1. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 1 Upgrade Peer Review Report Wesley H. Smith U. Wisconsin CMS Upgrade Peer Review Chair CMS Upgrade Project Office Meeting May 4, 2012 Outline: Review of Proposal 11.01 Thoughts about future of R&D Projects Web page of all proposals, status: http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/electronics/html/elec_web/docs/slhcusg/proposals/proposal_list.htm

2. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 2 Proposal: 10.02: Micro-Pattern Gas Detectors Title: R&D for a high η trigger and tracking detector for CMS; Contact: Archana Sharma Institutes: CERN, Frascati, Pisa, Gent, Florida I. T., Peking U. Activities: Comparison of small-size prototypes in the two technologies 3D modeling of a full-scale detector and services integration Construction of full-scale mock-up Construction and test of a full-scale functional prototype Evaluation of a possible construction project for the whole high-η region Proposal available on: http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/electronics/html/elec_web/docs/slhcusg/proposals/Propos al-MPGD.pdfhttp://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/electronics/html/elec_web/docs/slhcusg/proposals/Propos al-MPGD.pdf Submitted on March 26, 2010 Sent out for review on April 2. Referee responses received by April 25. Draft response & reviews discussed in Upgrade MB on April 27 Response send to Authors on April 29. Authors respond with comments & revised proposal on July 5, distributed to referees Referee responses received by August 9. Response approved by Upgrade MB on Sept. 30. Response sent to Authors on Oct. 1. Reply from Authors received on August 23, 2011

3. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 3 Status September, 2011: 10.02: Micro-Pattern Gas Detectors Review: The R&D needs further justification of the need to complete the high eta region and the priority that this represents when compared with the other needs of the forward muon system. Before starting this program of R&D there should be an initial phase of simulation studies to determine the trigger demands, expected backgrounds and detector parameter requirements Author Response: There was a workshop/review with CMS Management on June 24 where initial results were shown from an effort with the trigger upgrade group on reconstruction and trigger simulation studies. Upgrade MB Action: Panel recommends to approve that R&D program meets requirements set by Upgrade MB and bring decision to CMS Management but no official action taken.

4. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 4 Status Now: 10.02: Micro-Pattern Gas Detectors Subsequent Developments Technical Proposal Referee questions specifically addressed Two dedicated GEM Workshops Review by Upgrade Project Management Input: Referee reports, Technical Proposal, Workshops Conclusion: After review of the conclusions of the CMS SLHC Peer Review Panel, Upgrade Project Management recommends approval of proposal 10.02 as an R&D program of interest to CMS.

5. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 5 R&D Procedure up to now Running since 2006 by Upgrade Management Bd. Dedicated R&D Peer Review Panel est. 2008 Panel members from Upgrade MB, other experts and specific referees chosen for specific proposals W. S. Chair 30 proposals approved, 2 still “under review” Proposals & status collected on web page: http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/electronics/html/elec_web/do cs/slhcusg/proposals/proposal_list.htmhttp://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/electronics/html/elec_web/do cs/slhcusg/proposals/proposal_list.htm Criteria for Review: R&D is aligned with the needs of CMS for SLHC - that is focused on the areas where we need R&D that we don't duplicate too much R&D in one area

6. W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 6 Thoughts on Future of Upgrade R&D panel Based on discussion with Jeff & Didier Ideas presented for feedback: The R&D program should evolve – how should it change? Should take a more programmatic view of R&D Ensure that proposals are in line with CMS upgrade plans Existing R&D proposals assigned to be supervised by: Specific detector upgrade projects Forward Calorimeter or Trigger Working Groups Upgrade Project Office (if not fit in either above) In all cases, reports should be made to UPO Need to consolidate the existing list of R&D proposals Upgrade Projects representatives should collect existing R&D short status reports for presentation to the UPO All R&D projects should have milestones & deliverables Even if the deliverables are reports to the UPO New R&D proposals should be reviewed by R&D Panel composed of members assigned from UPO, Detector Projects & Working Groups After approval, R&D projects should be supervised as above.