0.5 cm Z min = 7.5 cm R max = 3.5 cm Z max = 18 cm Spectrometer : R min = 1 cm Z min = 20 (100) cm R max = 22 cm Z max = 120 (200) cm

CHIC – calorimetry Goal : measure  c  J/  +  Issues 1.Low energy photon (similar to  0   ) 2.High multiplicity of photon from  0 /    3.High multiplicity of charged particles (  +/- ) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR29 ~500 MeV ~3 GeV Pythia p+p -  s = 17.2 GeV

CHIC – calorimetry Goal : measure  c  J/  +  Issues 1.Low energy photon (similar to  0   ) 2.High multiplicity of photon from  0 /    3.High multiplicity of charged particles (  +/- ) 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR30 WA98: Phys. Lett. B458: , 1999) Phobos: Phys. Rev. C74, , 2006 ~480  ~340  ~350  +/- Epos 1.6 : 17.2 GeV ~400  ~370  +/- 0 – 5% 0 – 5% Pb+Pb most central  ~450   +/- Epos 1.6 : 17.2 GeV

CHIC – calorimetry Need very high segmentation – to separate two electromagnetic showers – To isolate photons from  +/- contamination W + Si calorimeter à la Calice – 30 layers – 0.5 x 0.5 cm 2 pads – 24 X 0 in 20 cm W+Si : two relevant quantities 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR31 1 st relevant quantity : distance between two incoming particles  Min. distance between 2 particles at impact = 1 free pad = 1 cm (for 0.5×0.5 cm²)  distance between two incoming particles must be > 1 cm  N photons  N/2 neutrals (  0 +  )  N  +/-  N  + N  +/- = 2N particles  distance between two photons must be > 2 cm (1cm×2N/N) 1 st relevant quantity : distance between two incoming particles  Min. distance between 2 particles at impact = 1 free pad = 1 cm (for 0.5×0.5 cm²)  distance between two incoming particles must be > 1 cm  N photons  N/2 neutrals (  0 +  )  N  +/-  N  + N  +/- = 2N particles  distance between two photons must be > 2 cm (1cm×2N/N) badgood 2 nd relevant quantity : EM shower transverse size  Moliere Radius R M : 90% of the shower energy  Distance between two photons must be > 2 cm (2 R M ) 2 nd relevant quantity : EM shower transverse size  Moliere Radius R M : 90% of the shower energy  Distance between two photons must be > 2 cm (2 R M ) Geometrical condition: in principle  > 2cm

CHIC – calorimetry Full simulation performed with the Calice Ecal proto 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR32 ~3 GeV Pb+Pb 3 photons with E~2 GeV distance between each photon~ 2 cm (full simu made by D. Jeans - LLR - Calice collab.) 0.5 x 0.5 cm² pads Pythia p+p -  s = 17.2 GeV

CHIC – calorimetry Size and position : tentative design 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR33  >4  2  1  <4 [-0.5:0.5] r min r max Z 20 cm 0 – 5% most central Pb+Pb events as measured by WA98 Distance between two photons Closer position to the target w/  >2cm:  Z = 205 cm [-0.5:0.5]  R min = 13.6 cm  R max = 40.9 cm Using 0.5 x 0.5 cm² pads Closer position to the target w/  >2cm:  Z = 205 cm [-0.5:0.5]  R min = 13.6 cm  R max = 40.9 cm Using 0.5 x 0.5 cm² pads

CHIC – calorimetry Size and position : tentative design 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR34  >4  2  1  <4 [-0.5:0.5] r min r max Z 20 cm 0 – 5% most central Pb+Pb events as measured by WA98 Distance between two photons Warning : not clear that  >2 cm is large enough. May need to investigate alternative design, for instance: taking  >4cm with z = 205 cm  R min/max =30/55 cm   *  [-0.8, -0.3] taking  >4cm with  *  [-0.5, 0.5]  z ~400 cm Must check with full simulation what is optimum  ! Warning : not clear that  >2 cm is large enough. May need to investigate alternative design, for instance: taking  >4cm with z = 205 cm  R min/max =30/55 cm   *  [-0.8, -0.3] taking  >4cm with  *  [-0.5, 0.5]  z ~400 cm Must check with full simulation what is optimum  !

CHIC – tentative design 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR35 20 cm 40 cm 60 cm 80 cm 100 cm 120 cm Calorimeter  >2 cm: Rmin = 14 cm Zmin = 205 cm Rmax = 41 cm Zmax = 225 cm   *  [-0.5, 0.5] Vertex detector : R min = 0.5 cm Z min = 7.5 cm R max = 3.5 cm Z max = 18 cm Spectrometer : R min = 1 cm Z min = 20 (100) cm R max = 22 cm Z max = 120 (200) cm Dipole field 1 m3 m4 m5 m6 m2 m

Absorber type  ++ DHCal CHIC – absorber 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR36 NA50/NA60 : measure muon momentum after the absorber  must minimize multiple scattering – Must use low Z material: best = BeO (but expensive) – NA50 : 0.6 m BeO + 4 m C m Fe = 5.2 m  need to match muon track position between spectrometer and trigger : Use an instrumented Fe absorber  can match muon track momentum between spectrometer and trigger : Use magnetized Fe absorber ? Minos CHIC : measure muon momentum before the absorber  minimization of multiple scattering less crucial  can use Fe material to absorb  +/- CHIC : measure muon momentum before the absorber  minimization of multiple scattering less crucial  can use Fe material to absorb  +/-

CHIC – absorber Absorber size and hadron energy loss 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR37 At least 2 m Fe length needed Fraction of hadron energy absorbed in Fe Fraction of hadron energy absorbed in Fe  all  +/- stopped with a 2.0 m Fe absorber Particle Data Group: J. Phys. G 37, (2010) Pythia p+p -  s = 17.2 GeV

CHIC – absorber Absorber size and muon energy loss 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR38 dE/dx ~ 2 MeV g -1 cm 2 Fe density ~ 7.8 g cm -3 dE/dx ~ 15.6 MeV cm -1 Muon energy loss in Fe Muon energy loss in Fe  2.0 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 200 ~ 3 GeV  A J/  ~ 18.4 %  3.2 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 320 ~ 5 GeV  A J/  ~ 18.0 %  3.8 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 380 ~ 6 GeV  A J/  ~ 17.3 %  4.5 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 450 ~ 7 GeV  A J/  ~ 16.1 %  2.0 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 200 ~ 3 GeV  A J/  ~ 18.4 %  3.2 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 320 ~ 5 GeV  A J/  ~ 18.0 %  3.8 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 380 ~ 6 GeV  A J/  ~ 17.3 %  4.5 m Fe   E/  x ~ 15.6 x 450 ~ 7 GeV  A J/  ~ 16.1 % 3 57 GeV/c Pythia p+p -  s = 17.2 GeV Particle Data Group: J. Phys. G 37, (2010) All  +/- stopped with a 2.0 m Fe absorber  but need more Fe to stop muons from pion decay

CHIC – trigger rate in Pb+Pb Pb Beam intensity – NA50  ions/bunch  10 7 ions/sec (with a bunch time length ~ 5 sec) – Luminosity : L = N b xN T = N b x (  x e x N A )/A = 10 7 x(11.35 x 0.4 x )/207.19=0.12  b -1 s -1 Number of min bias events (for Pb+Pb) –  I =68.8 x (A 1/3 proj + B 1/3 targ – 1.32) 2   PbPb minbias =68.8 x (208 1/ /3 – 1.32) 2 =7.62 barn – Nevents/sec ~ x 7.62 ~ 0.9 MHz Event rejection : 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR Pb+Pb minbias events generated with EPOS 1.6 At least 2  in the Detector (44 events) 3.2m Fe abs.: P z >5 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 44/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 4 kHz 3.8m Fe abs.: P z >6 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 12/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 1.1 kHz 4.5m Fe abs.: P z >7 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 3/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 270 Hz 3.2m Fe abs.: P z >5 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 44/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 4 kHz 3.8m Fe abs.: P z >6 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 12/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 1.1 kHz 4.5m Fe abs.: P z >7 GeV/c: Trigger accepts 3/10000 events  N events /sec ~ 0.9 MHz x ~ 270 Hz At least 2  in the Detector (12 events) At least 2  in the Detector (3 events) At least 2  in the Detector (329 events) ~ 4 kHz ~ 1.1 kHz ~ 270 Hz Absorber 205 cm  +/- stop decaying after ~1 I in tungsten ( I ~10cm)   +/- stop 2.15 m

CHIC – Detector design Primary goals :  c  J/  +    +  -  at y CMS = 0 J/    +  - in large y CMS range Detector features : very compact 1.Spectrometer - Measure tracks before absorber   M ~20 MeV/c² - Covers y CMS [-0.5, 2]  need high segmentation  Silicon technologies 2.Calorimeter - Measuring  in high  0 multiplicity environment  ultra-granular EMCal (Calice) 3.Absorber/trigger - Using 4.5 m thick Fe to absorb  /K and low P  +/- - Can use smaller absorber if Fe magnetized - Trigger to be defined (expected rate = 0.3 kHz) Expected performances 1.tracking : 2.Calorimetry : 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR40 Dipole field

CHIC – Performances  c2 in p+p collisions at  s=17.8 GeV – Sample: events with Pythia  c2  J/    +  -  per event Smearing  P  /P  = 1% Smearing  E  /E  = 20%/  E  – Selections : Keep muons w/ -0.5 < y cms < 0.5 Keep muons w/ P z > 7 GeV Keep muons w/ z vertex < 215 cm Keep photons w/ -0.5 < y cms < 0.5 Reject photons w/ M   [100, 160] MeV/c² – Results : signal/bkg = 2.8  c2 in Pb+Pb at  s=17.8 GeV – Sample: events minbias with Epos pythia  c2 embedded in each event – Selections Same selections as in p+p – Results : signal/bkg = /01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR41  c2 in p+p  c2 in Pb+Pb

Conclusion Already many data on J/  production at different energies, more to come Still difficult to fully understand: – Did we see sequential suppression ? – Did we see recombination ? The measurement of  c is a crucial step SPS is the best place to start It is today feasible Search for partners 26/01/ SUBATECHFrédéric Fleuret - LLR42 Dessins produits par Oscar Ferreira – LLR