ILC - HEPHY

Projektgruppe für ein Experiment am 

International Linear Collider (ILC) 

(Statusbericht, November 2007) 

Outline: 

• Organisatorisches zur ILC-Projektgruppe 

• Neues von ILC und den Detektor-Konzepten 

• Experimentelle Wiener Beiträge: 

– Vertex Reconstruction (RAVE/VERTIGO) 

– Detector Optimization Tool (LiC Toy) 

– Detektor R&D: Mitarbeit am SiLC-Projekt =⇒ siehe separaten Bericht von Th. Bergauer 

Winfried Mitaroff HEPHY Projektbericht, 19. November 2007

Reminiszenzen & Personalstand 

Der Gründungsauftrag: 

• Koordinierung und Vorantreiben der experimentellen Aktivitäten (Hard- und Software) mit dem Ziel 

der Beteiligung an einem Experiment am ILC; 

• Gründung der Projektgruppe auf der Vorstandsitzung am 29. November 2005, Beginn mit Jänner 2006; schon 

vorher experimentelle und organisatorische Aktivitäten: 

– RAVE/VERTIGO (erstmals präsentiert am 1 st ECFA Workshop ..., November 2003 in Montpellier), 

– SiLC R&D-Projekt (erste Kontakte mit Aurore Savoy-Navarro am LCWS, April 2004 in Paris), 

– Ausrichtung des 3 rd ECFA Workshop on Physics & Detectors for ILC, 14–17/18. Nov. 2005 in Wien; 

• Die Arbeit erfolgt in enger Zusammenarbeit mit den Fachbereichen ASE und HLD, später auch EL-II. 

Wiener Mitarbeiter 2007: 

• W. Mitaroff (Projektleiter) und M. Regler (WV-Drittel), 

• Th. Bergauer und M. Krammer (Fachbereich HLD), 

• R. Frühwirth und W. Waltenberger (Fachbereich ASE); 

• Studenten mit ggf. DV bzw. äquivalentem WV: 

– M. Valentan (bis Feb) und R. Höfler (Feb–Aug), 

– H.V. Riedel (Jan–Jul) und B. Pflugfelder (Apr–Aug); 

• Diplomanden & Dissertanten (ab Herbst 2007): 

– M. Valentan (ab Aug) und F. Moser (ab Okt): Diplomanden in ASE, 

– Th. Bergauer und St. Hänsel: Dissertanten im Fachbereich HLD. 


Internationale Wahrnehmung 

“Horizontale” R&D-Projekte: 

• Beteiligung an der europäischen “ECFA Study on Physics and Detectors for ILC”: 

– “Software Simulation, Reconstruction &Tools WG”: 

Vertex Reconstruction Toolkit (RAVE), Standalone Framework (VERTIGO), 

– “Software”, “Tracking”, “SiLC” gruppenübergreifend: 

Detector Optimization Tool (LiC Toy), Simulationsstudien zu diversen Setups; 

• Beteiligung an der “Worldwide Study (WWS) on Physics and Detectors for ILC”: 

– “SiLC R&D-Projekt” – Federführung LPNHE Paris: 

Entwicklung von Sensoren und Teststrukturen für Si-Tracker, Beteiligung an Teststrahl-Datennahmen von 

TPC & Si-Envelope bei DESY und CERN; 

• Assoziiert zum “EUDET SiTra”-Projekt im Rahmen des EU-FP6 (seit 2007). 

“Vertikale” Detektorkonzepte: 

• Interesse an 2 weltweiten Detektor-Konzeptstudien: 

– “Large Detector Concept” (LDC) – hervorgegangen aus Tesla (DESY), 

– “Silicon Detector” (SiD) – hervorgegangen aus LCD (Nordamerika); 

• Beteiligung an einer Proto-Kollaboration (ab 2007): 

– “International Large Detector” (ILD) 1 – Verschmelzung von LDC und GLD (Japan): 

Mitarbeit an der Erstellung des “Letter of Intent” (LoI), fällig 1. Okt. 2008. 

1 mein Namensfavorit wäre “Terascale Physics Detector” (TeD) gewesen ! 


Internationale Wahrnehmung 

Mitgezeichnete Dokumente: 

• Detector Outline Documents (DODs) für die Konzepte 

– LDC (Juli 2006): Th. Bergauer, W. Mitaroff, M. Regler, W. Waltenberger, 

– SiD (Mai 2006): W. Mitaroff ; 

• Proposal to the Detector R&D Review Panel on “Tracking” (Jan 2007): 

– The SiLC Collaboration: Th. Bergauer, W. Mitaroff, 2 M. Regler, M. Valentan; 

• Joint GDE & WWS ILC Reference Design Report (RDR) (August 2007): 

– Part 2 “Physics at the ILC”: H. Eberl, W. Majerotto, K. Kovarik (nach Redaktionsschluß), 

– Part 4 “Detectors”: Th. Bergauer, M. Krammer, W. Mitaroff, M. Regler, W. Waltenberger. 

Publikationen 2007: 

• Proc. 11 th Vienna Conference on Instrumentation (VCI), 19–24 Feb. 2007 in Wien: 

– LiC Toy, RAVE/VERTIGO; 

• Proc. Int. Linear Collider Workshop (LCWS), 30 Mai - 3 Juni 2007 in Hamburg: 

– LiC Toy (resolution study), RAVE (b tagging); 

• Proc. Int. Conf. on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP), 2–7 Sept. 2007 in Victoria (BC): 

– LiC Toy, RAVE/VERTIGO, Data Harvester. 

Preprints: http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/p3w/ilc/reports/ 

2 Editor von Chapter III-1-2 “Macroscopic FAST and FULL detector simulations”. 


Neues von ILC und den Detektoren 

GDE & WWS “Reference Design Report” (RDR): 

Endversion herausgegeben im August 2007. Inkludiert nunmehr auch den “Detector Conceptual Report” (DCR) für 

Physik & Detektoren. Besteht aus 4 Teilen und einem Begleitdokument: 

• Part 1: Executive Summary (Editors J. Brau, Y. Okada, N. Walker), 

• Part 2: Physics at the ILC 

(Editors A. Djouadi, J. Lykken, K. Mönig, Y. Okada, M. Oreglia, S. Yamashita), 

• Part 3: Accelerator (Editors N. Phinney, N. Toge, N. Walker), 

• Part 4: Detectors (Editors T. Behnke, Ch. Damerell, J. Jaros, A. Miyamoto), 

• Companion document: The ILC – Gateway to the Quantum Universe 

http://www.linearcollider.org/gateway/ 

WWS “ILC Detector R&D Review Panel”: 

Chairman Ch. Damerell. Reviews: Tracking (Feb. 07 – massive Beteiligung von SiLC), Calorimetry (Juni 07), 

Vertexing (Okt. 07), Particle ID, Muons, Solenoids, Beamdiagnostik, DAQ (März 08). 

Nächste große Meilensteine: 

• Aufruf zu Letters of Intent (LoI) für die Experimente: Einreichfrist 1. Oktober 2008; 

• Engineering Design Reports (EDR): geplant 2010 für 

– den Beschleuniger (Grundlage für die Errichtungsentscheidung), 

– die Detektoren der beiden ausgewählten Experimente. 


Neues von ILC und den Detektoren 

Wichtige Gremien und Personen: 

• “ILC Steering Committee” (ILCSC): 

Untersteht ICFA. Neuer Chairman ist Enzo Iarocci (folgt auf Shin-ichi Kurokawa). 

• “Research Director” (RD): 

Bestellt vom ILCSC wurde Sakue Yamada. Koordinierungsaufgaben für Physik & Detektoren (Position 

vergleichbar mit der des GDE-Direktors Barry Barish). 

• “ILC Detector Advisory Group” (IDAG): 

Eingesetzt vom ILCSC, Nominierungen durch den RD und WWS Co-chairs, Konstituierung Anfang 2008. 

Aufgabe: Auswahl der 2 zu realisierenden Experimente. 

Die ILD “Proto-Kollaboration” 

• “Joint Steering Board” (JSB): 

Ties Behnke, Henri Videau; Yasuhiro Sugimoto, Hitoshi Yamamoto; Dean Karlen, Graham Wilson; 

• Working Groups: derzeit für die Bereiche 

– Optimimization (Mark Thomson, Tamaki Yoshioka), 

– MDI & Integration (Karsten Büsser, Toshiaki Tauchi); 

Workshops in näherer Zukunft: 

• 6 th SiLC R&D Collaboration Meeting: Torino, 17–19. Dez. 2007; 

• Konstituierendes ILD-Meeting: Berlin-Zeuthen, 14–16. Jan. 2008; 

• ACFA Physics & Detectors Workshop: Sendai (JP), 3–6. März 2008; 

• 5 th ECFA Physics & Detectors Workshop: Warschau, Juni 2008; 

• Int. LCWS Conference: Nordamerika, Nov. 2008. 


“Global Design Effort” (GDE) Schedule 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Global Design Effort 

Project 

Baseline configuration 

Reference Design 

LHC 

Physics 

Engineering Design 

ILC R&D Program 

Expression of Interest to Host 

International Mgmt 


Reference Design Report (RDR) part 3 

– 11km SC linacs operating at 31.5 MV/m for 500 GeV 

– Centralized injector 

• Circular damping rings for electrons and positrons 

• Undulator-based positron source 

– Single IR with 14 mrad crossing angle 

– Dual tunnel configuration for safety and availability 

22-Oct-07 

ALCPG07/GDE Fermilab 

Global Design Effort 5 


Fermilab “pre-construction plan” 

Central Area fits inside the Fermilab boundary 

~ Boundary 

of Fermilab 

~ 5.5 km Site Characterization 

~ 5.5 km 

of the Central Area can 

be done 


Reference Design Report (RDR) part 3 

Max. Center-of-mass energy 500 GeV 

Peak Luminosity ~2x10 34 1/cm 2 s 

Beam Current 9.0 mA 

Repetition rate 5 Hz 

Average accelerating gradient 31.5 MV/m 

Beam pulse length 0.95 ms 

Total Site Length 31 km 

• E cm adjustable from 200 – 500 GeV 

• Luminosity Ldt = 500 fb 

-1 in 4 years 

• Ability to scan between 200 and 500 GeV 

• Energy stability and precision below 0.1% 

• Electron polarization of at least 80% 

Total AC Power Consumption ~230 MW 

22-Oct-07 Global Design Effort 6 

Kritikpunkte: 

• The machine must be upgradeable to 1 TeV 

22-Oct-07 Global Design Effort 4 

• Die Maximalenergie von 1 TeV steht nunmehr wieder auf Barry Barish’s Slides (siehe oben), aber weiterhin nur 

als “Upgrade-Option”. 

• Beschränkung auf nur eine Interaction Region mit Detektor “push-pull” bringt < 5% Ersparnis, hat aber massive 

negative Konsequenzen für die Experimente . . . 

• . . . insbesondere, wenn man sich den “Luxus” zweier Tunnelröhren leistet; 

• Befürchtung, mit “Salamitaktik” auf nur einen Detektor hinzusteuern ? 

• Statements von Raymond Orbach (Unterstaatssekretär im US-DoE) haben Pläne für “intermediate projects” 

ausgelöst, z.B. “Project X” (ein supraleitender p Linearbeschleuniger) bei Fermilab. 

Weitere Informationen: http://www.linearcollider.org/ 


The main linac’s SC cavities 

Producing Cavities 

Cavity Shape 

TESLA cryomodule 

4 th generation 

prototype ILC 

cryomodule 

Obtaining Gradient 

single cells 


How costs scale with the gradient 

• Balance between cost 

per unit length of linac, 

the available technology, 

and the cryogenic costs 

• Optimum is fairly flat 

and depends on details 

of technology 

• Current cavities have 

optimum around 25 MV/m 

Relative Linac Costs 

(from USTOS estimate) 

Gradient MV/m 

initial 

Cavity 

type 

TESLA 

Qualified 

gradient 

MV/m 

Operational 

gradient 

MV/m 

Length 

Km 

Energy 

GeV 

35 31.5 10.6 250 

upgrade LL 40 36.0 +9.3 500 


First cost estimate of accelerator 

The reference design was “frozen” 

as of 1-Dec-06 for the purpose of 

producing the RDR, including costs. 

It is important to recognize this is a 

snapshot and the design will 

continue to evolve, due to results of 

the R&D, accelerator studies and 

value engineering 

The value costs have already been 

reviewed extensively 

• 3 day “internal review” in Dec 

• ILCSC MAC review in Jan 

•International cost review in Spring 

Value = 6.62 62 B ILC Units 

Summary 

RDR “Value” Costs 

Total Value Cost (FY07) 

4.80 B ILC Units Shared 

+ 

1.82 B Units Site Specific 

+ 

14.1 K person-years 

(“explicit” labor = 24.0 M person-hrs 

@ 1,700 hrs/yr) 

1 ILC Unit = $ 1 (2007) 

Erste Kostenabschätzung: 6.62 G°plus 14.1 k Personenjahre (1.4 G°) = ca. 8 G°=ca. 6.5 Gû. 


First cost estimate: details 

4,500 

4,000 

3,500 

Main 

Cost 

Driver 

s 

Units - Millions 

ILC 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

Conventional Facilities 

Components 

1,000 

500 

0 

Main Linac Damping Rings RTML Positron Source BDS Common Exp Hall Electron Source 

% of Total Value per Year 

We are not usin inte rated cost/schedule 


ILC optimistic time schedule (Feb 2007) 

TENTATIVE OVERALL TIME SCHEDULE 

RDR/Reviews 

Bid to Host Specs 

Preparation of Bids to Host 

Site Selection Process 

Site Independent Eng. Studies 

(All CFS) 

EDR (All CFS) 

Selection of Main Consultants 

Site Investigations 

Call for Tender Preparation 

(CE Works + early Services) 

Call for Tender Procedure 


Contract(s) Placing 


Administrative Procedures 

+ Site Preparation Utilities 

CE + other CFS Works 

Machine Supply, Install, Assembly 

2007 

T 0 = 2012 

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 

2018 

Commissioning 

7-Feb-07 

R&D GDE/ACFA Closing 

Beijing 

Global Design Effort 14 


Vergleich des Untergrunds LHC – ILC 

ILC Environmental Challenges 

ILC is benign compared to LHC, … 

LHC ILC 

• Event Rates 

Inclusive 1 GHz (min bias) 1 kHz ( ->hadrons) 

• Bunch Crossings 

25ns (40 Mhz) 300ns (15kHz) 

DC 0.5% Duty Factor 

• Triggering 

Level 1 & 2 40MHz -> 1kHz No Hardware Trigger 

Level 3 ~100 Hz Software ~100 Hz Software 

• Radiation Field 

1-100 MRad/Yr 10 kRad/Yr 

• Occupancy 

Per bunch 23 min bias 

0.3 ->hadrons 

100 tracks 2 tracks 


Vertexdetektor Occupancy bei ILC 

Vertex Readout Challenge 

• Bunch train structure can swamp the inner layers of the VXD 

with beamstrahlung-induced pair backgrounds. 

• To reduce occupancies to 5 mm -2 , the detector livetime must 

be reduced. Faster effective readout speeds are required. 

• Getting enough power in for faster readout, taking enough heat 

out, are real challenges for “massless” detectors! 


The 4 detector concepts 

Evolving Designs for ILC Experiments 

SiD LDC GLD 

4th 

ILD 

•Solenoid Designs B=5,4,3 Tesla 

•Si vs TPC Tracking 

•“Particle Flow” Calorimeters 

•Dual Solenoid 

•Compensating Cal 

•TPC Tracking 


Detector concepts: details 

Tracking 

ECal 

Inner 

Radius 

Solenoid 

EM 

Cal 

Hadron 

Cal 

Other 

SiD 

silicon 

1.27 m 5 Tesla Si/W 

Digital 

(RPC..) 

Had cal 

inside 

coil 

LCD 

GLD 

TPC 

1.68 m 4 Tesla Si/W 

gaseous 

TPC 

gaseous 

2.1 m 3 Tesla W/ 

Scin. 

Digital 

it Had cal 

or 

inside 

Analog 

coil 

Pb/ 

Scin. 

Had cal 

inside 

coil 

4th 

TPC 

gaseous 

1.4 m 3.5/1.5 crystal 

Multi- 

fiber 

readout 

Double 

Solenoid 

(open mu) 


Merging the LDC and GLD concepts 

Common Parameters 

GLD LDC GLD’ LDC’ 

TPC Rin (m) 0.45 0.3 0.45 0.3 

Rout (m) 2.0 1.58 1.8 1.8 

Zmax (m)* 2.5 2.16 2.35 2.35 

Barrel ECAL Rin (m)** 2.1 1.6 1.85 1.82 

Material Sci/W Si-W Sci/W Si-W 

HCAL Material Sci/W Sci/Fe Sci/W Sci/Fe 

EndCap ECAL Zmin (m)*** 2.8 2.3 2.55 2.55 

B-Field (T) 3 4 3.5 3.5 

VTX Inner Layer (mm) 20 16 18 18 

- Region between VTX and TPC unchanged in both cases. 

* Note for GLD Zmax = 2.3 + 0.2 m for TPC readout. This is included in the 

standard LDC TPC Zmax 

** LDC allows less space between TPC and ECAL than GLD – here let TPC outer 

radius fix ECAL Rin and all subsequent radii 

10/23/2007 ILD Meeting 9 

*** propose to fix ECAL Zmin and let this define the exact details of the TPC endplate region. 


Example: the LDC detector’s tracking 

Quadrant view – vertex and forward tracking 

• 5 layers of vertex 

pixel detectors (VTX) 

• 7 Si disks in the 

forward direction (FTD) 

• 2 layers of Si strip 

detectors outside the 

VTX detector (SIT) 

(Layout version of August 2005) 


“Marlin”: C++ based software framework 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


“org.lcsim”: Java based software framework 

org.lcsim ALCPG 2007 

Overview: “SLIC + org.lcsim” Framework 

StdHep 

Events 

SLIC 

LCDD 

XML 

Compact 

XML 

LCIO 

Events 

org.lcsim 

Geom 

Converter 

AIDA 

User Analysis 

Drivers 

Conditions 

HepRep 

XML 

Software 

Package 

Data Format 

JAS3 

WIRED4 

T.Johnson 4/23 


First detector cost estimates 

 

 

Based on the work by the costing panel. 

They estimated the costs in light of the GDE costing rule, and attempt 

to identify breakdown and the cost drivers 

 

 

 

Calorimeters and magnets are cost drivers. 

The cost breakdowns are different according to how to categorize, 

for example, separation of M&S and man power costs. 

Overall, there is reasonable agreement among the three concept estimates. 

The total cost lies in the range of 400-500M$ with ~20% error 


RAVE/VERTIGO – main features 

1. Creation of an extensible, detector-independent toolkit (RAVE) for vertex 

reconstruction, to be embedded into various environments: 

• RAVE = “Reconstruction (of vertices) in abstract versatile environments”; 

• The toolkit includes both vertex finding (a pattern recognition task a.k.a. track bundling) and vertex fitting 

(estimation of the vertex parameters and errors); 

• Synergy used: starting point was the old CMS software (ORCA) which has recently been refactored and ported 

to the new CMS framework (CMSSW); 

• Principal algorithmic assets are robustified reconstruction methods with estimators based on adaptive filters, 

thus downweighting the influence of outlier tracks; 

• RAVE is foreseen to stay source-code compatible with CMSSW, but thanks to its generic API may easily be 

embedded into other software environments. 

2. Creation of a simple stand-alone framework (VERTIGO) for fast implementation, 

debugging and analyzing of the core algorithms: 

• VERTIGO = “Vertex reconstruction tools and interfaces to generic objets”; 

• Framework tools available: Visialization, Histogramming, a Vertex Gun for generating artificial test events, an 

LCIO input event generator, and a Data Harvester & Seeder for flexible I/O. 

• VERTIGO is able to emulate various detector setups by a flexible “skin” concept. 


Example of using the RAVE toolkit 

Calling RAVE from a C++ environment: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: the factory class name has recently been renamed 

rave::VertexFactory. 


Functionality of the VERTIGO framework 

Test 

Events 

LCIO 

Files 

CMS 

Events 

Belle 

Events? 

Vertex 

Gun 

LCIO 

EvtGen 

Data 

Seeder 

VertigoEventGenerators 

VERTIGO 

CMS/LCIO/... 

Skin 

Tracks 

RAVE 

Vertices 

DATA 

FLOW 

Visual− 

isation 

VertigoObservers 

Histo− 

gramming 

Data− 

Harvester 

Hdf/Root files 


Implementation of kinematics fitting 

Algorithm used: 

• The algorithm is based on a least squares fit with Lagrangian multipliers for the kinematic constraints; 

• Flexibility is achieved by separating the kinematics fitting proper from the “decay chain tree” steering; 

• For details, see K. Prokofiev, Proc. CHEP ’04, Interlaken (CH): CERN-2005-002 and 

http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=75&sessionId=4&resId=1&materialId=paper&confId=0 

Implementation: 

• Work has started on 1 October: the core code has been extracted from the CMS framework CMSSW; 

• The wrapper code for interfacing with the RAVE toolkit is finished, and has been successfully tested; 

• Calling it from a C++ environment proceeds via the new factory class rave::KinematicTreeFactory 

(both building the tree, and performing the fit); 

• Requires assignment of particle masses to tracks, and definition of the kinematic constraints. 

Test environment: 

• Functional tests of the new code are performed by using the VERTIGO stand-alone framework; 

• New VERTIGO tools have been or are being implemented in order to support the kinematics: 

– a vertex gun generating kinematically correct events, 

– observers able to handle the kinematics information. 


Example decay tree and fit algorithm 

cay tree: KinematicTree 

be created, 

Invalid production 

vertex 

Invalid decay 

vertex 

B 0 

s 

B 0 Decay Vertex 

s 

J/ Ψ 

Φ 

(Previous state) 

− + − 

µ + µ Κ Κ 

Constraints 

(Present State) 

The kinematic fit: LMS minimization 

χ 2 minimization with the set of additional constraints H y ref 

0, 

linearized (first order Taylor expansion) around some given point 

H y exp 

 

yy exp 

H y exp 

D yd 0 

y 

D: matrix of derivatives, one line per constraint equation 

(n_equations x n_parameters) 

d: vector of values of constraints 

Function to minimize with respect to y ref 

, : 

2 y ref yV y 

1 

y 

ref 

y 

T 

2 

T 

D yd min 

y exp 

Decay tree example for B 0 s → J/ψΦ → µ+ µ − K + K − . 


RAVE/VERTIGO – status and outlook 

Present status: 

• Code written in C++; RAVE depends on CLHEP and Boost, VERTIGO’s visualization also on Coin3d; 

• Tested with Linux (Debian, SLC4), Mac OSX and Windows (CygWin, VisualStudio), on Intel and PPC; 

• RAVE may be called directly from C++, and with a wrapper (SWIG) also from Java and Python; 

• Adaptor classes (“glue code”) exist for embedding RAVE into the reconstruction frameworks Marlin (C++) and 

org.lcsim (Java); tested with LDC and SiD simulation data; main user so far is N. Graf, SLAC; 

• RAVE has been successfully embedded into 4th’s ILCroot (C++) framework by C. Gatto, INFN Lecce; 

• Simple VERTIGO skins exist for the LDC and SiD detectors; tested with LCIO formatted input data. 

Recent progress: 

• Interfacing RAVE with the ZvTop topological vertex search algorithm (D. Jackson, B. Jeffery, S. Hillert); 

• Improvements: including the beam spot in a primary vertex fit, and re-fitting the tracks by a smoother step; 

• Still in progress: implementing heavy flavour tagging, and kinematics fitting (see the previous slides). 

Availability: 

• Our institute is committed to maintenance, documentation and distribution; a beta release is available at 

– http://projects.hepforge.org/rave/ (HepForge repository for RAVE source code, docus, etc); 

– http://stop.itp.tuwien.ac.at/websvn/ (repository for Marlin & org.lcsim glue code, and VERTIGO); 

• Standard installation support is for the GNU Build System (“Autotools”). 


The “LiC Detector Toy” – main features 

• The “LiC Detector Toy” is a simple but powerful program tool for detector design studies. It aims at investigating 

track resolutions for the purpose of optimizing the layout (geometries and material budgets). 

• Detector model corresponds to a collider experiment with a solenoid magnet. Geometry is cylinder symmetric 

w.r.t. beam axis z, but not necessarily symmetric w.r.t. the z = 0 plane. Surfaces are either cylinders (“barrel”) 

or planes (“forward/backward region”). The track model is a helix. 

• The latest version supports tracking from the barrel into the forward/backward region, and vice versa (i.e. 

re-entry into the barrel). However, this feature is not yet fully tested. 

• Simulation takes into account multiple scattering, detector inefficiencies and measurement errors, but no other 

degradation. Track reconstruction is performed by a Kalman filter, with the reference surface being the inside of 

the beam tube. Goodness-of-fit tests are standard. 

• Supported detectors are Si pixels, Si strips (single- or double-sided with any stereo angle), and a TPC. Detector 

description defined by a simple “input sheet”. An interactive GUI is available as well. 

• The program is written in MatLab. A beta release is available on request. For more information, please, consult 

the User Guide at 

http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/p3w/ilc/reports/LiC_Det_Toy/Reports/UserGuide.pdf 

and the ILC forum at 

http://forum.linearcollider.org/ → Fast Simulations → LiC Detector Toy. 


LDC and SiD barrel track resolutions: ∆p T /p T 


LDC and SiD barrel track resolutions: ∆p T /p 2 T 


LDC and SiD barrel track resol.: transverse i.p. 


LDC forward track resolution: ∆p T /p 2 T 

Low material budget at =20° 

• Two different assumptions 

for the material budget of 

the forward chambers 

TPC and silicon tracker 

well matched 

– FTD1-FTD3: 0.0012 X 0 

– FTD4-FTD7: 0.004 X 0 

– FTD1-FTD3: 0.012 X 0 

– FTD4-FTD7: 0.008 X 0 

• Low material budget: 

• High material budget: 


LDC forward track resolution: ∆p T /p 2 T 

High material budget at =20° 

• Blue: Silicon tracker only 

• Green: TPC only 

• Red: Silicon tracker & TPC 

– Added by weights of 

marginal distributions 

– Si tracker and TPC 

completely independent 

• Black: Simulation of both 

– Bump at middle momentum 

– Line: (a+b/p t2 

) fit, 

exclusion of bump points 

– Circles: badly matching 

points 

• Magenta: Additional forward 

chamber at z = 900mm 

– No improvement 

TPC and silicon tracker 

not well matched 

Weighted average 

of independent (1/pt) 

measurements 

Full Kalman filter 

corresponds to average 

with correlated full 

weight matrix (5x5) 


6th SILC Meeting - Turin 

19.11.2007 15:28 Uhr 

6th SiLC Meeting - Torino 

17th - 19th December 2007 

Home 

Welcome 

Agenda 

Informations 

Accommodation 

Transport 

Registration 

List of participants 

INFN Web Page 

SILC Web Page 

We are looking forward to see you! 

INFN Torino - University of Torino 

Email: Diego Gamba, Lorenzo Zamprotta © Lorenzo Zamprotta 

http://www.silc.to.infn.it/ 

Page 1 of 1

ILC Reference Design Report – parts 2 & 4 

international linear collider 

Reference Design Report 

Physics at the ILC 

international linear collider 

Reference Design Report 

Detectors 

August 2007 

ILC-REPORT-2007-001 

August 2007 

ILC-REPORT-2007-001 

All 4 parts can be downloaded from http://www.linearcollider.org/rdr/

ILC - HEPHY

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?