ILC Detector R&Ds and Design

1. ILC Detector R&Ds and Design Toward detectors and collaborations that realize and maximize the physics output of ILC Hitoshi Yamamoto Tohoku University ICFA seminar, Daegu, Sept. 29, 2005

2. ILC Parameters (http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/icfa/LC_parameters.pdf) • 1st stage • Energy 200→500 GeV • 500 fb-1in first 4 years + 500 fb-1in next 2 years • 2nd stage • Energy upgrade to ~1TeV • 1000 fb-1in 3-4 years • Energy scan + e- polarization • Options • g g, ge-, e-e-, Giga-Z, e+ polarization

3. ILC Physics

4. e.g. Higgs coupling measurements SM Higgs : coupling mass

5. Higgs Couplings : Deviations from SM (By S. Yamashita) SUSY (2 Higgs Doulet Model) Extra dimension (Higgs-radion mixing)

6. ILC Detector Performance Goals (http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~lc/randd.pdf) • Vertexing • ~1/5 rbeampipe,~1/30 pixel size (wrt LHC) • Tracking • ~1/6 material, ~1/10 resolution (wrt LHC) • Jet energy (quark reconstruction) • ~1/2 resolution (wrt LHC)

7. b, c tagging by vertexing • Pixel vertex detector • 4-layer • 0.3 % X0/ layer • rbp = 2 cm • conservative design • 5-layer • 0.1 % X0/ layer • rbp = 1 cm • agressive design • (~goal resolution)

8. e+e- → ZH Recoil mass resolution Only Z→l+l- detected : Higgs decay independent • Good momentum resolution of ~5x10-5 is required (not a luxuary). Not limited by the beam energy spread.

9. Jet(quark) reconstruction (Strong EWSB) • With , Z/Wjj can be reconstructed and separated

10. PFA (Particle Flow Algorithm) • Many other important modes have 4 or more jets : e.g. • Higgs self-coupling : 6 jets • Top Yukawa coupling : 8 jets • WW* branching fraction of Higgs : 4 jets+missing n • How to achieve for jet ? • Basic idea : PFA • Use trackers for charged particles • Use ECAL for photon • The rest is assumed to be neutral hadrons (ECAL+HCAL)

11. Z→qq (by T. Yoshioka) e- e+ Red : pion Yellow : gamma Blue : neutron

12. - Gamma Finding gamma Red : pion Yellow : gamma Blue : neutron

13. - Track Matching Red : pion Yellow : gamma Blue : neutron

14. Remaining hits are assumed to be neutral hadrons. Red : pion Yellow : gamma Blue : neutron

15. PFA : major soruce = confusion • Using typical values • ... and ignoring confusion, • Confusion is dominant even for the goal of • → fine segmentation , large radius : cost!

16. Beampipe radius • Stay-clear for the soft e+e- pair background • R ~ 1/B1/2 • Larger ECAL radius → larger solenoid radius → lower B (cost!) → larger beampipe R → worse vertexing • Where is the optimum? IP

17. Major Detector Concept Studies(the parameters are the current defaults - may change) • SiD (American origin) • Silicon tracker, 5T field • SiW ECAL • 4 ‘coordinators’ (2 Americans, 1 Asian, 1 European) • LDC (European origin) • TPC, 4T field • SiW ECAL (“medium” radius) • 6 ‘contact persons’: (2 Americans, 2 Asians, 2 Europeans) • GLD (Asian origin) • TPC (+Silicon IT), 3T field • W/Scintillator ECAL (“large” radius) • 6 ‘contact persons’: (2 Americans, 2 Asians, 2 Europeans)

18. + vertexing near IP ECAL/HCAL inside coil

19. Detector Concepts • 4th concept proposed at Snowmass 05 • Based on dual-readout compensating cal. • Requests from WWS for new concept (as of 2005,9) • Contact person(s) • Provide representatives for panels (R&D panel, MDI panel, Costing panel) • Produce “detector outline document” by end Feb. 2006

20. WWS (Worldwide Study) • Started in 1998 (Vancouver ICHEP) • 6 committee members from each of 3 regions • 3 co-chairs - now members of GDE • C. Baltay → J. Brau • D. Miller → F. Richard • S. Komamiya → H. Yamamoto • Tasks (in short) • Recognize and coordinate detector concept studies • Register and coordinate detector R&Ds • Interface with GDE • Organize LCWS (1 per year now)

21. Detector Outline Document • Document that precedes CDR • Contents (~100 pages total) • Introduction • Description of the concept • Expected performances for benchmark modes • Subsystem technology selections • Status of on-going studies • List of R&Ds needed • Costing • Conclusion

22. Detector Timeline Accelerator Detector

23. #BDS (beam delivery system) and crossing angles • 20mrad xing simpler and better understood now • Two BDSs →More constraints on linac • One BDS with 10-12mrad xing? • Machine simulation : more background for 2mrad • Detector simulation : more background for 20mrad • Baseline configuration to be determined

24. #IR, #detectors (at ILC startup)? • Roughly in rising/falling order of preference for acc./det. people, (iIR: instrumented IR, nIR: non-instrumented IR) • 2 iIRs/ 2 detectors     • 1 iIR/ 2 detectors (push-pull) + 1 nIR • 1 iIR/ 2 detectors (push-pull) • 1 iIR/ 1 detector (push-pull capability) • 1 iIR/ 1 detector + 1 nIR • 1 iIR/ 1 detector • #det panel of WWS (chair: J. Brau) • Produced a report (http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~lc/wwstudy)

25. WWS Panels parameter done R&D MDI WWS benchmark ~done costing software ........

26. R&D Panel • Charge: • Survey and prioritize R&Ds needed for ILC experiments (NOT individual proposals) • Inputs are from R&D collaborations and concept studies • Register and facilitate regional review processes • Chair:C. Damerell • Outputs: • Web links to R&Ds https://wiki.lepp.cornell.edu/wws/bin/view/Projects/WebHome • Detector R&D report (end 2005)

27. Horizontal and Vertical collaborations It is something like this : (detail may not be accurate)

28. Vertexing • 1 train = ~3000 bunches in 1ms, 5 Hz • Typical pixel size ~ (20mm)2 → occupancy is too high if integrate over 1 train. • No solution to bunch id each hit so far. Then what? • Readout during train ( ~20 times) • Standard pixel size - MAPS, CPCCD, DEPFET, SOI • Readout between train • Standard pixel size ( ~20 time slices stored on-pixel) • Store in CCD - ISIS • Store in capacitors - FAPS • Fine pixel size (~1/20 standard) • No Bunch id - FPCCD • Bunch id - CMOS (double pixel sensor) No demonstrated solution yet. (apology for not covering all...)

29. CPCCD (column-parallel CCD) • RAL • Readout each column separately • 50MHz would readout 5cm 20 times per train • Diffusion : multi hit while shifting → fully depleted CCD? • Prototype sensor (CPC1) tested w/ >25 MHz readout. • Clock drive is challenging. • Readout chip made (CPR1) Operation verified (w/bugs to fix) • New sensor/readout fabricated (CPC2/CPR2) and under tests.

30. MAPS (Monolithic Active Pixel Sensor) Inner layer • IReS,GSI,CEA (+SUCIMA coll.) • Use the epi-layer of commercial processes - small signal (a few 10s e) • 1Mrad g OK (SUCCESOR1) • 1012n/cm2 OK, 1013e/cm2 OK (MIMOSA9) • 3 sensors thinned to 50mm • CP,CDS works(MIMOSA8), but not fast - readout transversely. • Also try FAPS-like scheme (MIMOSA12) 5mm 2mm sensor ADC/clusterng Before&after 1Mrad g ADC count 55Fe

31. Reset transistor Source follower Row select transistor reset gate output gate storage pixel #1 transfer gate storage pixel #20 VDD row select sense node (n+) photogate To column load n+ buried channel (n) p+ well p+ shielding implant reflected charge Charge collection reflected charge High resistivity epitaxial layer (p) ISIS (In-situ Storage Image Sensor) • Small CCD on each pixel (~20 cells) - charge is shifted into it 20 times per train • Immune to EMI • Technology exists as ultra-high-speed camera • Prototype now being made (E2V)

32. FAPS (Flexible Active Pixel Sensor) • Pixels 20x20 mm2 • 10 storage cells per pixel (20 in the real sensor) • First prototypes in 2004 • Source test done

33. FPCCD (KEK) • Fine-pixel CCD • (5mm)2 pixel • Fully-depleted to suppress diffusion • Immune to EMI • CCD is an established technology • Baseline for GLD • Fully-depleted CCD exists (Hamamatsu : astrophys.) • Background hits can be furhter reduced by hit pattern (~1/20) • No known problems now • Want to produce prototype in 2006 (Funding!)

34. CMOS (double pixel sensor) • Yale, Oregon • 2 pixel sensors on top of each other - 5x5mm2 (micro) and 50x50mm2 (macro) • Macro pixel triggers and times (bunch id) hits - up to 4 hits stored on pixel. • Micro pixels store analog signal. • Time and ADC data are read out between trains. • Only micro pixels under hit macro pixels are queried. • Two sensors in one silicon, or bump-bonded. • Conceptual design being worked with Sarnoff. 50mm

35. Trackers • Two main candidates • TPC - central tracker for GLD, LDC • ~200 hits/track s~100mm/hit • Silicon strip - central tracker for SiD • ~5 hits/track with much better s • Also used as • Inner/forward tracker for GLD, LDC • Endcap tracker for GLD • Outer tracker (of TPC) for LDC

36. TPC • Endplate detectors • Wires - conventional • Amplification at wires only • Signal is induced on pads - slow collection • Strong frame needed - endplate material • Wires can break • MPGD (Multi-pixel Gas Detector) -R&D items • Amplification where drift electrons hit (w/i ~100mm) • Directly detect amplified electrons on pads - fast • Ion feeback suppressed • GEM (Gas Electron Multiplier) • 2-3 stages possible - discharge-safer(?) • MicroMEGAS (Micro Mesh Gas detector) • 1 stage only - simpler

37. S1 s S2 MicroMEGAS • Micromesh with pitch~50mm • Pillar height ~ 50-100mm • Amplification between mesh and pads/strips • Most ions return to mesh. ~50mm

38. S1 s S2 MicroMEGAS • Micromesh with pitch~50mm • Pillar height ~ 50-100mm • Amplification between mesh and pads/strips • Most ions return to mesh. ~50mm

39. GEM p~140mm • Two copper foils on both sides of kapton layer of ~50mm thick • Amplification at the holes • Gain~104 for 500V • Can be used multi-staged • Natural broadening can help center-of-gravity technique. p~60mm

40. ILC TPC R&D groups ~70 active people worldwide Kerlsruhe Berkeley Novosibirsk Carleton Cornell ..... Interconnected DESY Aachen Victoria KEK MPI Sacley-Orsay

41. TPC R&D results GEM vs wire • Now 3 years of MPGD experience gathered. MPGDs compared with wire • Gas properties rather well understood (dirft velocity, diffusion effect ~ MC) • Diffusion-limited resolution seems feasible • Resistive foil charge-spreading demonstrated • CMOS RO chip demonstrated • Design work starting for the Large Prototype (funded by EUDET) Charge spreading by resistive foil

42. Silicon Tracker R&Ds • DSSD in-house fabrication in Korea • Characterized. S/N = 25 • Radiation test in progress • Hybrid is produced • Long-ladder R&D (SantaCruz) • Readout chip LSTFE for long and spaced bunch train. Being tested. • Backend architecture defined • Long ladders being assembled • SILC collaboration • 10-60cm strip length • S/N = 20-30 for 28cm (Sr90), OK • New front end chip being tested ~OK. Next : power cycling • Ladder assembly prototype soon

43. Critical part of PFA ‘Realistic’ PFA Full shower simulation Clustering Photon finding Track matching Achieved ~40%/E1/2 for the 3 concepts Starting to be useful for detector optimization Analog vs digital HCAL readout Segmentation However, not quite mature yet to be conclusive Large international collaboration : CALICE Calorimeters Jet energy resolution at Z→qq

44. ECAL • Silicon/W • High granularity (~1cm2 or less) and stable gain. • Cost : $2-3/cm2 for Si. How far can it go down? SLAC/Oregon/UCDavis/BNL silicon wafer (4x4mm2) CALICE prototype (1cm2 cell) beam test

45. ECAL • Scintillator/W • Cheaper and larger granurarity (3x3 - 5x5cm2) • Scintillator strips may be cost-effective way for granurarity (1cm x Ycm) • Read out by fibre + PMT or SiPM/MPC Colorado : staggered cells (5x5cm2) Japan/Korea/Russia

46. SiPM (invented in Russia) • ~100 cells in 1mm2 • Limited Geiger mode • High B field (5T) OK • Gain ~ 106 ; no preamp • Fast s(1g) ~ 50ps • Quite cheap • Noisy? • Temperature dependence • Steep bias valtage dependence HAMAMATSU MPC (Multipixel Photon Counter) Sees ~60 pe’s at room temp.

47. 0.5 cm active 2 cm steel HCAL • Analog : Scintillator (CALICE) • Modest granurarity (3x3cm2 up) • SiPM readout • MINICAL prototype tested with 100 SiPM - Same resolution as PMT

48. HCAL • Digital (CALICE) • Fine granurarity (~1x1cm2) • 1 bit readout • GEM and RPC w/ pad readout Common readout electronics • Understood well - ready for 1m3 prototype Signal Pad Mylar sheet 1.1mm Glass sheet 1.2mm gas gap GND 1.1mm Glass sheet -HV Mylar sheet Aluminum foil RPC GEM

49. Calorimeter R&Ds • Si-Scintillator hybrid for ECAL • Cost-performance optimization • Crystal for ECAL • Focus on energy resolution • DREAM • Dual readout of dE/dx (scintillator) and Cerenkov (quartz fibre) • Ideal compensation to obtain very good hadron energy resolution • Basis for the 4-th concept • Challenge : ILC implementation

50. Other subsystems Just as importnat as what has been shown • Muon system is probably easy in concept but difficult in practice (large system - support, etc.) • 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. • With the long train, DAQ is not a trivial problem • Beam instumentations such as pair background detector play important roles in machine operation/tuning