David Miller; charge to the Prague ECFA/DESY workshop 15/11/2002 1 Charge to the Workshop

1David Miller; charge to the Prague ECFA/DESY workshop 15/11/2002

Charge to the Workshop


Charge to the Workshop

Topics1. Physicists’ consensus2. Steering Committees3. Loew Panel4. Worldwide Study5. Our Study6. Portentous Conclusion(7. North American overview - Jim Brau)


Much has happened since the TESLA TDR was launched in March 2001, some things dreadful, some good.

For linear colliders it has mostly been goodSnowmass consensusECFA panel reportAcfa reportHEPAP recommendationsGerman Science Council

The work of the LCWS series and the inputs from ECFA/DESYand the other regional studies have been vital to making the case.

BUT WE HAVE NOT GOT APPROVAL YET.The hardest parts have still to come. Many of them are down to us.

Physicists worldwidewant a single internationalmachine in the 500 GeVto 1 TeV range;expeditiously.

Physicists’ Consensus


International Linear Collider Steering Committee

Began at ICHEP Amsterdam, July 30, at request of ICFA

Three year mandate for promoting the LC as an international initiative

Overarching StatementThe primary role of the Steering Committee is to promote the construction of an Electron -Positron Linear Collider through world-wide collaboration. In so doing the Committee will give particular attention to Outreach, Science, Technology and Organization of the LC project. The Steering Committee will report to ICFA.

ILCSC


The ILCSG will:1. Engage in outreach, explaining the intrinsic scientific and technological importance of the project to the scientific community at large, to industry, to government officials and politicians and to the general public. 2. Based upon the extensive work already done in the three regions, engage in defining the scientific roadmap, the scope and primary parameters for machine and detector. It is particularly important that the initial energy, the initial operations scenario and the goals for upgradability be properly assessed.3. Monitor the machine R&D activities and make recommendations on the coordination and sharing of R&D tasks as appropriate. Although the accelerator technology choice may well be determined by the host country, the ILCSC should help facilitate this choice to the largest degree possible.4. Identify models of the organizational structure, based on international partnerships, adequate for constructing the LC facility. In addition, the ILCSC should make recommendations regarding the role of the host country in the construction and operation of the facility.5. Carry out such other tasks as may be approved or directed by ICFA.

Mandate of the ILCSC


Membership of ILCSC

+ Cnada

Category Current incumbentDirectors

KEK H. SugawaraSLAC J. DorfanDESY A. WagnerCERN L. MaianiFNAL M. Witherell

LC Steering Group ChairsAsian To be determined by ACFA

European B. FosterN. American J. Dorfan

OtherChair M. Tigner

China (IHEP Director) Hs. ChenRussia (BINP Director) A. Skrinsky

ICFA outside LC regions C. Garcia Canal to be invitedAsia Rep.* S. Komamiya – protem pending ACFA

selectionEurope Rep. * D. Miller

N. American Rep.* To be determined by DPF/DPB* Physicist representatives from these regions to be nominated by ACFA, ECFA and theDPF in consultation with the DPB, respectively

P.Grannis

Totsuka

Won Namkung


Subcommittees of ILCSC

Don’t want to duplicate existing activities

a) Physics and Detectors (Us. Our Worldwide Organising Committee volunteered. ILCSC accepted.) b) Outreach; new c) Organisational Structures; new d) Accelerators; starting from Loew panel members (Worldwide linac technology study requested;

modelled on our Physics and Detectors study)


US SG central to their approach to LC. (co-ordinating Labs+Universities, DOE+NSF)

Asian SG started at ACFA in October

European SG is chaired by Brian Foster, + Albrecht Wagner, Luciano Maiani, Sergio Bertollucci, Francois Richard, DJM.

Same pattern of subcommittees. George Kalmus chairs c) “Organisation & Management” (urgent; request from German Science Council for concrete proposal)

Reinhard Brinkmann chairs b) “Accelerator Technology”

Will probably have a cross-member between b) and c). Full CERN participation in b) and c). We’ll press for more in

ECFA/DESY!

Regional Steering Groups.


Loew Panel

Final report early 2003.

I quote from interim report of Greg Loew to ICFA Seminar October 9 (on web)

Charge to panelTo assess present technical status of the 4 LC designs (TESLA,

JLC(C), NLC/JLC(X), CLIC and their potentials for meeting the advertised parameters at 500 GeV c.m., using same assessment

tools for all 4 designs.

To assess potential of each design for reaching higher energies above 500 GeV.

To establish for each design the R&D work that remains to be done.

To suggest future areas of collaboration.

3 sub-panels doing the detailed hard work: Technology,

Luminosity performance, Reliability and Operability


Loew Panel’s criteria for ranking the status of parts of programmes

Rankings arrived at by debate between experts from all Labs, using common programs and methods. (Maybe a useful language for detector R&D too)

R1. More R&D needed for feasibility-demonstration of machine.

R2. R&D needed to finalise design choices and ensure reliability.

R3. R&D needed before starting production of systems and components.

R4. R&D desirable for technical or cost optimisation.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TESLA 500 TESLA 800 NLC/JLC(X) 500 NLC/JLC(X) 1 TeV

R1 - none 35 MV/m Accel. structures Higher gradient SLED II RF compression

R2 All machines need R&D; especially Damping rings, Low emittance transport, Reliability, Availability, Operability. + Specific needs.

R3 and R4: many items for all machines; much in common.


Greg Loew’s conclusions so far

The panel believes there are no insurmountable obstacles to build TESLA, JLC(C) or JLC/NLC(X) in next few years (start dates between 3 and 5 years from now).

If have to launch a project today for 500 GeV, TESLA is only one with“essentially” proven performance specifications for main linac.

By end 2003 will know if TESLA can reach 800 GeV at 35 MV/m (with extra RF- and cryo- power)

By end 2003 will know if JLC/NLC(X) 500 can reach main linac RF specs.

It should then be easier to reach an objective decision - including othermerits of the respective designs.


Worldwide Study Activities

1. Detector R&D report now on the web, plus webpages linking to ongoing R&D programmes. Still quite a few uncovered topics (e.g. FTD). Worldwide video meetings planned, the day before regional workshops:

Vertex detectors; 8 Jan. 2003, from Arlington TX

Tracking; 31 March 2003, from Amsterdam

Calorimetry; Summer 2003, from somewhere in Asia



2. The “10 page” document.

ILSC asked LCWS 2002 to set the “scope” for the machine. Much debate at Jeju about what they wanted and what was appropriate from the whole World LC intended-user community.

In response to the request, we* are preparing a statement of about 10 pages which should

- summarise the physics aims of the proposed International Linear Collider, drawing on existing reports including TDR, Snowmass and ACFA books.

- outline the kind of detector(s) to be built by international collaboration,

- state the desirable properties of the machine, and the benefits which will come from the options we have studied (e.g. , GigaZ, polarised e+).

* Drafting panel: Paul Grannis, Francois Richard, Sachio Komamiya, Takayuki Matsui


The draft is being circulated to all members of the three regional studies for comment and approval before final submission to the ILCSGin the names of all of us.

We believe that this international endorsement will have an impact on government decision makers.

Please read it and help us improve it.

Worldwide Study Activities..our “10 page” document, continued

At Jeju we did not feel that the whole membership of the World Study could agree the precisely prioritised scope of the baseline machine

- energy, luminosity, which options in which order (e.g. 2nd intersection; gamma-gamma; e+ polarisation; GigaZ etc. etc.)

- though the need for each is explained in our document.

Instead the ILCSC will form a panel with 2 members per region (ours to be nominated by ECFA) to propose a definition of

scope for ILCSC to adopt. It should advise on which choices must be kept flexible to respond to Physics results.



3. Next LCWS will be in Europe in Spring 2004

Bids are coming from Durham (UK), Warsaw and Paris.

The ECFA/DESY organising committee will choose one ofthem by the end of this year.


European Study

Last workshop of ECFA/DESY in Amsterdam 1-4 April 2003.

4 full days; extra 1/2 day to allow fuller reports on each Physics and Detector topic as an update of TDR, not just a report of the latest news from the groups.

Scientific representatives of funding agencies invitedto the final day for these reports.

Will decide at OC+Conveners and Contactpersons meetingthis Monday if Amsterdam will produce paper proceedings.

Continuation as the “ECFA Study” requested to Spring 2005.Essential to keep up momentum, tackle outstanding problemsand play our part in European and International Steering.Decision at RECFA+ECFA meetings, November 28/29.


This meeting

New working group on overall detector performanceneeds inputs and participation from all (LoopVerein excused).

Joint group on LHC/LC relationship has an important and difficult job; to make the case as strongly as possible without overstating it.

Tools still need a lot of hard work. Many detectors not properly included. GEANT4 not fully operational. What scope for sharing effort with other regions?

New problems for Machine Detector interface - see Nick Walker’s talk.

Rolf Heuer will announce a Global Detector Network.

Groups encouraged to give short reviews of Jeju for those who missed it.


LCWS2002 Jeju Island, Korea

Picture takenAugust 30th,during finalplenary reports.

The Gods were paying attention.

We must be doing something important.

Typhoon Rusa

Conclusion

Documents

David Miller; charge to the Prague ECFA/DESY workshop 15/11/2002 1 Charge to the Workshop