April 10, 2004

Review of the Fermilab Program

Report of the 2004 meeting of the URA Visiting Committee for Fermilab

March 12-13, 2004

Submitted by

Dr. Douglas Cowen (PennState)

Dr. Sally Dawson (BNL)

Dr. Gerald Dugan (Cornell)

Dr. Lawrence Gibbons (Cornell)

Dr. Donald Hartill (Cornell)

Dr. Yorikiyo Nagashima (Osaka)

Dr. Rene Ong (UCLA)

Dr. Stephen Peggs (BNL) – Chair

Dr. Frank Sciulli (Columbia)

Dr. Thomas Weiler (Vanderbilt)

Table of Contents

Executive Summary -...... 3

1. program planning & management...... 8

1.1 Summary of Long Range Planning...... 8

1.2 Future Accelerator R&D...... 9

2. run ii...... 12

2.1 Operations in 2004 ...... 12

2.2 Future Prospects...... 13

3. experiments...... 16

3.1 BTeV...... 16

3.2 CDF...... 17

3.3 D0 ...... 18

3.4 MiniBooNE ...... 19

3.5 NUMI/MINOS...... 19

4. Large Hadron Collider...... 21

4.1 US - LHC Accelerator Project - Phase I...... 21

4.2 US - LHC Accelerator Research Project (LARP)...... 21

4.3 CMS ...... 22

5. particle astrophysics...... 23

5.1 Experimental Astrophysics Group ...... 23

5.2 Auger Project...... 24

5.3 Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS-II)...... 25

5.4 Theoretical Astrophysics Group)...... 26

6. Theoretical Particle Physics ...... 28

7. Fermilab users...... 28

8. Appendices

A. meeting agenda...... 29

B. Charge to the Visiting Committee...... 30

C. external Committee members...... 31

Executive Summary – Observations and Recommendations

The 2004 Visiting Committee of the Universities Research Association (URA) reviewed the Fermilab program on March 12-13, 2004. The Appendix of this report includes the meeting agenda, the charge to the committee from the URA, and the committee membership. The main body of the text describes the state of the Lab, its research programs, upgrade plans, and its future prospects. In the executive summary, below, we summarize our findings and supplement them with comments, concerns, and recommendations.

Program Planning and Management

The Fermilab Long Range Planning Committee (FLRPC), which was appointed by the laboratory director, presented draft proposals from a report that will soon be released. Two alternative scenarios were presented, in which the Linear Collider (LC) is built either onshore at Fermilab, or offshore. Both scenarios foresee Fermilab playing a role in both LC and in neutrino activities, but they differ in the levels of emphasis in the two areas. If very high fluxes of neutrinos are required, an 8 GeV “Proton Driver” needs to be built to replace the Booster.

The committee:

  • commends the Laboratory on beginning the process of longer term planning
  • encourages even more attention on vital long range issues, with broader involvement of the US HEP community

strongly supports the engagement of Fermilab in the international development and planning efforts for a Linear Collider

endorses the FLRPC draft Linear Collider recommendations, that Fermilab should:

re-iterate the directors commitment to Fermilab serving as host for the LC

create a full-time position within the directorate to co-ordinate LC activities

prepare for a (warm or cold) Engineering Test Facility at Fermilab

assure that LC planning is based on the host laboratory/international project model

  • would support a Fermilab bid to host the LC Global Design Organization
  • congratulates the Lab on building the first RF structure to reach the NLC specifications for breakdown rate at the design voltage gradient
  • supports the preparation of a “mission need case” (CD-0) for a 2 MW proton source, after the elaboration of the physics case and the choice of Proton Driver technology
  • strongly supports a careful comparison of the two proton driver options before a technology choice is made, and a Technical Design Report is written. Only a cost-effective solution will make the proton driver competitive with similar neutrino super-beam proposals from other accelerator laboratories.

concurs with the Lab’s view of the importance of long-term accelerator R&D (such as high-field superconducting magnets), and strongly supports strategically-targeted increases in resources devoted to this work

  • urges Lab management to continue to vigorously support activities that provide the next generation of accelerator physicists, through the graduate fellowship program
  • encourages debate over the potential broadening of the Lab mission to include interdisciplinary science, such as medical accelerators and other technology R&D

Run II

The Directorate has focused most of its attention in the past year on improving the luminosity performance of the Run II accelerator complex. Both the “base” and “design” instantaneous luminosities for FY04 have already been surpassed, and the design integrated luminosity for FY04 is within grasp. The Recycler ring has a much improved vacuum system, and has progressed significantly in its commissioning performance. Version 2.0 of the Run II Luminosity Upgrade plan has been released, describing the technological steps that are planned in order for Run II to meet its base or design goals through FY09. Nonetheless the successes of the past year have been achieved without a significant expected improvement in the anti-proton stacking rate – upon which future luminosity improvements nominally depend for a factor of 4 increase in the anti-proton bunch intensity.

The committee:

enthusiastically congratulates the Lab for the great strides of the last year in increasing the luminosity and the reliability of the Tevatron complex, and in improved Run II upgrade planning

concurs with the assessment of the February 2003 Lehman Run II review that “.. the base goal of 4.4 pb-1 by the end of FY09 [has] a good probability of being met or exceeded. Meeting the design goal of 8.5 pb-1 by the end of FY09 remains a very challenging goal.”

is concerned with the apparent difficulty in increasing the anti-proton stacking rate

finds that electron-cooling in the Main Injector, stack-tail cooling in the Accumulator, and strong-strong beam-beam compensation in the Tevatron, are all high risk activities that need close attention.

Experiments

Five experiments dominate the Fermilab landscape into the next decade. The two Run II experiments – CDF and D0 – will run until the arrival of physics results from LHC makes their continued operation redundant, around the end of this decade. The MINOS experiment is expected to turn on in January 2005. It will make significantly increased demands on the total average number of protons per hour that the Fermilab complex can deliver. “Proton economics” issues, rooted in the need to limit Booster activation levels, work to the detriment of the currently running MiniBooNE experiment, which is nonetheless expected to receive a substantial number of protons by the end of the calendar year. The BTeV experiment will be commissioned when CDF and D0 turn off. It hopes to reach CD-3 “start of construction” status by early 2005.

The committee:

  • congratulates both collider detectors for their readiness to take maximum advantage of the recent Tevatron luminosity improvements
  • anticipates impressive science from the prodigious amounts of data that CDF and D0 are recording
  • commends CDF for their aggressive action in trying to understand unexpected aging effects in their Central Outer Tracker
  • commends D0 and the Lab for supporting development of a radiation hard silicon layer that will be inserted inside the existing detector in summer 2005

recommends that CDF and D0 pay special attention to aging effects on all their sub-detectors, given the ever increasing luminosities

  • commends the Lab for establishing a Tevatron Electro-Weak Working Group
  • applauds the invaluable role played by the Computing Division in enabling CDF and D0 to analyze their data with admirably short turn around times
  • notes the successful use of SAM-GRID services in CDF and D0 data analysis, to be extended to MINOS and CMS
  • urges Lab management, CDF, and D0, to plan for the long-term health of the collaborations in the face of likely future outflows of physicists to the LHC
  • believes that the total delivery to MiniBooNE of about 5  1020 protons (expected at the end of this calendar year, when NuMI/MINOS turns on) will provide a good start to validating or ruling out the LSND anomaly
  • applauds the remarkable progress of NuMI/MINOS construction in the last year, and applauds the project management focus on safety that resulted in no injuries
  • congratulates Fermilab on the attainment of CD-0 status for BTeV

is pleased that the BTeV IR upgrade capitalizes on the development of high gradient quadrupoles for the LHC

  • is concerned about the beam impedance of the RF shield for the BTeV pixel detectors

Large Hadron Collider

The first phase of the US-LHC Accelerator Project is a collaboration of 3 US labs (BNL, FNAL, LBL) working with KEK to support the construction of the LHC. Nearly complete, this phase is segueing into the US-LHC Accelerator Research Project (LARP), which also includes SLAC membership. Initial LARP goals are to help commission the LHC, while later goals are to play a major role in a luminosity upgrade of the LHC interaction regions. Fermilab manages these projects, and is the host institution for the CMS collaboration, as well as being a Tier I computing center for LHC data analysis. A significant increase in the number of CMS collaborators is foreseen as CMS approaches completion, and scientists divert more of their attention to LHC issues.

The committee:

  • commends Fermilab and the US-LHC project on the successful delivery of critical superconducting magnets, feed boxes, and specialized absorbers to the LHC.
  • finds the two US-LHC Accelerator Projects to be excellent examples of international collaboration in the construction of high-energy accelerators
  • notes the sharp contrast between LARP and typical HEP experiments, in which LARP physicist salaries are carried by the project, and not by the base program
  • applauds Fermilab’s continuing effort to advance the construction of the CMS experiment
  • strongly supports the Labs plans to build a CMS Virtual Control Room, and a PhysicsAnalysisCenter, on the 11th floor of Wilson Hall.
  • appreciates and encourages the active involvement of FNAL/CMS in QuarkNeT

Particle Astrophysics and Theoretical Particle Physics

The Experimental Astrophysics Group (EAG) is leveraged by membership in multi-institution collaborations such as the mature Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), the Supernova Acceleration Project (SNAP) proposal, and (potentially) the Dark Energy Camera (DECAM) project. All three EAG projects are well supported by the Lab’s world class Theoretical Astrophysics group. In additional activities, the Pierre Auger project is constructing large arrays in the southern hemisphere (Argentina), and in the northern hemisphere (perhaps Utah), to help answer the mystery of ultra high energy (1020 GeV) cosmic rays. Southern Auger is just beginning to take scientific quality data, after a funding shortage delayed its installation and commissioning. The second version of the Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS-II) is also just beginning to take data, in the Soudan mine in northern Minnesota, to seek Weakly Interaction Massive Particles (WIMPs). The Theoretical Particle Physics group is strong in phenomenology, perturbative QCD, lattice gauge theory, model building, neutrino physics, and super symmetry.

The committee:

applauds the first rate particle astrophysics activities being carried out at FNAL in some of the most exciting areas of research in basic science.

supports the requested 3 year funding extension for the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

  • approves directing EAG resources to the R&D phase of SNAP, assuming it does not delay SDSS completion
  • supports FNAL involvement in DECAM, subject to the availability of personnel resources
  • hopes that the Fermilab group playing a central role in the Auger project will develop a data analysis effort, as the southern observatory begins taking high quality data
  • is very pleased with the substantial progress the CDMS-II collaboration has made in the last year, and eagerly awaits new results in the search for dark matter WIMPs
  • supports the strengthening of the Theoretical Astrophysics group in particle-astrophysics, and their initiation of a numerical cosmology effort, subject to the financial priorities of the Lab
  • endorses the plan to bring the various components of the astrophysics effort (theory, EAG, Auger, and CDMS) closer together, both geographically and intellectually
  • encourages better communication between the theoretical astrophysics and the theoretical particle physics groups
  • encourages the Lab to guard against the EAG spreading itself too thin by planning for a reasonable level of growth, as outlined in the draft FLRPC report
  • commends the role of the Theoretical Particle Physics group in supporting the experimental program at Fermilab

Fermilab Users

The Fermilab Users Executive Committee (UEC) organized a significant list of activities in the last year, including the annual visit to Washington with visits to Congress people and their staffers. The UEC also performed a visa survey of Fermilab foreign scientists prior to meeting with similar committees from other national laboratories at BNL, in order to discuss the difficult visa situation for foreign scientists.

The committee:

  • commends the UEC for its active role in helping to make Fermilab a great place to do science
  • wholeheartedly joins the UEC in its concern that difficulties and delays in granting work permits and visas disrupt the lives of foreign scientists, deter talented physicists from doing science at Fermilab, and restrict the ability of the Lab to build new international facilities

1.PROGRAM PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

1.1 Summary of LongRange Planning

The Lab has recently announced a long range plan, looking beyond LHC turn on when the major activities presently planned for Fermilab are MINOS and BTEV along with LHC data analysis. The committee appointed by the Director to foresee this future consisted of esteemed laboratory and university physicists and was chaired by Hugh Montgomery. After about a year of deliberations, they have recently arrived at conclusions and are writing their report.

They describe two alternate scenarios, with similar basic elements but differing in prioritization of the two principal elements. In both scenarios, the two major items involve

(a)involvement in an electron-positron Linear Collider (LC) to investigate collisions at center of mass energies initially up to 500 GeV and

(b)a neutrino activity capable of shedding new light on the masses and mixings of neutrinos.

No other scientific issue rose to a level competitive with these two activities. Both are at the forefront of particle physics science and are likely to remain there for the foreseeable future. Both require major accelerator facilities that push accelerator technology. In each scenario, the Lab would continue limited efforts pursuing fixed target and other experiments, for example on quark flavor, as physics demands and opportunities present themselves. The planning committee also supports growth in programs of particle astrophysics in either vision.

The first scenario assumes that the U.S. community succeeds, and the world community agrees, to having the Linear Collider facility sited in the U.S. and at Fermilab. Addressing the most compelling post-LHC questions on the behavior of matter and energy at the TeV energy scale, such a facility would require contributions and commitment from a world-wide community. To convince the funding agencies and political powers to site the LC in the U.S. at Fermilab will require a unanimous commitment and major initiative by the U.S. particle physics community of all laboratories and universities. Furthermore, particle physicists will need to convince the broader scientific community at home and abroad of the scientific advantages to this U.S. location. If this effort were successful, U.S. science might recoup some of the momentum lost over the past decade. In this Lab scenario, it is anticipated that resources might still be available to support efforts in pursuit of neutrino issues.

The second scenario assumes the LC is located offshore. Though Fermilab would be strongly involved in both the LC accelerator and its operation, the primary Lab focus would involve scientific issues related to the neutrino masses and mixings. One potential need foreseen for this next era of neutrino science is very high fluxes of neutrinos, requiring substantially higher fluxes of protons to produce them. The Main Injector is capable of accelerating and targeting substantially more high energy protons than presently; the limit is in the now aged 8 GeV Booster injector. Specifically a linear proton accelerator, or “proton driver”, to replace the Booster would provide roughly an order-of-magnitude more protons for the Main Injector to make neutrino beams. A detailed physics case is needed to quantitatively address this option and to compare with other capabilities.

Either scenario requires more attention and support for these long range issues than has previously been the case. Both organizational and technical work must be done to accomplish either. The specific recommendations made by the FLRPC to accomplish them are discussed in the next section.

1.2Future Accelerator R&D

The A0 research program at Fermilab that is partially funded by the Department of Education through NorthernIllinoisUniversity is a cost effective way of introducing young physicists and engineers to the excitement of accelerator physics. The program is centered on generating and using low emittance electron beams to study a variety of accelerator physics issues. The acceleration system uses superconducting RF cavities that were developed as part of the TESLA project and provides experience in developing and using this important technology. The goal of a new Fermilab graduate fellowship program in accelerator physics is to recruit up to ten graduate students to work in both the A0 program and in the Accelerator Division on various problems in the array of accelerators that support the Tevatron.

The Committee is pleased with these developments and urges the Laboratory Management to continue to vigorously support these important activities to provide the next generation of accelerator physicists. An important benefit from this program is to have bright young people in residence who are interested in the daily operational problems, and who will help Fermilab realize the potential of Run II.

Linear Collider

There is now a worldwide consensus that the next large facility in particle physics should be an international high energy electron-positron Linear Collider. This consensus recognizes the central importance of the physics to be studied, as well as the maturity of the accelerator designs. The importance of this facility to the future U.S. program in high-energy physics has been highlighted recently in the DOE 20 year plan, in which the Linear Collider was identified as the highest mid-term priority for the Office of Science. As the largest high-energy physics laboratory in the United States, Fermilab should play a key role in the development of the international effort to advance the Linear Collider.