1. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 1 Performances studies of the calorimeter/muon det. e + e –  W + W – at  s=800 GeV Simulation SLAC-Gismo Simulation MOKKA-GEANT4 Visualisation FANAL CALICE The paradigm in 2002 : the jet reconstruction is the key point

2. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 2 jet(s) or di-jet ? zoom e + e ‒  W + W – à  s=800 GeV Calorimeter jet view View for W-Si ECAL and Digital HCAL

3. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 3 ++  2 jet =  2 ch. +  2  +  2 h 0 + + dominant contributions For a track momentum resolution about ~ 10 -5 An ECAL energy resolution ~ 12% ( (stochastic term) An HCAL energy resolution ~ 45% ((stochastic term) On a  2 jet ~ (0.14) 2 E jet +  2 confusion +  2 threshold  2 confusion The strategy Individual reconstruction of each particle by topology (Bubbles chamber) The level of confusion between particle determine the quality of the reconstruction Improperly called Energy Flow E jet =+ + E jet = E charged track + E  + E h 0 fraction fraction 65% 26% 9% A typical jet Large multiplicity of low/medium energy particles No confusion No threshold ⇒  ∼ 0.14  2 threshold Adapted from Dean Karlen

4. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 4 The minimisation of the confusion contribution leads to ① A strong magnetic field and a large internal radius of the calorimeter ⇨ Help for the separation charged /neutral ② A small Molière radius ⇨ Minimise the overlap between close showers (vision in 3D) ③ A maximisation of the longitudinal segmentation (vision in 3D) ⇨ Allows a better separation between close showers ④ to have both ECAL and HCAL inside the coil and minimise the dead zone ⑤ The development of 3D reconstruction algorithm And for the threshold ⑥ A good S/N at low energy Choice in ECFA groups,choice in LCD-US groups Choice in ECFA groups, choice in LCD-US groups ACFA choice is different e/h=1 and some precise layers

5. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 5 ECAL :  Sampling tungsten-silicon  Sampling radiator-tile HCAL :  Sampling radiator-scintillator tiles  Sampling radiator-gas detector n CALICE CALICE W-Si Rint~170 Pad 1x1 cm SD-LCD W-Si Rint~120 (SLAC-Oregon) Pad 0.5x0.5cm LCCAL 5x5cm tiles (Italian labs) 3 silicon layers ACFA choice 4x4cm tiles 2 layers fibers Staggered tileRint~160 (Uni. Colorado)tile 5x5cm CALICE tile-HCAL CALICE tile-HCAL projective tiles 9 layers CALICE CALICE DHCAL ( Pad 1x1cm 1bit-readout 40 layers And some exotic proposals (crystal ECAL,…)

6. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 6 CALICE performances studies include  Performance variation with dead wafers, with inter-calibration(Only ECAL), with pad size (DHCAL), perf. on jets with HCAL resolution, with variation of X0 in tungsten plates,…  Electronics readout performances,noise,etc…is included (ECAL only)  Performance with jets (at Z peak for both HCAL option)  Performance with jets at high energy (numerical values for tile HCAL)  Studies of DHCAL performance (single track) with radiator (steel, tungsten,…), with pad size.  Electron, muon ID. for isolated particle/in jets (better than ALEPH…) TO DO  Almost everything - performances with pad size, with layer numbers (partly done for ECAL) - performances at high energy (including boson mass) - input for the electronics (HCAL mainly) - input for Lumi. measurement (end-cap), input for TPC T0 calibration. …………

7. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 7 Impact from dead wafers Impact from non-uniformity (inter-calibration) Response non-uniformity in ECAL (%) Fraction of dead wafers in ECAL (%) CALICE CALICE ECAL studies J-C. B. Only a small variation of the performances with imperfect construction/knowledge of the device

8. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 8 Photon ID in jets Jets at 91 GeV ZH at 500 GeV Z in, H in jets Electron ID Hadron MISID Particle momentum GeV ALL VALUES in % Photon energy GeV Electron ID in jets ECALECAL  /mean ~ 29% DHCAL 1 cm X 1 cm HCALHCAL S.Magill  ID Jet mass  → →  →  and  →  new 250 GeV  ±

9. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 9 Jet mass < 0.2 Jet mass in 0.2-2  →  82% 17%  →  2% 90% Tau decays ID is essential for  ID and polarisation measurement  (250 GeV) →  charged pion Photons from  o Looking along the ch. track in 5-12 X0 Looking along the charged track in the first 4 X0

10. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 10 CALICE ECAL (W-Si) + DHCAL Z at rest decaying in jets CALICE CALICE ECAL+HCAL studies D.Orlando V.Morgunov CALICE ECAL (W-Si) + THCAL

11. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 11 Position resolution ~ 2mm SD-LCD SD-LCD (M.Iwasaki, T.Abe,…) Photons ID in jets Effic. ~85% Purity ~ 85% Top mass measurement (no neutral hadron rec.) Resolution on photon direction Etc… Need a more complete/improved reconstruction LCCAL LCCAL (P.Checchia) Single particle perf.  electron/pion separation  electron position resolution Need simulation Need reconstruction 50 GeV Electron Test beam data 10 GeV photon from IP

12. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 12 CALICE  CALICE A lot of performances have been estimated on GEANT3-4 simulation It remains a lot to do – progress foreseen for next ECFA workshop LCCAL  LCCAL single particle performance in TB, jets ?? SD-LCD  SD-LCD Works started with full simulation, some results on jets events ST-ECAL*  ST-ECAL* Works in progress ACFA  ACFA calorimeter group Works in progress, single particle performance in TB Conclusion * Staggered tiles ECAL in Colorado

13. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 13 What about muon outer system A la TDR (Marcello Picollo). Simulation Geant4 with only a crude reconstruction. It clearly need to be linked with the inner detector (inside the coil) Which number of layers ? What is the best location in the Yoke,… Which mode (Streamer, avalanche), which level of occupancy acceptable ? Which readout ?Which performance in jets ?, etc… RPC’s Proposed by G.Fisk. Could be very cheap !! But so far I don’t know about any simulation and/or performances study. Scintillator based “a la MINOS”

14. J-C BRIENT Prague 2002 14 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 01020304050 Muon momentum GeV Efficiency muon ID Isolated muon ID. (crude criteria) - with 2D readout 1x1 cm - from FULL simulation GEANT4 Marcello in Jeju-do Note the threshold due to the coil at About 6 GeV/c