Report from ILCSC

Shin-ichi KurokawaFormer ILCSC Chair

KEKNovember 4, 2007

CCAST ILC WorkshopIHEP, Beijing, China

2003 年 7 月Asia

Global Effort on ILC Design & R&D

Joint Design, Implementation, Operations, ManagementHost Country Provides Conventional Facilities

Europe Americas

ICFA and ILCSC

2002 ICFA has established the ILC Steering Committee (ILCSC) with Maury Tigner as the 1st Chair

2003 ILCSC set up Parameter Committee

2004 ILCSC set up ITRP and ICFA/ILCSC have approve ITRP recommendation

2005 ICFA/ILCSC has established GDE

2005 SK became 2nd ILCSC Chair (July)

　　　　

ILC Organization Chart

ICFA

ILCSC

GDE

Asia Regional

Team

EuropeanRegional

Team

AmericanRegional

Team

ACFA

ALCSC FALC

WWS

DirectorsCERN Robert AymarDESY Albrecht WagnerFermilab Pier OddoneKEK Atsuto SuzukiSLAC Jonathan DorfanLC Steering Group Chairs Asian Won NamkungEuropean Karlheinz Meier American Satoshi OzakiOther Chair(2nd ) Shin-ichi Kurokawa China (IHEP Director) Hesheng ChenRussia (BINP Director) Alexander SkrinskyICFA outside LC regions Vinod SahniAsia Rep. 　　　　　 Sachio Komamiya Europe Rep. Francois RichardAmerican Rep. Jim BrauSecretary Roy Rubinstein

Membership of the ILCSC(Present)Membership of the ILCSC(Present)

Parameters for the ILC (2003)

• Ecm 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%

• The machine must be upgradeable to 1 TeV

Parameters Report Revisited (Nov. 2006)

• The ILCSC Parameters Group has given updated selected clarification on accelerator requirements, based on achieving ILC science goals:

– Removing safety margins in the energy reach is acceptable but should be recoverable without extra construction. The max luminosity is not needed at the top energy (500 GeV), however …..

– The interaction region (IR) should allow for two experiments ….. the two experiments could share a common IR, provided that the detector changeover can be accomplished in approximately 1 week.

International Technology Review Panel

Global project named International Linear Collider (ILC)

ITRP Recommendationendorsed by ICFA in August 2004

ICFA has decided on superconducting technology for the future linear collider (LC), by endorsing the resolution of the ITRP. The ITRP report emphasizes the importance of world-wide unified approach as a single team to design the international linear collider (ILC).

-> ILCSC has established GDE

Global Design Effort (GDE)• ILCSC set up a committee with Paul Grannis as Chair

to select a Director for the GDE.

• February 2005, at TRIUMF, ILCSC and ICFA unanimously endorsed the Committee’s choice.

• On March 18, 2005

Barry Barish

officially accepted

the position at

the opening of

LCWS 05 meeting

at Stanford.

ILC DGEILC-MOU : Signed on May 10, 2005

ILCSC from 2005 to 2007

2005 July: SK became 2nd ILCSC Chair

2006 January: ILCSC set up Machine Advisor Committee (MAC); MAC met 5 times

2007 February: First release of RDR of ILC in Beijing

2007 May: International Cost Review of RDR

2007 August: Final version of RDR was handed to ILCSC in Daegu

2007 September 27: Appointment of Research Director

2007 October 4: Call for Letter of Intent

2007 October 25: Enzo Iarocci became 3rd ILCSC Chair 　　

Revised Mandate of ILCSC (August 2006)

• The ILCSC, as a Sub-panel of ICFA, is established in order to facilitate a global support towards the realization of the International Linear Collider as a global collaborative effort, drawing on input from regional steering committees.

• The ILCSC has established the Global Design Effort (GDE) Central Team to coordinate and direct the effort of the teams in Asia, Europe and the Americas that comprise the GDE. The ILCSC, representing ICFA, will provide oversight to the GDE.

• The ILCSC will monitor the progress of the GDE activities, including through reports by the GDE Director and the assessment of technical progress through reports by the MAC Chairperson.

Revised Mandate of ILCSC (wrt FALC)• The ILCSC will work closely with the Funding Agencies f

or the Linear Collider (FALC) and/or other national or international agencies to facilitate the evolution of GDE to an institution under international governance aimed at the construction of the ILC.

• The ILCSC will assess and endorse budget requests for the common operations fund of the Central Team that the GDE Director will put forward to Funding Agencies for the Linear Collider (FALC) for approval.

• Comment: FALC has changed its name from Funding Agencies for Linear Colliders to Funding Agencies for Large Colliders in May 2006

• FALC determined its Terms of Reference in July 2007

Role of Governments (FALC)

• Governments are the key – they will make the decisions that lead to the establishment of an ILC project

• The main forum is the Funding Agencies for Large Colliders (FALC), which meets about twice a year. Major steps (like ITRP, GDE, etc) are discussed with FALC to ensure acceptance by the governments of ICFA’s actions. FALC has created a small common fund for the GDE.

• FALC has recently expanded its role beyond the ILC to be able to put it into proper context with the plans around the world. It has formed “terms of reference” to establish its roles and plans to make an annual report for governments.

FALC Terms of Reference

1. To consider the wider picture of particle physics research, to understand the priorities and constraints in each region and to provide information and guidance to governments for planning and coordinating large particle physics facilities.

2. To improve the possibilities for international co-operation by understanding the planning processes in the funding agencies.

3. To provide a forum to prepare for, and report, decisions about funding arrangements for future particle physics facilities.

4. To provide a forum to promote knowledge of the applications of the technologies to be developed for large colliders, both in other scientific areas and in industry.

5. Recognising ICFA as the scientific reference point, to receive reports from ICFA (and its subsidiary bodies as appropriate), on the status of programmes for future particle physics facilities.

6. To exchange information on R&D projects being carried out for future particle physics facilities requiring international cooperation.

7. To encourage global cooperation in the R&D programmes for existing projects (such as the LHC and J-PARC), promote coordination for projects in the R&D and design phase (such as the ILC) and share information on possible future technologies and projects (such as CLIC and a neutrino factory).

8. To promote for the ILC specifically, the coordination of resources and the conduct of an R&D programme for the engineering design phase, and to work towards an appropriate organisational structure for the engineering design phase.

9. To produce a public annual report, including a scientific report from ICFA and information on the global picture of R&D for future particle physics facilities.

These Terms of Reference will be reviewed no later than 2010.

Reference Design Report for ILC Released on February 8, 2007, in Beijing

21

RDR Design & “Value” CostsSummary

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)

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 twice

• 3 day “internal review” in Dec• ILCSC MAC review in Jan

Σ Value = 6.62 B ILC Units

International Cost Review• It was agreed that a single international cost review of the RDR shoul

d take place.

• The ILCSC was invited to organize this review. ILCSC would nominate 2 members per region and might add a few members taking into account expertise of members. In addition to it two members per region would be selected by FALC.

• The committee consists of 16 members: 7 (6+1) members nominated by ILCSC, 6 members by FALC, ILCSC Chair, ILC MAC Chair, and Secretary.

• Charge: This review should focus on cost trends and relative costs of sub-systems as they relate to potential scope changes to be incorporated in the EDR, their relevance to the R&D program needed to complete the EDR, and the methodology used in the estimate.

• The review committee meeting was held at LAL Orsay on May 23-25.

• First draft report has been just sent to the committee members

Membership

Sergio Bertolucci (Frascati, Italy) ILCSC (from Europe)Jia-er Chen (Peking University, China) ILCSC (from Asia)Mark de Jong (Canadian Light Source) ILCSC/FALC (from Americas)Lyn Evans (CERN) FALC (from Europe) (Chair)Norbert Holtkamp (ITER) ILCSC/FALC (from Americas)S. S. Kapoor (BARC, India) ILCSC (from Asia)G. S. Lee (NFRC, Korea) FALC (from Asia)Vera Luth (SLAC, USA) ILCSC/FALC (from Americas) Norihiko Ozaki (Institute for Techno-Economics, Japan) ILCSC (at Large)Lucio Rossi (CERN) ILCSC (from Europe)Ed Temple (Fermilab, USA) ILCSC/FALC (from Americas)Dieter Trines (DESY, Germany) FALC (from Europe)Toshihide Tsunematsu (JAEA, Japan) FALC (from Asia)

Ex-officioShin-ichi Kurokawa (KEK) ILCSC ChairFerdinand Willeke (DESY) ILCSC MAC Chair

Secretary Roy Rubinstein (Fermilab)

Major Points 　• The Committee believes that GDE is doing an excellent job of

designing ILC under the conditions that currently exist. The costing methodology is as good as can be done at the present time.

• The Committee notes that the GDE has already reduced the ILC cost by over 25% since July 2006, and that the technical design has been scrutinized in four reviews by the ILC Machine Advisory Committee (MAC). Because of this, the Committee concentrated on two major cost drivers: the Main Linac and Conventional Facilities, which together comprise 70% of the ILC cost.

• The Committee, together with the GDE, sees further possible cost savings, including in Main Linac, RF distribution, Damping Ring optimization, tunnel diameters, the number and size of vertical access shafts, and the tunnel water cooling parameters.

• More industry involvement in ILC design and R&D would be very desirable.

Major Points (cont)• The methodology for the Main Linac design is the best that can be

done at present. The cavity gradient goal is aggressive, but progress towards it is being made; further R&D should help, and XFEL experience over the next few years should be valuable.

• Project management will need to be strengthened during EDR phase; the reporting by engineers directly to the GDE management is especially important during this phase.

• ILCSC provides good scientific oversight of the project, but more government involvement is needed to optimize costs. More government funding would allow a more centralized organization and more R&D, including industrial R&D.

Modified Mandate of ILCSC (wrt WWS)

• The Worldwide Study (WWS) will report regularly to the ILCSC and advise it on ILC physics and detector issues, while maintaining close contact with the GDE on the development of detector concepts and detector R&D

• The ILCSC will monitor the progress of the detector and machine detector interface development, including through reports by the co-chairpersons of the WWS and the Machine Detector Interface Committee (MDI).

Detector Roadmap

• Timeline requirement– Synchronize with accelerator timeline– 2012 ‘completed’ detector EDR

• Construction can begin

– 2010 ‘light’ detector EDR• Two EDRs• To be ready together with the accelerator EDR• Cost accuracy consistent with that for accelerator

– Then, it would require: ~2008• Two groups to write EDRs formed

Roadmap

• October 4, 2007 – ILCSC announces call for LOI due October 1, 2008.

• October 2008– Detector design teams submit LOI.

• End 2008– Two detector designs recognized for development

toward the engineering design phase.• ~2010

– Engineering designs completed for two detectors in a synchronized way with the accelerator EDR.

Management Structure

• Research Director (RD)– Appointed by and reports to ILCSC– Responsible for the experimental program of

ILC

• International Detector Advisory Group (IDAG)– Recruited by RD and approved by ILCSC– Reviews the experimental program of ILC– Advises the RD in performing its tasks– Reports to RD

New ILC Organization Chart

ICFA

ILCSC

GDE

ACFA

ALCSC FALC

Physics Community

RD Director3 PMs AABIDAG

PAC

WWS

RG

Discussion under way at ILCSC

• New MoU for GDE EDR phase

• Chair and Membership of Project Advisory Committee (PAC)

• Siting Strategy

ILCSC PAC (Project Advisory Committee) Mandate

• The International Collider Steering Committee (ILCSC) is responsible for the oversight of the Global Design Effort (GDE) activities.

• PAC will assist ILCSC in this function and report to the ILCSC.• PAC will review the GDE accelerator activities, notably the proces

s that will lead to the EDR and the accelerator design. • It will complement the Accelerator Advisory Board (AAB), which is

part of the GDE process and which reports to the GDE Director.• In addition, PAC will assist ILCSC in its oversight functions by revi

ewing the ILC detector activities, notably detector integration into the accelerator. It will complement the International Detector Advisory Committee (IDAC), which reports to the Research Director.

• In its review activity PAC will examine the overall consistency and realism of the project, in relation with physics, technical design and cost.

• PAC shall comprise about nine members, appointed by the ILCSC for term of two or three years, and will meet several times per year until ILCSC and the International Committee for Future Accelerators (ICFA) approves the Engineering Design Report (EDR).

Comment on Common Fund

• 2008 common fund 1.47 M$ + 0.15 M$ (support of RD)

• In Asia- Half is supported by Japanese party and the other half by other party or parties- Until 2007 Korean is only the other party- From 2008 India will join

Summary and Most Important Issues

• ILC has entered a new phase (EDR phase) from this autumn.

• It is utmost important to have governments of major players commit the ILC and create an international governance scheme.

• In Asia, to strengthen ILC activities in China, Korea, Taiwan, India and Japan and cooperation among these are crucial.

• To encourage participation of other players such as Vietnam, the Philippine, Pakistan, etc, is our duty.

Thank you for your attention