1. ILC Activities in Asia H. Yamamoto (Tohoku U.) LAL Orsay, May 2005

2. Machine

3. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ITRP ‘Decision’ ■ August 2005 International Technology Recommendation Panel (ITRP) headed by Barry Barish recommended that LC be based on super-conducting RF technology. ◆... we are recommending a technology not a design. We expect that the final design be developed by a team drawn from the combined warm and cold linear collider communities...

4. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 LC Efforts Worldwide are Moving ■ Official name : ILC (International Linear Collider) ■ First ILC workshop : Nov. 2004 at KEK ■ GDE director elected in Mar. 2005 : Barry Barish ■ Timeline Second ILC workshop : August 2005 at Snowmass Good control of basic Linac configuration by end 2005 Report on needed machine R&Ds : end 2005 CDR with reliable costing : end 2006

5. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 LC Project Office at KEK ■ Organized ~ one year ago ■ Current members F. Takasaki (head) K. Yokoya H. Hayano N. Toge S. Yamashita Urakawa ■ http://lcdev.kek.jp/LCoffice

6. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Working Groups at KEK ■ WG1 Overall design (K. Kubo) ■ WG2 RF (H. Hayano) ■ WG3 Injectors (M. Kuriki) ■ WG4 Beam Delivery System (T. Sanuki) ■ WG5 Cavities (K. Saito) ■ Facility (A. Enomoto) ■ Site (R. Sugawara) Having regular meetings

7. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Focus on Three Areas ■ Establishing the technology for 35 MV/m gradient ■ Pursue possible higher accelerating gradient : STF (Superconducting RF Test Facility) ■ Beam technology development using KEK-ATF : ATF, ATF2 (Accelerator Test Facility) ■ All effots are in collaboration with the other regions

8. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ATF2 (extention of ATF) ■ Fully international collaboration KEK, SLAC, DESY, LLNL, BINP, LAL Orsay, UK Labs, and universities etc. ■ Goal : Establish stable beam size of ~35nm ◆ Use the small emittance of ATF (  y ~3 E-8m) Stable beam center of 2nm or less ◆ Bunch to bunch feed back for ILC type train ■ Good test bench even after ILC starts

9. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ATF2 plan view

10. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 KEK 3-cavity BPM ■ nm mover, nm feedback ■ BPM, electronics Built at KEK:

11. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ATF2 Timeline ■ Mini workshops Dec 11 2004 at KEK, Jan 5 at SLAC ■ Report (proposal) ~ May 2005 ■ Component production: autumn 2005 ■ Floor construction: summer 2006 ■ Start operation: Jan 2007 ■ Aim for 37nm end 2007 ■ Budget ~ $3M

12. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ATF ■ Goals : Beam dynamics study (fast-ion instability, wiggler etc.) Beam diagnostics (laser wire, cavity BPM, etc.) Extraction improvement (coupling, stabilization) Development of fast extraction kicker ■ Achieved  y ~3 E-8m

13. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ATF Configuration

14. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 STF (Superconducting RF Test Facility) ■ ILC Requires a large number of RF cavities Desirable to have multiple bases for Superconducting RF cavities (TTF2, SMTF, STF) ■ A building is allocated at KEK W/ test accelerator tunnel (~100m long) Currently used for J-PARC, to be evacuated this summer ■ Goals : Establish the technology for 35 MV/m gradient Pursue possible higher accelerating gradient Industrialization (cost reduction, mass production) Train young researchers and students ■ Joined Tesla Technology Collaboration DESY,SLAC,FNAL,Jlab,KEK,INFN-Milan/LNL,Cornell,PAL,IHEP

15. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 STF Covers... ■ SC cavities fabrication, surface treatment, tests ■ Cryomodule installation, alignment, input coupler, tuner mechanism ■ Power source modulator, klystron etc. ■ He plant high efficiency ■ Beam instrumentation ILC beam generation, BPM, etc. ■ Cavity surface treatment facility CBP, CP, EP, HPR, clean room

16. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 KEK Recipe for Cavity Fabrication PressEBWCBPLight CP AnnealingEPHPRBake This recipe pushed the Tesla TTF 9-cell cavity to near 40 MV/m. Even before ITRP decision - in parallel with warm LC R&Ds

17. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 STF Plans ■ Projects : Phase I (2005~2006) ◆ Establish reliable and stable 35 MV/m cavity with reasonalbe yield ◆ Provide data for 45 MV/m cavity ◆ Provide solutions to existing ILC-SC engineering ◆ Construct cavity treatment facility Phase II (2007~) ◆ Construct assymbly facility of cryomodule ◆ Assemble cryomodule ◆ Construct test facility of cyomodule ■ Smooth transition to organization under GDE when it is in place (→Phase II is quite uncertain at present)

18. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5

19. ■ Improved low-loss cavity ■ Now being tested ■ DESY,SLAC,FNAL,Jlab,KEK ‘Ichiro cavity’ 9-cell Cavity

20. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Nb/Cu-clad seamless cavity Cost reduction (~1/3) and industrialization

23. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Machine Summary ■ After the ITRP decision on technology, we have re- organized the entire LC R&D strategy ■ Three main areas are defined : Establishing 35 MV/m technology, pursue higher gradient, and utilize ATF effectively. ■ All efforts are conducted within the framework of international collaboration. (With GDE’s initiative in mind) ■ Collaborators are now flowing in: how about YOU?

24. Detector

25. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 History ■ 1992 : “JLC-I” report B=2T, R=4.5 m CAL : Compensating EM- and H-CAL, 2.5<R<4.0 m Trk : Small-cell Jet chamber, 0.45<R<2.3 m, L=4.6 m ■ 2003 : “GLC” report B=3T for pair bkg suppression Studies on TPC and digital calorimeters start ■ 2004 : Paris meeting. ITRP technology choice approaching → Re-optimization of the design concept based on JLC/GLC detector (‘large/huge’ or ‘GLD’ detector) ■ 2005 April Contact persons and executive board elected The official name : GLD

26. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 GLD Organization (still flexible) ■ Contact persons H.-B. Park, H.Yamamoto, G. Wilson, M. Ronan, R. Settles, M. Thomson ■ Executive board S. Yamashita - detector optimization A. Miyamoto - software/reconstruction Y. Sugimoto - vertexing H.-J. Kim - intermediate trackers R. Settles - central tracker T. Takeshita - calorimeters T. Tauchi - MDI H. Yamaoka - magnet/support M. Thomson - space/band-width watch dog

27. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Performance Goals ■ Vertexing 1/5 r beampipe,1/30 pixel size (wrt LHC) : b,c tags... ■ Tracking 1/6 material, 1/10 resolution : tagged Higgs... ■ Jet energy (quark reconstruction) 1/2 resolution : W,Z separation...

28. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Jet Resolution Strategy ■ Overall jet energy resolution  jet 2 =  ch 2 +   2 +  nh 2 +  confusion 2 +  threashold 2 If no confusion, ■ Fine granularity (ECAL, HCAL) ■ Reduce effective Moliere radius (ECAL) R m eff = R m (1+x g /x a ) ( R m =9mm (W), 16mm (Pb)) ■ And above all... xaxa xgxg

29. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ■ Increase ECAL radius (R in ) to separate clusters Charged track separation  B R in 2 Neutral separation  R in

30. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ECAL size (parameters not final) ■ Area of EM CAL (Barrel + Endcap) SiD: ~40 m 2 / layer Tesla: ~80 m 2 / layer GLD: ~ 100 m 2 / layer (JLC: ~130 m 2 / layer)

31. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Tracking Strategy ■ Momentum resolution Use moderate B field of ~3T ■ Use TPC Low mass Good at high B Large number of samples

32. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Basic parameters (all parameters not final) SiDTeslaGLD Solenoid B(T)54 3 R(m)2.483.0 3.75 L(m)5.89.2 9.86 E st (GJ)1.42.3 1.8 Main Tracker R min (m)0.20.36 0.4 R max (m)1.251.62 2.0  m  7150 N sample 5200 220  1/pt) 3.6e-51.5e-4 1.2 e- 4

33. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Basic parameters (cont’d) (all parameters not final) SiDTESLA GLD ECAL R in (m) 1.271.68 2.1 BR in 2 8.111.3 13.2 TypeW/Si W/Scint R m eff (mm) 1824.4 16.2 BR in 2 /R m eff 448462 817 X0X0 2124 27 E+H CAL 5.55.2 6.0 t (m)1.181.3 1.4 In order to utilize the good BR 2 /R meff, fine granurality is needed.

34. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Overall Geometry

35. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5

36. ‘GLD’ is smaller than CMS

37. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Issues ■ Can such a large magnet be built ? Will the field uniform enough? ■ Can ECAL/HCAl be supported ? By SC coil from outside ■ Cost of ECAL ? Use scintillator (SiPM readout?) ■ Moderate B field → larger r beampipe Vertex resolution good enough? ■ Will such a large TPC work? ■ Studies are on-going

38. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Solenoid Field Magnetic field distribution Flux lines OK (Muon coverage?) Cost estimate : $~50M

39. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Return Yoke Max. 1.8mm Max. 90MPa<120MPa Max. 7mm Max. 65MPa<120MPa End Cap Barrel

40. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ECAL/HCAL Support 9mm t=40mm t=60mm t=100mm 2000tons Fixed 2000tons x 0.3G Fixed 9mm 125MPa Gravity ~ OKEarth quake ~ OK 118MPa<140MPa

41. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ECAL Pb/Scint = 4mm/1mm 4cmx4cm tile (5X5 tiles)x24 layers Fiber readout

42. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ECAL Beamtest results : 1~4 GeV  (E) = 16.3/√E  3.6%  (x) = 0.8/√E  3.2cm →Smaller tiles SiPM readout Sampling optimization Shower max layer Scintillator strip ECAL

43. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 SiPM (silicon photo multiplier) ■  m) 2 cell : limitted Geiger many cells/unit (~10000 ■ Vbias ~ 50 V ■ High B operation (5T OK) ■ Gain ~ 10 6 ■ Cheap (~$1/unit for mass purchase?) ■ Can be directly attached to scintillators (only electrical wires come out) ■ Noise?

44. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 SiPM Tests SiPM (Russian) ‘SiPM’ (Hamamatsu) cooled

45. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 ILC Calorimeter R&D in Korea ■ W/Scinti strip calorimeter (ECAL) ■ Simulation studies ■ Fabricate scintillator strips by extrusion ■ Develop and fabricate ‘SiPM’ in house (design work this semester) Kungpook National U, Seoul National U, SungKyunKwan U

46. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 TPC Beamtest in B Field Europe/Asia TPC collaboration (MPI, DESY, IPN Orsay + Asian institutions) ■ JACCEE SC Solenoid 1~1.2 Tesla Lage volume ■ MPI TPC ■ Wire or GEM ■ Study Diffusions etc.

47. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 TPC Beam Test (Preliminary)  x ~ 280  m @ 2000mm evenif  geom =0  m Long drift of GLD is (probably) OK

48. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 GEM Tests CERN GEM Biconial hole Fuchigami GEM Straight hole (Chemical etching) Possibly less discharges

49. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 GEM Test 23.5mm 1.5mm Drift region 1mm Readout pads x pad  x track GEM Pad response function

50. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Vertexing Study ■ Layer-1 radius at 0.5% occupancy (pair bkg) : R1 = 1.92±0.03 cm (3T) R1 = 1.69±0.03 cm (4T) R1 = 1.55±0.03 cm (5T) 3T 4T 5T

51. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Track Resolutions ■ Based on the R1 values at 0.5% occupancy ■ Tracker radius set to nominal SiD, Tesla, GLD values ■ Full simulation study on-going Impact parameter resolution Momentum resolution

52. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Vertexing Detector Options : ■ Fine-Pixel CCD (FPCCD) 5x5  m 2 Fully depleted to suppress diffusion → same occupancy as before. Read out in train gap (no need to readout during train). Thinned to 50  m. Who makes it ? Needs an industrial partner. ■ Other options are being pursued (e.g. FAPS-like)

53. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Intermediate Tracker R&D in Korea ■ 5 layers for r = 9 to 37 cm ■ 10 m 2 of Si strip detector (20  m resolution) n+ implanted p-stop in atoll via in hourglassreadout pad in staggering guard ring p+ implantedreadout strip N sideP side

54. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Full Simulator (GEANT4) ■ Installation of a new geometry into a full simulator “JUPITER” is under way

55. H.Yamamoto, France 2005/5 Detector Summary ■ Large radius is diriven by cluster separation to optimize PFA. ■ Moderate B field (~3T) is used, and such a large coil can be built and seems capable to support itself and CALs. ■ Focus is on cost optimization of ECAL. Scintillator/W with SiPM ? ■ Such a Large TPC seems plausible. ■ Tracking and vertexing seem not to be sacrificed. ■ Detailed study based on full simulation and realistic reconstruction code (i.e. fully implemented PFA) is needed and work has just begun. ■ Needs more people to work on : please join in works in this direction!