Jan 13 2010 p 11

The aims of the meeting are to prepare ourselves for interacting with STFC as the situation unfolds.

Specifically:

Review and summarise our options to optimise the science output from SPiDeR.

Identify the papers which could/should be published in the next year.

Martial the arguments for continued funding until April or September. These would include completing started initiatives, maintaining expertise and strategic (e.g. finding new funding)

Identify who has the interest and the ability to continue working

Explore other options to obtain funding?

Explore options to collaborate (CERN) or migrate some of the work under an LHC umbrella

Understand what we should we do to ensure that the concepts of TPAC/INMAPS/FORTIS/CHERWELL/ISIS are not lost e.g. Can we ensure that we have demonstrators available for user evaluation?

Jan 13 2010 p 22

10:00 – 11:00 TPAC, FORTIS, CHERWELL, ISIS status reports11:00 – 11:30 Discussion and summary

The presentations should be brief (10’) recalling the investment to-date, the current status, the likely status in April and the benefit of continuing until September (or longer) i.e.

• Brief update on status of measurements and analysis

• What is still needed to complete work to publication?

• What would be the case for submitting a new prototype?

• What are the reasons to proceed with test beams at DESY, CERN

• TPAC (Paul)

• FORTIS & CHERWELL (Jaap, Jamie)

• ISIS & SOI (Gary)

Jan 13 2010 p 33

11:30 – 12:00 Other MAPs projects12:00 – 12:30 Institute plans – Pixel RD, continued involvement with ILC, CLIC

• Overview of active MAPs projects in the UK (Renato?)

• Mass Spec (Andrei)

• The international scene and prospects for continuing work e.g. collaboration, new funding (All).

• LePix, OKI SOI (Mike/Gary)

• Birmingham (Nigel)

• Bristol (Joel)

• Imperial (Paul)

• Oxford (Andrei)

• RAL (Mike, Renato)

Jan 13 2010 p 44

13:00 – 15:00 Pub lunch and summary session

Structure a discussion around the following themes:1. Make explicit the investment to-date in detector RD (SPiDeR +LCFI + CALICE+ CFI)

– SY, £M, equipment for ISIS, TPAC, FORTIS, CHERWELL

2. Summarise the next natural steps for each SPiDeR device

– Testing, Publication, Next iteration for ISIS, TPAC, FORTIS, CHERWELL

3. Give our advice on a sensible managed “run-down” scenario for each SPiDeR device

– Time, SY, equipment for ISIS, TPAC, FORTIS, CHERWELL

4. Summarise ideas to keep R&D and LC development alive without SPiDeR funding

– Other funding options, collaboration, repackaging (LHC, KE)

5. Make a list of current ‘international positions’ which are threatened in detector RD, future LC

– Person, position – one line description

6. Prepare a summary of international efforts on similar detector R&D

– CERN (LePix), FNAL, KEK(SOI), Strassbourg VIPs(2010), http://eil.unipv.it/MaKaC/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=0

7. Make the links between SPiDeR RD and possible future physics experiments explicit

– Projects (e.g. LCVD, LCCAL, super-B, LHC?), Role of SPiDeR devices

8. Make the potential KE growing from SPiDeR RD explicit

– Projects (e.g. LCVD, LCCAL, super-B, LHC?), Role of SPiDeR devices

Jan 13 2010 p 55

Backup: Advisory panel chairs’ letter to Drayson (12/01/10)

….extract– the waste of much of the significant prior investment made by the UK in forefront science;

– the loss of hard-won UK leadership in many significant areas;

– the lack of opportunity for developing future UK strategic opportunities for advancing the scientific frontier, with relevant knowledge exchange impact, on the 10-20 year horizon;

– the extremely negative message to bright young people about the importance the UK places in cutting-edge, fundamental science, and the career opportunities that follow from training in these areas.

Jan 13 2010 p 66

Backup: Le Pix summary (original presentation from W Snoeys attached)

• CERN initiative – with other groups joining IRES, IC, INFN,… )

• MAPs R&D for sLHC and LC applications– Goal is to reduce power and material & achieve radiation tolerance (sounds familiar?)

• Technology– IBM 90nm

– High resistivity epi

– Power <20mW/sq cm; 25nsec time tagging

– Column parallel architecture

Jan 13 2010 p 77

Backup: VIPS 2010 Workshop (Pavia Apr 22-24)

http://eil.unipv.it/MaKaC/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=0

Vertical integration processes and interconnect techniques

Homogeneous CMOS 3D

Heterogeneous 3D ICs

SOI pixel detectors

Monolithic active pixel sensors.

Front-end electronics and signal processing

Pixels for future high luminosity colliders e.g. ILC, the SuperB Factory and the SLHC.

Photon detection and imaging.

Latest experimental results from 3D device characterization

Implications for system integration (cooling, mechanics, etc.)