Transcript スライド 1 - Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare

Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPSI2012 @ 16Nov2012
LHCf and High Energy Cosmic Rays
Yoshitaka Itow
STE Lab / Kobayashi-Maskawa Inst.
Nagoya University
and on behalf of the LHCf collaboration
“HCPS 2012”
Nov 12-16, 2012, Kyoto
1
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Thanks for exciting HCP2012, various exciting
results in Higgs, BSM, rere dacays, QGP, etc..
And now, something completely different point of view...
Connection to Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays
2
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Hadron interactions at ultra high energy
Accelerator n Cosmic rays 1020eV
1017eV
Hadron interaction data
Hint for interactions at
ultra-ultra high energy
ECM ~ ( 2 × Elab × Mp ) 1/2
√s=14 TeV n 1017eV cosmic rays
√s=447TeV n 1020eV cosmic rays
3
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
1017 eV :Crossroad of accelerators and UHECRs
AUGER
TA
Air shower experiments
HEAT
TALE
2nd Knee?
Knee
Colliders 0.5
Cosmic rays 1014
0.9 2.2
AUGER, TA
7
Ankle
GZK
14TeV
1017
1020eV
 LHC, Tevatron, SppS and RHIC can verify interactions at 1014 ~ 1017 eV
 Low E extension (TALE, HEAT) plan can verify 1017eV shower
4
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Air shower observation
Air Florescence telescope (FD)
EM component
(>90% of collision energy)
 Total calorimeter
 Shower max altitude
surface
detectors
Surface Detectors (SD)
# of particles at given altitude
(EM or Muon component)
5
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
GZK cut-off confirmed ? But…
GZK cut off ?
UHECR2012
p  CMB  
Need identify UHECR is
“proton”
Too many m @ Auger, if proton
TA prefers proton
Auger prefers Fe
6
ICRC2011
ICRC2011
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
① Inelastic cross section
④ 2ndary interactions
nucleon, p
If large s
rapid development
If small s
deep penetrating
② Forward energy spectrum
If softer
shallow development
If harder
deep penetrating
③ Inelasticity k= 1-plead/pbeam
If large k
(p0s carry more energy)
rapid development
If small k
( baryons carry more energy)
deep penetrating
7
(relevant to Nm )
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Feedback from LHC to UHECRs Astropart.Phys. 35 (2011) 98-113
sinel
Central multiplicity
EPL, 96 (2011) 21002
CMS PAS FWD-11-003
Forward energy flow
Forward energy flow
3
3.5
4.5
5
4
h CERN-PH-EP/2011-086
8
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Very forward : Majority of energy flow (s=14TeV)
Multiplicity
Energy Flux
All particles
neutral
8.4 < h < ∞
Most of the energy flows into very forward
( Particles of XF > 0.1 contribute 50% of shower particles )
9
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
very forward
~ very low pT
pT (GeV/c)
N
String fragment
1
0
0
2000
remnant
NxE
pT (GeV/c)
T.Pierog
Energy (GeV)
1
0
0
2000
10
Energy (GeV)
The
LHCfLHCf
collaboration
The
collaboration
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
T.Iso, Y.Itow, K.Kawade, Y.Makino, K.Masuda, Y.Matsubara, E.Matsubayashi,
G.Mitsuka, Y.Muraki, T.Sako
Solar-Terrestrial Environment Laboratory, Nagoya Univ.
H.Menjo
Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya Univ.
K.Yoshida
Shibaura Institute of Technology
K.Kasahara, T.Suzuki, S.Torii Waseda Univ.
T.Tamura
Kanagawa University
M.Haguenauer
Ecole Polytechnique, France
W.C.Turner
LBNL, Berkeley, USA
O.Adriani, L.Bonechi, M.Bongi, R.D’Alessandro, M.Grandi,
P.Papini, S.Ricciarini, G.Castellini
INFN, Univ. di Firenze, Italy
K.Noda, A.Tricomi
INFN, Univ. di Catania, Italy
A-L.Perrot
CERN, Switzerland
~30 physicists from 5 countries
11
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
LHCf site
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
TAN
D1 magnet
Protons
Charged particles (+)
Neutral particles
IP
Beam pipe
Charged particles (-)
96mm
140m
ATLAS
LHCf/ZDC
140m
TAN absorber
12
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
The LHCf detectors
140m
calorimeter
Arm2
IP1
n
p0
calorimeter

Arm1
Front Counter
Front Counter
Arm1
Arm2
44X0,
1.6 lint
16 tungsten + pl.scinti. layers
25mmx25mm+32mmx32mm
4 Silicon strip tracking layers
16 tungsten + pl.scinti. layers
20mmx20mm+40mmx40mm
13
4 SciFi tracking layers
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Calorimeter performance




Gamma-rays (E>100GeV, dE/E<5%)
Neutral Hadrons (E>a few 100 GeV, dE/E~30%)
Neutral Pions (E>700GeV, dE/E<3%)
Shower incident position (170mm / 40mm for Arm1/Arm2)
p0
-like
Had-like
14
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Brief history of LHCf
 May 2004 LOI
Jul 2006
construction
Jan 2008
Installation
 Feb 2006 TDR
 June 2006 LHCC
approved
Sep 2008
1st LHC beam
Aug 2007
SPS beam test
Mar 2010
1st 7TeV run
Dec 2009
1st 900GeV run
(2nd 900GeV in May2010)
Jul 2010
15
Detector removal
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
LHCf single  spectra at 7TeV
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
0.68 (0.53)nb-1 on 15May2010
DPMJET 3.04 QGSJETII-03 SIBYLL 2.1 EPOS 1.99 PYTHIA 8.145
Gray hatch : Sys+stat errors
h>10.94
Magenta hatch: Stat errors of MC
8.81<h<8.99
8.81<h<8.99
h>10.94
Arm1
8.81<h<8.99
h>10.94
PLB 703 (2011) 128-134
 None of the models agree with data
 Data within the range of the model spread
Arm2
16
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
LHCf single  spectra at 900 GeV
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
PLB 715 (2012) 298-303
May2010 900GeV data ( 0.3nb-1 , 21% uncertainty not shown )
DPMJET 3.04 QGSJETII-03 SIBYLL 2.1 EPOS 1.99 PYTHIA 8.145
h>10.15
8.77 <h<9.46
8.77 <h<9.46
MC/Data
h>10.15
6
5
4
6
5
4
3
2
1
3
2
1
50
E(GeV)
450
8.77 <h<9.46
h>10.15 17
50
E(GeV)
450
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Comparison of Data/MC ratio at two energies
2
MC/Data
High h
2
1
MC/Data
1
MC/Data
900GeV
7TeV
MC/Data
DPMJET 3.04 QGSJETII-03 SIBYLL 2.1 EPOS 1.99 PYTHIA 8.145
2
2
1
1
low h
18
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf 7TeV p0 analysis
Type-I
Type-II
Type-I
sM=3.7%
1
Type-II
PTp0(GeV/c)
1
0
0
Ep0(GeV)
3500
0
0
Ep0(GeV) 193500
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf p0 PT spectra at 7TeV
PRD 86 (2012) 092001
DPMJET 3.04 QGSJETII-03 SIBYLL 2.1 EPOS 1.99 PYTHIA 8.145
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
20
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf p0 PT spectra at 7TeV (data/MC)
MC/Data
DPMJET 3.04 QGSJETII-03 SIBYLL 2.1 EPOS 1.99 PYTHIA 8.145
EPOS gives the best agreement both for shape and yield.
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
MC/Data
0
21
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
0
PT[GeV]
0.6
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Feed back to UHECR composition
 Retune done for cosmic ray MC (EPOS, QGSJET II) with all the LHC input.
(cross section, forward energy flow, LHCf, etc.)
 Uncertainty reduced from 50 gcm2 to 20gcm2
( p-Fe difference is 100gcm2 )
Detal reanlaysis of UHECR is also needed for conclusion.
T.Pierog, S.Ostapchenko, ISVHECRI2012
Before LHC
After LHC
22
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf future plan
2010
0.9, 7 TeV
2012
8TeV
2014
LHC LS1
Detector
LHCf upgrade
p-Pb
Reinstall
Detector
upgrade
2013
Reinstall
LHCf I
2011
2015
14TeV
LHCf II
RHICf?
 Analysis ongoing for 2010 data
 Neutron energy spectra g inelasticity.
 Reinstall Arm2 for p-Pb in early 2013
 Very important information for nuclear effect.
 Under discussion of common triggers for
combined analysis w/ ATLAS detector.
 Reinstall Arm1+2 for 14TeV in 2014
 Now upgrading detectors w/ rad-hard GSO.
 A new measurement at RHIC 0 degree
 Under discussions for 500GeV p+p and d + light-A.
 Far future (>2020?) p-N and N-N collisions at LHC ?
23
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Expct’d E spectra (p-remnant side )
Small tower
Pb
p
Large tower

n
24
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Summary
 UHECR needs accelerator data to solve the current enigma,
and may also hint QCD at beyond-LHC energy.
 1017-1014eV is an unique overlap region for colliders and
UHECRs
 Various LHC data already implemented for cosmic rays
interaction models.
 LHCf provides dedicated measurements of neutral particles
at 0 deg to cover most of collision energy flow.
E spectra for single gamma at 7TeV and at 900GeV.
Agreement is “so-so”, but none of models really agree.
PT spectra for 7TeV p0. EPOS gives nice agreement.
 Future
2004 LHC p-Pb run to study nuclear effect at 0 degree.
Revisit “14TeV” at ~2014 with a rad-hard detector.
Possible future RHIC run is under discussion.
25
Possible LHC light ion runs is under discussion.
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Backup
26
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf calorimeters
Arm#2 Detector
Arm#1 Detector
27
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Setup in IP1-TAN (side view)
BRAN-Sci
ZDC
type1
BRAN-IC
ZDC
type2
LHCf
Calorimeter
LHCf Front
Counter
Beam
pipe
Side view
TAN
Neutral
particles
Distance
from center
IP1
Beam pipe
28
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Event sample (p0 g 2 )
Longitudinal development measured by scintillator layers
25mm Tower
32mm Tower
600GeV
420GeV
photon
photon
Total Energy deposit
Energy
Shape
PID
Lateral distribution measured by silicon detectors
Hit position,
Multi-hit search.
X-view
Y-view
π0 mass reconstruction from two photon.
M p 0 = Eg 1Eg 2 × q
29
Systematic studies
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Forward production spectra vs Shower curve
XF = E/Etot
Half of shower
particles comes
from large XF 
Measurement at
very forward region
is needed
30
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Parent p0 pseudorapidity producing
ground muons
31
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
The single photon energy spectra at 0 degree at 7TeV
(O.Adriani et al., PLB703 (2011) 128-134
 DATA
 15 May 2010 17:45-21:23, at Low Luminosity 6x1028cm-2s-1, no beam
crossing angle
 0.68 nb-1 for Arm1, 0.53nb-1 for Arm2
 MC
 DPMJET3.0４, QGSJETII03, SYBILL2.1, EPOS1.99
PYTHIA 8.145 with the default parameters.
 107 inelastic p-p collisions by each model.
 Analysis
 Two pseudo-rapidity, η>10.94 and 8.81<η<8.99.
 No correction for geometrical acceptance.
 Luminosity by FrontCounter (VdM scan)
 Normalized by number of inelastic collisions
with assumption as s inela = 71.5mb.
(c.f. 73.5±0.6. +1.8
mb by TOTEM )
-1.3
Arm1
Arm2
32
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
New 900 GeV single  analysis
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Arm1 small 50-100GeV
 0.3nb-1 data (44k Arm1 and 63k Arm2 events ) taken at
2,3 and 27 May, 2010
 Low luminosity (L~1028 typical,1 or 4 xing), negligible
pile up ( 0.05 int./xing ).
 Relatively less h-dependence in the acceptance.
Negligible multi-incidents at a calorimeter (~ 0.1 
(>50GeV) /int. )
 Higher gain operation for PMTs. Energy scale
calibration by SPS beam, checked with p0 in 7TeV data.
-like
hadron-like
PID (L90)
Mp0 in 7TeV
w/ normal&high gain
33
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
XF spectra for single :
900GeV/ 7TeV comparison
7TeV
0.9TeV
(sys error not included)
Arm1-Data
Preliminary
XF
Arm1-EPOS
Preliminary
XF
 Comparing XF for common PT region at two collision energies.
 Less root-s dependence of PT for XF ?
34
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf  / p0 measurement
1.0
PT [GeV]
p0 @ 7TeV
0
Energy [GeV]
p0 g 
θ
[μrad]
η
310
8.7
0
∞
Viewed from IP1
(red:Arm1, blue:Arm2)
Projected edge
of beam pipe
35
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf type-I p0 analysis
1/Nint Ed3N/dp3
PTp0(GeV/c)
 Low lumi (L~5e28) on 15-16May, 2.53(1.91) nb-1 at Arm1
(Arm2). About 22K (39K) p0 for Arm1(Arm2) w/ 5%BG.
 For E>100GeV, PID ( selection), shower leakage
correction, energy rescaling (-8.1% and -3.8% for Arm1&2).
 (E, PT) spectra in +-3s p0 mass cut w/ side band subtracted.
 Unfolding spectra by toy p0 MC to correct acceptance and
resolution
y=8.9
y=10.0
Mp0(MeV)
Acceptance of
p0 Rapidity
1
10-4
0
36
PTp0(GeV/c)
0.6
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
37
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Average PT of p0
1. Thermodynamics
(Hagedron, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 6:10, 1 (1983))
Comparison w/ UA7@630GeV
Extend to higher h regions
Less energy dependence of <PT>?
38
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Next target: Inelasticity~ 0 degree neutrons
 Important for Xmax and also Nm
 Measurement of inelasticity at LHC energy
Neutral hadrons at 14 TeV
(LHCf acceptance, no resolution)
Neutral hadrons at 14 TeV
39
(LHCf acceptance, 30% resolution)
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Nuclear effects for very forward region
 Air showers take place via p-N or Fe-N collisions !
Nuclear shadowing, final state interaction, gluon saturations
Nuclear modification factor at 0 degree may be large.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 152302
p-p
p-N
p-Pb
QGSJET II-04
All hs
8.81<h<8.99
h>10.94
40
Courtesy of S. Ostapchenko
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
LHCf p – Pb runs at √sNN=4.4TeV (Jan2013)
IP2
Pb
Arm2
IP1
p
IP8
 2013 Jan / a month of p-Pb opportunity.
3.5TeV p +1.38TeV/n Pb (√sNN=4.4TeV)
Expected luminosity: 3×1028cm-2s-1, sAA=2b
Install only Arm2 at one side (Si good for multiplicity)
Trig. exchange w/ ATLAS  centrality tagging
• Requested statistics : Ncoll = 108 ( Lint = 50 mb-1 )
• 2106 single γ
Si Elec. Arm2
• 35000 p0
• Assuming L = 1026 cm-2s-1
Preamp
(1% of expected lumi)
• t = 140 h (6 days) !
41
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
“RHICf” : h acceptance for 100GeV/n d-N MC
h>5.8 is covered
d
N
All particles
No acceptance forπ0
at 900GeV
Neutrals
42
Acceptance for p0
Energy flow
Y.Itow, LHCf and UHECRs
HCPS2012 @ 16Nov 2012
Future p-N and Fe-N in LHC ?
 LHC 7TeV/Z p-N and N-N collisions realize the
laboratory energy of 5.2x1016eV and 3.6x1017eV,
respectively (N: Nitrogen)
 Suggestions from the CERN ion source experts:
 LHC can in principle circulate any kind of ions, but switching ion
source takes considerable time and manpower
 Oxygen can be a good candidate because it is used as a
‘support gas’ for Pb ion production. This reduces the switching
time and impact to the main physics program at LHC.
 According to the current LHC schedule, the realization is not
earlier than 2020.
 New ion source for medical facility in discussion will enable even
Fe-N collisions in future
43