1 / 44

“Summary” of Calorimetry and Muons

“Summary” of Calorimetry and Muons. Brief overview, recent progress, R&D issues and coverage Muons Calorimetry. Ray Frey University of Oregon Victoria ALCPG Workshop July 31, 2004. Gene Fisk. Status of ALC Muon Detector R&D. Colo. State, UC Davis, Fermilab, Northern Illinois Univ.,

tao
Download Presentation

“Summary” of Calorimetry and Muons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Summary” of Calorimetry and Muons • Brief overview, recent progress, R&D issues and coverage • Muons • Calorimetry Ray Frey University of Oregon Victoria ALCPG Workshop July 31, 2004 Victoria04 R. Frey

  2. Gene Fisk Status of ALC Muon Detector R&D Colo. State, UC Davis, Fermilab, Northern Illinois Univ., Univ. of Notre Dame, Wayne State Univ., Univ. of Texas Austin

  3. TASK: What apparatus do we need to identify/measure muons and separate them from hadrons? • P from central tracking • Penetration of Emcal, Hcal, SC Coil, mFe • Matching m detector track with central track – how well? (Simulation studies) • Background environment: shower leakage? • Punchthrough hadron rejection/fakes • Energy deposition, min. ion. vs. Eh Victoria04 R. Frey

  4. Proposal: Scint. + (WLS+Clear) Fiber + MAPMTs • Choice of Scintillator – extruded plastic strips • WLS: choice of dia., glue, key-hole groove, .. • WLS  Clear: thermal splice, optic. connectors • Fiber routes, bending, securing, light tighting • Photodetectors – MAPMTs; Other options are APDs and NIU SS det,. • Electronics – LED test source for PMT meas., scint. QA (= #p.e.s) and perhaps: • Calibration scheme • Front end electronics/signal processing/digitz’n • In Principle: R&D Unique to LC detector Victoria04 R. Frey

  5. Fermi-NICADD Extruder Victoria04 R. Frey

  6. Prototype 5 m X 2.5 m plane MINOS MAPMT and base → Victoria04 R. Frey

  7. R&D Goals Unique to LC Muon Sys • Simulation studies (NIU/Fermilab) • LED - pulser/calibration (WS) • MAPMTs – learn how to use them (WS) • APDs New tech w/ industry (Colo State) • FE/Digitizat’n/Read out, ProtoSpecs (UCD) • Scintillator Protype Modules to understand: mech engr, assembly, fiber optics splicing, routing, light tighting, coupling to photodet, calibration hardware • Test Beam Victoria04 R. Frey

  8. R&D Accomplishments • R&D proposals – rated excellent/barely funded • Simulation software – framework, m & p , b-b^bar studies - NIU/Fermilab, Frascati • MAPMT tests – LED pht spectra/yields - WS • Fiber splicing + routing design – ND • Prototype electronics – UCD • Scintillator procurement/tests – Fermilab/NIU Good progress and lots of fun – more funding for universities is essential for R&D progress! Victoria04 R. Frey

  9. gluing and light yield tests 3m long scintillator Sasha Dychkant’s Measurements of Strip Response using a Cs137 source. May 19, 2004 Victoria04 R. Frey

  10. Further Work: • Caroline Milstene: Simulation Studies • Arthur Maciel: Framework (not here) • Paul Karchin: MAPMT LED Pulser Development/Method • Mitch Wayne: Fiber Optics (not here) • Mani Tripathi: Electronics, Digitization, Readout • Bob Wilson: APD developments • Marcello Piccolo: RPCs Victoria04 R. Frey

  11. Muon R&D Summary • R&D focused on scintillator strips (1 cm) readout by MAPMTs via fibers, interleaved with 5 cm Fe • Complementary to other regions • RPC detectors; recon. algorithms – M. Piccolo • Initial reconstruction software exists, but is immature • Preparing for a test beam prototype in 1-2 years • Detector R&D “straightforward” but needs to be done • Progress substantially limited by funding • Similar techniques to be used for a tail catcher (V. Zutshi 4) – • Initially for the CALICE test beam to validate MC • Possibly of interest for full detector • Readout by SiPMTs Victoria04 R. Frey

  12. Some Calorimeter R&D Issues May 2002 Simulations • Evaluate EFlow • Full simulation [ Gismo→Geant4 ] • Pattern recognition algorithms [ emerging…] , merge with tracks, etc → Full reconstruction [ JAS, Root ] • Optimize detector configuration • Case for jet physics • Low-rate processes (eg Zhh, tth) • Beam constraints vs not • t-channel • reduce combinations for mult-jet recon. (eg tt→6 jets) • How to combine with other info. (eg flavors from vxd) • e, photon id; muon id; forward (2-photon), missing E • Timing requirement (viz. 2-photon, beam bkgds.) • Opportunities: algorithm development, validity of Geant4, parameterizations, detector ideas Note!

  13. R&D (2) May 2002 ECAL • Si/W • Cost, readout config., packaging, cooling • Mechanical structure • Optimize sampling vs Si area • Alternatives! [issues] • Scint. tiles [segmentation, light output, readout] • With Si layer(s) ? • Shashlik [segmentation] • Crystals [segmentation, physics case for reso.? ] • LAr Addressed in part Opportunities: generic detector development; detector and electronics prototyping; comparative and detailed simulations Note! Victoria04 R. Frey

  14. R&D (3) May 2002 HCAL • Required segmentation for EFlow? • “Digital’’ detector [issues] • RPCs [reliability, glass?, streamer/avalanche] • Scint. [segmentation, light, readout] • GEMs [reliability] • Other? • Other options • Scint. tiles, ….? • Generic Issues: • In/out –side coil • Compensation (partial?) • Absorber material and depth • Integrate muon id with dedicated muon det. Much of this addressed • Opportunities: Wide open: detailed simulations in • conjunction with various detector options; detector prototyping Victoria04 R. Frey

  15. July 2004: Where are we? • Essentially all issues are being/have been addressed… …at “some level”  not necessarily a good level The BIG R&D issues • Development of full particle flow algorithm codes (N. Graf talk) • Goal: Physics signals (jet final states) optimized as a function of basic detector parameters: B, Rtrk, cal. segmentation, etc. • Parts of problem have been attacked incompletely • Not easy! Needs to be recognized as a top R&D priority. • Validation of key, new detector innovations • Validation of the MC codes for simulating hadronic showers which in turn will be used to design the calorimeter (using PFAs). This is fundamental to calorimeter progress.  Prototypes in a test beam Victoria04 R. Frey

  16. Where are we (contd.) ? • Development of full PFAs. • Validation of detector innovations. • Validation of the MC codes  Prototypes in a test beam All of these require money … which we do not have. We are likely to miss the window of opportunity (Jae Yu). Victoria04 R. Frey

  17. Hadronic final states and PFAs 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. σM / M  13% without FSR • At the LC, the situation is reversed: Detection dominates. • Opportunity at the LC to significantly improve measurement of jets. Victoria04 R. Frey

  18. Particle flow and calorimeters(contd) Complementarity with LHC: LC should strive to do physics with all final states. • Charged particles in jets more precisely measured in tracker • Jet energy 64% charged (typ.) Separate charged/neutrals in calor.  The “Particle Flow” paradigm • ECAL: dense, highly segmented • HCAL: good pattern recognition H. Videau Victoria04 R. Frey

  19. Traditional Standards Hermeticity Uniformity Compensation Single Particle E measurement Outside “thin” magnet (~1 T) P-Flow Modification Hermeticity Optimize ECAL/HCAL separately Longitudinal Segmentation Particle shower reconstruction Inside “thick” coil (~4 T) Optimized for best single particle E resolution Optimized for best particle shower separation/reconstruction Particle-Flow Implications for Calorimetry S. Magill 3-D shower reconstruction in ECAL/HCAL requires high degree of longitudinal segmentation and transverse granularity

  20. calorimetry (contd) Reconstructing jets using particle flow algorithms: • So the “confusion” term – correctly assigning energies – will dominate  pattern recognition (+ QCD). • 0.3/Ejet is a reasonable goal with good physics justification. D. Karlen • Inserting resolutions for • charged hadrons (tracker) 64% Ejet • photons (EM cal.) 25% Ejet • neutral hadrons (hadronic cal.) 11% Ejet Victoria04 R. Frey

  21. Shower reconstruction by track extrapolation S. Magill ECAL HCAL • Mip reconstruction : • Extrapolate track through CAL layer-by-layer • Search for “Interaction Layer” • -> Clean region for photons (ECAL) • Shower reconstruction : • Define tubes for shower in ECAL, HCAL after IL • Optimize, iterating tubes in E,HCAL separately (E/p test) IL track shower

  22. Track Substitution, Neutral Sum Results G4v6.1 • Jet cones – 0.5 • Neutral contribution to E sum ~3.7 GeV (most) • -> Goal is ~3 GeV (all) Includes mips + cell energies in conical tubes Further tuning of E/p parameter is still needed Victoria04 R. Frey

  23. It’s not just for jet physics… Brient, Calor2004 • Such a calorimeter will also do very well for: • Photons, including non-pointing • Electrons and muons • Tau id. and polarization • 3rd generation • Yukawa coupling • Separation of tau final states → ,  →→+o Victoria04 R. Frey

  24. LC Calorimeter Themes Current paradigms • ECal: Silicon/tungsten • HCal: • “Analog” (5-10 cm seg.) • CALICE tile-cal (TESLA) • “Digital” (1 cm seg.) • SiD: RPCs, GEMs • CALICE: RPCs, GEMs Alternatives • ECal: • Si/scint/W hybrids • Scint/W • Scint/Pb • HCal: • Scint/Pb → Large/Huge Detectors

  25. Comment: Good to see some new thinking about Large Detector calorimeters • Area of EM CAL (Barrel + Endcap) • SD: ~40 m2 / layer • TESLA: ~80 m2 / layer • LD: ~ 100 m2 / layer • (JLC: ~130 m2 / layer) S. Komamiya

  26. What’s New: Silicon/W, SLAC-Oregon-BNL Victoria04 R. Frey

  27. Dynamically switched Cf(D. Freytag) • Much reduced power • Much better S/N • Allows for good timing measurement what’s new Si/W (SOB), contd Victoria04 R. Frey

  28. Timing with Si/W ECal 50 ns time constant and 30-sample average  ns resolution • Concerns & Issues: • Needs testing with real electronics and detectors • verification in test beam • synchronization of clocks (1 part in 20) • physics crosstalk • For now, assume pileup window is ~5 ns (3 bx) D. Strom Victoria04 R. Frey

  29. Timing is good Warm detector concern: Pileup of → hadrons over bx train T. Barklow Si/W ECal Timing  1 ns 192 bx pileup (56 Hadronic Events/Train) 3 bx pileup (5ns) Victoria04 R. Frey

  30. What’s New: Silicon/W, CALICE A. White

  31. what’s New: Silicon/W, CALICE (contd) Wafers: Russia/MSU and Prague/IOP First structure from LLR PCB: LAL design, production – Korea/KNU Victoria04 R. Frey

  32. What’s New: Scintillator/W ECal, Colorado (contd) U. Nauenberg

  33. What’s New: DHCal with GEMs, UT Arlington 140mm 70mm GEM foil etching GEM field and multiplication From CERN-open-2000-344, A. Sharma A. White Victoria04 R. Frey

  34. What’s New: DHCal with GEMs (contd) Installing 2nd 1mm walls and fishing line spacers

  35. What’s New: DHCal with RPCs, Argonne NL • AIR4 is a 1-gap RPC built with 1.1mm glass sheet • 1.2mm gap size • Resistive paint layer is about 1MΩ/□ • Running at 6.8 KV • Avalanche signal ~5pc • Efficiency >97% • Total RPC rate from 64 channels <10 Hz • Very low noise! (On-board amplifiers) Pad array Mylar sheet Resistive paint 1.1mm Glass sheet 1.2mm gas gap GND 1.1mm Glass sheet Resistive paint -HV Mylar sheet Aluminum foil Lei Xia

  36. what’s New: DHCal with RPCs, Argonne NL (contd.) J. Repond R&D with chambers Essentially completed Electronic readout system Design and prototype ASIC Specify entire readout system Prototype subcomponents Construction of m3 Prototype Section Build chambers Fabricate electronics Tests in particle beams Without and with ECAL in front FY 2004 CY2004 and early 2005 CY2005 CY2006 - 8 Victoria04 R. Frey

  37. Calorimeter R&D Summary J. Repond Victoria04 R. Frey

  38. J. Repond Motivation for prototype construction and beam tests Validate various technical approaches (technique and physics) Many novel concepts: Fine granularity E/HCAL, DHCAL, Calorimeters with RPCs/GEMs, SiPMs… Validate various concepts of the electronic readout Many novel concepts: Imbedded ECAL readout, cheap digital readout… Measure hadronic showers with unprecedented spatial resolution Validate MC simulation of hadronic showers Compare performance of Analog and Digital HCAL Prerequisite for designing the LCDs Comparison of hadron shower simulation codes by G Mavromanolakis

  39. The Test Beam Prototypes • Particle Flow will be tested and detectors optimized using full Monte Carlo simulations • These Monte Carlos (ie Geant4) must be validated with test beam • A new regime: “Imaging” hadron (and em) calorimeters • Previous MC-cal comparisons not especially relevant • Hadron showers are spatially large  a large prototype is needed (with an ECal in front) • 1 m3 , 4105 readout channels • This requires money (more than current LCRD/UCLC awards) • Meanwhile, initial R&D goals are at or near completion • …. stuck Victoria04 R. Frey

  40. Calorimeter Summary • Based on preliminary Particle Flow results and educated guesses, the critical detector R&D has gone very well. • Si/W ECal and digital (semi-digital) HCal • Innovative and interesting approaches • But these efforts will soon be stalled by lack of resources • Other detector R&D is coming up to speed • Goal: A feasible calorimeter design for a Large Detector • We have learned much about LC requirements • eg timing and hermeticity requirements (The ITRP process) • Further progress on PFAs is critical for detector optimization • Test beam validation of simulations is crucial for the cal. effort. • This can go on in parallel with the PFA developments • Thanks to my colleagues for interesting sessions, as usual ! Victoria04 R. Frey

  41. calorimetry (contd) Expectations for jet resolution • Let σ(confusion)=0 (QCD+res) • What can we expect for σ(conf) ? • Requires full simulations with believable MC (Geant4?) • To be verified at test beams • Development of algorithms • Studies to date: jet res  0.3/  Ejet TESLA TDR Z→ 2 jets •Z peak •ZH 500GeV Hope to see more PFA results Brient, Jeju LCWS Victoria04 R. Frey

  42. Hermiticity • This is a 4π issue, of course • We focus on the forward region, which has been “under appreciated”. TESLA Victoria04 R. Frey

  43. hermiticity (contd) • Consider as an example: sleptons nearly mass-degenerate with neutralinos • Favored by SUSY-WIMP consistency with CDM • The SUSY events will look like 2-photon events… unless the 2-photon electron is vetoed. • Requires good forward veto coverage e+ e- smu+ smu- e+ e- e+ e-m+m- OPAL G. Wilson Victoria04 R. Frey

  44. hermiticity (contd) Veto < 25 mrad ? (Msmu-MLSP)/Msmu= 2.8%,5.6%,11% T. Maruyama G. Wilson ← pairs 2-photon bkgd Veto to 25 mrad No veto ← 250 GeV e- • requires few ns readout (warm) • TESLA: veto to 6 mrad (Lohmann)

More Related