1. R Frey SLUO P61 LC Detector R&D, SLAC, and SLUO… pre-P5 meeting R. Frey, University of Oregon Detector R&D will have a huge positive impact on the physics program of the TeV-scale LC.  We see how to make big steps in performance over the LEP/SLC generation of detectors. And there is additional untapped potential.  These steps will “possibly” be crucial for elucidating the New Physics.  Major labs and their users should play a meaningful role. Outline: The LC challenges for detectors Snapshots of some current R&D involving SLAC and users SLAC as a center for LC R&D

2. The TeV Scale – What will it bring? R Frey SLUO P62 H. Murayama We know there is New Physics, but we don’t know what it is. The LHC will uncover (choose): a)all the New Physics b)a known portion c)an unknown portion

3. Jet (hadronic) final states at LHC LHC Study: Z→ 2 jets D. Green, Calor2002 FSR is the biggest effect. The underlying event is the second largest error (if cone R ~ 0.7). Calorimeter resolution is a minor effect. σ M / M  13% without FSR  At the LC, the situation is reversed: Detection dominates.  Opportunity at the LC to significantly improve measurement of jets. 3R Frey SLUO P6

4. LC environment: interaction rate; accelerator timing Cross section is small  0 or 1 event per bunch crossing  No underlying events (pairs swept forward)  Little or no radiation damage All events are interesting  no trigger (record everything) Long time between bunch trains  turn off (most) power in FE  Can use passive cooling  very light tracking systems Small IP  can get very close with vertex detectors R Frey SLUO P64 ILC (SC RF)

5. R Frey SLUO P6 LC detector goals In general, LC measurements are limited by the detectors (and luminosity,  s), not by the collider environment. LC detectors should aim to measure all final states and measure with precision.  Multi-jet final states With or without beam constraint  Leptons including tau  Heavy quarks  Missing energy/mass  Collision energy and polarization 5

6. Meeting the challenges I: PFA for multi-jet final states R Frey SLUO P66 Typical jet content:  2% at 100 GeV + confusion = 3-4% at 100 GeV This is >2x better than previous collider detectors Key is minimizing confusion: 1.Algorithms 2.Calorimeter segmentation

7. R Frey SLUO P67 Steve Magill: PFA Illustration t tbar  6 jets

8. R Frey SLUO P68 The SiD Si/W ECal Layers tiled with silicon sensors, each with 1024 13 mm 2 pixels KPiX chip

9. R Frey SLUO P69 KPiX chip (SLAC, Oregon, BNL) one channel of 1024 Si pixel Dynamic gain select Event trigger Leakage current subtraction calibration Storage until end of train. Pipeline depth presently is 4 13 bit A/D Developed for Si/W ECal and Si strip Tracker. Being considered for GEM HCal, muon system, FCal.

10. (some) implications of excellent jet measurement R Frey SLUO P610 multi-jet masses in the absence of beam constraints, e.g. WW vs ZZ, W/Z  jets TESLA TDR reducing combinations with intermediate jet masses, e.g. ZHH  jets segmented, imaging calorimeters open up new measurements, e.g. tau id and polarization; non-pointing photons (GMSB)  +   +  (  +  o )

11. Meeting challenges II: tracking R Frey SLUO P611 SiD vtx+tracker

12. Meeting challenges III: vertexing R Frey SLUO P612

13. (some) implications of excellent tracking/vertexing R Frey SLUO P613 Yamashita

14. Meeting challenges IV: L.E.P. A Luminosity Spectrum dL/dE Contributions 1.ISR 2.Beamstrahlung 3.Linac energy spread,  E/E Need to measure dL/dE “  (E o ) + tail” Broadening near E o e.g. t-tbar threshold 14R Frey SLUO P6

15. University-SLAC detector R&D projects (incomplete) GroupsR&D activity Annecy, UC Davis, Oregon (, BNL)Silicon/tungsten ECal Brown, Michigan, New Mexico, Purdue, Santa Cruz, Tokyo, Washington (, FNAL) Silicon tracking and vertexing Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, N. Illinois, Iowa, Oregon, Santa Cruz (, ANL, FNAL) Simulations, Reconstruction, PFA development OregonBeam Energy measurement (synchrotron spectrometer) Cambridge U., DESY, Dubna, Royal Holloway U., U. of Notre Dame, University College London, UC Berkeley Beam Energy Measurement (BPM spectrometer) TuftsPolarimeter backgrounds (BNL,) Yale, Colorado, DESYFar-forward calorimeters R Frey SLUO P615

16. SLAC test beam users for LC R&D (M. Woods) R Frey SLUO P616 GroupsTest Beam activity Cambridge U., DESY, Dubna, Royal Holloway U., U. of Notre Dame, University College London, UC Berkeley, SLAC Beam Energy Measurement (BPM spectrometer) U. Oregon, SLACBeam Energy Measurement (synchrotron spectrometer) U. of Oxford, Rutherford Appleton Lab, U. of Essex, Dartmouth College, SLAC Beam profile measurements (Smith-Purcell radiation) Oregon, SLACEMI effect on Vertex detectors SLACKPiX readout of Si strips U. of Birmingham, CCLRC (UK), CERN Manchester U., Lancaster U., DESY, TEMF TU Darmstadt, SLAC Collimator wakefield studies U. of Oxford, Daresbury Lab, SLACIP BPM studies (FONT)

17. Why a SLAC Center for R&D? It already is at some level… SLAC-based activity should increase with the U.S. LC effort. The presence of a LC on site!!  Unique national/international capability  Detector test beams  Accelerator instrumentation test beams  The test beams are great (several personal experiences) Well-defined position, time, and energy  With a LC bunch timing structure(!) Local detector/instrumentation expertise and infrastructure  Electronics group  HEP-related engineering  Detector experts  Computing facilities and simulation/software group Location Historical user base R Frey SLUO P617