1 Physics and Detector Studies in Japan Akiya Miyamoto KEK ILC Korea PAL 17 February 2006

2 Physics Scenario at ILC

3 Vertexing  ~1/5 r beampipe,~1/30 pixel size (wrt LHC) Tracking  ~1/6 material, ~1/10 resolution (wrt LHC) Jet energy (Higgs self-coupling, W/Z sep. in SUSY study)  ~1/2 resolution (wrt LHC) ( Or better ILC Detector Performance Goals

4 Detector for ILC experiments Good jet energy resolution  calorimeter inside a coil  highly segmented calorimeter Efficient & High purity b/c tagging  Thin VTX, put close to the IP  Strong solenoid field  Pixel type High momentum resolution Hermetic down to O(10)mrad Shielded enough against beam- related background Detector design Philosophy Muon detector Calorimeter Tracker Vertex detector Coil

5 Concepts - Technologies

6 GLD Concept Pixel vertex detector + Si tracker, self-tracking capable Large gaseous central Time Projection Chamber (TPC) Large radius, “Medium/High” granularity ECAL: W-Scitillator “Medium/High” granuality HCAL: Pb-Scintillator inside 3T solenoid

7 Comparison to other concepts GLD: Large ECAL radius  good for better jet energy resolution GLDLDCSiD

8 Our Activities Concept Study  GLD : as an inter-regional team  DOD  Home page: Software studies  Simulation and Reconstruction based on full simulation Vertex Detector TPC Calorimeter Some topics of recent activities will be presented Apologies for not covering all

9 Software activities Development of tools and studies based on them  Geant4 based full simulator, Jupiter and analysis tools, Satellites  Study items  Particle Flow Analysis –By cheated method –By realistic method –Performance comparison: digital vs analog, tile size, etc. –Better understanding of hadron shower programs  Tracking –Khalman track fitter for TPC/IT/VTX –Track reconstruction  Backgrounds in tracker  Physics performances  They will be described in the GLD DOD in detail

10 Detector Geometry Full One Tower EM + HD 27 X 0 6.1λ New Geometry in Jupiter (Feb, 2006) in Dec. 2005

11 Perfect PFA Perfect track-calorimeter matching based on Monte Calor Info. Shower fluctuation, particle interactions with material fully simulated  Identify terms contributing to the resolution to design the best detector including a best kink track treatment: improves  kink ~ 1.3 GeV u,d,s quark pair Events at Z pole

12 PFA : error source Contribution to Jet Energy Resolution Neutrino 0.30 GeV 5mrad cut 0.62 Low Pt track 0.83 TPC Resol. 0 EM Cal Resol HD Cal Resol Total 2.48 Effect of Pt cut Important to measure low Pt track for the best energy resolution ! B=6T

13 e+e+ e-e- Realistic PFA Critical part to complete detector design  Large R & medium granularity vs small R & fine granularity  Large R & medium B vs small R & high B  Importance of HD Cal resolution vs granuality  … Algorithm developed in GLD: Consists of several steps  MIP finding  Gamma Finding  Small-clustering  Cluster-track matching  Neutral hadron clustering Red : pion Yellow :gamma Blue : neutron

14 PFA performance so far Z-pole events Further improvement necessary to  Achieve 30%/Sqrt(E)  Similar resol. At higher energy  Optimize detector w.r.t jet energy resolution

15 Higgs Study e + e -  ZH  4-jet or 2-jet + missing :  Studied assuming the cheated PFA performance, using QuickSim  Study assuming the realistic PFA performance is in progress  Other channels such as ZHH or SUSY processes need to be studied

16 Higgs mass : if Mh=120GeV Incl. beamstrahlung 350GeV, nominal  (Mh)~109MeV Incl. beamstrahlung 350GeV, high-lum  (Mh)~164MeV Incl. beamstrahlung 250GeV, nominal  (Mh)~27MeV  E/E(beam)~0.1% Differential Luminosity(500GeV)

17 Forward Region for SUSY Study BCAL : Total Z length 20 cm 30 layers of 3mm thick Tungsten + 0.3mm thick Si. + Air gap FCAL Front and Tail: 30 layers of 3mm Thick Tungsten + 0.3mm thick Si + Air gap HDCAL QC1 MUD CH2 Mask TPC EMCAL FCAL BCAL Response to 10GeV e+

18 Background Low energy e+e- pair background in BCAL region. Simulated using CAIN data, 500 GeV, Nominal parameter ~1/65 bunch of pair backgrounds are simulated BCAL FCAL e+/e- tagging in the forward region ? Needs serious study for SUSY physics

19 VTX R&D in Japan Challenge of ILC Vertex detector  To achieve performance goal, vertex detector has to  Thin( 3  Bunch spacing, ~300nsec, is too short to readout O(1) Giga pixels, but occupancy is too high if accumulate 3000 bunches of data with a standard pixel size of ~ 20x20  m 2. No proven technology exist yet. Candidates are,  Readout during train  CPCCD, MAPS, DEPFET, …  Local signal storage, and readout between train  ISIS, CAP, FAPS, …  Fine Pixel, readout between train  FPCCD (5x5  m 2 pixel CCD) In Japan, we (KEK-Tohoku-Niigata collaboration) are proposing Vertex Detector using Fine Pixel CCD (FPCCD) We believe FPCCD is the most feasible option among the proposed technologies

20 FPCCD Chip 5  m pixels, to reduce occupancy  Promising, because Fine pixel CCD device exists already for optical applications Fully depleted epitaxial layer to suppress charge spread by diffusion Multi-port readout with moderate (~ 15MHz) readout Low temperature operation to keep dark current negligible for 200msec readout cycle.

21 FPCCD Vertex Detector Baseline design for GLD 2 layers  Super Layer, 3 super layers in total minimize the wrong-tracking probability due to multiple scattering 6 layers for self-tracking capability Cluster shape analysis can help background rejection

22 Background rejection by cluster shape WZ Sig, W  Sig : Expected width A big advantage of Fine Pixel Sensors

23 B.G. rejection by cluster shape R=20 mm Cut at dW=10  m Z (mm) All dW<10  m Ratio 1/20

24 Status of sensor R&D Fully depleted CCD for astrophysics by Hamamatsu  24  m, 12  m pixel size:  Available now  We will test them soon : Charge spread, Lorentz angle  5 – 9  m pixel size:  Under development  Will be available in 0.5 – 1 year Custom fully depleted FPCCD for VTX  High speed (~15MHz)  Multi-port readout  We wish to start in 2006

25 Challenge of TPC technology Principle of TPC Pad Plane Bz E Central Membrane Drift Time  Z position Position at Pad plane  r  position Challenges To achieve  r  2m  MWPC  MPGD readout R&D issues Gas amplification in MPGD : GEM, MicroMegas Properties of chamber gas: drift velocity, diffusion Ion feedback control

26 TPC R&D A series of beam tests has been done at KEK PS, to study performances Of TPC using readouts of MWPC, GEM, and MicroMegas

27 Beamtest setup KEK PI2 beamline Beam MPI Field Cage 26cmL Readout Pad 10cmx10cm For MWPC, GEM, MicroMegas 1T Magnet 86cm , 1mL

28 MWPC vs GEM

29 B Field Dependance Bfield improves spatial resolution significantly. For long drift, diffusion term dominates the spatial resolution. Calculated results of C D are more or less consistent with test results.  probably OK to extrapolate to 3~4T  need to be confirmed by future tests with large B field and long drift. ILC Target

Data Comparison with Numerical Calculation Neumerical Calculation (by K. Fujii) MicroMEGAS Pad : 2.3 mm Diffusion Constnat : 469, 285 and 193 for B = 0, 0.5 and 1.0 T Neff = 27.5 f :  function Data: MicroMEGAS B = 1 T Gas: Ar-isobutane (5%) Pad: 2.3 mm Pads pad-pitch dominant region asymptotic region diffusion dominant

31 Resistive Anode or Digital Resolution with short drift length is dominated by  Readout pad pitch  Width of induced charge on pad plane. To increase pad picth  Digital TPC : O(100  m) pad size and readout  Future possibility  Increase signal width  Resistive anode pad readout, but two track separation might be scarified KEK Beamtest : MicroMegas TPC and a registive anode readout

32 Plan of TPC R&D Study properties of MPGD, GEM and MicroMegas, and gas amplification mechanism well  Simulation/ test bench studies Study chamber gas properties and amplification in MPGD  Drift velocity, diffusion constants, …  For ILC application, gas with no H is preferred to reduce effects of neutrons background.  Positive ion feed back has to be reduced sufficiently Study properties of MPGD with large prototype  EUDET Design and develop a large TPC system with electronics.

33 Calorimeter Design goals  Fine granularity, O(1) cm, for the best track-cluster matching  Crucial for best jet energy resolution  Hermetic down to O(10)mrad  Elemag and hadron calorimeters are both inside Coil Challenge:  Achieve sufficient granularity with a reasonable cost  Optimize configuration to satisfy design goals.  Develop best PFA. Hardware configuration best meats PFA algorithm Our choice:  Scintillator based calorimeter

34 Calorimeter Configuration EM Configuration : Tungsten-Scintillator Strip  Large inner radius  Small Moliere radius  Fine Granuarity Distance of  from  0 at r=210cm O(1) cm segmentation is necessary HD CAL: Lead-Scinti. Sandwitch Active Sensor: Strip/Tile combination

35 GLD CAL Configuration 12 sided shape: EM CAL HD CAL Readout cable goes between HD CAL module to minimize dead space in EM

36 Photon Sensor R&D Merits of Silicon Photon Pixel Sensor  Work in Magnetic Field  Very compact and can directly mount on the fiber  High gain (~10 6 ) with a low bias voltage (25~80V)  Photon counting capability SiPM case: O(100) pixels, Each pixel is in Geiger mode. # hit pixel = # input lights ~1cm

37 >2000 pix For GLD

38 Status and Plans on Calorimeters ECAL large prototype in progress  Sci-strip type HCAL large prototype needs funding! SiPM/MPPC promissing and testing in progress More PFA study painfully needed  Optimization for high-energy jets (granularity)  Scintillator strip design works?

39 (2005 end) Acc. Baseline Configuration Document (BCD) Detector R&D report (2006,3) “Detector outline documents” (one for each detector concept) (2006 end) Acc. Reference Design Report (RDR) Detector Concept Report (DCR : one document) (~2008) LC site EOICollaborations form ~Site selection + 1yrGlobal lab selects experiments. Accelerator Detector Detector Timeline By H.Yamamoto

40 Summary Detector Outline Document will be released soon. But there are many issues yet to be studied. Detector Concept Study will continue further towards DCR. Studies of detector technologies are in progress for Vertex Detector, TPC, and Calorimeter. In all items, regional and inter- regional cooperation will be strengthened towards detector LOI/TDR in several years:  Japan-Korea joint studies on Calorimeter  EUDET: TPC and Calorimeter  Calorimeter beam tests in FNAL with CALICE  … more Detector R&D needs more funding

41 Backup slides

42 More missing items Muon system is probably easy in concept but difficult in practice (large system - support, etc.) - Missing R&D item! Solenoid and compensation coil (DID - for large xing angle) : non-trivial problem to realize, and DID is a problem to solve for trackers and bkg. Forward regions (endcap regions) are important for t-channel productions such as Very forward regions (FCAL, BCAL) are critical for tagging electrons for SUSY pair creations : recently attacked by Korean groups (thanks!) With the long train, DAQ is not a trivial problem (now P. LeDu alone for GLD) Needs more people for beam background simulations

43

44 Beam tests are crucial Cal. Performance depends on cut values.  Reported to be solved in the latest Geant4 release (8.0) Beam test and hadron shower simulation is not consistent. Can we use it for the design of highly segmented calorimeter ?  Future beam test.

45 Detector R&D plan 2006 : DOD : Detector R&D Budget : in Japan – applying several resources to get fund  4~5 year terms  If founded, complete detector R&D -> to prepare detector TDR In 2006,  ACFA workshop ?  Detector workshop ?  Needs good organization …

46 Coverage in Forward region Crucial for stau search to reduce backgrounds due to two-photon process Response to 10 GeV e+   No-crack now, BUT  Dead spaces has to take into account more seriously  Can we detect even in huge beam-beam background ? cos  EMCALFCAL BCAL