Superb 23.09,2005 NapoliMarcello A Giorgi1 Marcello A. Giorgi Università di Pisa and INFN Pisa...

23.09,2005 Napoli Marcello A Giorgi 1Superb

Marcello A. GiorgiUniversità di Pisa and INFN Pisa

Possibilities for a future Super B Factory

INFN Riunione CSN1Napoli 19-23 Settembre 2005


OUTLINE

• The INFN Super B Group

• Physics at B Factory

• Status of the art

• Few examples of Physics Reach at very High luminosity

• Super B possibilities


INFN Super B group

INFN has setup a roadmap program to evaluate future options and commitments in major physics projects.

Groups have been setup to collect informations in a coherent way to be presented to the INFN management.

In the area covered by Gruppo I (Particle Physics with accelerators) a group (a sort of an advisory body) to study the possibility of a SuperB Factory in Italy as a true international project and evaluate parameters, time and costs , has been set up.

I have been asked to coordinate this group.


Structure and How to move on

Marco Ciuchini has been appointed as a theorist member of the group.

I hope to be able to assemble the entire group (Pannel, Thing, COSA?) by the end of next week , of course coordinators of GruppoI are welcome and their contributions based on their experience and wisdom will be particularly valuable.

The report to my understanding should be ready by the end of January 06, that is TOMORROW.

The charge I received was to limit the membership of the group to people of INFN, and that is fine since it will act as an advisory group internal to INFN. However a larger community , from Slac, us in general, Canada, Europe, is interested in the possibility of the SuperB in Italy, they have studied the case in the past few years and volunteered to continue their activity in studying the parameters of the machine and the detector and in supplying all possible information as consulting group to our INFN pannel.


How to move on

Regular weekly meetings of the consulting group have been setup on mondays , they are open and volunteers can freely subscribe!

The group contains machine physicists from LNF and Slac, italian european and US experimental physicists .

Material will be collected about the machine and the detector and given in real time to our Pannel.

We think that the documents on the physics case are already available, so I think that on this subject the task for the pannel and in particular for Marco would be somehow easier than the evaluation of the other parameters.


e+e- for Beauty Studies : …..

B meson environment is a friendly laboratory• Mixing and CP violation in b are sizeble• HQET works and has predictive power• Rich of transition channels that can probe different quantities

e+e- machines are fantastic probes• Coherent initial state (Y4S exclusively into B Bbar ) allows interference

measurement, the orthogonality information about final states and high tagging efficiency.

• Clean environment: loose trigger efficiency with low dilution. Example:The tagging quality factor is 30.5% in BABAR it is 2% for CDF.

Luminosity is :THE VERY MACHINE PARAMETER• Large samples allow precision measurements• Rare and very rare decays are becoming more and more• crucial for the discovery potential of the experiments

i

iT wQ 2)21(


Today

>268 M >469 M

CDF Detector


and Tomorrow ????

• What: – PEP-II/Babar & KEK-B/Belle currently at peak luminosity 1034 cm-2s-1 ± 10% and at the end

of 2006 2.0 1034 cm-2s-1 ± 10% – Integrated sample of > 1ab-1 expected for each machine by end 2008– Upgrade ideas/proposals to increase luminosity by a factor 10 to 100, for a sample size of 5-50

ab-1. • Why:

– High precision Standard Model Unitarity Triangle (UT) measurements– New Physics (NP) contributions to rare decays B.R. & Asymmetries.– Distinctive patterns may discriminate between models

• How:– Different upgrade scenarios are being considered: from ≤4÷.5 x 1035 as SUPER KEKB o to

≤7÷10 x 1035 as in SLAC Design or ≤2÷10 x 1036 as in P.Raimondi=J.Seeman sketch– there are severe Detector issues in traditional machines as PEPII and KEKB.

• When:– in the era of LHCb and LHC experiments.

– Competitiveness and complementarity with hadron machines is the issue.


PHYSICS MENU

• Unitarity Triangle sides measurements– From (semi)leptonic decays, inclusive or exclusive– |Vub|, |Vcb|, |Vtd|

• UT angles precision measurements– bs penguin transitions very sensitive to new physics– CPV Asymmetries in BKs, Ks0 compared with sin2.– measurement with B and – direct CPV– measurement with BDK or similar channels.

• Rare decays– Exclusive and inclusive b sBFs, direct asymmetries, photon

helicities– Exclusive and inclusive b sl+l- BFs, AFB, CP asymmetries– B decays to states with large missing energy, such as B(d,s) +-, B K(*), b s, B D(*), B XCB

– LFV in hand similar channels


In the basket of BFACTORIES Direct CP

0

0B KB K 0.133 0.030 0.009 CPA

Signal (227 pairs): 1606 51M BBPRL 93 (2004) 131801

0 B K 0 B K

BBAABBARARBBAABBARAR4.2

0 B K 0 B K

0.06 0.06 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.02 Belle

CP

CP

A BABARA

Average 0.049 0.040 CPA

3.6

Confirmation at ICHEP04

0.101 0.025 0.005 CPASignal (274 pairs): 2140 53M BB

Average 0.114 0.020 CPA3.9

BelleBelleBelleBelle

BBAABBARARBBAABBARAR


New unitarity triangle with new value of Belle for sin2

New value of Sin2 vs. UT general fit with new Vub/Vcb value

After Lp 05 Preferred solution

Before Lp 05

Lp05 new Belle value with 386M

New average values BaBar BelleSin2b=0.685±0.032C=0.016±0.046


Methods for extraction of

cbV

*usV

ubV

*csV

Color suppressed

*ub csA V V

*cb usA V V 3

3 2 2 ie

is phase between ( ) and ( ) amplitudes ub cbb u V b c V Basic Idea

0 0

0 0 Use interference between and decays

where the ( ) decay to a common final state B D K B D K

D D f

(*)0

(*)(*)0

Size of CP asymmetry depends on | ( ) |

~ 0.1 0.3| ( ) |B

A B D Kr

A B D K

D0 Dalitz plot method(*)0 0Use decaysSB D K K


results (mainly from Dalitz)K.Abe Lp05


Results from B and decays

Using the full information in isospin analysis

BABAR: Updated for ICHEP040 (227 pairs) B M 0 (227 pairs) B M

0 30 0.17 0 030 09 0.15 0.04

S . .C .

1 00 0.21 0.070 58 0.15 0 07

S .C . .

Belle: PRL 93 (2004) 021601

152 pairs M 152 pairs M

BABARBABARBABARBABAR

Comparison

Caution averaging!

0 0

0 0

6(1 17 0.32 0 10) 100 12 0.56 0.06

BF . .C .

First

measurements

0

0

6

0 01 0.10 0.02

(5 8 0.6 0 4) 10

A .

BF . .

o- 35 at 90% CLeff

0 (122 pairs) B M BB 0 (122 pairs) B M BB 0 19 0.33 0.110 23 0.24 0 14

long

long

S .C . .

Signal: 314 34 events1.00 0.02longf

0 0 B 0 0 B 224M pairs0 65.7 ( ) (22.5 5.8) 10 5.4BF B

0 0 0 B 0 0 0 B 224M pairs0 0 0 6 ( ) 1.1 10 (90% CL)BF B

:From Grossman-Quinn bound on 2peng

o

( ) ( ) ( ) 96 10 4 11 stat sys peng

BABARBABARBABARBABAR

( ) Isospin Corrections for

()


CP Results for B 0

+ –

BABAR (227m) Belle (275m) Average

S –0.30 ± 0.17 ± 0.03 –0.67 ± 0.16 ± 0.06 –0.50 ± 0.12

C –0.09 ± 0.15 ± 0.04 –0.56 ± 0.12 ± 0.06 –0.37 ± 0.10

BABAR, hep-ex/0501071 Belle, hep-ex/0502035

Mediocre (but improved) agreement :

2 = 7.9 (CL = 0.019 2.3σ)

Results for the time-dependent analysis :


Isospin analysis with B

1396][

BABAR BELLE

fL

S,L

C,L

B

B

B__

67.54.5 10)8.55.22(

029.0033.0031.0039.0951.0

021.0029.0014.0978.0

08.014.024.033.0

08.042.009.0

09.018.003.0 09.010.030.000.0

68.37.6 10)1.77.31(

610)5430( 68.31.4 10)2.24.24(

6101.1

New

Use averages for BF and S/C coefficientsUse BABAR limit, which dominates the error.|eff |< 11°

A new approach using has been developed and presented at ICHEP04

A full time-dependent Dalitz plot analysis of the decay can constrain .


Hints of NP from UT ?USE: , md , sin 2, , , cos 2

From the general Fit : SM at 93% C. L. NP at 7% C. L.

L.Silvestrini LP05

)(93.1]CKM[ 6.912.5-

)(99]all[ 129-


sin2 and loops

b ss

sd

dg

, ,u c t

0SK

0B

b sd

dd

d

W

g

, ,u c t0SK

0

0B

0B

b

s

s

sd d

, , ( )CPKK

0SK

0B

b

d

s

dd d

0SK

0

New phases from SUSY?

, , ( )CPKK

W

In SM interference between B mixing, K mixing and Penguin bsss or bsdd gives the same e as in tree process bccs. However loops can also be sensitive to New Physics!

2( )

~ 5%

2( / )

~ 20%

Purely dimensional estimate


Winter vs. Summer 05 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Deviation from SM: No theory error: 3.7 sNaïve theory errors: 2.9 s

Lp05


Comment on averaging

On purely dimensional considerations the corrections to the bs penguins are ranging between 5% and 20% , on the other hand the sign of the corrections is far from been the same for different channels.

As I mentioned at ICHEP averaging the results on penguins is something adventurous and not simply legitimate.

The averaged value can be diluted and non reflecting the real amount of the difference from sin2 value of charmonium.

CP asymmetries in bs penguins will show perhaps the first indications of new physics. But HIGHER STATISTICS needed!


In SM: ACPFB~ 0

Determination of sign of AFB very important.

cp(Bs l+l-) SM: <0.5% (0.05% for K* l+l)

cp(Bd l+l-) SM: -~(4.4+/-4 )%

B(BsB(Bse+e-) SM: ~1

AFB(K*l+l-):s0(zero crossing) SM predicts with ~5% accuracy

AFB(K*l+l-):CP asymmetry Very small in SM

OTHER CHANNELS for NP (observables in s/d l+l- decay)

In dilepton rest frameNF = when l+ along b dirNB = when l+ opposite b dir

SM:S0 NNLO error = 5%

S0 = 0.162+/-0.008 ~ C7/C9


Kll, K*ll branching fractionsin range predicted bySM + form factors

theory uncertainty >experimental uncertainty Rarest B decay observed!

Beyond branching fractions: Asymmetries

ACP consistent with zero

K/Kee ratio consistent with unity

Forward-backward angular asymmetryof lepton pair vs. dilepton mass probesrelative size, phase of penguin diagrams

Raw AFB, K*ll

BK(*)l+l-F.Forti LP05


Recoil Method as pure B beam

The final efficiency is ~0.4% (per bbbar pair) ~4000 B/fb-1 (at 30% purity) 1500 B0/fb-1

2500 B+/fb-1

> 107 recoil Bs in 10ab-1

Recoil cinematics well knownRecoil flavor and charge is determinedEvent closure needed with neutrinos


B• SM expectation

– Direct measurement of fB (currently only from LQCD)

–

510)9.33.9()Β( B

2

td

2

ub constrains /)Β( VVMBdB

> 2 in the event Use hadronic or semileptonic tag 1 or 3 prong topology

Can constrain SUSY parameters

C.L.%[email protected] 4 C.L.%[email protected] 4)Β( B

BBM 232 BB

M 275new new

F.Forti LP05


Theoretical uncertainties

Ligeti, ICHEP 2004


Unitarity Triangle – Sides& Angles

Unitarity Triangle - Angles e+e- Precision 1 Year Precision

Measurement 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab LHCb BTeV

a(pp)SBR’s isospin) 6.7 3.9 2.1 - -

() (Isospin, Dalitz) (syst 3) 3, 2.3 1.6, 1.3 1, 0.6 2.5 -5 4

() (penguin, isospin, stat+syst) 2.9 1.5 0.72

(J/ KS) (all modes) 0.3 0.17 0.09 0.57 0.49

(BD(*)K) (ADS) 2-3 ~10 <13

(all) 1.2-2 7 8Theory: ~1° ~ 0.2° <<1°

Unitarity Triangle - Sides e+e- Precision

Measurement Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab

Vub (inclusive) syst =5-6% 2% 1.3%

Vub (exclusive) () syst=3% 5.5% 3.2%

fb (B) SM: ~5x10-7

Fb (B) SM: ~5x10-5 3.3 6 13fb to

Vtd/Vts ( Theory 12% ~3% ~1%


CP Violation in bs penguins

Rare Decays – New Physics – CPV (?) e+e- Precision 1 Year Precision

Measurement Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab LHCb BTeV

S(B0KS) SM: <0.25 (0.05)

0.08 0.05 0.02 (?) 0.08? 0.04?

S(B0KS+KL) SM:<0.25 (0.05)

S(B'Ks )SM:<0.3 (0.1) 0.06 0.03 0.01

S(BKs)SM:<0.2 (0.15) 0.08 0.05 0.04 (?)

S(BKs)SM:<0.1 0.11 0.06 0.04 (?)

ACP(bs) SM: <0.6% 2.4% 1% 0.5% (?)

ACP(BK*) SM: <0.5% 0.59% 0.32% 0.14% - -

CPV in mixing (|q/p|) <0.6% X X


bsl+l- precision measurements

New Physics – Kl+l-, sl+l- e+e- Precision 1 YearPrecision

Measurement Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab LHCb

(BK/(BKe+e-) SM: 1 ~8% ~4% ~2% X

ACP(BK* l+l-) (all) (high mass)

SM: < 0.05%

~6%

~12%

~3%

~6%

~1.5%

~3%

~1.5%

~3% (?)

AFB(BK*l+l-) : ŝ0SM: ±5% ~20% ~9% 9% ~12%

AFB(Bsl+l-) : ŝ0 27% 15% 6.7%

AFB (Bsl+l-) : C9 , C10 36-55% 20-30% 9-13%


Rare Decays

MEASUREMENT Goal 3/ab 10/ab 50/ab 100/ab

BD*) SM: : 8x10-3 10.2% 5.6% 2.5%

Bs)K,K* SM:Theory ~5%1 excl: 4x10-6

~3

Binvisible) <2x10-6 <1x10-6 <4x10-7

Bd ) - - ? ?Bd ) - - ? ?) now< 7 10-8 <10-10

h) now < 10-7 <10-10


New particles

BELLE and BABAR have discovered several new particles in the last couple of years, Thanks to the extraordinary high statistics.

BABAR has first observed Ds(2317) and BELLE the X(3872) and Y(3940) .

Now a new state…


New Structure Y(4260) in +-J/ Mass Spectrum

• ISR production: e+e- ()J/+-

25% of ’s observed

(2S) used for cross checks

m = 4260 8 MeV = 88 23 MeV

J/ sideband

missing mass consistent with : Y data, Y MC, and (2S) data


Is now this Physics case solid?Question is:Is there still a physics case for highly precise flavour experiments in the next decade?

• Evidence for New Physics could be found by ATLAS and CMS in the first few years of LHC operation (2÷5 years?)

• LHCb will take data on the same time scale

My view:

It is a solid case if the SuperB is really SUPER

(10 10 ÷ 10 11 B and pair per year well before 2015 )

( in the same running period as LHC and before ILC).3years of Physics Workshop have produced heavy documents

The Discovery Potential of a Super B Factory is available

Please subscribe if you want to receive a copy!


Complementary information

LHC

Super B Factory

Squark mass matrix (d sector)

A Super B Factory (with 1036 BETTER with 1037 ), early in the LHC era, can

provide the meansto eliminate potential models as well as unique information on CP phases

From HITLIN Hawaii05


HEP in the next decade

LHC finds SUSY

LHC doesn’tfind SUSY

2005

What canthe ILC say ?

What can a Super B Factory add?

Still need for precision measurements in flavour sector

HEP

07 LHC

startup


SUPER BFACTORY a la PEPIIBABAR has shown that in the continuous injection operation mode and thanks to the data taking

efficiency >98% is able to integrate in one year 107x Lpeak . 7.0 1035 cm-2 s-1 corresponds to 10000 fb-1/year.

BABAR Roadmap Committee has chosen the option of 7.0 1035 cm-2 s-1 based on the

present PEPII (2200m circumference) to integrate 10000 fb-1/year to investigate NP at a

mass scale ~ 1 TeV.In addition it is still upgradable in luminosity.

Pos

sib

le S

up

er B

p

aram

eter

sP

arameters are tunable


..a la PEPII

Seeman et.al Hawaii05


Installation of Crab Cavity

• Shutdown for 18-26 months in 2009-2010 for the upgrade.• 0.9 /ab/month in 2020.

We are here.

Shutdown

SuperKEKB

LHCb may produce LHCb may produce physicsphysics

equivalent to 50 /ab in equivalent to 50 /ab in e+e- in some channels e+e- in some channels

within a few yearswithin a few years

9 /ab/year3.5×1035 × 40 weeks

15 /ab/year


Detector for Superb scaling BABAR

1.5 TESLA SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNET


Vertexing and Tracking at 1036

• The tracking system could be made of– One or two layers of pixel detectors near beam pipe

• Pixel required mainly because of high occupancy

• Beam pipe radius is a big issue, depends on machine details:– KEK-B plans on 1cm more performing– PEP-II plans on 1.5-2 cm safer– <1 cm possible with RS idea

– A few layers of silicon strip detectors at intermediate radii• Vertexing, impact parameter resolution, low P tracking

– For the main tracker two possible solutions:• Small cell/fast gas drift chamber, combined with normal DCH

• All silicon tracker

• Main issues– Radiation hardness: possible using LHC technology

– Material budget: current hybrid pixel layers are thick;the all silicon solution can get pretty heavy

– Rate capability: effects on silicon segmentation and drift chamber cell size


Belle approach to tracking

Pixel

Silicon striplets


Babar approach to tracking

• All silicon tracker– Two inner layers of pixel detectors (or striplets for initial luminosity)

– Three intermediate layers of strips as with current SVT

– Replace DCH with 4-layer silicon tracker with lampshade modules. Remove support tube

– Radii of pixel modules: 3.3, 4.0

– Radii of barrel part of SVT modules : 5.9, 12.2, 14.0 cm

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

Electronics & cooling outside ofthe tracking volume.

Current detector. CST 300 um.

60 cm

B abar ™ and © L. de B runhoff

MATERIAL !

<1.0,<2.0 cm

200m


Pixel R&D

• Two possible R&D directions• Reduce thickness of conventional hybrid pixels

– It doesn’t seem possible to go too far

• Develop large area MAPS– Development on-going in several places:

• LEPSI, LBNL, Japan, Hawaii, Perugia

– Proposal by Pisa-Pavia-Bergamo-Trento-Trieste-Modena approved by the Italian Ministry for Education and Scientific Research

• Main goal is to develop a submicron Full Custom CMOS MAPS that can be used on large area systems

• Time frame is 2-3 years (at least)

Active thickness from 10-15 to 35-50 m total thickness<100m


Momentum resolution

90º incidence


Delta E impact

CST 300 um option.

A.Roodman


Babar PID: DIRC

• Light transmitted through length of radiator bar preserving angle information

• Rings projected in water-filled stand-off box to PM tubes• Fused silica bars are OK, but backgrounds too high in

Stand off box



Babar approach: different kind of DIRC

• Barrel– New non-SOB focussing DIRC is under development in SLAC Group B

• Quartz is sufficiently radiation hard• Need pixellated readout that works inside the magnetic field

– APDs, HPDs, MAPMTs, Need R&D

• Endcap – Requires single photoelectron readout in a magnetic field– An aerogel threshold counter would work, as would a RICH with an aerogel

radiator



Belle approach: TOP + A-RICH

• Time of propagation counter– Use internally reflected light, but

measure time instead of the y coordinate. Needs < 100ps time resolution

Achieves some separation at low p

Cherenkov angle distrbution for 0.55 GeV/c beam

NOW :Aerogel Cherenkov Counters Time of Flight


Radiation Dose Superb a la PEPII It needs R&D

Integral Lumi Endcap Barrel

250 fb-1 1.0 kRad 0.6 kRad

500 fb-1 1.5-3 kRad 0.8-2 kRad

1 ab-1 2-8 kRad 1-5 kRad

3 ab-1 3-24 kRad 2-15 kRad

10 ab-1 7-50 kRad 5-35 kRad

20 ab-1 10-80 kRad 6-50 kRad

50 ab-1 25-200 kRad 15-120kRad

100 ab-1 50-400 kRad 30-250kRad

ENDCAP needs Upgrade BARREL needs Upgrade

Lowest Scenario = 20% Lumi termHighest Scenario =100% Lumi term

Need 10x more radiation hardness than CsI(Tl) Light output drops by ~0.7 after 10-20 kRad

Superb a la Raimondi at least 2 order of magnitude lower


Crystal options

• Finding the right compromise between speed, light yield and cost is not straightforward.

• Belle is proposing to keep the CsI(Tl) in the barrel EMC and replacing the encaps with pure CsI R&D on readout.


The LXe Calorimeter concept

• Hexagonal cells of ~ 1 Molière radius in transverse dimension are formed from thin quadraphenyl butadiene (TPB)-coated eptfe sheets

– Cells are not load-bearing, thus thin

• Longitudinal segmentation is provided by TPB-coated optical separators, with WLS fibers sensitive only in a particular segment

– Three segments is probably optimal1. Massless gap – ascertain whether

there was an interaction in materialin front of the EMC

2, Two larger segments, with divisionnear shower max

• Fibers are read out by a pixelized APD,located in the LXe volume

– Clear fibers between coil segment and APD– Redundant readout is simple and inexpensive– All readout at rear, minimizing nuclear counter

effect

R&D in Caltech on Xstals and Xenon


• Basic Idea comes from the ATF2-FF experiment (R&D for ILC)

In the proposed experiment it seems possible to acheive spot sizes at the focal point of about 2m*20nm at very low energy (1 GeV), out from the damping ring

• Rescaling at about 10GeV/CM we should get sizes of about 1m*10nm =>

• Is it worth to explore the potentiality of a Collider based on a scheme similar to the Linear Collider.

(P.Raimondi at Hawaii 05 meeting on Super B)

A NEW HERETIC APPROACH


Asymmetry must be reduced as possible, compatible with time dependent analyses

DR can be piled upFollowing D.Hitlin presentation

Injection System

electrons positrons

Injection of HER and LER at their collision energies

BKG in detector between 10-2 and 10- 3 as in more traditional design as SperKEKB and Super PEPII

Beam pipe diameter at IR <10 mm (it can allow for a substantial reduction of asymmetry ( 4+7 GeV ?).

Acceptance up to 99%


Parameter list for a flat and a round beam case

M.Biagini

In this simulation

E+=8GeV

E-=3.5 Gev

Sorry Prof. Sanda , not yet 1043 but…


Horizontal Collision Vertical collision

D. Schulte

Effective horizontal size during collision about 10 times smaller, vertical size 10 times larger


Parameters

Choice of the asymmetryWith a machine a la Linear Collider we expect a strong reduction of

the Background in the IP and due to the extremely reduced transverse size of the bunches (10nm x 100nm) the beam pipe radius could be reduced down to less then 10 mm , a factor 3÷3.5 lower than the present pipe in PEPII/Babar.

Simulations are going on to evaluate the optimal reduction of the machine asymmetry without compromising the physics in the time dependent analysis where the uncertainty in between Dz is dominated by the charm lifetime namely the spread introduced in the tag vertex fit by the use of all the tagB traks including the displaced tracks coming from charm.


Beam spot

Interaction Point

BREC daughters

BREC direction

BTAG direction

TAG Vertex

TAG tracks, V0s

z

Vertex and t Reconstruction

• Reconstruct Brec vertex from – charged Brec daughters (z(BRec)=65 m)

• Determine BTag vertex from – charged tracks not belonging to Brec

– Brec vertex and momentum

– beam spot and (4S) momentum

• High efficiency (93%) through inclusion of 1-prong tags• Average z resolution is 180 m (<|z|> = ct = 260 m)

corresponding to a t resolution of 0.6 ps. • t resolution function measured from data (Bflav sample)

BREC Vertex


Choice of Asymmetry

Asymmetry can be reduced ?

Going from 9-3.1 Gev to 7-4 Gev

<|z|> = ct goes from 260 m to 130 m

Whereas (without a new vertex algorithm) the

z) goes from 180 m to <150 m

An accurate simulation is needed to evaluate

A realistic resolution.


Nor

mal

ized

lum

inos

ity

degr

adat

ion

fact

or

sin2 efficiency in B0J/KS versus Ebeam(HER)

S. Wagner

PEP-IIKEK-BNormalized to 9 on 3.1 GeVcm=0.56


¼ of detector in R-view

R (cm)0

30140

180

33090

80

Beam Pipe + VDET (2 layer MAPS)+ SIT (5 layer DSSD)

DC (20 layer drift)

DIRC (quartz bars)

ECAL (PbWO4 or LSO crystals)

Magnet cryostat

new

new

IFR (LST)

new


R-z (forward) view

Z (cm)

BeamPipe + VDET + SIT DC DIRC ECAL Magnet IFR

30

140

180

330

90

80

R (cm)

40160

240

0

360200

300 mr

50 mr

100 mr


Possible SIT R-z (forward)

Z (cm)

MAPS

4

30

R (cm)

0

50 mr

100 mr

8

12

20

16

24

28

10 20 4030

2.51.25

BeamPipe

DSSD


• In any case I agree that one super-B factory should be built in the world.

• And it may be a good idea for you to jointly work for the best scheme of the super-B factory. I understand that there will be a Belle-BaBar joint workshop scheduled in Hawaii in January next year.

• This will be a great opportunity to start discussing the joint super-B factory.


Conclusions

The present policy of DOE exclude the construction of a Superb in US in the next decade.

In KEK a project is being developped, but for a solution that is not quite adequate in term of Luminosity (few 10 9 BBpair/year asymptotically in 2015)

BABAR and BELLE communities are in close contact ( 2 joint Meetings in Hawaii in 04 and 05 and a joint committee) to develop a common project.

The Super b , if any, must be a true international project, wherever it would be.

The Super B a la Linear collider is an option.

The total cost not including detector would be between M300$ and M500$.


• BACKUP

Superb 23.09,2005 NapoliMarcello A Giorgi1 Marcello A. Giorgi Università di Pisa and INFN Pisa...

Documents

Transcript of Superb 23.09,2005 NapoliMarcello A Giorgi1 Marcello A. Giorgi Università di Pisa and INFN Pisa...