3 October, 2006GLD Meeting1 The Detector Chapter of The Detector Concept Report GLD Meeting 3 October, 2006 Akiya Miyamoto

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 2 The RDR and DCR DCR is associated with the RDR: Due end of 2006 Detector Concept Report consists of  Physics section : ~50 Pages – Editors: Klaus Moening, Yasuhiro Okada, Joe Lykken, Mark Oreglia, Satoru Yamashita, Adbelhak Djouadi – Wiki page:  Detector section: ~150 pages – Editors: Ties Behnke, C.J.S.Damerell, John Jaros, A.M. – Based on detector DOD's and input from experts DCR is for Non-ILC HEP researchers/beginners Executive summary  Executive summaries of RDR+DCR physics + DCR detector  Executive Summary with a help of communication experts

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 3 Purpose of the Detector Section Based on four DOD's and input from experts Prepared by 4 editors + authors to be enlisted Goal of the detector chapter:  To demonstrate that – Detectors which can do the ILC physics are within reach – The case for detector and concept R&D are made

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 4 Activities of the Detector Editors Bangalore, LCWS2006.  Detector editor met for the first time and exchanged initial idea  Met with physics editor  Version 1 was presented at LCWS2006 Joined WWS phone meetings in April and June to discuss the DCR. Held phone meetings several times and version 2 draft was presented at VLCW06:  DCR related presentations are at Held weekly phone meeting since late August  To nominate authors of each sections  To develop outline of each sections Hope to release a full text version at ECFA meeting

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 5 The Outline of the Detector Chapter 1.General Introduction 2.Challenges for Detector Design and Technology 3.Introduction to the Detector Concepts 4.MDI Issues 5.Subsystem Designs and Technologies 6.Sub-Detector Performance 7.Integrated Physics Performance 8.Why We need 2IRs and 2 Detectors 9.Detector Costs 10.Future Options 11.Next Step 12.Conclusion  Experts : T.Takahashi + ?? + ??  John Jaros + Experts  Concept teams (Who?)  Ties Behnke + MDI experts (T.Tauchi)  C.Damerell + R&D panels  A.Miyamoto + Concept Rep.  open  2IR panels  Costing panels  WWS OC

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 6 Editors (John Jaros) + Tim Barklow + Henri Videau + Keisuke Fujii Outlines  Jet energy resolution: Required lum. vs resolution. –  ( WW/ZZ), Br(H  WW*),  (HHZ), SUSY(WW/ZZ)  Momentum resolution: – Recoil mass of ZH  llX, Slepton Mass, Lum weighted ECM det. from  pair and   Vertexing at ILC – Br(H  bb), Br(H  cc,gg), AFB(bb) with vertex charge – Challenges imposed by the ILC beam structure  Beamcal – High rad. Env., reacdout each bunch, need to veto H.E. e at the smallest possible angle – S(SUSY) vs veto efficiency, electron angle,..  Others – Ebeam, Pol., High B Solenoid., Muons, required R&D An example of Outline of each section: Challenge of detector design and technology Needs to collect requirements to detectors as much as possible

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 7 Philosophy  Pickup typical results from concept studies in order to show that detector performance used in the physics chapter is confirmed with some extent by full simulations. Outline  Basics:Material budget of detectors  Tracker performacne – Momentum resolution: TPC (GLD, LDC, 4 th ), SiD – Track reconstruction: TPC & Silicon  Calorimeter Performance – Single particle: Energy resolution, angular resolution – PFA: 2 jets events, at Z pole and different energy – Particle ID in Jets  Vertexing – Inpact parameter, b/c tagging, charge tagging  Muon ID  Beam Cal Performance New full simulation results are highly waited. An example of Outline of each section: sub-system performance

3 October, 2006 GLD Meeting 8 Time line to prepare the detector chapter Time line:  At Vancouver: – Propose the outline – Authors are nominated/selected  By End of September – First draft including major part of figures collected. – Some figures will be preliminary  By End of October=ECFA meeting at Valencia – Combine drafts, make a balance, editing, draft open to society  By End of November – Get feedback from community  By end of 2006: – Shape up and complete DCR  Slower than the initial plan