Super BABAR Plans & Status David B. MacFarlane UC San Diego & SLAC 2 nd Super B Workshop in Hawaii...

Super BABAR Plans & Status

David B. MacFarlaneUC San Diego & SLAC

2nd Super B Workshop in HawaiiApril 20, 2005

April 20, 2005 Super BABAR Status & Plans 2

Latest News from PEP-II & BABAR

First collisions in PEP-II early morning April 15 Began routine data collection with BABAR late

Monday nighto PEP-II delivered up to 4.8x1033 on Monday night; improving

rapidlyo LER and HER trickle injection operationalo Very fast start once collisions achieved; much faster than

previous Run 4 startup

BABAR & PEP-II are very pleased & excited to be back in the gameo Installed upgrades to PEP-II should allow at least 1.3x1034 o Upcoming run will extend through to July 31, 2006, with only

one month interruption in October for PPS certification


Outline

Summary of PEP-II/BABAR study of scenarios for Super B Factoryo Try to give you a sense of the thinking behind our push to

very high luminosity

Developments at DOE and SLAC concerning future of PEP-II and Super PEP-II/BABAR opportunityo Substantial change in outlook at SLAC & a potential

opportunity to look at a collaborative effort on a Super B Factory


BABAR Roadmap Study: Jan – July 04 Defining physics case for Super B Factory

o Primarily New Physics sensitivity in CP violation & rare decays

o Capability for precision SM measurements as benchmark for New Physics

Requirements of viable project planso Factor in duration of approval and funding processo Collider options and upgrade capabilitieso Detector capabilities & requirements in light of machine

parameters & projected backgroundso Integrated scenarios for collider and detector construction,

with implications for time to first data & competitiveness Projections of physics reach in light of

competition & other opportunitieso Projections of samples & sensitivities; analysis of physics

reach


Physics Case for Super B Factory

Lots of work done, but everyone not convinced yeto Super B is not yet part of the US long-range planning for HEP

• National Academy study could change thiso Will compete with other physics opportunities in 2010-2015

• Most notably large-scale neutrino physics Case rests primarily on ability to explore flavor

physics couplings of New Physicso Complementary to hadron b experiments; perhaps natural

successoro Perhaps our data is already hinting at New Physics, which will

motivate further precision studies of flavor physics; perhaps LHC will see direct evidence for New Physics

• Physics case may very well strengthen with time Luminosity goals & physics timeliness a major

factor as well


Constructing a Viable Plan

What is the timeline for approval process? What are the machine upgrade options?

o Components development and replacements requiredo Flexibility for further luminosity improvemento Timelines for construction and commissioning

What are the detector system requirements and options?o Limits of existing detector technologies due to backgroundso Modifications to existing technologies or possible alternatives

• Impact on physics performanceo Requirements for fundamental detector R&D

• Uncertainties can impact approval process

Fit together elements into a coherent set of options


Parameters for High-Luminosity B Factory

Luminosity (x1034)

0.9 2.4 15 25 70 Units

e+ 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.5 8.0 GeV

e- 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.0 3.5 GeV

I+ 2.45 4.5 8.7 11.0 6.8 A

I- 1.55 2.2 3.0 4.8 15.5 A

(y*) 11 8 3.6 3.0 1.5 mm

(x*) 30 30 30 25 15 cm

Bunch length 10 7.5 4 3.4 1.7 mm

# bunches 1588 1700 1700 3450 6900

Crossing angle 0 0 0 11 15 mrad

Tune shifts (x/y)

4.5/7 8/8 11/11 11/11 11/11 x100

rf frequency 476 476 476 476 952 MHz

Site power 40 40 75 85 100 MWJ.Seeman Jul 04 Jul 07 LERvacuum

+IR +HER vacuum, 952MHz rf


PEP-II upgrades schemes

Luminosity (x 1035)

1.5 2.5 7 57

RF frequency (MHz)

476 476 952 476952

Site power (MW)

75 85 100 70100

Crossing angle

No Yes Yes Yes

Crab cavities

No Yes Yes Yes

Replace LER Yes Yes Yes Yes

Replace HER No No Yes Yes

Upgradeable NoYes

(to 952MHz)Yes YesDetector requirements depend on projecting

backgrounds for luminosities that are >20 times larger than at present

Recommended

I II III IV


Input from Detector Systems

1. Extrapolation of backgrounds with and without luminosity component; spatial and/or angular distributions if significant;

2. Performance degradation with occupancy and projected limits; likewise radiation damage and projected limits;

3. Any modest upgrades that will increase performance range or radiation tolerance;

4. Speculation about options for 5-10x1035 machines.

What are limits of current technologies?

Long extrapolation from current background studies, which include significant luminosity-

dependent component at PEP-II


32.5

2 1.51

0.5

LER Radiative Bhabhas

-7.5 -5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5

0

10

20

30

-10

-20

-30

m

cm

M. SullivanFeb. 8, 2004API88k3_R5_RADBHA_TOT_7_5M

3.1 G

eV

3.1 G

eV

9 GeV

9 GeV

Luminosity Dependent Backgrounds

M.Sullivan

Luminosity term

depends on IR design


SVT Backgrounds: Bottom module

SVT Occupancy (Bottom)

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

8 200 700 1000Luminosity (10E33)

Oc

cu

pa

nc

y (

%)

100%

50%

20%

10%

0%

Lumi term

DANGER with 4x granularity increase

B.Petersen, F.FortiAssumes striplets increase granularity 4-fold


Monolithic Active Pixels Option for very high luminosity is MAPS =

Monolithic Active Pixels = sensor and electronics on the same substrate.o R&D on MAPS started in several places, including Pisa

Possible approaches:o Integrate electronics on the high resistivity substrate

usually employed for sensors: 4 times thinner total material

• Active components are not of the best quality• The fabrication process is highly non-standard with

large feature size (>1-2mm)o Use the low resistivity substrate of standard CMOS process

as sensor• Can use standard sub-micron process with state-of-the-

art electronicsFar from a proven technology: fundamental R&D required


DCH Occupancy Based on 2004 Studies

Based on 2004 Fits

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

7 33 200 700 1000

Lumi

HER

LER

Based on 2004 Fits

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

7 33 200 700 1000

20% Lumi

HER

LER

N_LER [%]

N_HER [%]

N_BEAM [%]

N_LUMI [%]

20% L [%]

N_DCH [%]

N_DCH [%] 20%L

0.7 1 6 7 3 1 10 73.3 2 9 11 15 3 26 1420 1 5 6 23 5 28 1070 2 7 8 79 16 87 24

100 2 10 12 90 18 102 30

4 x cells 4 x cells

M.Cristinziani

100% Lumi term

20% Lumi term


Options for Beyond 2x1035

Basic configuration iso Leave SVT geometry unchanged; replace DCH with 4-layer

silicon tracker with lampshade modules. Remove support tube

o Radii of barrel part of SVT modules: 3.3, 4.0, 5.9, 12.2, 14.0 cm

o Radii of barrel part of CST modules: 25,35,45,60 cm

Current detector

60 cm

All silicon tracker

F.Forti


Momentum Resolution

Central Silicon Tracker Performance

0.001

0.01

0.1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Ptot(GeV)

Sig

mak

(Gev

-1)

CST-100.300

CST050-nosupp

CST100-nosupp

CST100

CST200

CST300

CST300-small

S-DCH Present detecto

r

Future?

F.Forti


EMC Background Projections

Integrated Luminosity

(2008) 1 ab-1

(2x1035) 10 ab-1

(1036) 100 ab-1

BackwardBarrel

0.88 0.78 X

ForwardBarrel

0.82 0.61 X

Endcap Small rings

0.82 0.69 X

Endcap Large rings

0.71 0.53 X

Degradation of light output with luminosity

Is this a functional

EMC?

Radiation Damage Projections

2x10

35

7x10

35

10

36

Versus ~8 physics clusters

Occupancy Projections

EMC lifetime limit: about 20 ab-1


Radiation-Hard Calorimeter Options

Lutetium (+Yttrium) OxyOrthosilicate [LSO or LYSO]o Fast light output in 40ns; solves occupancy problem.o Smaller radiation length 1.15cm (CsI 1.86cm) and Moliere

radius 2.3 cm (CsI 3.8cm)o Believed to be radiation hard to 100MRad!o Currently cost is ~$40/cc; pushes radius towards 700mm

Liquid Xenono Fast light output again, within ~20ns. o Radiation length is 2.9cm: need all of radial space

between 700 and 1350mm for cryostat, liquid Xenon and readout.

o Moliere radius 5.7cm: long. sampling to separate overlaps. o Cost of Liquid Xenon is $2.5/ccBoth Rad Hard crystal and Liquid Xenon options require EMC inner radius reduction to about 70cm: need to replace DRC

bars as well


Summary of Upgrade Options

LER replacement

1.5 2.5 5.0 7.0 x 1035

+ HER replacement

+ 952 MHz rf

SVT striplets

Thin pixels

CsI EMC

Rad Hard EMC+DRC bars

DRC SOB replacement

Wire chamber

Silicon outer tracker

[No x 2 for crabbing]


Scenario 1: Detector Upgrades

Replace inner layers of present SVT with radiation hard upgrade

Replace DCH with small-cell version and faster gas

Replace DRC SOB Replace forward EMC Replace IFR forward endcap


Scenario I

LER replacement

1.5 x 1035

SVT striplets

Wire chamber

CsI EMC

DRC SOB replacement




Replace inner layers of present SVT with radiation hard upgradeo Not much headroom with conventional strips

Replace DCH with small-cell version and faster gaso Drift chamber may not work at this luminosity and has no

headroomo More likely we would have to go to an all silicon tracker

Replace DRC SOB Replace forward EMC

o Barrel EMC has limited lifetime of a few years

Replace IFR forward endcap


Scenario 2: Unlikely Solution

LER replacement

SVT striplets

Wire chamber

CsI EMC

DRC SOB replacement

2.5 x 1035[No x 2 for crabbing]


Scenario 2: More Viable Solution

LER replacement

2.5 x 1035

SVT striplets


Rad Hard EMC

DRC replacement




Replace inner layers of present SVT with thin pixels

Replace DCH with all silicon tracker Replace DRC SOB and bar boxes due to

smaller radius for EMCo Not at all clear that DRC will work at these luminosities

Replace EMC with either radiation hard crystals or liquid xenon

Replace IFR forward endcapFundamental R&D for thin pixels drives approval schedule and overall timeline

Impossible to predict timeline for successful development


Scenario 3

LER replacement

7.0 x 1035

+ HER replacement

+ 952 MHz rf

Thin pixels


Rad Hard EMC

DRC replacement




Replace inner layers of present SVT with segmented stripso Should be viable to about 5 x 1035

o Develop thin pixels and replace inner SVT at an appropriate time to go higher in luminosity

Replace DCH with all silicon tracker Replace DRC SOB and bar boxes due to

smaller radius for EMCo Not at all clear that DRC will work at these luminosities

Replace EMC with either radiation hard crystals or liquid xenon

Replace IFR forward endcap


Upgrade Plan: Initial 5x1035

ProjectLER replacement

5.0 7.0 x 1035

+ HER replacement

SVT striplets

+ 952 MHz rf


Rad Hard EMC

DRC replacement

2.5

Performance limit



Upgrade Plan: Ultimate Reach

LER replacement

5.0 7.0 x 1035

+ HER replacement

SVT striplets

+ 952 MHz rf

Thin pixels


Rad Hard EMC

DRC replacement

2.5[No x 2 for crabbing]


Important Factors in Upgrade Direction Project is “tunable”

o Can react to physics developmentso Can react to changing geopolitical situation

• Size of interested community, depth of financial support• Will emerge from BABAR and Belle, but could be attractive

to wider community in context of other opportunitieso As we learn more about machine and detector requirements

and design, can fine tune goals and plans within this framework

Project has headroomo Major upgrades to detector and machine, but none contingent

upon completing fundamental R&Do Headroom for detector up to 5 x 1035; with thin pixels beyondo Headroom for machine up to 8.5 x 1035; requires additional rf,

which can be staged into machine over time


Possible Timeline for Super B Program

LOI

Construction of upgrades to L = 5-7x1035

-1~10 ab / yrLdt

Super-B Program

CDR Installation

R&D, Design, Proposals and

Approvals

P5

Construction

2001 2003 2010200820062005

Planned PEP-II Program

-1140 f bLdt -1500 f bLdt -1~1 2 abLdt

(June 30, 2003) (End 2006) (PEP-II ultimate)

Commission

2012

Super B Operation

2011


0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20Ja

n-03

Jan-

04

Jan-

05

Jan-

06

Jan-

07

Jan-

08

Jan-

09

Jan-

10

Jan-

11

Jan-

12

Jan-

13

Jan-

14

Jan-

15

Jan-

16

Err

or

on

sin

e am

pli

tud

eProjections for Super B Factory

f0KS

KS0

KS

’KS

KKKS

K*

5 discovery region if non-SM physics is effect of 0.15

Super B Factory 5-7x1035 cm-2s-1

Projections are statistical errors only; but systematic errors at few percent

level

Luminosity expectation

s:

20122004

( ) 0.15S

Scale chang

e!


0.00E+00

1.00E+03

2.00E+03

3.00E+03

4.00E+03

5.00E+03

6.00E+03

7.00E+03

8.00E+03

9.00E+03

1.00E+04

Jan-

03

Jul-0

3

Jan-

04

Jul-0

4

Jan-

05

Jul-0

5

Jan-

06

Jul-0

6

Jan-

07

Jul-0

7

Jan-

08

Jul-0

8

Jan-

09

Jul-0

9

Jan-

10

Jul-1

0

Jan-

11

Jul-1

1

Jan-

12

Jul-1

2

Jan-

13

Jul-1

3

Jan-

14

Jul-1

4

Jan-

15

Jul-1

5

Jan-

16

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.18

0.19

0.20

Comparisons: Projections for +-

(S) Lint

Eff

ecti

ve n

um

ber

of

tag

ged

even

ts

Err

or

on

sin

e a

mp

litu

de

SuperBLHCbBTEV

PEP-II, KEKB Super B-Factory 10/2011


0.00E+00

5.00E+02

1.00E+03

1.50E+03

2.00E+03

2.50E+03

3.00E+03

3.50E+03

Jan-

03

Jul-0

3

Jan-

04

Jul-0

4

Jan-

05

Jul-0

5

Jan-

06

Jul-0

6

Jan-

07

Jul-0

7

Jan-

08

Jul-0

8

Jan-

09

Jul-0

9

Jan-

10

Jul-1

0

Jan-

11

Jul-1

1

Jan-

12

Jul-1

2

Jan-

13

Jul-1

3

Jan-

14

Jul-1

4

Jan-

15

Jul-1

5

Jan-

16

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Projections for 2-Body Isospin Analysis

() Lint

Eff

ecti

ve n

um

ber

of

tag

ged

even

ts

Err

or

on

delt

a [

deg

rees]

SuperB

[Estimate: Summary of a range of errors depending on BFs,

asymmetries]


0.00E+00

1.00E+03

2.00E+03

3.00E+03

4.00E+03

5.00E+03

6.00E+03

7.00E+03

8.00E+03

9.00E+03

1.00E+04

Jan-

03

Jul-0

3

Jan-

04

Jul-0

4

Jan-

05

Jul-0

5

Jan-

06

Jul-0

6

Jan-

07

Jul-0

7

Jan-

08

Jul-0

8

Jan-

09

Jul-0

9

Jan-

10

Jul-1

0

Jan-

11

Jul-1

1

Jan-

12

Jul-1

2

Jan-

13

Jul-1

3

Jan-

14

Jul-1

4

Jan-

15

Jul-1

5

Jan-

16

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.18

0.19

0.20

Projections for K*Eff

ecti

ve n

um

ber

of

tag

ged

even

ts

Err

or

on

sin

e a

mp

litu

de

PEP-II, KEKB Super B-Factory 10/2011

SuperB


Developments at DOE Budgetary backdrop in US

o US domestic discretionary budget is under enormous pressure for the next few years at least: 5-year projections are for 3.7% decrease through to FY2010 in then year dollars

Priorities for US programo Highest priorities at present are full exploitation of Tevatron,

PEP-II, and LHC preparationso Intention is to make room for a new suite of mid-scale

experiments to be launched in 2007-2010 time frame, following ramp-down of PEP-II (2008) and Tevatron operations (2009)

• Focus is on accelerator and non-accelerator based neutrino, dark matter, & dark energy experiments

• Coherent plan for Fermilab as the national HEP laboratoryo ILC is the long-term highest priority for future major facility,

with US site the intended goal assuming international support


Institutional Future of SLAC

Shift in institutional funding & focus 2006-2009o Major new $380M light source “LCLS” under construction

2005-2008: x-ray laser based on downstream 1/3rd of Linac• Additional beam lines later & use of full Linac (Stage 2)

o SLAC will become dual purpose laboratory• Roughly 2/3rd light science funded by DOE/Basic Energy

Sciences (BES), including entire Linac operation• Roughly 1/3rd HEP & particle-astrophysics funded by

DOE/HEP Consequences for future of PEP-II program

o FY2006 budget request by DOE foresees PEP-II operation only through to end of FY2008

o When PEP-II shuts down, there will be no longer be any machine operating for HEP on the SLAC site

• Major New Physics discovery might change this end date


SLAC Planning for HEP

Plan presented by Jonathan to National Academy Long-Range Planning Committee in Januaryo Long-term priority is to play a leading role in the ILC,

independent of site• Follows guidance from SLAC scenarios studies• Follows strengths & technical expertise of lab• Follows SLAC’s long-term history of leading the push for

linear colliders, as well as priorities of the field and DOEo Full exploitation of the PEP-II B Factory program, including

physics output, through next decadeo Pursuit of an exciting & growing suite of possible astro-

particle physics experimentso Fill in behind the ILC long-term goal with a yet-to-be-

determined new accelerator-based project after PEP-II


Consequences for Super B Factories Super PEP-II is not presently part of SLAC’s

long-range plano Does not fit with commitments to ILC & LCLS, or priorities

from DOE in tight budget situationo Could change depending on success of turning ILC into an

approved international project

Members of PEP-II & BABAR communities are starting to discuss future optionso Super KEKB is a possibility for a core part of PEP-II/BABAR,

depending on the strength of the physics case & competitiveness with other physics opportunities

o New participants could lead to expansion of scope for the Super B project and/or a more aggressive timescale


Conclusion

Ideas for Super PEP-II/BABAR do not fit in SLAC plans at presento Reflects changes underway to SLAC’s scientific mission,

which is broadening in a big way into light science Core parts of PEP-II/BABAR are looking at

future options outside SLACo Early in a process of examining international accelerator-

based physics opportunities in the next decade, including Super KEKB

o Concerned about competitiveness & scope of Super KEKB; impact of planned peak & integrated luminosity goals on ability to convince international audience of the importance & viability of the project

o See this meeting potentially as part of a process of re-examining scope, assuming we factor in the possibility for additional US and/or European contributions to the project

Super BABAR Plans & Status David B. MacFarlane UC San Diego & SLAC 2 nd Super B Workshop in Hawaii...

Documents

Transcript of Super BABAR Plans & Status David B. MacFarlane UC San Diego & SLAC 2 nd Super B Workshop in Hawaii...