Towards Snowmass

1. Towards Snowmass Jul. 13, 2005 Y.Sugimoto

2. Charge for Detector WGs • Charge for Concept Groups: • work towards a baseline design • define performance criteria based on physics objectives, in consultation with the physics WGs and using common benchmarks when possible • develop costing procedures common across all concepts • identify and create a timeline of critical R&D for subsystems • develop tools to assess the detector concept's capability to achieve physics objectives • discuss the impact of machine parameter choices on detector performance (L*, crossing angle, non-uniform B-field), especially for subsystems in the forward region • define minimum space or stay-clears for beam pipe, masking, diagnostics • Charge for Subsystem Working Groups: • identify and timeline R&D necessary to evaluate subsystem concepts • compare alternative subsystem technologies • identitfy cost/material/performance tradeoffs

3. Schedule until Snowmass • GLD Documents – by July 31st • Report to MDI Panel  Tauchi-san • Report to Detector R&D Panel • Define the baseline design concept • For each sub-detector, describe the baseline technology and possible options • Show the status of funding and manpower (at least for the baseline technology R&D) • By Snowmass • Define the 0th baseline design including geometry of each sub-detector  Input fromthe IR task-force study • At Snowmass • Polish up (optimize) the baseline design • Find out the missing R&D and new collaborators • Define performance criteria based on Physics (completely missing now)  Input from simulation study and from discussion with other groups

4. VTX task list • Please read the following document: http://ilcphys.kek.jp/gld/documents/VTXtasklist.pdf

5. Question List on VTX • Inner radius • Beam pipe radius: • SR mask vs. Luminosity • Core of pair background • Pair background and 2-g background vs. tracking efficiency • Physics capability as a function of inner radius (and sensor thickness) • Impact parameter resolution, b, c, t-tag efficiency, and impact on physics • Vertex-charge determination • Outer radius (and inner radius of SIT) • Connection with SIT (Tracking efficiency) with background hits • cosq coverage and forward disks? • Support structure and readout electronics – material budget • Tracking efficiency under large background condition • Standard pixel option vs. fine pixel option • Background rejection capability of FPCCD using cluster shape • Do other PIDs help the flavor tagging?

6. Initial Parameters of VTX • Standard Pixel Option • Pixel size / s = 20 / 3 mm • R = 20, 30, 40, 50 mm (4 layers) • L/2 = 65, 100, 100, 100 mm • cosq: 0.95 (1st layer) – 0.9 (4th layer) • t / tepi = 50 / 15 mm • Fine Pixel Option • Pixel size / s = 5 / 1.5 mm • R = 20, 22, 32, 34, 48, 50 mm (6 layers) • L/2 = 65, 65, 100, 100, 100, 100 mm • cosq: 0.95 (1st layer) – 0.9 (6th layer) • t / tepi = 50 / 15 mm • Forward disk • Z = 120 (+ 122 for FP option) mm, R = 40 – 58 mm (cosq:0.95 – 0.9) • Beam pipe • R = 15 mm, t = 250 mm, Be

7. What can we do for VTX? • For “Concept” • Demonstrate FPCCD can achieve good tracking efficiency and impact parameter resolution to make it as one of the candidate technologies for GLD/LDC • Determine baseline geometry for GLD from the view point of beam background (IR task force) • Identify timeline for R&D (depends on budget) (T_T) • For “Subsystem” • Identify timeline for R&D (depends on budget) (T_T) • Exchange information with other groups