Workshop Agenda 2g

New Phenomena Workshop ’98

Thursday March 26 - Sunday March 29, 1998
University of California, Davis

Please send comments to the NP Workshop organizers, especially about the working groups.

Last updated: March 24, 1998 01:26:09 PM

Last changes were (most recent at top)

• Added link (provided by Doug Norman) to trigger utilities available for use during the workshop.
• Added new page with list of speakers and their email addresses (for those who don't want to hunt through the agenda page, where you can also find the list of speakers).
• Added pointer to QSIM (fast detector simulation) information (provided by Sarah Eno) note also the link therein to the description of the QSIM common blocks.
• Added information about campus map, under Workshop Agenda.
• Added room assignments to agenda; added explicit times for coffee breaks.

Table of Contents

• Goals and Products for the Workshop
• Working Groups and a (partial) shopping list of NP models
• Working Group Charge
• Workshop Agenda
• Workshop Follow-Up
• Videoconferencing
• Accomodations and Travel Information
• DØ Collaboration Participants and invited speaker (theorist) participants
• Skiing
• Information on QSIM (fast detector simulation program)
• UPG_GEANT and Upgrade trigger simulation information

Goals and Products for the Workshop

Goal

The goal for this workshop is to begin preparation for Run II analyses for DØ. For such a short workshop to be fruitful, we need to limit attention to a few topics on which we can make real progress.

Products

There must be some tangible output from this workshop. The output should be results from the working groups, and concrete plans for future work, to be used as input for the TEV II Workshops, and also to be used by our DØ collaborators in designing trigger lists and tools, offline reconstruction tools, et cetera. These tasks require concrete physics input in order to make rational decisions.

Working Groups

We'll spend the first afternoon in "model-specific" working groups. These groups have the task of writing a short document (doesn't have to be elegant TeX) listing what channels are important for their model, why it is important, what unusual features are present, etc. These documents are intended to "feed" the "channel-specific" working groups, which meet on the following days. These documents will also be of use to our collaborators with less expertise in a wide variety of NP models, to help them understand why various channels are important.

For the following 3 days, we'll arrange our working groups by experimental final state, rather than by model. This will allow us to concentrate on trigger and particle ID issues, and to encourage the theorists to interact with more than one working group. Each working group is expected to consider many possible models that could be studied in a specific final state. These working groups will use the output of all of the "model-based" working groups, and additional input from the theorists, in order to determine as complete a menu as possible of the uses for various final states. We expect each of our invited theorists to participate in several (or even all) of these "channel" working groups, and that most DØ collaborators will participate just one of the groups.

The current organization of the working groups is given below. If you know that you would like to participate in one of the groups, especially if you have already done some work that you would like to share with other, please contact the leaders of the appropriate working group. If you're not sure which is the appropriate working group, please contact Marc Paterno (paterno@fnal.gov).

Working Group Charge

Please note this list is (clearly) not yet complete!

Here is a (partial) list of what each working group is expected to brainstorm about and report on in its summary document:

• Triggering requirements. This is perhaps the most important single topic, and includes both consideration of what triggers are necessary to collect the signal events, and also what triggers are necessary to understand the backgrounds, while using the least possible bandwidth. Issues to think of include:
  • How do we deal with multiple interactions?
  • How much intelligence can be pushed down into Level 2 (or even Level 1), rather than relying on Level 3?
  • What sort of vertexing is required (both primary vertex and displaced vertices)?
  • What is the effect of the instantaneous luminosity varying over the duration of a store?
• Particle ID requirements. Some of this is obvious, but perhaps not all. Last time, we seemed to miss the importance for low energy electrons. What, if anything, have we missed so far this time?
• Simulation requirements. For what tasks to we need detailed MC information (for studying cluster shapes in the calorimeter, or tracking details in quest of displaced vertices, for example), and where can we make do with a parameterization? For parameterized MC, how do we collect the correct data to determine (or at least test) the parameterization? What degree of uncertainty is acceptable in such parameterizations, and how do we quantify it?

We're sure more topics will arise during the course of discussions at the workshop. The task of the working groups will be to formulate the appropriate questions (maybe those above, maybe others as well or instead), and to start to answer the questions. When we leave, we would like to have progress on as many fronts and possible. And, perhaps even more important, we'd like to have a plan for how to proceed in the months following the workshop.

Workshop Follow-Up

The workshop shall be a failure if it has no long-lasting impact on our preparation for Run II. We must make sure that the work done in these working groups is not wasted. This requires follow-ups after the workshop.

We should plan to have monthly updates from the working groups, so that we make some constant (if low-intensity) progress on each topic. Brief reports should be made at the New Phenomena group meetings, but it would be reasonable to have longer ones made at occasional Run II planning meetings.

We should also plan to have another workshop, perhaps in one year’s time, with the same general plan: preparing for Run II.

Videoconferencing

We will have limited support for videoconferencing. We will have access to the department's videoconferencing equipment. The VC room is suitable for small working meetings (5-6 people). It is not suitable for videocasting of any of the plenary talks. There is only one room, so only one conference at a time can be supported.

As demand dictates, we will set up a schedule for use of the room. If you know you will have the need to contact someone not able to attend the workshop for a specific meeting, please send mail to Marc (paterno@fnal.gov) to reserve a time.