1. June 19, 20071 Outcome of the CERN meetings Preparing the upgrade R&D proposal M. Shochet

2. June 19, 20072 The meetings at CERN We are encouraged to submit an upgrade R&D proposal ASAP. –Internal review by an appointed committee: takes a few months. –Then a few weeks to allow other groups to join. –Focus on next year – producing a technical design report. Make FTKSim available to others. Compare FTK and software tracking. How are b-tag efficiencies correlated across levels? –I think the last two bullets are not very important or at least derivative. More sophisticated algorithms can be carried out with FTK because more L2 time is available. –What does matter is Track efficiency Impact-parameter resolution Effect of the minimum P T of tracks Effect of limiting the cone size for tracking Need current level-2 timing for 4-jet events.

3. June 19, 20073 Upgrade R&D Proposal Introduction –Importance of trigger flexibility, robustness, redundancy, operating margin –Importance of 3 rd -generation and the problem of its QCD background –FTK: provides full tracking with high quality helix parameters @ L2 start –Give a few physics examples (briefly). –We propose to prepare a technical design report. Participating Institutions: –So far: Chicago, Illinois, Pisa –Seek additional participation? U.S.: Berkeley (Beate) Italy: Frascati, Rome, Pavia, … Topic & Goal, etc.: –FTK: where it fits in, data flow, how it works, dual-output HOLA in hand –What this proposal covers: developing the TDR

4. June 19, 20074 TDR tasks (with dates & # of people) Complete and document physics studies during R&D proposal consideration. Complete FTK simulator Study performance vs. luminosity Data-path specification for 10 34 Determine size of AM Specs for each board: DF (strips & pixels), DO, AM, fitters Specify output format for ROBINs Physical layout: fibers, crates, cables Firmware needed Software needed: initialization, readout, monitoring Resources needed for design, construction & testing, commissioning, operating.