1. NEUTRON TRANSVERSITY (E12-10-006) Haiyan Gao Duke University Durham, NC, U.S.A. ( SoLID Collaboration meeting June 2-3, 2011

2. Nucleon Spin Structure Understand Nucleon Spin in terms of quarks and gluons (QCD). – Nucleon spin is ½ at all energies, how to divide non trivial (recent development by Chen et al., Wakamatsu) – Small contribution from quarks and gluons intrinsic spin – Orbital angular momentum of quarks and gluons is important Understanding of spin-orbit correlations. ~30% from quark spin by EMC 1/3 confirmed by more precise data Gluon intrinsic spin contribution not large Nucleons spin Jis Sum Rule (example) J q

3. Transverse Momentum-dependent parton distributions (TMDs) At leading twist 8 total, only 3 TMDs non vanishing upon integrating over transverse momentum of the quark So how to study transversity and other TMDs experimentally? Q: how about quark transverse momentum ? 3-D description in momentum space?

4. Transverse Spin Structure Some characteristics of transversity h 1T = g 1L for non-relativistic quarks No gluon transversity in nucleon Chiral-odd difficult to access in inclusive DIS Soffers bound |h 1T | <= (f 1 +g 1L )/2 Longitudinal Spin structure function: g 1L Its transverse spin counter part (Transversity): h 1T NN qq

5. All Leading Twist TMDs f 1T = f1 =f1 = g 1 = g 1T = h 1L = h 1 = h 1T = Transversity Boer-Mulder Pretzelosity Sivers Helicity Nucleon Spin Quark Spin

6. Access TMDs through Hard Processes Partonic scattering amplitude Fragmentation amplitude Distribution amplitude proton lepton pion proton lepton antilepton Drell-Yan BNL JPARC FNAL EIC SIDIS electron positron pion e – e + to pions

7. Access Parton Distributions through Semi- Inclusive DIS Unpolarized Polarized Target Polarized Beam and Target S L, S T : Target Polarization; e : Beam Polarization Boer-Mulder Sivers Transversity Pretzelosity

8. Separation of Collins, Sivers and pretzelocity effects through angular dependence SIDIS SSAs depend on 4-D variables (x, Q 2, z and P T ) Large angular coverage and precision measurement of asymmetries in 4-D phase space is essential.

9. Transversity Distributions A global fit to the HERMES p, COMPASS d and BELLE e+e- data by the Torino group, Anselmino et al., arXiv:0812.4366 Solid red line : transversity distribution, analysis at Q 2 =2.4 (GeV/c) 2 Solid blue line: Soffer bound |h 1T | <= (f 1 +g 1L )/2 GRV98LO + GRSV98LO Dashed line: helicity distribution g 1L, GRSV98LO A. Prokudin, Talk 1059

10. Extraction of Sivers fcn (HERMES p, COMPASS d)p and COMPASS d) Ext: M. Anselmino et al., arXiv:0812.4366

11. JLab E06 010 Experiment Polarized 3 He Target, > 60% with beam, world record Polarized Electron Beam – ~80% Polarization – Fast Flipping at 30Hz – PPM Level Charge Asymmetry controlled by online feed back BigBite at 30º as Electron Arm – P e = 0.7 ~ 2.2 GeV/c HRS L at 16º as Hadron Arm – P h = 2.35 GeV/c 11 Beam Polarimetry (Møller + Compton) Luminosity Monitor Collaboration includes Ma and Mao groups at PKU

12. Data Coverage Kinematics Coverage p T & ϕ h - ϕ S Coverage Q 2 >1GeV 2 W>2.3GeV z=0.4~0.6 W>1.6GeV x bin 1 234

13. 6 GeV Neutron Results X. Qian et al, to be submitted to PRL

14. PR-10-006: Update to PR-09-014 Nucleon Transversity at 11 GeV Using a Polarized 3 He Target and SOLid in Hall A Approved by JLab PAC35 E12-10-006 ( Beijing U., CalState-LA, CIAE, W&M, Duke, FIU, Hampton, Huangshan U., Cagliari U. and INFN, INFN-Bari and U. of Bari, INFN-Frascati, INFN-Pavia, Torino U. and INFN, JLab, JSI (Slovenia), Lanzhou U, LBNL, Longwood U, LANL, MIT, Miss. State, New Mexico, ODU, Penn State at Berks, Rutgers, Seoul Nat. U., St. Marys, Syracuse, Tel aviv, Temple, Tsinghua U, UConn, Glasgow, UIUC, Kentucky, Maryland, UMass, New Hampshire, USTC, UVa and the Hall A Collaboration Strong theory support, Over 130 collaborators, 40 institutions, 8 countries, strong overlap with PVDIS Collaboration

15. GEMs (study done with CDF magnet, 1.5T) Study done with CDF and BarBar magnets (CDF shown here) Experiment E12-10-006

16. Kinematic Coverage Precision 4-D (x, Q 2, p T and z) mapping of Collins, Sivers and pretzelosity. Coverage with 11 GeV beam shown here – Black: forward angle – Green: large angle x B : 0.1 ~ 0.6 P T : 0 ~ 1.5 GeV/c W: 2.3 ~ 4 GeV z: 0.3 ~ 0.7 M m : 1.6~ 3.3 GeV

17. Tracking with GEM detectors 5 planes reconfigured from PVDIS GEM detectors (23 m 2 ) Total surface for this experiment ~ 18 m 2 Need to build the first plane 1.15 m 2 Electronics will be shared PAC 34 report

18. Particle Identification Large angle side: 14.5 o – 22 o (Electron only) – Momentum: 3.5 – 6.0 GeV/c – /e < 1.5 – Shashlyk calorimeter: (Pre-shower/Shower) Forward angle side: 6.6 o – 12 o (Electron and Pion) – Momentum: 0.9 – 7.0 GeV/c – Calorimeter: Pre-shower/Shower splitting – Light Gas Cherenkov for electron identification – Heavy Gas Cherenkov and TOF detectors for hadron identification

19. Hadron Identification Momentum range: 0.9 – 7.0 GeV/c Configuration for only pion identification Gas Cherenkov: CO 2 @ 1 atm n = 1.000585, 210 cm N.P.E. ~ 17 (80:1 pion rejection) P (GeV) Heavy Gas Cherenkov: C 4 F 10 @1.5 atm n = 1.0021, 80 cm N.P.E ~ 25 (50:1 kaon rejection)

20. π/K separation up to 2.5 GeV/c – assume 9 meter path-length: (20:1 kaon rejection at 2.5 GeV/c) Can also help to suppress photon events – Multi-Resistive Plate Chamber – < 80ps – Rates > 0.28 kHz/mm 2 – Estimated rates: 0.1 kHz/mm 2 Time-of-Flight (MRPC) 600 ps < 2.3 GeV

21. Projected Data on Collins Total 1400 bins in x, Pt and z for 11/8.8 GeV beam. z ranges from 0.3 ~ 0.7, only a sub-range of 11/8.8 GeV shown here.

22. Projected Data on Sivers Total 1400 bins in x, Pt and z for 11/8.8 GeV beam. z ranges from 0.3 ~ 0.7, only a sub-range of 11/8.8 GeV shown here.

23. Projected Data on Pretzelosity Total 1400 bins in x, Pt and z for 11/8.8 GeV beam. z ranges from 0.3 ~ 0.7, only a sub-range of 11/8.8 GeV shown here.

24. Power of SOLID

25. 28 January 2011 Paul E. Reimer, SoLID Collaboration Mtg, Magnets Options Magnet Comparison BaBarCLEOZEUSCDF Cryostat Inner Radius 150 cm 86 cm150 cm Length345 cm350cm245cm500 cm Central Field1.49T1.5T1.8T1.47T Flux Return Iron Yes No Cool IconYes No Variation in Current density with z? Yes?? Varying current density 25% more current at ends No AvailableProbably Not????Probably 28 January 2011 Paul E. Reimer, SoLID Collaboration Mtg, Magnets Options 2525

26. ZEUS Magnet Study for SIDIS Yang Zhang Zhiwen Zhao Simulation study with Hall D magnet next

27. Design Layout

28. Dimensions GEMR min (cm) R max (cm) Z (cm) to targetZ(cm) to upstream yoke Chamber 128.044.114853 Chamber 224.855.818287 Chamber 328.967.5216121 Chamber 433.176.5250155 Chamber 537.066.0284189 Chamber 644.681.0344249 CalorimeterThickness (cm) Z(cm) to target Z(cm) to upstream yoke Large angle30250155 Forward angle30464369 Target center to the front of upstream yoke: 65 cm

29. Calorimeter & GEM Acceptance

30. Calorimeter Acceptance

31. GEM Acceptance

32. Kinematic Coverage@11GeV

33. ZEUSBaBarCDF x0.05-0.580.05-0.650.05-0.64 z0.3-0.7 Q2Q2 1-61-91-7.2 W2.3-4.22.3-4.42.3-4.2 W 1.6-3.41.6-3.51.6-3.4 PTPT 0-1.450-1.70-1.45

34. Background@GEM