DOE HEP Renewal Proposal from Duke University High Energy Physics to Department of Energy Oﬃce of Science

January 3, 2019

Project Title: Research in High Energy Physics at Duke University

Project Director: Christopher W. Walter address: Physics Department, Science Drive Duke University, Box 90305, Durham, NC 27708-0305 email: [email protected] phone: (919) 660-2535

Principal Investigators: Task A (Energy Frontier): A. Arce, A. Goshaw, A. Kotwal, M. Kruse • Task C (Cosmic Frontier): C. Walter • Task M (Intensity Frontier): S. Oh • Task N (Intensity Frontier): P. Barbeau, K. Scholberg, C. Walter •

Project Period: April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2019

DOE award number: DE-SC0010007 Funding Opportunity Number: DE-FOA-0001358

Recipient Address: Duke University c/o Oﬃce of Research Support 2200 West Main Street, Suite 710 Durham, NC 27708-4677 Recipient TIN: 56-0532129

DOE Oﬃce of Science Program Oﬃce: High Energy Physics

Technical Contact: Dr. Abid Patwa email: [email protected]

1 1 Cover Page Supplement for Multiple Research Areas

Lead PI: Christopher Walter

Task A (Energy Frontier): A. Arce, A. Goshaw, A. Kotwal, M. Kruse • Task C (Cosmic Frontier): C. Walter • Task M (Intensity Frontier): S. Oh • Task N (Intensity Frontier): P. Barbeau, K. Scholberg, C. Walter • Name and Yearly Budget for Proposals with Multiple Research Areas Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Name Research Area Budget Budget Budget Budget Lead PI C. Walter - - - - Co-PI A. Arce Energy Frontier $1,117,858 $1,117,026 $1,142,970 $3,377,855 A. Goshaw A. Kotwal M. Kruse Intensity Frontier Co-PI S. Oh $249,707 $257,346 $239,386 $746,439 Muon Intensity Frontier Co-PI K. Scholberg $349,317 $470,528 $480,788 $1,300,633 Neutrino C. Walter Co-PI C. Walter Cosmic Frontier $198,406 $204,582 $209,778 $612,767 TOTAL - - $1,915,289 $2,049,482 $2,072,922 $6,037,693

2 Contents

1 Cover Page Supplement for Multiple Research Areas 2

2 Introduction 4 2.1 Summary of Research Activities ...... 5

3 Task A: Hadron Collider Physics at ATLAS 7 3.1 ATLAS Physics ...... 8 3.2 Plans for Run 2 physics at ATLAS ...... 15 3.3 Operations Support ...... 17 3.4 Community Service ...... 23 3.5 Budget Justiﬁcation and Personnel Requests ...... 24 3.6 ATLAS Conference Talks ...... 24

4 Task C: Cosmology 24 4.1 Introduction ...... 24 4.2 Current Work, Accomplishments and Near Term Plans ...... 25 4.3 Other Contributions to LSST and the DESC ...... 28 4.4 Long Term Plans and Context ...... 28 4.5 Budget Justiﬁcation and Personnel Requests ...... 29

5 Task M: Intensity Frontier program at Mu2E 29 5.1 Introduction ...... 30 5.2 Mu2e ...... 30 5.3 Mu2e at Duke ...... 31 5.4 Budget ...... 37

6 Task N: Neutrino Physics 38 6.1 Task N History and Overview ...... 38 6.2 The COHERENT Experiment ...... 39 6.3 Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment ...... 55 6.4 Super-Kamiokande and T2K ...... 55 6.5 Additional Activities ...... 58 6.6 Service to the Particle Physics Community ...... 58 6.7 Future Plans ...... 58 6.8 Publications and Presentations ...... 58 6.9 Budget Justiﬁcation ...... 58

Appendices 59

Appendix 1 Biographical Sketches 59

Appendix 2 Research Scientists 75

Appendix 3 Current and Pending Support 79

3 Appendix 4 Bibliography and References Cited 84 4.1 Energy Frontier References ...... 84 4.2 Cosmic Frontier References ...... 84 4.3 Intensity Frontier References ...... 85

Appendix 5 Facilities and Other Resources 88

Appendix 6 Equipment 89

Appendix 7 Additional Budget Requirements 90 7.1 Task A Budget and Justification ...... 90 7.2 Task C Budget and Justification ...... 91 7.3 Task M Budget and Justification ...... 92 7.4 Task N Budget and Justification ...... 93

Appendix 8 Data Management Plan 96

Appendix 9 Other Attachment 98

2 Introduction

The Duke High Energy Physics Group has been carrying out elementary particle research for over forty years. Initial experiments used bubble chambers, with a transition to electronic ﬁxed target experiments in the 1970’s. The current program is focused on measurements using hadron colliders, high energy neutrino beams, intense muon beams and survey science telescopes. The active experiments are: ATLAS at the LHC (since 1995) • Neutrino physics at Super-Kamiokande, T2K, DUNE and COHERENT (since 2004) • Search for rare processes at Mu2E (since 2011) • The study of Dark Energy with LSST (since 2013) • The ATLAS experiment forms the basis of our program at the energy frontier where we conduct studies of electroweak, exotics, Higgs and top physics. The research program at AT- LAS is carried out by four Duke faculty members (Professors Arce, Goshaw, Kotwal, Kruse), one senior scientist, two postdocs, and typically six graduate students. These activities are funded by a single umbrella Task A. The Neutrino program is centered around a set of experiments in both Japan and the United States. It is carried out by Professors Barbeau, Scholberg and Walter along with typically two postdocs (currently one) and eight students. The COHERENT program is the current focus, along with contributions to DUNE in the U.S., and continued involvement with Super-K and T2K in Japan. The neutrino research program is described under Task N. Research on rare processes at Fermilab’s intensity frontier was established at Duke in 2011 by Prof. Oh and one senior scientist on the Mu2E experiment. This research program, currently focussed on the tracker R&D, is described under Task M.

4 Starting in 2013, Walter started a new Cosmic Frontier eﬀort at Duke by joining the LSST Dark Energy Survey Collaboration (DESC). He is proposing funding in the Cosmic Frontier for the ﬁrst time in this proposal. This research program is described in the narrative of Task C.

2.1 Summary of Research Activities Sections 3 through 6 of this document contain the detailed project descriptions of our research programs carried out by each PI. We include here a summary of physics goals and contributions Duke has made to each of the frontiers.

2.1.1 Energy Frontier - Hadron Collider Physics Duke’s hadron collider physics program focuses on research at the CERN LHC using the ATLAS detector. We have made major contributions to the design, construction and installation of the barrel Transition Radiation Tracker. We have also played major roles in ATLAS data preparation and performance, including TRT reconstruction software and alignment, software commissioning, the alignment of silicon detectors and the global inner detector alignment, Monte Carlo simulation, electron-photon and jet substructure reconstruction:

TRT software group co-leaders • Eγ group co-leader • Jet substructure group co-leader • Run-dependent Monte Carlo coordinator • MC production coordinator • Finally, we have taken on leadership roles in many aspects of USATLAS computing and management, and in project planning for the ATLAS Phase-II upgrade:

Standard Model Electroweak Co-convener • USATLAS and ATLAS Tier 3 project co-leader • USATLAS Institutional Board Chair • USATLAS Physics Advisor • USATLAS Physics Support Deputy Manager • USATLAS TRT Level 3 Manager • USATLAS Outreach Coordinator • ATLAS Upgrade Physics Sub-Committee • Continuing service work in ATLAS operations will be based upon our experience from CDF and ATLAS, with tracking detector alignment and reconstruction, Eγ and jet substructure reconstruction, and computing. We are working on the ATLAS upgrade, through investigation of the physics case, simulation, and the upgrade of the silicon tracker. We have a number of published and ongoing physics analyses ranging from measurements of electroweak processes to searches for new physics at high mass scales.

5 2.1.2 Intensity Frontier - Neutrino Research Duke’s neutrino physics program is focused on Super-Kamiokande, the ongoing T2K off-axis beam experiment, the future experiment DUNE, and the new COHERENT experiment. We have been active in: Super-K atmospheric ν oscillations, including three-flavor, Lorentz violation, sterile oscillation• and τ appearance analyses Beam neutrino oscillation analyses with T2K (νe appearance and νµ disappearance) • Supernova neutrino physics studies for DUNE • LBNE Supernova Burst Physics Working Group Convener (2010-2014); DUNE CD1-R Supernova• Burst Physics Task Force Convener; DUNE Low-Energy Physics Working Group Co-convener (2015-) Hyper-K Simulations Software Convener (2013-) • Our service work is extensive and primarily in support of our physics interests. Recent and ongoing responsibilities include: COHERENT Spokesperson (2014-2017) • COHERENT Analysis Coordinator (2014-) • COHERENT Deputy Spokesperson (2017-) • COHERENT Physics Coordinator (2018-) • DUNE Executive Committee (2015-2018) • DUNE Supernova Burst/Low-Energy Physics Working Group Co-Convener (2015-) • DUNE Single Phase Photon Sim/Reco Group Co-Convener (2016-) • DUNE Dual Phase Photon Sim/Reco Group Co-Convener (2016-) • Outer detector PMT calibration, data quality control and simulation for SK • In the next cycle we will continue SK and T2K responsibilities, and these experiments will continue to provide training and theses for students, and publications for postdocs. We will continue scientific leadership roles in COHERENT and DUNE.

2.1.3 Intensity Frontier - Rare Processes Research Duke’s research program in this area is based on the Mu2E experiment at Fermilab. We are active in the R&D on the straw tracker which is at the heart of the experiment. The Duke group has expertise in straw trackers after building the ATLAS barrel TRT and is playing a leading role in the Mu2E straw tracker eﬀort.

2.1.4 Cosmic Frontier - Cosmology with LSST Starting in 2013, Walter started a new Cosmic Frontier effort at Duke by joining the LSST Dark Energy Survey Collaboration (DESC). He is proposing funding in the cosmic frontier for the first time in this proposal. Currently he: Serves as a DESC Survey Simulation co-convener • Is a full member of the DESC, working in the Weak Lensing group. • Works in the Sensor Anomalies Working Group on validating dynamic sensor effects. • Works with project members in the Camera, Simulation and Data Management teams. • 6 Supports the DESC with documentation and communications efforts. • More details on this new effort can be found in section 4.

We summarize in Table 1 the Duke HEP research personnel and the expected distribution of their research eﬀorts over the next year.

Fraction of research eﬀort Name Position ATLAS Cosmology Neutrino Mu2E A. Arce Asst. Prof. 100% A. Goshaw J.B. Duke Prof. 100% A. Kotwal Fritz London Prof. 100% M. Kruse Prof. 100% S. Oh Prof. 100% K. Scholberg Prof. 100% C. Walter Assoc. Prof. 75% 25% A. Bocci Senior Scientist 100% C. Wang Senior Scientist 100% D. Benjamin repl. Postdoc 100% S. Li Postdoc 100% E. Kajomovitz Postdoc 100% TBD Postdoc 100% A. Himmel repl. Postdoc 100% E. O’Sullivan Postdoc 100% D. Bjergaard Graduate Student 100% D. Davis Graduate Student 100% M. Epland Graduate Student 100% M. Feng Graduate Student 100% K. Holway Graduate Student 100% S. Sen Graduate Student 100% P. Zhao Graduate Student 100% TBD Graduate Student 100% Z. Li Graduate Student 100% G. Sinev Graduate Student 100% J. Solis Staﬀ Assistant 24% 4.5% 7.6% 6.1% J. Fowler Engineer 100% B. Thomas Engineer 75%

Table 1: Summary of personnel and research eﬀorts over the next year.

3 Task A: Hadron Collider Physics at ATLAS

7 Task A includes the Energy Frontier work of Professors Arce, Goshaw, Kotwal, and Kruse on the ATLAS experiment.

Duke colleagues have been making substantial contributions in the areas of TRT software, calibration and alignment (Bocci, Kruse), combined ID alignment (Cerio, S. Li and Kotwal), and TRT aging studies (Liu and Goshaw). Presently there is one senior scientist (Bocci) and two research associates (Kajomovitz and Li) at CERN who are leading various data analyses and operations activities. There are currently about six undergraduates working with the ATLAS group. Our extensive CDF and ATLAS analysis experience is being carried over to the Run 2 data analysis. We are well-positioned to make important contributions. We have joined the ATLAS upgrade eﬀort for HL-LHC which will come on line in about 10 years in the current schedule. This eﬀort is led by Kruse and Arce, and our interest is in testing silicon sensors which we have received funding to initiate. Table 2 below shows the expected fraction of research time for the ATLAS experiment.

ATLAS research fraction Physicists 2016 2017 2018 Ayana Arce 100% 100% 100% Andrea Bocci 100% 100% 100% Alfred Goshaw 100% 100% 100% Shu Li 100% 100% 100% Enrique Kajomovitz 100% 100% 100% Ashutosh Kotwal 85% 85% 85% Mark Kruse 100% 100% 100% Graduate Students David Bjergaard 100% graduating 2016 Douglas Davis 50% 100% 100% Matthew Epland 20% 50% 100% Minyu Feng 20% 50% 100% Kevin Holway 100% 100% 100% Lei Li graduating 2015 Sourav Sen 80% 90% 100% P. Zhao 100% 100% 100% Chen Zhou graduating 2015

Table 2: Summary of personnel and expected fraction of research time on ATLAS.

3.1 ATLAS Physics Our physics analysis program on ATLAS can be classiﬁed into Standard Model (SM) measurements and Beyond-the-Standard Model (BSM) searches. In many cases we exploit the

8 synergies between important channels for SM measurements which are also promising channels for BSM searches.

3.1.1 Search for SM Higgs boson in the VBF mode Benjamin Cerio’s Ph.D. thesis topic (supervised by Kotwal) was the search for the SM Higgs boson in the vector boson fusion (VBF) mode qq qqH qqW W lνlν + 2jets using the boosted decision tree (BDT) technique. This is→ a multivariate→ method→ designed to use the full kinematic information of each candidate event in the optimal way. Cerio, Kotwal and collaborators from TRIUMF, Simon Fraser University and UIUC pioneered the use of this technique in the VBF Higgs WW search at ATLAS. This channel tests the HWW coupling at tree-level in both the production→ and decay vertices. Therefore, the VBF H WW cross section is proportional to the 4th power of this coupling, and a 5σ observation of→ this mode will provide a measurement of this coupling with 5% precision assuming the SM value. This allows its definitive measurement independent of other Higgs couplings. The VBF process has a much smaller cross section compared to the gg H WW process, requiring the development of special techniques and optimized selections→ for→ its observation. Cerio was one of the lead students of this analysis. The goal was to obtain 3σ “evidence” sensitivity using optimized BDT technique and control of systematic uncertainties. Cerio was also responsible for the statistical treatment of the signal and control samples and producing the final result. He was a key player in the optimization of the BDT, using his experience with statistics software to assess the sensitivity for a range of BDT inputs and settings. He also optimized the kinematic selection applied after BDT training, further increasing the analysis sensitivity by 5-10%. Motivated by shortcomings in the modeling of top quark processes in the MC generator MC@NLO, he performed studies to demonstrate that powheg + pythia was better suited for the phase space region selected by the BDT. He then implemented a data-driven estimate in the likelihood fit, using auxiliary measurements to constrain the normalization of top quark background as a function of the BDT score. In addition to top quark background, he motivated changing the generator for the dominant background, non- resonant WW , from powheg+pythia to sherpa. The theoretical motivation for such a change was due to the fact that powheg can only generate WW + 1j at NLO in QCD, while sherpa, for which WW + 2j is generated at LO, is expected to better model WW observables in the VBF phase space. Theory uncertainties for WW were large and had not been computed in a BDT context, and Cerio computed QCD-scale and matrix-element modeling uncertainties, using self-produced samples of madgraph+pythia. To push the BDT analysis through the ATLAS approval process, Cerio performed a myriad of studies, including checking contributions from double-parton interactions and H ττ, updating the nuisance parameter-pruning criteria, and re-analyzing the 7-TeV dataset→ with the same BDT. Due to these efforts, the BDT analysis improved the expected sensitivity by 70%. In addition, he performed “service-oriented” tasks, like periodically making signal and background samples for the BDT team, maintaining the statistics code for the BDT analysis, and training new post-docs and students to run the full BDT analysis chain. In the H WW observation paper Phys. Rev. D 92, 012006 (2015), Cerio’s result was published→ quoting 3.2σ “evidence” of Higgs production in the vector boson fusion mode, the most significant evidence of this important mode. Cerio has graduated and is

9 gainfully employed in the Data Science industry.

3.1.2 Top physics at ATLAS The top quark, through its extraordinarily large mass, could provide a window into new physics beyond the Standard Model. In particular, some extensions to the Standard Model (e.g. technicolor or other scenarios with a strongly coupled Higgs sector) can modify top quark couplings leading to discrepancies between measured and predicted production and decay rates. This motivates our eﬀorts in several analyses involving the top quark.

3.1.3 Simultaneous measurements of tt¯, WW and Z/γ∗ ττ → In 2008 Kruse and his former graduate student Sebastian Carron (now a staff scientist at SLAC) published a novel likelihood technique to simultaneously extract the cross sections of processes that appear with a final state involving two leptons (eµ, ee, µµ) at CDF: Phys. Rev. D78, 012003 (2008). The analysis technique provides a more global test of the Standard Model (in this final state) than afforded by any cross section measurement dedicated to a particular process. On ATLAS, Kruse formed a small group (around 2009) involving his Duke grad student (Kevin Finelli), a postdoc from Melbourne (Antonio Limosani), and postdocs from Sydney (Andrea Bangert, Aldo Saavedra), to explore this analysis technique on ATLAS. The collaboration with the Australian groups is through Kruse’s association with the ARC (Australian Research Council) funded Centre of Excellence in Particle Physics (CoEPP) based in Melbourne. On CDF the technique was dubbed ”AIDA” (for An Inclusive Dilepton Analysis) and this name has persisted on ATLAS as well. The first published ATLAS AIDA analysis (using 7 TeV pp collision data) was the thesis project of Kevin Finelli (graduated 2014, and now a postdoc at Sydney). Since 2009 various other colleagues have joined (and left/graduated) the ”AIDA group”, mostly students and postdocs from Duke and Sydney, but also more recently from ANL. Duke/Sydney continues to organize the group’s efforts which have expanded aspirations for analysis of ATLAS Run 2 data (see below). Final states involving a high-PT electron and muon are relatively rare in the standard + model, the main processes being tt¯ W b W −¯b e±µ∓ννb¯ ¯b, WW e±µ∓νν¯, and → → → Z ττ e±µ∓νeνµντ ντ . These processes are nicely separated in a phase space defined by → → missing transverse energy (ET ) and jet multiplicity (Njet), as shown pictorially in Figure 1. 6 Figure 1: Summary of eµ final state processes in a phase space that we consider for simultaneously extracting the production cross sections of the three main contributions, tt¯, WW , and Z ττ, which are our “signal” processes.→ Other contributions are also shown which we consider as our backgrounds. The basic idea of the technique is to first select events with a high-PT electron and muon (of opposite charge) and make no other requirements on the event (for the ATLAS

10 AIDA analysis we did not use ee and µµ events). We then fit the eµ data in the ET -vs-Njet phase space to expected templates of the signal and background processes (derived6 from Monte-Carlo) using a maximum likelihood function, , which to first order is a product of L Poission probabilities in each (Njet, ET ) bin comparing the observed to expected number of events in each bin. In the normalizations6 of the signal templates are allowed to float, while the background templateL normalizations are constrained to their expected values and uncertainties (using Gaussian constraint functions in ) as are various systematic uncertainties. The best fit of the signal template normalizationsL are used to simultaneously derive the cross sections of the signal processes. 1 We performed this analysis using an integrated luminosity of 4.6 fb− of 7 TeV LHC collision data collected by ATLAS. The full cross-sections are measured to be: ¯ +9.7 σ(tt) = 181.2 2.8 9.5 3.3 3.3 pb ± − ± ± + +7.3 σ(W W −) = 53.3 2.7 8.0 1.0 0.5 pb, and ± − ± ± +72 σ(Z/γ∗ ττ) = 1174 24 87 21 9 pb → ± − ± ± where the cited uncertainties are due to statistics, systematic effects, luminosity and the + LHC beam energy measurement, respectively. The W W − measurement includes the small + contribution from Higgs boson decays, H W W −. These results from our AIDA analysis→ represent the most precise top dilepton cross section measurement at 7 TeV, and the WW and Z ττ cross sections are competitive with and complement the respective dedicated measurements.→ In addition to these full cross section measurements we were also able to extract the fiducial cross sections for each process – that is, the cross section with all detector effects unfolded, which are of more interest for theoretical comparisons. These results were the basis for Finelli’s thesis and were published in 2015: Phys.Rev. D91 (2015) 052005. The broader impact of this analysis meant that the internal ATLAS approval process included both the Top and Standard Model physics groups. Another unique aspect of the analysis, is that we are able to measure the correlations between pairs of extracted cross sections. These results quantify for the first time the un- derlying correlations in the predicted and measured cross sections due to proton parton distribution functions, and indicate that the correlated NLO predictions for tt¯ and Z/γ∗ ττ underestimate the data, while those at NNLO generally describe the data well. NLO→ predictions for WW also underestimate the data, but NNLO calculations were not available for comparison. These results for σ(Z/γ∗ ττ) versus σ(tt¯) are shown in Figure 2. Correlation plots of other pairs of processes are given→ in the publication above.

3.1.4 Measurement of tt¯ production in association with a W or Z boson The top quark coupling to the Z boson has never been measured with suﬃcient precision to test the Standard Model and there are various scenarios which could modify this coupling. In addition this measurement is an important stepping stone toward the measurement of the top coupling to the Higgs boson, one of the major physics goals in Run 2. The thesis project of Chen Zhou (graduate student supervised by Kruse) is a Run 1 search for ttW¯ and ttZ¯ .

11 Figure 2: Contours of the likelihood function as a function of the two full production cross sections, σ(Z/γ∗ ττ) versus σ(tt¯) compared to NLO predictions (left) and NNLO predictions (right). The→ contours obtained from the data (full circle) represent the 68% C.L. (full line) and 90%C.L. (dashed line) areas, accounting for all systematic uncertainties. Contours labeled ”th. extrap. uncertainty” depict the theoretical uncertainties on extrapolating the ﬁducial cross section to the full phase space and are obtained by constructing a likelihood function with only theoretical uncertainties. The theoretical cross-section predictions are shown at NLO (left) and NNLO (right) in QCD for diﬀerent PDF sets (open symbols) with the ellipse contours corresponding to the 68% C.L. uncertainties on each PDF set. Also shown as horizontal and vertical error bars around each prediction are the uncertainties due to the choice of QCD factorization and renormalization scales.

The ttW¯ process is a Standard Model source of same sign dilepton events, a ﬁnal state that provides the best sensitivity for this measurement in addition to being a potential source for many models beyond the Standard Model. The leading order Feynman diagrams for ttW¯ and ttZ¯ are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Examples of leading order Feynman diagrams for the production of ttW¯ (left) and ttZ¯ (right).

Our AIDA group investigated using the AIDA technique with the traditional 2D ET -vs- 6 Njet phase space but with the addition of a thrid access of two bins: same-sign dilepton and trilepton events. This nicely separates ttW¯ (which appears predominantly in the same-sign dilepton final state) from ttZ¯ (which apprears predominantly in the trilepton final state) allowing the simultanoeus measurement of the cross sections of these two processes. This simultaneous measurement is the thesis of Zhou who will defend his thesis later in 2015. Within ATLAS, other groups were focussing on the opposite sign, trilepton, and four lepton channels in ttW/Z¯ searches. In the end it was agreed upon to combine our same sign dilepton results with these other efforts for the combined ATLAS result. Our same sign dilepton result produced the first 5σ ttW¯ measurement. The combined ttZ¯ analysis resulted in a 4.2σ measurement. The same sign eµ distributions for different ET and Njet bins are shown in Figure 4. Instrumental backgrounds, including fake or non-prompt6 leptons and leptons with misiden- tified charge are predicted using data-driven methods. The final ttW¯ and ttZ¯ measurements are summarised in Figure 5. These results have gone through the ATLAS approval process (public nore available as ATLAS-CONF-2015-032) and are about to be submitted for publication.

12 Figure 4: Distributions of events in the Figure 5: The result of the combined two- same-sign eµ signal region according to the dimensional simultaneous fit to the ttW¯ and binning used in the likelihood fit. The distri- ttZ¯ cross sections along with the 68% and butions are shown before the fit. The bins la- 95% CL uncertainty contours. The shaded belled ”Low-ETmiss” correspond to ETmiss areas correspond to 14% uncertainty, which in (40,80) GeV, and those labelled ”High- includes renormalisation and factorisation ETmiss” correspond to ETmiss 80 GeV. scale uncertainties as well as and PDF un- ≥ The hatched area corresponds to the total certainties including αs variations. uncertainty on the predicted yields.

3.1.5 Future plans for AIDA We have established a very nice niche in ATLAS using the AIDA analysis technique developed by Duke in collaboration with the Sydney and Melbourne groups. This provides us with an exciting future program to extend the impact we have had in Run 1. We are developing several AIDA-based analyses in preparation for Run 2 data. These include:

Short term in Run 2 will conduct the Run 1 AIDA analysis with some extensions. • In particular we will also allow the single top production process to float in the fit, thereby allowing us to study correlations between single top and tt¯ production. This effort is being led by Kevin Finelli and a graduate student in Sydney.

As will be discussed in section 3.1.6 our ttW/Z¯ analysis stemmed from a same sign • dilepton SUSY analysis being doen in collobaration with others (most notably Sasha Paramonov from BNL when Chen Zhou was at BNL on a grad student fellowship). During the early part of Run 2 we plan to conduct a simlar search based on our Run 1 experience. One will note in Figure 4 that there is an excess of same sign eµ events with large ET and number of jets. We have documented other interesting characteristics of these6 events which we will follow up with in Run 2.

In the longer term for Run 2, we will use both the SS dilepton and trilepton categories • as a third axis to the traditional AIDA phase space to simultaneously extract the cross sections for ttW¯ and ttZ¯ . This was done by Kruse’s graduate student Chen Zhou in Run 1 for his thesis as discussed above (although only the SS category was used in the combined ttV¯ result). This simultaneous measurement will also allow for the study of correlations similar to those described above. In addition a precision measurement of the tZ coupling will be an important stepping stone toward the important tH coupling measurement in Run 2.

3.1.6 SUSY In 2013 Chen Zhou won a BNL graduate student fellowship, and spent 8 months at BNL under the auspices of Sasha Paramonov. Zhou’s analysis work at BNL consisted of a SUSY search using the same sign dilepton ﬁnal state (together with multiple jets). Gluinos produced in pairs or in association with a squark can lead to same sign signatures when decaying to any ﬁnal state that includes leptons. Squark production, directly in pairs or throughg ˜g˜ or

13 g˜q˜ production with subsequentg ˜ qq˜ decay, can also lead to same sign dilepton or 3 lepton signatures when the squarks decay→ in cascades involving top quarks (t), charginos, neutrali- ( ) 0 0 ( ) 0 nos or sleptons, which subsequently decay as t W b,χ ˜i± W ± ∗ χ˜j ,χ ˜j h/Z ∗ χ˜j , or ˜ 0 → → → ` `χ˜1, respectively. → Zhou led the effort in understanding the fake same sign dilepton contribution (where one of the lepton signatures is either faked from a jet or a real lepton’s charge is misinden- tified) which is a major component to the background and the most difficult to understand. One of the exclusion regions from the analysis is shown in Figure 6. Although we were not the main protagonists for this analysis we were included in the small group of internal authors and the analysis was published in 2014 (JHEP 06 (2014) 035). Zhou’s work on this led to our analysis of ttW/Z¯ described above (and continuing the collaboration with BNL), and which is the main focus of Zhou’s thesis.

Figure 6: Observed and expected exclusion limits from one of the (several) interpreta- tions investigated in the combined same sign and trilepton ﬁnal states: that of gluino- mediated top squark production. Shown are the excluded regions in the stop mass versus gluino mass plane. Roughly such particles are ruled out at the 1 TeV level.

3.1.7 Quantum Black Holes A Duke visiting student, Elena Villhauer being supervised by Kruse, is working on the preparations for a Run 2 analysis to search for quantum black holes (QBH). Villhauer is externally funded and not part of our DOE grant and will be applying for grad schools next year (she graduated from Emory College and wanted to get some HEP experience before graduate school). Villhauer has been developing the analysis framework for the QBH models developed by Doug Gingrich of the University of Alberta (arxiv.org/abs/0912.0826) with whom we have been in frequent contact. One of the largest branching ratios of neutral QBHs is to tt¯ and for charged QBHs to tt or t¯t¯. We are using the dilepton ﬁnal states in this search. For charged QBHs we are using our same sign dilepton expertise for an understanding of all Standard Model backgrounds. In the event of no signal constraints on the existing models will be placed.

3.1.8 Search for tt¯ resonances Chris Pollard’s Ph.D. thesis topic (supervised by Kotwal) was the search for strongly- produced (e.g. Kaluza-Klein gluons) and weakly-produced (e.g. Z0) bosons decaying to a pair of top- antitop quarks. In a number of new physics models of Z0 bosons and Randall- Sundrum Gravitons, the decay channel to the heavy top quark dominates. Results with 2 1 1 fb− and 4.7 fb− respectively of 7 TeV data have been published (Eur. Phys. J. C72

14 (2012) 2083 and Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 012004), in which Pollard contributed the results in the dilepton channel. For the 8 TeV data, Pollard took over the lepton+jets channel and also became the liaison between the top physics and electron/photon performance working groups. He was responsible for optimizing and measuring the electron reconstruction performance and understanding any discrepancies between data and prediction due to electron identification for all analyses within the top physics group. He was the primary PhD student in the tt¯ resonance searches in the lepton channels over the last four years. As the group’s electron identification expert, he re-optimized the selection criteria for high-mass tt¯resonances: events with high-pT top quarks decaying to electrons are susceptible to inefficiencies due to overlapping electrons and b quarks. His optimized selection improved the tt¯ reconstruction efficiency by 35% in the electron channel for the highest signal-mass range to which the analysis was sensitive. This work resulted in an internal note, ATL-COM-PHYS-2014-343, and the results from the 8 TeV dataset have been submitted for publication in JHEP (arXiv:1505.07018). A narrow leptophobic topcolour Z0 boson with mass below 1.8 TeV is excluded. A Kaluza- Klein excitation of the gluon in a Randall-Sundrum model with fractional width of 15% is excluded for masses below 2.2 TeV.

3.2 Plans for Run 2 physics at ATLAS A new phase of the LHC program started this year with a 3-year long Run 2 data-taking campaign at √s = 13 TeV.

3.2.1 Plans for the Duke electroweak physics program in Run 2 The investigation of the electroweak sector is extremely interesting, and provides good opportunities for observing physics beyond the SM. We are well positioned to exploit these data using the Run 1 experience of Bocci, Goshaw, Kotwal and Li with precise photon measurements and identification of W/Z bosons from their leptonic decays. We propose to supplement this using the techniques developed by Arce and Kajomovitz for identifying highly boosted W/Z bosons from their hadronic decays. We are well-integrated into the ATLAS program in these physics areas through convenership of various groups: Arce is co- convener of Jet Sub-structure; Bocci is EWK Co-convener and previous e/γ Perfromance Group Co-convener; Kajomovitz is Co-convener of Run 2 Exotics VV; S. Li is Analysis Contact of Run 2 X Vγ. The research program→ we propose will exploit the new opportunities brought about by the higher pp collision energy and the foreseen factor of five increase in integrated luminosity with respect to the 8 TeV run. The study of tri-boson V γγ production was statistically limited in Run 1 and will greatly profit from the Run 2 data. The electroweak production qq qqV γ will be enhanced from the increased pp collision energy in the VBS-enriched → phase-space (Mjj 1 TeV), providing complimentary approaches to probe of anomalous quartic gauge couplings.≥ In addition we plan to introduce into our electroweak program new techniques, namely the identification of (boosted) hadronic W/Z decays from “fat” jet structure, similarly to those successfully used in Exotics searches. High Et photon events will be used as the trigger for searching for recoiling high ET , boosted V ( qq) bosons. →

15 This phase space is also the most sensitive to search for aTGC, further enhanced by the more favorable W/Z hadronic branching ratio with respect to leptonic decay. As discussed in Sec. 3.2.2, these studies will be coordinated with the X VV exotic search of Arce and Kajomovitz. →

3.2.2 Plans for searches in boosted hadronic channels in Run 2 With the new LHC collision energy of 13 TeV, the strong efforts to optimize hadronic boosted particle reconstruction and the improvements to the tracking detector and trigger systems, the prospects for searches using jet substructure and tagging techniques are especially bright. Our group is very well positioned to continue leadership in the high-profile Run 2 searches for resonances in the fully-hadronic and partially-hadronic diboson decay channels, to test models of new resonances at and well beyond 2 TeV. Arce, Epland, and Kajomovitz are currently focusing on the fully-hadronic channel using the newly optimized tagger, which will compete with the Run 1 sensitivity when about 1 5 fb− have been collected. These searches will have strong impact on models of composite Higgs bosons and other natural explanations for the electroweak scale over the next three years. We also propose new applications of boosted boson tagging: besides initiating a V γ search at high mass in the hadronic channel, in collaboration with Goshaw, Kotwal, Bocci, and Li, we also intend to expand the diboson resonance search to the ννJ (hadronic plus invisible) channel, which has a large expected sensitivity for ZZ and WZ decays. The optimization of a tagger for this final state, in-situ background constraints, including treatment of the background from mis-reconstructed tt¯ events, and the study of correlated systematic uncertainties in the missing transverse energy and boosted boson reconstruction, are challenges we will confront in this effort. Finally, Arce and Kajomovitz also plan to contribute to a fully hadronic search for WH resonances in the H b¯b channel. This will build our expertise in boosted H b¯b reconstruction, as testing hadronic→ decays of Higgs bosons to b and c quarks both figure→ in the group’s long-range plans.

3.2.3 Search for new resonances in W γ and Zγ final states using boosted bosons Searches for resonances in diboson final states can explore sources of electro weak symmetry breaking (EWSB) in addition to the neutral Higgs boson discovered at the LHC in Run-I. Since the precise role of the Higgs boson is not yet known, a dynamical mechanism of EWSB and fermion mass generation may yet involve a variety of heavy scalar, vector or tensor bosons with narrow resonances that decay into the SM Electroweak bosons (W /Z/γ). Many new physics models are a motivation for these searches using ATLAS Run 2 data. A discovery of new massive resonances could complement the EWSB role played by the 126 GeV Higgs boson. For example, in some models inspired by the 2 TeV diboson excess observed by ATLAS in Run-I, the Higgs boson is an excited weak boson with the prediction of a new multiplet of massive bosons. We propose a model-independent search using LHC 13 TeV data for new diboson resonances at the TeV scale decaying to W /Z+γ final states with the W /Z decaying hadronically. Due to their large branching fraction, the use of the hadronic W /Z decays will substantially increase sensitivity over the leptonic decay channels. Due to the large masses of these new

16 resonances W /Z bosons from their decay will be highly boosted, and therefore the hadronic decay products of the W /Z will be reconstructed as single jets. The backgrounds to this search will be controlled by introducing a boson-jet tagging procedure by taking advantage of the inherent differences in the internal structure of jets resulting from high-pT boson decays and those jets initiated by high-pT gluons and quarks. The Duke ATLAS group is playing a leading role in this research (Li is co-convener of the X V γ subgroup). This group has accomplished a thorough understanding of the boosted→ boson jet+γ final state for the first time in the ATLAS experiment. We are currently working on a common analysis data format to be used by both VV 0 and V + γ resonance searches, as well as producing the benchmark BSM resonance signal Monte Carlo samples using Low-Scale TechniColor (LSTC), Heavy Vector Triplet (HVT), High Mass Higgs Effective Coupling models. These studies provide estimates of trigger efficiencies using high ET photons, and acceptances for the BSM signals based upon various models. Depending on details of the model, using Run 2 data we expect to be sensitive to narrow V γ resonances with masses up to 4 TeV or higher. A first high ET photon trigger selection efficiency is shown in Figure 7. The current goal of this analysis is to obtain a first Run 2 publication with better sensitivity to beyond the Standard Model (BSM) resonances than obtained using the W /Z+γ fully leptonic analyses with ATLAS Run-I data. This will lead to three-year research program using the full Run 2 dataset to set limits (or discover) production of massive W /Z+γ resonances.

Figure 7: Photon selection eﬃciency when cutting on ET (γ) >130 GeV with (blue) and without (green) detector geometric restriction on η <2.37

3.3 Operations Support Duke continues to play a central role in the eﬀort of commissioning and understanding the TRT performance. The personnel involved over the last 3 years includes Benjamin, Bocci, Kruse, and Duke undergraduate students under the supervision of Kruse (Wall, now a graduate student at Yale, and Minot, who graduated in May 2010 and became a Fulbright scholar working in HEP at the LHC). We brieﬂy list our main accomplishments and activities below.

3.3.1 ATLAS TRT activities We have continued to play important roles in the operation and performance of the Transition Radiation Tracker (TRT), building on our history of such activities dating back to 2006. Our past activities have included integral contributions to TRT straw eﬃciency studies, the TRT alignment, the TRT simulation and digitization, high-threshold tuning to data, and TRT performance in high pile-up conditions. Past student Finelli (supervised by Kruse) made important contributions in 2012 to TRT particle identiﬁcation in high pile-up environments, before his graduation in August 2013. Our more recent activities and plans are as follows.

17 Kruse is the US ATLAS TRT level 2 manager, responsible for the US TRT budget, • personnel, and reports to DOE on TRT operations.

Graduate student Mia Liu (graduated 2014, supervised by Goshaw) carried out a • detailed analysis of the eﬀects of aging to TRT performance. Details of these studies can be found in Liu’s thesis: http://www.phy.duke.edu/%7Eml149/dissertation.pdf

Leaks of the TRT Xenon gas in Run 1 has necessitated the consideration of running • some fraction of the TRT with Argon and/or Krypton to mitigate the cost of the lost Xenon. New (second year) graduate students Doug Davis and Kevin Holway (supervised by Kruse) are starting their ATLAS qualification tasks by investigating the effect of running with Krypton (which has lower transition radiation capabilities), and how to optimize the TRT gas geometry and the tuning of straw threshold levels that define ”hits” for tracking performance. These studies need to be completed by early 2016.

3.3.2 Combined Inner Detector alignment The physics performance of ATLAS depends on accurate track reconstruction, for which the global alignment of inner detectors is very important. The global alignment effort was started at Duke by Kotwal, Shekhar and Cerio (graduate students supervised by Kotwal), by working on the alignment of the pixel, SCT and TRT detectors within the ID Alignment group. This work was done in consultation with Bocci at Duke who worked on TRT alignment. Ben Cerio investigated the hit resolutions for the pixel, SCT and TRT as well as the dependence of these quantities on track properties. He generated time-dependent sets of hit resolutions which are used in official ATLAS data production. Cerio did further detailed studies of precision effects in the global alignment, such as the beam-spot constraint and the dependence of the alignment on mean track curvature. Our inner detector alignment work builds on Kotwal’s significant experience with the CDF drift chamber alignment using cosmic rays and collider tracks. Shu Li worked on the pixel module deformation and track-to-hit residual performance study using a track-based technique by minimizing the track-to-hit residuals. He obtained the module position corrections approaching more accurately the real geometry of the ID using ATLAS Run 1 survey data and also co-commissioned the ID alignment monitoring software release for Run 2 milestone cosmic runs.

3.3.3 NLO and NNLO calculations for V γ and V γγ production Goshaw and his students have worked closely with theorists to provide the SM predictions used in ﬁve ATLAS Run 1 publications describing V γ and V γγ production. The NLO cross section predictions and their uncertainties were made in consultation with John Campbell, Keth Ellis and Ciaran Williams using the MCFM generator. Massimiliano Grazzini worked with Goshaw on cross checks of NLO Zγ SM predictions, and then provided the NNLO predictions that will be compared to our Run 1 8 TeV Zγ measurements.

18 3.3.4 Realistic simulation of variable detector conditions Arce, as Coordinator for run-dependent Monte Carlo production at ATLAS during Run 1, developed a framework to ensure that simulated data accurately reflects the two major sources of variability in the acceptance and performance of ATLAS over time – temporarily excluded channels from each sub-detector, and LHC beam conditions leading to pile-up (multiple collisions per beam crossing). This project involved changes to the ATLAS simulation software, databases, and the Monte Carlo production system, to reflect the average detector and pile- up conditions during a run in time intervals as short as one minute. The most important result of this work was the detailed pile-up simulation used throughout all ATLAS Run 1 physics measurements, including the Higgs discovery and characterization measurements. Bjergaard made substantial improvements to this Run-dependent MC framework as part of his qualification project, so that the increased pileup requirements would not overload the Monte Carlo production system in Run 2.

3.3.5 MC Preparation Service for Run 2: new MC generator implementation for SM/PMG of ATLAS As part of the Monte Carlo (MC) modeling diboson taskforce for SM Electroweak subgroup, Shu Li is working on investigating and implementing Next-to-Leading-Order (NLO) Mad- Graph aMCNLO generator to be used to model DiBoson/Triboson/Vector Boson Scattering (VBS) production in Run 2 (with and without the eﬀect of anomalous couplings). The current two benchmark NLO MC generators for Electroweak MC in Run 2 are PowHeg- Box and Sherpa. PowHegBox at the moment can not model well the multi-boson processes with photons. It is crucial for ATLAS to deploy a third benchmark generator (e.g. Mad- Graph aMCNLO) to model the W/Z + γ(+γ) processes properly for Sherpa cross-validation and theory uncertainty understanding. This is also very important for background MC samples to be used for EXOTIC and other BSM physics search groups. The work is counted as service contribution by PMG (Physics Modeling Group) group of ATLAS.

3.3.6 Data Preparation Service for Run 2: xAOD derivation for SM/EXOTIC/ASG groups of ATLAS The Run 2 physics analysis model as proposed by the ATLAS Analysis Software Group (ASG) is aiming to help the physics analysts to be able to run over their data sample more efficiently and frequently. Handy and transparently slimmed and skimmed data samples should come to analysts’ plate with the size reduced by a factor of 1000 or more. In Run 1, such slimming and skimming was mainly done by the analysts themselves, causing duplication of effort, making cross-group collaboration difficult, and wasting disk and CPU resources. In the forthcoming Run 2, such work will be harmonized and centralized by the production team to provide the software tools as well as centrally produced data sample derivations (“DxAOD”) trimmed/skimmed from the common analysis data format of “xAOD”. The derivations are optimized and maintained by individual physics teams and centrally monitored/coordinated by ASG (Analysis Software Group) of ATLAS. Shu Li is working for both SM Physics group and EXOTIC Physics group as part of the derivation developer/maintainer

19 taskforce and is responsible for maintaining the derivations specialized in photon/jet/MET physics object information. Shu Li newly developed one of the central derivations of EX- OTIC physics group (EXOT-3 derivation) to accommodate photon information so as to be used in common by both VV JJ and V γ J + γ resonance search analysis teams in EXOTIC physics group. This→ new derivation is→ recently accepted by the EXOTIC physics group and will soon go for central production of both DATA15 and MC15. Shu Li is now also working on a new SM derivation (would become STDM-6 derivation once it is approved) to be used in SM Electroweak measurements specialized in Zγ νν + γ channel which will → be dramatically optimized compared to ATLAS Run-I with relaxed oﬄine pT and trigger thresholds. The work is recognized and counted as a service contribution by ASG.

3.3.7 Phase 2 Upgrade Physics Studies Li, Pollard and Kotwal worked on building the physics case for the ATLAS Phase 2 upgrade. Pollard performed all the studies for dilepton and tt¯ resonances. Li and Pollard also performed new analyses of VBS to quantify the sensitivity to new TeV-scale resonances in longitudinal W/Z scattering tagged by forward jets. 1 These sensitivity studies for a “high-luminosity LHC” (Phase 2 upgrade with 3000 fb− to be collected in the period 2022-2030) were documented and submitted to the European Strategy Forum (ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-001, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-004, ATL-PHYS- PUB-2012-005). Kotwal wrote the exotics and VBS chapters of these proposals. Further new results were obtained by S. Li and published for the Snowmass and ECFA Workshops (ATLAS-PHYS-PUB-2013-003, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2013-006). Pollard performed a new study of BSM Higgs A, H µµ for the Phase II upgrade (ATL-PHYS-PUB-2013- 016 and ATL-COM-PHYS-2013-774→ ). In summary, all the upgrade studies for dilepton and tt¯ resonances, and triboson production and vector boson scattering for the Phase II upgrade were initiated by and led by Kotwal’s group. Kotwal served as a member of the Upgrade Physics Sub-committee. In this role, he helped organize the work needed for the physics justiﬁcation in the Phase 2 LoI and the European Strategy documents.

3.3.8 ATLAS Phase-2 silicon upgrade activities For phase-2 (currently scheduled to begin 2026), the ATLAS inner detector (pixels, strips, TRT) will be replaced by an all-silicon tracking system (ITk). The ITk will need to operate in an environment with higher occupancy which will require higher granularity (by a factor of 5), and higher radiation which will require operation at a lower temperature. In addition Figurethe readout 8: One speed of the will possible be increased ITk layouts to 1 MHz (left) (from and the the structure current 100 of the kHz). stave The components ITk is being of thedesigned silicon to strip at least system retain (right). the current In the physics ITk layout, performance the blue and lines not represent increase the the silicon amount strip of layers,material the from project the current the Duke system. group isOne active of the in. possible layouts is shown in Figure 8 as well as the structure of the basic silicon strip components. Duke faculty members Arce and Kruse have been actively participating in the phase 2 ATLAS silicon strip upgrade project and have built up a solid group which includes students and a technician, Brogan Thomas, who started in March 2015 and is 80% funded from US ATLAS R&Dand 20% from Duke. We have also received funding from the North Carolina

20 Lord Foundation and from Duke University to involve many undergraduate students (supervised by Arce and Kruse) in the project over the last few years, in addition to REU funded students. Duke graduate students that are and have been involved include Mia Liu (supervised by Goshaw, now graduated and a postdoc at Fermilab), Chen Zhou (supervised by Kruse, and who will graduate at the end of 2015), and Pingchuan Zhao (supervised by Kruse) who is a second-year student. Duke postdoc Enrique Kajomovitz (supervised by Arce) has helped coordinate activities at CERN. We are hoping to have additional postdoc support at Duke in the near future to help with our growing roles and responsibilities. Components of the upgraded silicon strip detector are called staves, and comprise sensors, readout electronics, powering, cooling, and mechanical support in an integrated package. Staves are composed of modules, which are bare silicon sensors with readout chips mounted directly on them and wirebonded to the sensors. We are involved in many aspects of the project, which is positioning us to be an important player in silicon strip module testing in coordination with BNL (and with ANL on the DAQ front). A module is the 20- chip unit shown in Figure 8. The readout chips, mounted on the silicon sensors, are called ABCn chips, and are either ABCn250 (using 250 nm technology) or ABCn130 (using the newer 130 nm technology). In the current schedule, the ITk TDR is due near the end of 2016, with pre-production of modules/staves being 2017-2018 when our module testing role (see below) will ramp up. Full production of ITk components will begin in 2019, with the phase 2 data taking beginning in 2026. Below we provide brief descriptions of our activities and future plans.

3.3.9 ITk Data Acquisition Over the last two or three years we developed a setup to test ABCn250 chips using a cus- tom made (by SLAC) HSIO board which houses a Xilinx FPGA chip to which ﬁrmware is downloaded to communicate to the ABCn250 chip. Our setup is shown in Figure 9. This proved very useful for understanding the testing procedures and associated software. More recently the project is moving to commercially available boards to replace the HSIO board. One of the available options is the somewhat confusingly named Atlys board manufactured by Diligent. We are now gaining experience with this system, with the caveat that Diligent has recently stopped production of their Atlys board, so we will eventually move to another option. Grad students Pingchuan Zhao and Chen Zhou have been gaining valuable experience with the Atlys DAQ system and FPGA ﬁrmware in trying to get the Atlys system Figureworking 9: with The a ABCn250 Duke HSIO one-chip DAQ board.setup (left) where we can communicate to and test a ABCn250 readout chip mounted on a one-chip board. The Atlas board connected to the one-chip board is shown on the right.

Our future plans include developing module testing procedures, which will utilise this DAQ system. Such tests are being coordinated with BNL (Dave Lynn) and include thermal stress tests, electrical tests, and perhaps magnetic ﬁeld exposure tests. In addition, we plan to develop our growing expertise with the FPGA ﬁrmware (which is currently solely developed in the UK) to play a more direct role in DAQ testing procedures.

21 3.3.10 Development of Module Testing Infrastructure In coordination with BNL we are developing a more standardised system for module testing to be used by the groups involved. We are leading the eﬀort in the design of the module enclosure (which includes thermal and electrical isolation) and the associated cooling, interlock, and humidity control systems. A schematic of the current design (by our technician Brogan Thomas) is shown in Figure 10. Figure 10: Schematic of the current module enclosure being designed by Duke for module testing which includes thermal and electrical isolation (all walls here are shown to be transparent so you can see inside but in reality only the top will be transparent with a copper mesh for electrical isolation). The module sits on a cooling block (designed by LBL) shown inside the enclosure and is held in place by a vacuum. The cooling block has cooling lines running through it to enable cooling of the module. The panel on the right will also provide the electrical and air-drying services to the module. A module (of 20 readout chips) is expected to generate about 5W of power during typical operation. We have determined the speciﬁcations required for a chiller to remove this heat and be able to cool the module down to 40oC. Although this is much colder than what the operating temperature will be it will be needed− for thermal stress tests. In addition the air inside the module enclosure will need to be kept dry to avoid condensation (which can short the wire bonds) and we have purchased a desiccant art dryer for this purpose. We will soon be starting the process of machining the enclosure and cooling blocks, purchasing the chiller, and assembling the whole system.

3.3.11 Development of Module Testing Interlock System The modules being tested are valuable and will need to be protected against events where the temperature or humidity exceeds some predetermined thresholds. As a student project supervised by Kruse and Arce, Duke undergraduate students (including an REU student) designed and successfully produced an interlock printed circuit board (PCB) involving a commercially available Arduino temperature and humidty sensor board and additional electronics they designed to produce an interlock signal to the module power supplies. The system is shown in Figure 11. This inexpensive system (total cost < $50) can be used for all planned module testing stations.

3.3.12 Simulation Studies We have been active in two aspects of simulation: thermal modeling of modules (and their enclosures) for testing to help determine chiller speciﬁcations and identify possible stress

22 Figure 11: Photo of the module interlock PCB designed and produced by Duke students. An ethernet connection allows real-time monitoring of temperature and humidity from sensors on an Arduino board. Additional electronics (to the right of the Arduino board) produces a pulse if an interlock threshold on temperature or humidity is reached that will shut down the power supply to the module. points on the module, and, as part of the ITk simulation group at CERN investigating optimal ITk tracking geometries. Graduate student Pingchuan Zhao (supervised by Kruse) has led an effort to provide thermal modeling of the module which will be useful when conducting temperature stress tests, and together with undergraduate Matt Tobin, including the effect of the enclosure. The enclosure can also radiate significant heat, and these models are helping with the design of the thermal isolation requirements and geometry of the module enclosure. Preliminary thermal profiles are shown in Figure 12. This work is ongoing and we are regularly discussing our results with engineers at BNL and Will Emmet (engineer at Yale) who have provided valuable input regarding materials and techniques to use for the module testing infrastructure Figuredesign. 12: Thermal profile of the module (left) assuming 30oC coolant into the cooling block and 5W of power generated by the module, and, the thermal− modeling of the module plus enclosure (right).

As part of the ITk simulation group, graduate student Chen Zhou, worked on optimizing detector geometries for tracking and comparing diﬀerent simulations. This was part of Zhou’s ATLAS qualiﬁcation task, which he completed last year, in addition to his work on developing the DAQ system at Duke and working on the ones at CERN.

3.3.13 Coordination of ITk Setups at CERN Over the last few years we have been helping develop and coordinate stave and module testing at CERN. Our group at CERN has included graduate students Mia Liu and Chen Zhou, postdoc Enrique Kajomovitz, and several undergraduate students over the last couple of summers funded by the aforementioned sources. Our work has included the development of the CO2-based stave testing cooling system, DAQ procedures for both models and staves, and the reassembly and recommissioning of all testing setups after being required to move lab locations at CERN.

3.4 Community Service Kotwal co-convened the Electroweak Physics subgroup of the High Energy Frontier group in the DPF Community Planning Study (Snowmass 2013). A new sensitivity study to anomalous quartic couplings using triboson production and VBS was published (arXiv:1309.7452)

23 as a Snowmass Whitepaper for 33 TeV and 100 TeV proton colliders. Postdoc Shu Li produced a significant fraction of the studies presented in this Whitepaper. A comprehensive Snowmass summary report on electroweak physics was also published (arXiv:1310.6708) by Kotwal and co-convener D. Wackeroth. As the USATLAS Physics Advisor at the time, Kotwal served as the contact person between ATLAS and the Snowmass process. Kotwal is now serving as the US Coordinator for physics studies of a future, very high energy pp collider. In this capacity he is leading a study group that will publish physics sensitivity studies, culminating in a white paper which will articulate the physics case. He is coordinating this effort with the CERN-FCC and Chinese circular collider physics efforts. This role starting in Summer 2014 and will continue for another year. In the last year, Kotwal has co-authored three publications describing physics sensitivity studies and experimental requirements (boosted top tagging in Phys.Rev. D91 (2015) 3, 034014 and double- Higgs resonances in vector boson scattering in Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 11, 114018) and integrated luminosity requirements (Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 23). Kotwal also organizes a biweekly seminar series on a broad range of physics and experimental topics relevant to the future pp collider physics case. The speakers are drawn from the international scientific community and the seminars are broadcast via INDICO and tele-conferencing. Kotwal and a few colleagues are also organizing a series of mini-workshops focussed on themes such as electroweak baryogenesis, dark matter, naturalness and new resonances, new symmetries and rare decays in collider physics etc. These coordination activities are synergistic with the ATLAS research program presented in this proposal.

3.5 Budget Justiﬁcation and Personnel Requests See Appendix 7.1 for the details of the Task A budget request and the personnel to be supported.

3.6 ATLAS Conference Talks See the list of ATLAS talks and posters in http://www.phy.duke.edu/ kotwal/TalksFile.pdf ∼ 4 Task C: Cosmology

Task C includes the Cosmic Frontier work of Professor Walter in the LSST Dark Energy Science collaboration. Details of his Intensity Frontier effort on the Super- Kamiokande and T2K experiments can effort can be found in Section 6 which de- scribes Task N. 75% of Walter’s effort is proposed in the Cosmic Frontier, 25% in the Intensity Frontier.

4.1 Introduction Starting in 2013, Walter started a new Cosmic Frontier eﬀort at Duke by joining the LSST Dark Energy Survey Collaboration (DESC). He is now proposing that 75% of his eﬀort

24 be based in the Cosmic Frontier working on LSST. In 2013, after some years of previous investigation and thought, Walter used a sabbatical and the Snowmass process to finalize plans for future research directions. Driven by his excitement about the science of Dark Energy studies, he decided that he would like to work in cosmology on the LSST. After meeting with the LSST director at SLAC in 2013 he began working in the DESC and in the LSST project with an initial emphasis on a program of understanding sensor effects and their impact on weak lensing science. In the past two years, Walter has taken on important roles in the DESC and in the project and now has recognized responsibilities in both. Before explaining these roles and responsibilities, details of his transition into the Cosmic Frontier will be detailed. In the last two years, Walter has taken no agency funding for his work on LSST other than an agreed use of his time with the Intensity Frontier program managers. All of the funding for travel to LSST meetings and workshops, computer resources and undergraduate research support was supplied by Duke University. With a current research program focused in astro-particle and neutrino physics and no formal background in cosmology, Walter’s strategy was to first work hard to make an impact inside of LSST, learn the experiment and science, and only then ask for Cosmic Frontier funding. This proposal is that request. In order to be able to concentrate on a LSST research program Walter has scaled back his efforts in his neutrino physics research program. In particular, he stepped down from two major roles related to the T2K experiment. Since the positions were created during the start of the T2K, Walter has served as the co-convener of the T2K-Super-K analysis group in the T2K experiment, and as the Super-K long-baseline co-convener in the Super-K collaboration. These two major responsibilities were taking a large fraction of Walter’s time and, in 2015, he asked and was allowed to step down from them. The 25% time of his effort in the Intensity Frontier will concentrate on working with students and postdocs on physics analysis and water Cherenkov R&D in the Super-K and T2K experiments. He will also continue to serve on the analysis steering group inside of T2K. More details on Walter’s proposed Intensity Frontier activities can be found in Section 6 (Task N). In this request to the Cosmic Frontier program, Walter is requesting 75% of his summer salary (1.5 months) along with support for a graduate student and postdoc and associated travel. A letter of support reinforcing Walter’s impact in LSST and the DESC from Professor Steven Kahn, the LSST director, can be found in Appendix 9.

4.2 Current Work, Accomplishments and Near Term Plans Walter is a full member of the DESC (and was in the first group of full members created from the larger associate members list). Walter serves as the co-convener of the DESC Survey Simulations group, and will soon begin to lead a task force in the project to understand dynamic effects in the focal plane CCDs through a combined program of lab measurement, simulation and analysis. He is also personally working in DESC Sensor Anomaly Working group (SAWG) to validate the current dynamic space charge effects in the sensor model as implemented by PhoSim, LSSTs photon-by-photon simulation package. Walter is a member of the Weak Lensing analysis working group. Currently, he is working towards understanding how sensor level effects will impact the systematic errors in the weak lensing shear analysis.

25 4.2.1 The DESC Survey Simulation Group In July of 2015 Walter was appointed with John Peterson of Purdue as the co-convener of the DESC Survey Simulations group. This group, which is an expansion of the previous PhoSim group convened by Peterson (the PhoSim author), is responsible for simulation infrastructure and studies necessary to prepare the experiment for running. Currently the DESC is going through a planning process to prepare for the commissioning of the experiment starting with the installation of the commissioning camera in 2019. Each analysis group (Weak Lensing, Large Scale Structure, Galaxy Clusters, Strong Lensing and Supernovae) is writing software and doing studies to prepare analysis pipelines including common tools and frameworks. The DESC is currently finalizing the Science Roadmap document (to be made available at http://www.lsst-desc.org/) that lays out the high-priority tasks and deliverables for the collaboration to be ready for LSST first light. As part of this work, a set of ever more sophisticated data challenges using simulated data sets will be undertaken. In the Survey Simulations group Walter has been working with the DESC computing coordinator Andy Connolly from the University of Washington, other technical working groups including Cos- mological Simulations, Sensor Anomalies, and Computing Infrastructure and representatives of the all of the analysis working groups to prepare the list of needed simulated data sets and the work necessary to produce them. Walter is also a member of the project and, through his connections with the simulation team, is coordinating work needed on project tools for upcoming DESC studies. A specific recent example of this is bringing people together to see that the system used to query sky databases (CatSim) can be used to return regions of the sky with oversampled time- dependent sources such as supernovae and strong lenses. Regular meetings will also focus on leveraging other tools for DESC work such as the community package GalSim, and the LSST project operations simulator (OpSim) which can explore the impact of different cadence and dithering strategies on physics sensitivity.

4.2.2 The CCD Sensor Brighter Fatter Effect From a home in the DESC, Walter is working collaboratively with the Camera, Simulation and Data Management teams to attempt to validate the PhoSim model of the so called Brighter-Fatter (BF) effect. The BF effect is an observed property of thick CCDs that, as the intensity of the light source increases (becomes brighter), the PSF becomes wider (fatter) [1, 2, 3, 4]. This has potentially serious consequences as stars are typically used to extract PSFs used in the measurement algorithms applied to much dimmer galaxies. Understanding this topic is one of the highest priority items in the DESC sensor group. It is of a particular concern for Weak Lensing science where accurately measuring the PSF-convolved shapes of galaxies is essential and systematic errors which effect shear measurements must be strictly controlled. Our current understanding of the BF effect is that charge already collected in a pixel is believed to deflect later arriving drifting electrons into adjacent pixels, thereby modifying both the expected spot size as a function of height and the expected relationship between the mean pixel occupancy and its variance in a flat illumination. In addition to changing the size of observed sources, the BF effect induces correlations between neighboring pixels that should be observable in flat fields.

26 Figure 13: Brighter Fatter spot spreading simulate with the PhoSim package. Plotted is the sigma of the measured spot size in X and Y in pixels by the LSST shape measurements versus the number of electrons in the peak of the spot. The red points are with no BF eﬀect applied and the green points are with the BF eﬀect turned on. Near full well, a simulated increase of the spot width of near 2% is seen in line with previously reported results.

This effect has been observed in the DECam [5, 6] and it has also been seen in the LSST prototype sensors. Our plan inside of LSST is to carefully measure the properties of the sensors in laboratory tests exposed to a variety of sources (spots, flats, Fe55 etc) while running in a controlled environment. Then, using a model, we will attempt to replicate those lab results in our simulations thus ensuring we have confidence that the systematic errors caused by instrumental effects in the image plane CCDs are not themselves larger than the size of the signals being measured. The overall LSST strategy is that, whenever possible, we will always employ a physics-based model for the effects in the instrument including electron-by-electron tracking. Driving this philosophy is a desire to not trivially simulate and then correct for instrumental effects with similar parameterized models. Walter’s recent work on this topic has been to work with the PhoSim authors to try to validate the PhoSim field model (which changes dynamically) by comparing to previously taken laboratory data. By carefully controlling all other sensor effects in the simulation and also varying the size and shape of the fields we have now shown that BF effects of the correct size can be induced in the PhoSim model. In addition to reporting on this work at the last two DESC collaboration meetings and LSST project-wide yearly meetings Walter presented his work the 2nd workshop on Precision Astronomy with Fully Depleted CCDs held at BNL in December of 2014. His proceedings from this meeting were published in JINST [7]. Figure 13 shows results of Walter’s most recent simulation and analysis work. Using PhoSim, spots of increasing intensity with a width of 1.62 pixels (chosen to match laboratory data) are simulated impinging on a LSST sensor. SDSS shape measurement algorithms as implemented in the LSST software stack [8, 9] are used to extract the measured spot width, and the resulting width in pixels is plotted against the number of electrons at the peak of the spot. As can be seen, as the intensity increases, the spots spread out, resulting in both a wider measured sigma and a reduced peak height. The resulting width near full well is about 2% higher than the unmodified spot, in line but perhaps not quite as large as results reported in the literature [3]. Walter has also simulated flat exposures [7] and induced auto- correlation coefficients between neighboring pixels with a magnitudes of a few percent were seen although there are currently missing asymmetries between the X and Y directions. The next step in Walter’s research plan is to use the same software to analyze both simulated and real data from LSST sensors taken in the laboratory test stands, thus doing a direct comparison of model and data. New measurements addressed specifically to the BF effect coupled with targeted simulations can aid in its understanding, especially when trying to determine the best models to eventually incorporate into PhoSim. For this reason, as stated in Professor Kahn’s letter, Walter was also recently asked by the project to lead a brighter fatter task force to organize new measurements, simulations and analyses with a focus on determining which new measurements are most the useful for distinguishing models relevant to the science analysis, with

27 a emphasis on understanding how in-situ calibration systems could be designed to measure the BF characteristics of the chips in the LSST focal plane.

4.2.3 Contributions to the Science Roadmap Walter will be leading and making major contributions to three high-priority items listed in the Science Roadmap through his work in the SAWG and leadership in the Survey Simulation group: validating the BF eﬀect in simulations, development of the infrastructure to allow multiply lensed and oversampled time-dependent sources to be returned in sky catalog queries and development of infrastructure for realistic time-dependent SEDs in those sources. The later two are both part of the ’Assess, Study, and Validate Survey Simulation Tools for DC1 & 2’ deliverables in the roadmap.

4.3 Other Contributions to LSST and the DESC In addition to Walter’s work in the SAWG and project on the Brighter Fatter eﬀect and his new work as the Survey Simulations co-convener, he attends all DESC and project wide LSST and Science Collaboration meetings. Within the DESC and the project Walter has made several other contributions to each. Some are listed here:

Walter donated free shop time in the Duke physics machine shop to manufacture pieces • for sensor test stands at BNL in order to meet schedule requirements when the BNL shop’s capacity was full. Obtained university funding and sent two Duke undergraduates to BNL in the summer • of 2014 to help Andrei Nomerotski characterize sensor eﬀects in the lab. Wrote early LSST Data Management documentation for DESC members in the form • of iPython notebooks, thus allowing several people to start physics studies employing the LSST software stack. Served on the DESC Dark Energy School board which is building a set of interac- • tive lectures and tutorials presented for members before collaboration meetings and recorded for posterity. Have helped explore and implement several intra-collaboration communication tools • and will begin to serve on a committee to help ﬁnalize choices this year.

4.4 Long Term Plans and Context Walter’s long term plan is to make LSST the center of his research focus for the next decade through the construction and running of the experiment. At least for the time being, he also intends to keep working at a level reduced from his previous eﬀort in the Intensity Frontier. These are the only currently running experiments that he is now involved in, and he has long term interest, experience and responsibilities in them. In addition to his research program including supervising current Duke graduate students and postdocs on Super-Kamiokande, there are important connections between the neutrino properties measured directly from accelerators and natural sources, and those measured through cosmological inference. In the

28 future, Walter can act as an important bridge between the two experimental communities as someone who really understands the details of both forms of analysis. Inside of the DESC, Walter is a member of the Weak Lensing group. Currently he is working on pixel level effects and hopes to study the induced systematic errors from them. His work on the brighter-fatter effect is currently a high priority item and that work is needed right now. Going forward, as the understanding of those effects are finalized, Walter plans to work on other issues related to extracting cosmological parameters using weak lensing. Leveraging his simulation expertise, he is already starting to work with DESC colleagues on studying simple complete pipelines for creating samples from a given cosmology, simulating the entire telescope system, and then extracting those parameters for comparison. Up until now, all of the work done by Walter at Duke has been done by him alone. In order to progress further in his LSST work, and be able to successfully undertake all of the tasks that are being requested of him, he is asking for graduate student and postdoctoral support. In addition to working on analysis tasks in the DESC, Walter intends to have people working in his group help with the infrastructure and commissioning of the system. Walter has already discussed with colleagues at BNL and SLAC about sending personnel to the labs to help with needed manpower for sensor and camera testing and commissioning. In fact, last summer Walter already began this sort of exchange by arranging for two Duke undergraduate physics majors to spend the summer at BNL helping with sensor characterization. In the next few years, there will be great opportunities for group members to make an impact on science. As part of the DESC and project preparatory work we will likely also reprocess precursor public data sets with the LSST software, thereby opening physics analysis opportunities for Walter and people in his group who are not on a currently running dark energy experiment. As the experiment nears commissioning it is a very good time for postdocs and graduate students to get involved. They will be deeply immeshed in LSST by the time the survey begins and they commence looking for their next positions. Walter’s connections with the labs, DESC, camera, simulation and data management teams will mean they will be well connected to people across LSST. Leveraged with a large talented undergraduate pool Walter is ready to start a funded LSST dark energy group at Duke that can make an even bigger impact than he has been able to make himself.

4.5 Budget Justiﬁcation and Personnel Requests In this proposal Walter is requesting 75% of his summer salary (1.5 months), funding for a graduate student and postdoc, and travel for the group to DESC collaboration meetings, the annual project and science meeting and a workshop or conference during the year. Note that all travel expenses in this grant have been granted a waiver from overhead costs by Duke University.

5 Task M: Intensity Frontier program at Mu2E

Task M includes the Intensity Frontier work of Professor Oh in the FNAL based Mu2E program.

29 5.1 Introduction The principle personnel of Task M are Seog Oh (PI) and Chiho Wang (research scientist). There were also two undergraduate students contributed to the task, and they were Sebas- tian Lin, and Dean Hazineh. Their independent research projects were the bases of two of four published papers (in NIM and JINST) as described later. During last three years, the main eﬀort under Task M has been the Mu2e experiment, and we have been key members in the straw tracking collaboration where CW is a level 3 manager. We also continued to make intellectual contribution to the ATLAS TRT (Transition Radiation Tracker) collaboration. But in terms of overall time, it has been quite minor. For the coming three-year cycle, we propose to continue to work on Mu2e. It will busy three years as the tracker construction and installation move full steam ahead. We are also actively searching for a research associate to augment our Mu2e software (alignment) and some hardware eﬀort.

5.2 Mu2e The Mu2e experiment is one of high priority experiments at FNAL. The experiment is to search for muons converting to electrons in a nuclear ﬁeld (BSM physics). The present limit 13 17 is 10− and Mu2e is sensitive to 3 10− . According to the latest schedule, the data taking∼ is to start in 2023. We have∼ been× involved with the straw tracker from the design stage and critical members throughout the process based on our experiences with the ATLAS Transition Radiation Tracker (TRT). For TRT (also based on straw tubes), we were deeply involved with R&D, design, construction (we constructed a half of the TRT modules) and installation. The basic unit of the Mu2e tracker is called a panel consisted of 96 straws and shown in Figure 14. The length of the shortest (longest) straw is 47.5 (120.6) cm. Six panels form a ring-shaped so-called plane and two planes form a so-called station. There are 216 panels corresponding to 18 stations. The plan is to assemble 240 panels including spares. The inner radius of the station is 38 cm and the outer radius is 81 cm. Our coordinate sytems is that the x-axis is along the straws/wires, the wire plane is the xy-plane, and the magnetic ﬁeld as well as the beam is along the z-axis. When the text says a straw or wire y-position, it is a measurment along the y-axis.

Figure 14: Left: A panel with 96 straws. The straw material is metallized Mylar, and the diameter is 5 mm. There are two straw layers. Right: Six panels form a plane and two planes form a station. There are eighteen stations corresponding to 20736 straws in the tracker.

The Straw Tracker passed the CD3, and the pre-construction started early 2018. An- other hurdle before the full production was a CRR (Construction Readiness Review). For the review, three panels were constructed, and a plane was assembled (with three blank panels) with the frontend and readout electronics. One panel was readout successfully with

30 the expected noise level. With the success, the CRR occurred in September, 2018, but the reviewers concluded that we were not quite ready for the full production. They recommended that we ﬁrst construct 12 panels (called pre-production) before moving to the full production mode. After the 12-panel construction, another CRR will occur (likely in early spring, 2019). The full production is expected to last over a year. The tracker schedule is behind by 1.5 years and the delay caused to change our schedule to hire a research associate because 1/2∼ of the support is tied to the tracker construction. The Duke University is committed to provide the other 1/2. Please see the budget justiﬁcation section for a detail.

5.3 Mu2e at Duke Our main responsibilities have been in three areas. One is to procure and prepare the panel components for the panel assembly, another is to develop an x-ray scanner to measure all the wire and straw positions in three dimensions after panels are assembled, which will be an input to the tracking software. The last is the development of the tracker alignment software using our scan data and cosmic rays. Based on our work, we published four papers (three in NIM-A and one in JINST) since 2016. Please follow here to the Duke Mu2e website to see more details of our eﬀort.

5.3.1 Straw testing Our first important contribution was to find a straw vendor and measure the straw properties to make certain that the straws met the specifications. There are three demanding requirements for the Mu2e straws. One is that the straw wall thickness should be about 15 microns to reduce the multiple scattering and background. The other two are leak-free and robustness under the pressure and tension despite its thickness. The last two come about because the straws will be operating in vacuum under the tension to keep the straws straight. However, the tension decreases as a function of time because of the creep (relaxation), and knowing the creep rate is very important. In other words, the initial tension has to be higher in order to keep the minimum tension of 250 gf after 10 years. With 250 gf tension, the longest straw sags about 200 µm due to gravity.∼ The straw property study has been largely our responsibility and we have been continuing with two long-term measurements, namely, the creep rate and leak rate. We collected the creep data for five years under two conditions. One is the fixed tension condition where two straws (140∼ cm long) are under a constant weight, and their elongations are measured as a function of time. The other is that four straws (120 cm long) are tensioned with different initial tension and glued to a frame (fixed length) and the straw tensions are monitored as a function of time. This condition simulates the experimental condition. The results from the study were published in NIMA (902 (2018) pp.95-102), and a few highlights are presented here. The left figure of Figure 15 shows the tension (T) as a function of time from four straws with different initial tension. The right figure shows the same but the tension is divided by the initial tension (T0) and a nice scaling appears. We found that the data (T/T0) can be well modeled with a logarithmic function, A+Blog10(t), where t is the time. This implies that the tension change from 50 to 500 days equals to the change from 500 to 5000 days. Using the parameters, A and B, from a fit, we found that

31 the necessary initial straw tension should be about 600 gf to meet the 250 gf requirement after 10 years. To be conservative, the default initial straw tension is 700∼ gf. One interesting ﬁnding was that if a tube material is similar to our tubes and wound similarly, the tube obeys the same scaling formula (A + Blog10(t)) regardless of the length and cross-sectional area. For example, if one uses an 80 cm long tube with 10 times thickness, its tensions after time t is still T0(A+Blog10(t)).

Figure 15: Left figure: The tension as a function of time for four straws. Their initial tensions were 608, 505, 420 and 318 gf. Right figure: T/T0 plot. The lines are from the fit to the logarithmic function (A+Blog10(t)).

Another long-term test has been measuring the straw leak rate under the tension and pressure. This tests robustness. The required leak rate of the tracker is extremely stringent because it will be in vacuum. At the operating pressure (14 psi above the surrounding), the leak rate should be less than 10 cc per minute for the entire tracker ( 800,000 cc). With ∼ the operating gas mixture (80% of Argon and 20% of CO2), the gas permeation through the straw wall contributes about 3 cc of 10 cc. Although we found that most of straws were gas tight other than the permeation leak, one concern was the long-term leak under the operating condition. For the test, 1000 gf weight were hung at the end of four straws placed vertically and pressurized to 18 psi resulting in an effective tension of 1250 gf. The pressure inside straws has been monitored∼ for about 1.8 years (with occasional∼ refilling) and Figure 16 shows the results. Two straws are filled with dry air and the other two are filled with CO2. The length of straws is 140 cm. The leak rate for CO2 gas is higher because of the higher gas permeation rate. The figure shows that there should not be a problem during the tracker operation period.

Figure 16: The results of a long-term ( 500 days) leak test under 1000 gf tension and 18 psi gauge ∼ pressure. The left plot is with dry air and the right plot is with CO2. Ignore the outlier data points in plots. There is no indication of straw degrading.

32 5.3.2 Panel component procurement and preparation This is one of our main responsibilities for the production. A panel frame consists of 16 parts; 10 are made of aluminum and 6 are made of plastic (3-D printing). The parts are glued together except for the gas cover attachment where screws are used. We receive all parts and our responsibilities are two folds. One is to check all critical dimensions. For the dimensional check, we have been responsible for developing some of the dimension checking fixtures. The other is to apply initial glue to all to-be-glued surfaces after removing aluminum oxide. For this task, we constructed a deoxidizing fixture and a temperature-controlled oven (175 95 80 cm) to hold parts for 8 panels The oven is to cure glue at 60◦C to increase the strength.× × ∼ The pre-gluing is to minimize re-oxidization after cleaning. It is known that the glue strength to the oxidized aluminum surface is not as strong as to the un-oxidized surface. The aluminum surface is cleaned with an abrasive scratch pad and a thin layer ( 25 µm) of glue is applied. We have been testing several different glue applying techniques∼ to speed up the process. When a part has holes (screw holes, for example), they have to be covered with Kapton or Teflon disks before glue is applied. There are 317 holes to be covered per panel. We have processed all parts for the 12 pre-production panels without much difficulty, and we are ready for the full production. The part preparation task is very labor intensive, and we are to hire at least 1.5 full time technicians. After the parts are prepared, they are vacuum packed and shipped to University of Minnesota for the panel assembly. Once panels are assembled, they are shipped back to us for the x-ray mapping, where all the wire and straw positions are measured in three dimensions as described in the next section.

5.3.3 X-ray mapper, and wire and straw position measurement Another main responsibility is to measure all the wire and straw position in three dimensions and implement the data in the tracking software. There are about 23000 wires and the required wire y and z-position accuracy are about 50 and 100 µm respectively.∼ We developed an x-ray scanner shown in Figure 17 (left figure) and demonstrated that the wire and straw y-positions can be measured better than 20 µm accuracy (right lower figure of Figure 17) and about 50 µm along the z-axis. The z-positions are measured by tilting the beam by an angle (right upper figure in Figure 17). The angle is 15 degrees for the Mu2e application. The working principle of the scanner is to measure the x-ray transmission rate as the beam moves across material. A detail of its construction and performance was published in NIMA (807 (2016) 64-68). In the present scheme, the wire and straw positions are measured with respect to three survey markers attached to the panel. The markers are also to be optically measured when the tracker is installed to transfer our measurements to the Mu2e detector coordinate system. We made a complete scan of one of the prototypes and the scanner performed very well. As we would do for the production panels, there are 16 normal and stereo measurements along the length of a wire or straw, and some results are shown in Figure 18 for the y-position (left figure) and z-position (right figure) as a function of x. There are many cases where the distance between the wire and straw axis is larger than 100 µm, which is comparable to the detector resolution. The plot shows that the wire positions have to be corrected and our

33 Figure 17: Left figure: A picture of the x-ray scanner and a prototype panel. The x and y-slides are attached to stepper motors to control the movement. The beam slit (30 micron wide and 2 cm long) is at the end of the beam tube. The x-ray detector below the panel measures the x-ray transmission rate. Top s s right figure: A technique to measure the wire and straw z-position. y1(y1) and y2(y2) are from the normal s (stereo) scan, and zi = (yi yi)/tan(15◦). Bottom right figure: A y-scan across a straw tube with 20 µm step size. The peak at the right− and left ends are from the straw walls, and the peak in the middle is from the wire.

scan data will play an important role. The ﬁndings were conveyed to the construction site and changes were made in positioning tubes and wires. The scanner is also a very useful QC tool.

Figure 18: The straw center is the average of the two straw wall positions. The straw in the right plot sags slightly because of the gravity.

Even if the wires and straws can be measured with high accuracy, the scanner has to be calibrated. The calibration was accomplished by measuring precision gauge blocks as a function of the room temperature. The lengths of blocks, 20 and 4 inches, are known with high accuracy (0.0001 inch), and the temperature expansion coefficient is provided by the manufacturer. The blocks were scanned every a couple of hours for a week while the HVAC system was off. The data show that at 20◦C at which the blocks are calibrated, our length measurement is quite good (the difference is less than 5 microns). Since the room is temperature controlled within +/- one degrees, the temperature effect on the panel data is minor. Another important measurement is to check the robustness of the panel. The panels go through two long trips. One is from Minnesota to Duke and the other is from Duke to FNAL. We need to test if any wires or straws move during the shipping. For the test, the prototype at Duke will be shipped to FNAL and returned, which should happen soon. It will be scanned again to compare with the old measurements. One area we spent a great deal of time was to reduce the scan time. When the scanner was initially designed, the goal was modest. We were to measure only wires in two dimensions

34 (on the wire plane). Moreover, the expected panel production speed was one panel every two days. Now the requirements have changed. We have to measure straws as well as wires in three dimensions and at least one panels per day. The panel production throughput has increased to meet the schedule. To increase the scan speed, we completely overhauled the DAQ system as well as software written in LabVIEW. We scrutinized the time for every step to minimize the overall time, and we now can scan one panel per eight-hour shift including rescanning some wires and straws. This means that evening shifts will be necessary if we have to map two panels per day. It is worthwhile to point out that the number of scan points per panel is about 50,000. After the panels are scanned, they are sent to FNAL for the plane and station assembly (see Figure 14). The front-end electronics and readout electronics are mounted and tested before being installed in the tracker frame.

5.3.4 Wire shift due to electrostatic force and gravity The scanning of all panels is to be done without HV applied. But when the tracker is in operation with HV, there is the electrostatic force between the wire and straw, which results in additional shift in the wire position. The measured wire and straw positions in the prototype panel indicate that the wire can be misplaced by a few hundred microns from the center of the straw tube, and for these misplaced wires, the additional shift can be large. This implies that not only the initial wire position but also the additional shift has to be accounted for in the tracking software. We carried out a systematic study of the additional wire shift as a function of the high voltage, initial wire displacement and wire/straw tension including the gravity. This was an undergraduate independent research topic by Dean Hazineh, and results were published in NIMA (888 (2018) 79-87). For the study, we constructed two modules. One module has two straw tubes and anode wires (Figure 19) where the ends of wires can be arbitrarily moved to obtain different initial wire position and tension. For each initial set of conditions, the wire and straw positions were measured as a function of HV. The other module consists of three 30 µm wires with different tension (16, 39 and 118 g) to measure the gravity effect. Some results from the study are shown in Figure 19 (two right figures). Plotted are the differences in the wire positions between the data taken with HV = 0 and HV = 0. The two HV values were 1600 and 1800 volts, and the initial wire end coordinates (HV=0)6 were (x = 0, y = 0.12 mm, z = 0.43 mm) and (1260, 0.10, 0.30) with respect to the straw axis. The tension in the wire (straw) was 54 (500) gf.

Figure 19: Left figure: The straws are 120 cm long. The disk on the outer end-plate can be adjusted to change the wire position and tension. Middle (Right) figure: The wire y-shift (z-shift) with respect to the initial position for two different HV values. The dotted lines are the prediction, and shaded region indicates the uncertainty. The matches between the data and the theory are quite good.

We also developed complete diﬀerential equations governing the wire and straw shift

35 simultaneously under the electrostatic force and gravity. This was first time that such differential equations were constructed and solved, and the results are shown in Figure 19. With the validation of the differential equations, we can predict the wire and straw positions in three dimensions once the initial positions are measured. The new predicted wire and straw positions can then be an input to a tracking software to improve the position resolution. The solutions are quite general and can be applied to many other straw based detectors.

5.3.5 Tracker alignment and momentum calibration Another task we are committed is to incorporate the scanned position data to the track reconstruction software and align the tracker. As discussed, using the measured initial positions, we calculate the additional shift due to the electrostatic and gravity force at the operating voltage using the differential equations. We found that the corrected wire positions can be modeled well using a third-degree polynomial function. The parameters of the polynomial for each wire are then transferred to the Mu2e coordinate system using the three survey markers, which are also to be measured optically after the tracker installation. The transferred parameters are inputs to the tracking reconstruction software. This process should provide good wire positions for the initial track reconstruction. After the tracker is installed in the experimental area, there will be cosmic ray runs. The plan is to use cosmic ray tracks to align the tracker better. The first step would be aligning each station with respect to other stations. Once they are aligned, then the individual panel can be aligned. Eventually, if there are enough cosmic tracks, the three- dimensional position of the individual wire could be found. We have been working on an alignment scheme using simulated cosmic ray tracks. The panels in a station are arranged with 12 different wire angles (θi, i = 1 to 12), and in the tracker, all stations are installed identically such that there are only 12 angles. In other words, we can select hits in the panels with the same angles θ2, for example, then the track reconstruction using the hits become a simple procedure. Using the tracks, the panels with θ2 can be aligned with respect to each other. Figure 20 shows an example of hits from a cosmic ray in panels with θ = 50◦ with respect to the vertical direction. One can easily recognize a track. The next step is to align different angle panels with respect one another. Presently, we are in the process of aligning the same angle panels. This work is progressing steadily but not as fast as we hoped for because of a manpower issue.

Figure 20: The hit distance from the center of each straw of a comic ray track as a function of the station number (0 to 17). The distance between stations is 17.6 cm. The ﬁgure is not to scale.

Another study we are carrying out is to ﬁnd a way to calibrate the tracker momentum scale. Knowing the absolute momentum scale is important, because our signal (µ−Al → e−Al) has a distinct peak at 104.3 MeV and the continuous background momentum spectrum from the muon decay while in an orbit (µ− e−νµνe), is a fast falling function reaching →

36 the signal region. For a discovery or setting a limit, a momentum window has to be used, which assumes knowing the absolute momentum scale. Our study involves K−, and there are two channels. One is the K− decay in orbit similar to the muon just described, and the 0 interested decay modes are π−+π and µ−+νµ. The other is the hyper-nuclei production and 27 27 0 27 0 27 27 decay, namely, K− + Al Λ Mg + π Al + π1− + π , and K− + Al Λ Al + π2− 27 → → → → Si + π3− + π2−. The previous measurements involving different nuclei (He, Be, and B) show that the momentum of π− is well defined. We generated events with K− beam using GEANT under the Mu2e software structure. The tracks were reconstructed from hits and the momentum distribution of tracks was plotted. There are four peaks as expected. Two are from the decay in orbit and the other two are π1− and π3−. The momentum of π2− is around 300 MeV and the reconstruction efficiency is low. One problem is theoretically calculating the momentum of the decay products from hyper-nuclei better than 0.2 MeV (better than our momentum resolution) to properly calibrate the tracker as there∼ are no experimental measurements. We are continuing the study.

5.3.6 Techniques to measure the wire and straw tension The techniques of measuring the tension have been around for a while and can be divided into two general categories. One is an active mode. In this mode, sinusoidal current passes through a wire in a magnetic field and cause the wire to vibrate. As the wire vibrates inside a magnetic field, the induced voltage is observed as a function of the frequency to determine the resonance frequency. The other is a passive mode, where an external force oscillates a wire. A speaker connected to a sinusoidal function generator vibrates the detector where wires reside. We came up with two new ways of detecting the signal in the active mode operation. This work was based on Sebastian Lin’s independent research project and published in JINST (2018, JINST 13 T01001). The difficulty with the active mode is to detect the signal embedded in the driving voltage, which is typically a few hundred times bigger than the signal. Our new techniques are simple and low cost.∼ The first one is based on an operational amplifier, which acts as a subtractor subtracting the input waveform from the signal. The second one is based on analog switches, which send the driving voltage to a wire for a fraction of second and route the signal to an amplifier. The former technique fits well to measure a single wire/straw, while the latter technique fits well to measure many wires/straws at a time, and we successfully assembled a circuit capable of measuring 16 channels at a time. Using the device, we measured the tension in wires and straws in the prototype panel, and we found that the panel is deformed because of the tension in wires and straws. Although the tension loss should not cause any serious operational problems, the deformation could cause some difficulties in assembling a plane.

5.4 Budget We propose to continue our Mu2e eﬀort and please see the budget justiﬁcation page for a detail.

37 6 Task N: Neutrino Physics

Task N includes the Intensity Frontier work of Professors Barbeau and Scholberg, as well as some continuing contribution from Professor Walter.

6.1 Task N History and Overview The Duke HEP Neutrino Physics program includes activities in the COHERENT, DUNE (Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment), and SK (Super-Kamiokande), T2K (Tokai to Kamioka) collaborations. The Task N group was created in 2004 when Kate Scholberg and Chris Walter moved to Duke, originally focusing on Super-K and T2K activities, which still continue. Scholberg has been involved in DUNE (previously LBNE) since its beginning. Scholberg started a coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering (CEvNS) effort at the Spal- lation Neutron Source in 2006, which became the COHERENT collaboration in 2014, for which she was founding spokesperson. In 2013, Phil Barbeau joined the Duke Physics department and the CEvNS effort. In 2014 he received a Sloan Fellowship and in 2015 he won a a DOE HEP Early Career Award for CEvNS work. He is currently the Deputy Spokesperson and Analysis Co-Coordinator. Barbeau’s ECA funding ends in mid-2020, and this request includes support for his research group starting at that time. Over the past several years, Walter has transitioned his activities to the Cosmic Frontier, and these are described in the Task C section of this proposal. Walter retains some modest involvement in Super-K, although support for him and students are not included in Task N. Scholberg and Barbeau lead separate research groups, but they and their group members collaborate closely on COHERENT; specific activities are described in Sec. 6.2. Schol- berg’s activities on DUNE are described in Sec. 6.3 and on Super-K/T2K are described in Sec. 6.4. Barbeau’s detector R&D activities are described in Sec. 6.4.1. COHERENT is the current primary Task N activity. There are connections between other activities and COHERENT physics as well. A theme threading through much of the work is low-energy neutrino detection and low-threshold detector development. Narrative on comings and goings, where alumni are etc. Table 3 summarizes personnel. Former Super-K postdoc Erin O’Sullivan is currently a postdoc at Stockholm University, and former COHERENT postdoc Mayra Cervantes is now working as a data scientist. Former graduate student Josh Albert worked on SNOwGLoBES for a few months in a short-term postdoctoral position, before finding a full-time data scientist position. Dan Pershey, a recent Caltech Ph.D., joined as a postdoc in summer of 2018, and is already making a major impact in COHERENT, DUNE and T2K. Walter’s student Zepeng Li graduated in 2016 with thesis on tau neutrinos and is now a postdoc at Yale. Graduate student Sinev is now in his sixth year; he transitioned from DUNE to COHERENT and is expected to graduate in fall of 2019 with a thesis on NSI physics in COHERENT. Justin Raybern, a fifth-year student spent a year at ORNL as a SCGSR fellow in 2017-2018 and is expected to graduate in 2020 with a thesis related to neutron backgrounds. Erin Conley is a third-year student, now past her preliminary exam, who has been working primarily on DUNE supernova-related physics. She will transition to COHERENT, with plans to work on cross sections in liquid argon relevant

38 to DUNE. Adryanna Smith is a second-year graduate student who has been working on a physics project related to supernova neutrinos, and move to full time research on DUNE in summer of 2019. Baran Bodur is a second-year graduate who has been working on Super-K; his project is connected to the COHERENT heavy-water detector. A.J. Roeth is spending a year at Duke after graduating from the University of Oklahoma as a research intern, and is primarily working on supernova physics in DUNE. Jack Fowler is an engineer involved in the DUNE project. Former UNC and TUNL graduate student Grayson Rich is now the Enrico Fermi Fellow and Kavli Fellow at the University of Chicago. He received the 2018 Dissertation Award in Nuclear Physics for his thesis work on COHERENT, and is now the Analysis Co-Coordinator for COHERENT and institutional representative for the University of Chicago. Long Li, a ﬁfth-year student, is expected to graduate in 2020 with a thesis related to quenching factor measurements for COHERENT and dark matter detectors. Sam Hedges is a forth year student and CNEC Fellow who has worked on neutron backgrounds and neutrino-induced neutron emission on lead for COHERENT, and is the NaI[Tl] working group co-lead for COHERENT. Connor Awe is also a forth year and CNEC fellow who is working on quenching factor measurements for COHERENT, as well as new neutrino detector development. Peibo An is a second year who’s focus is on the inelastic charged-current reaction on 127I. Jay Runge is a second year who works on novel multi-channel data acquisition schemes for COHERENT and is also participating in the EXO-200 and nEXO experiments. Tyler Johnson is a ﬁrst year student and Sloan Graduate Scholar who’s currently focusing on upgrades to the Advanced Neutron Calibration Facility, in support of COHERENT quenching factor measurements. This request includes support for only some of these personnel; details of other support are included in the budget section. We mentor a large number of undergraduates and a few high school students. For space reasons, these are not included in this table, although some who have substantial accomplishments are mentioned in the text.

Current Past Three Years Faculty P. Barbeau, K. Scholberg, C. Walter Postdocs D. Pershey M. Cervantes, E. O’Sullivan, J. Albert Grad Students P. An, C. Awe, B. Bodur, E. Conley, Z. Li, G. Rich S. Hedges, T. Johnson, L. Li, G. Sinev, J. Raybern, J. Runge, A. Smith Post-Baccalaureate A.J. Roeth A. Smith Engineer J. Fowler

Table 3: Task N personnel summary.

6.2 The COHERENT Experiment Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering (CEvNS) was predicted in 1974 as a consequence of the neutral weak current [?, ?]. Although the cross section is large compared to other

39 neutrino-matter interactions in the few to few tens of MeV energy range, the requirements for observation of this standard model (SM) process were daunting: very low nuclear recoil energy thresholds, intense sources/large target masses, and low backgrounds [?]. Employing state-of-the-art low-energy-threshold detector technology coupled with the intense stopped- pion neutrino source [?] available at the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), the COHERENT Collaboration made the first measurement of CEvNS, published in Science [21] in 2017. This first measurement, which used a 14.6-kg CsI[Na] detector, tested the SM with a precision of 30%. Even this rather large uncertainty was sufficient to produce consequential constraints∼ on new physics [21, ?, ?, ?, ?].

Figure 21: Neutrino Alley

This result is just the beginning for COHERENT. The Collaboration plans further CEvNS measurements on multiple targets and with increased precision. Because the CEvNS cross section is quite cleanly predicted in the standard model, a deviation from the prediction provides a test of beyond-the-standard-model physics. A ﬁrst goal of COHERENT is a test of the SM prediction of proportionality of the CEvNS cross section to neutron number squared, N 2, which requires a range of target nuclei. Furthermore, the recoil spectrum is cleanly predicted. We have explored a variety of possibilities, and many more are in the literature. The “low-hanging fruit”, searches for non-standard interactions (NSI) of neutrinos with quarks, for which existing knowledge can be easily improved, is described below. Other possibilities, such as neutrino magnetic moment, will require few-percent precision, but we will move towards that regime in the longer term. It is also possible to make measurements of neutron distribution properties (i.e., form factors) using neutrinos, and CEvNS measurements can approach theoretical accuracy (percent level) in the longer term. There are also opportunities at the SNS to measure inelastic charged-current (CC) and neutral-current (NC) interactions on argon, oxygen, iodine, lead and iron. These cross sections are poorly measured in the few-tens-of-MeV regime relevant for supernova neutrinos. These inelastic neutrino interaction studies represent connections between COHERENT, DUNE and Super-K. Finally, although it is not strictly neutrino physics, we can also search

40 for accelerator-produced dark matter recoils in COHERENT detectors (for which CEvNS is the background). COHERENT currently has two CEvNS-sensitive detectors deployed: the CsI[Na] detector will run until approximately mid-2019, and a 22-kg single-phase argon detector (CENNS- 10) has been taking data since 2017. In addition, a 185-kg prototype NaI detector, two neutrino cubes (“Nubes”) and the MARS neutron-background-monitoring detector are also deployed. We plan three future CEvNS detector deployments: an upgrade to a tonne-scale single phase argon detector, 14.4 kg of Ge detectors, and 3388-keg NaI detector. Further- more, we plan to use a heavy-water “flux calibrator” to reduce the current 10% SNS flux uncertainty using the well-known νe d cross section. These are described in more detail in the following sections. Fig. 21 shows− the proposed future configuration in Neutrino Alley at the SNS. More information can also be found at [?]. Funds for tonne-scale argon, heavy water and the final deployment of the NaI array– which is primarily supported by Barbeau’s ECA–have been requested to DOE; the Ge detectors will be an NSF Major Research Instrumentation request via Duke and NCCU. Barbeau and Scholberg are charter members of COHERENT and are involved in almost every aspect of the experiment. Scholberg was spokesperson from 2014-2017, and currently serves as Physics Coordinator. Barbeau is Deputy Spokesperson and Analysis Co- Coordinator along with his former student Grayson Rich. Barbeau’s student Sam Hedges is NaI[Tl] working group co-lead. We describe here the main Task N COHERENT activities, in categories of physics and analysis, detector design and deployment, and service. We described both completed and ongoing work, and describe in detail the roles of all personnel. CEvNS First Light (An, Awe, Barbeau, Cervantes, Hedges, Li, Raybern, Rich, Schol- berg, Sinev): Group members were deeply involved in the 2017 result. Barbeau’s former Ph.D. student Grayson Rich led quenching factor measurements at the Advanced Neutron Calibration Facility at TUNL, which was developed by Barbeau’s group, supported by the ECA. Rich also performed the statistical analysis of the data, and organized the data release [?]. He won the DNP thesis prize for his COHERENT thesis. Scholberg performed the NSI study, shown in panel (a) of Fig. 24. Barbeau was the Analysis Coordinator for the result, and performed (with assistance from Rich and Hedges) the analysis of the prompt and neutrino-induced neutron backgrounds and associated systematic uncertainty for the result. Barbeau and Scholberg also performed the standard-model rate calculation. Future Physics Sensitivity (Awe, Barbeau, Conley, Hedges, Li, Pershey, Raybern, Rich, Scholberg, Sinev): A number of physics sensitivity studies are underway. Scholberg coordinated the physics section of the recent proposal to DOE, with input from many collaborators. Fig. 23 shows the expected CEvNS cross section weighted by the stopped-pion neutrino flux (see Section ??), as a function of N, with and without form-factor suppression. COHERENT has made one measurement so far, and measurements with additional targets will result in a clear observation of the coherent N 2 nature of the cross section. The expected nuclear recoil spectra before detection-efficiency corrections are shown in Fig. 23. We pull out here a few specific physics sensitivity studies incorporating major contributions from Duke COHERENT collaborators: NSI and accelerator-produced dark matter

41 Counts ( / PE µs ) 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5· 15.0 17.5 20.0 Counts ( / 2 PE ) 0 40 80 120 0

Photoelectrons (PEs) 40

50 )

s 120 µ

5 90 . 0

60 (

s t 30 n u

o 0 C 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Arrival time (µs)

Figure 22: Two-dimensional photoelectron vs time plot for beam-on CsI data for the ﬁrst- light sample [?]. Plot from Ph.D. thesis and Zenodo data release organized by G. Rich [11].

searches. Non-Standard Neutrino Interactions (Pershey, Scholberg, Sinev) Because the CEvNS cross section is cleanly predicted in the SM, deviations can indicate new physics (e.g., [?, ?, ?, ?, ?]). As one example of a test of beyond-the-SM physics, we consider a new vector coupling in the CEvNS cross section. Possible NSI neutral currents mediated by heavy particles can be parameterized by new flavor-dependent ε couplings. Following [?, ?], under the reasonable assumption that spin-dependent axial contributions are small, the vector qV qL qR couplings εαβ = εαβ + εαβ, dominate. The differential cross-section for CEvNS with NSI of neutrinos of flavor α off a nucleus is given by

2 dσ GF M 2 MT = F (2MT ) 1 2 (1) dT ναA π − 2Eν × p uV dV n uV dV 2 [Z(gV + 2εαα + εαα) + N(gV + εαα + 2εαα)] { X + [Z(2εuV + εdV ) + N(εuV + 2εdV )]2 , αβ αβ αβ αβ } α=β 6 p where Z is the number of protons in the nucleus, N is the number of neutrons, and gV 1 2 n 1 ∼ ( 2 2 sin θW ), gV 2 are the SM weak constants (modulo well-understood radiative corrections).− The eﬀect∼ − of NSI for this type of heavy-mediator model is an overall scaling of the CEvNS rate, which can be either a suppression or an enhancement. The values may be positive or negative, and can conspire to result in the SM rate for given Z, N values. uV dV To provide a concrete example of NSI sensitivity, we focus on the εee , εee parameters.

3 CsI 14.57 kg, 19.3 m 10 NaI 3388 kg, 21.0 m 23 Na 520 kg, 21.0 m Ar 612 kg, 28.0 m Ar 22 kg, 27.5 m 102 Ge 14.40 kg, 22.0 m 103 ) 2 Cs 10 cm 102 I -40

Events per keVr year 1 Ar 10 Cross section (10 Na

− 10 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Recoil energy (keVr) Neutron number

Figure 23: (a) Illustration of the N 2 proportionality of the stopped-pion-neutrino flux- averaged CEvNS cross section versus∝ neutron number, N. The black line assumes a unity form factor. The green band shows the effect of an assumed form factor (very similar effects from [?, ?] and [?], the latter used in the prediction in Ref. [21]), with its width indicating the effect of a 3% uncertainty on the assumed neutron RMS radius in the Helm param- eterization. The± points show the relevant isotopes of COHERENT target materials. The blue square shows the flux-averaged cross section inferred from the measurement reported in Ref. [21]. (b) Differential recoil rates for the COHERENT suite of detectors in Neutrino Alley. The iodine recoil spectrum is separately indicated, as the comparatively higher light yield for sodium recoils permits the separation of these two populations in the measured scintillation spectra. This plot represents interaction rates for the first 6000 ns after each beam pulse, including all flavors and assuming 100% detection efficiency. Note this does not take into account quenching factors, which are different for different detectors, or other detector-specific efficiencies. The kinks are due to different endpoints of prompt and delayed flavor components for different target isotope components. The materials are assumed to have natural abundances of isotopes.

p uV In the case of non-zero values of these, the SM couplings are modified as GV = ((gV +2εee + dV n uV dV V 2 εee ) Z +(gV +εee +2εee )N) Fnucl(Q ). Neutrino-scattering constraints on the magnitude of qV non-zero values for εee from CHARM [?] are of order unity; they are shown in Fig. 24 as the shaded grey region1. A search for NSI can therefore be performed by comparing measured CEvNS cross sections to SM expectations. CEvNS constraints may also help to resolve NSI ambiguities for interpretation of neutrino oscillation parameter measurements [?, ?]. The uV dV initial NSI result from COHERENT [21] for these two parameters, εee and εee (assuming all other ε parameters are zero) is shown in Fig. 24 as a blue band. Reference [?] shows that the first data set can already constrain the “LMA-Dark” degeneracy, which can confound mass ordering measurements at long-baseline experiments. Sensitivity to NSI parameters can be improved with simultaneous measurements of the cross sections on different nuclei that factor out the neutrino flux uncertainty. The angles of the diagonal-band allowed regions

1Note that these constraints are valid only for heavy mediators [?].

43 Figure 24: (a) Result from [21] with initial constraints on two of the NSI ε parameters, showing also the constraint from the CHARM experiment [?]. (b) Same with realistic as- sumptions for COHERENT’s detector suite at a point three years from now, assuming Ge and 1-tonne argon and heavy water detectors running, as well as an improved CsI quenching factor measurement, and assuming that all detectors measure the SM CEvNS rate. The black shows the result from a combined fit. (c) Predicted sensitivity obtained with the COHERENT detectors in six years, assuming also two years of underground argon running. vary slightly between the different isotopes due to different N : Z ratios. With realistic efficiency and background for COHERENT detectors, described in the following sections, the expected constraints from a null search for CsI[Na], Ge, Ar, and the combined analysis, are shown in Fig. 24 as superimposed diagonal bands. Figure 25 shows some estimates of how the constraints on these parameters will improve (assuming SM CEvNS rates are measured) as a function of time, given anticipated detector deployments. CEvNS measurements using uV dV stopped-pion neutrinos can also constrain other NSI ε parameters besides εee and εee . Precision measurements of the CEvNS recoil spectrum (i.e., the momentum transfer Q dependence) also provide information on potential beyond-the-SM couplings [?]. In particular, for the case of new interactions via light mediators, Z0, for which mass scale is comparable to √Q, the signature of the new interaction will be a characteristic recoil spectrum shape. 2 V V 2 Following Ref. [?], the weak charge Qw = (Zgp + Ngn ) is replaced by a non-standard Qα,NS according to

3g2 3g2 2 Q2 = Z gV + + N gV + , (2) α,NSI p 2 2 n 2 2 2√2GF (Q + MZ0 ) 2√2GF (Q + MZ0 ) where g is the new coupling, and MZ0 is the new mediator mass. Our projected sensitivity to this dark photon model with our CsI[Na], Ge, and Ar detectors is shown in Fig. 26. A model of this type can explain the g 2 anomaly. We are sensitive to the g 2-favored range of coupling constants for dark photon− masses between 1 MeV and 10 GeV− Further examples of NSI constraints from the CsI[Na] data set, and exploration of future potential, are described further in e.g., Refs. [?, ?, ?].

0.35 CsI QF Ar 0.3 1t Ar start Ge Combined

0.25 No D2O

D O start 0.2 2 UAr fill

0.15

0.1

0.05Fraction of NSI parameter space

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Years

uV dV Figure 25: Fraction of area of the εee and εee plot in the -1 to 1 range constrained at 90% C.L. in the COHERENT single-bin NSI fit as a function of calendar years, starting December 2018, assuming that SM values are measured. The black line shows the results of the combined fit. The projected area for the combined fit for the case of no heavy water detector is shown (dashed line) to illustrate the improvement from reduction of flux uncertainty. Also included is the impact in year 1 of a reduction in quenching-factor measurement uncertainty for the CsI[Na] detector (25.5% to 7%).

Accelerator-Produced Dark Matter (Pershey): COHERENT recoil-sensitive detectors are sensitive to sub-GeV particles postulated in some models as candidate dark matter [?, ?]. To comply with the Lee-Weinberg bound on WIMP mass[?], such models also predict a “portal” particle to mediate interactions between standard model particles and dark matter candidates. Such light, weakly-coupled portal particles could be produced via pion decays produced by 1-GeV proton interactions with mercury target and subsequently decay to a pair of dark matter particles, one of which could interact coherently with nuclei in the detector. A tonne-scale Ar detector would place leading bounds on two distinct phenomenological dark matter production models: a vector portal coupling to SM particles and a leptophobic portal coupling to baryonic matter. For leptophobic dark matter, we project sensitivity to a coupling constant more than an order of magnitude below the current experimental bounds over a signiﬁcant range of portal particle mass. Both models depend on the mass of the predicted portal and dark matter particles, mV and mχ, respectively. The vector portal model depends on two coupling constants, and α0, while the leptophobic portal depends on a single coupling, αB. Within the vector portal model, the relic dark matter annihilation rate can be expressed in terms of the di-

45 Figure 26: Expected sensitivity to a new mediator as a function of mass, mZ0 and coupling, g, for the proposed Ge array and tonne-scale Ar detectors along with the existing CsI[Na] detector. Such a model can explain the g 2 result. The teal band shows the parameter space consistent with the g 2 result. Each− individual sub-system shows an unconstrained region, just below the g 2 preferred− region, where the CEvNS prediction in the dark photon theory is degenerate with− the SM. However, these degenerate regions do not overlap for each detector, and the combined region can break all degeneracies.

2 2 mχ mensionless constant, Y [?], defined as Y = α0 . Using this constant, our results mV may be compared to a direct-detection experiment in the parameter space of interest. In a leptophobic dark matter model, the relationship between model parameters and the relic flux is more complicated, and somewhat model-dependent[?], and thus results are shown as a function of the predicted coupling, αB. Using a Monte Carlo code developed in Ref. [?] for calculating relevant V production and χ scattering cross sections, postdoc Dan Pershey has calculated projected sensitivity to these parameters while accounting for appropriate backgrounds and systematic uncertainties. Our projected sensitivity to the relevant parameter space, compared to current limits, is shown in Fig. 27 using the proposed tonne-scale Ar detector with four years of running, including two years of running with depleted Ar. We take advantage of the distinct recoil energy distribution predicted for dark matter scatters allowing us to probe lower values of the coupling constant in each model. Further, as the produced dark matter particles are predicted to be relativistic, their scatters are expected to be coincident with the arrival of the beam, reducing the relevant exposure of steady-state backgrounds for the analysis. Systematic uncertainties on flux normalization, neutron normalization, quenching factor, and nucleon form factor are included in the estimates. Other detectors in the COHERENT program are also sensitive to this signal channel, though the tonne-scale Ar detector is the most sensitive proposed detector due to the large mass and low background rate. As this measurement is expected to be limited by statistical uncertainty over the lifetime of the experiment, data from multiple detectors may be combined. However, such an analysis would only give an small improvement in physics sensitivity compared to an Ar-only result.

46 We note that existing data from CsI[Na] will provide some meaning ful limits in this space, and Pershey is preparing an analysis for publication in the short term.

Figure 27: Predicted sensitivity to sub-GeV dark matter production parameters in a vector (a) and baryonic (b) portal theory. The gray region gives the current excluded region while our proposed Ar detector is sensitive to all parameter space above the blue curves. To reduce the dimensionality of the ﬁgure, we set α0 = 0.1 and mV = 3mχ on the left and mχ = 5 MeV on the right.

Sodium Iodide Detector (Barbeau, An, Hedges,): NaI[Tl] scintillating crystals are another detector material with the capacity for low- threshold recoil detection. The sole stable sodium isotope, 23Na, with 12 neutrons, has the lowest N value of COHERENT’s target materials, and will result in the highest-energy recoils so far. A small-N nuclear target in combination with measurements on heavier nuclides reduces the impact of the flux uncertainty and improves the physics reach (see Sections ??). Furthermore, a few-percent effect from axial contributions is expected at high recoil energy, and could be of interest to measure with a near-future lower-background, precision effort.

Figure 28: (a) installation of the prototype 185-kg NaI array in Neutrino Alley by members of the TUNL/Duke and UW groups. (b) 3.388-t array visualization.

47 On the order of 4 tonnes of recycled NaI[Tl] detectors are immediately available to the COHERENT collaboration on loan from Barbeau’s group at Duke, as well as ORNL and UW, with potentially more (up to about 9 tonnes available in the future. The NaI[Tl] detectors are available in the form of 7.7-kg NaI[Tl] modules sealed in aluminum and packaged with Burle S83013 (or equivalent) photomultiplier tubes. These rectangular detectors are suitable for deployment in a compact array, as can be seen in the deployment of the prototype array in Fig. 28. Their intrinsic backgrounds are high, as they were not designed with low-radioactivity operation in mind. However, CEvNS backgrounds can be reduced by rejecting coincident events between multiple detectors. The deployment of the 185-kg array by Barbeau’s group has provided for the characterization of these background in the range 250 counts per keVee per kg per day in the 10 keVee recoil energy range (see Fig. 29). The∼ immediate focus of this CEvNS measurement∼ is on the 23Na recoils, which extend to higher energies than those of 127I. The 23Na recoils also have a higher quenching factor, producing more scintillation light than 127I recoils of the same energy. Studies of these crystals with different bases have demonstrated 3 keVee threshold, which allows the near complete separation of these two recoiling species. As part of an upgrade option, the simultaneous measurement of the 127I recoils in these crystals is possible by replacing the low-gain PMTs with ones capable of observing single photoelectrons, thus increasing the deployed mass of 127I (and statistical precision) over that reported in the Science paper by more than two orders of magnitude. The feasibility of this will be studied with the current deployment, and with a handful of PMTs already available to Barbeau’s group. The NaI[Tl] light yield is 40 photons per keVee, with significant nonlinear corrections for low energy signatures, and∼ so careful calibration of 23Na and 127I recoils is necessary. Recent quenching factor measurements by Barbeau’s group at the facility developed for this purpose have been performed in collaboration with the COSINE and ANAIS dark matter collaborations. The combined effort aims to control numerous subtle systematic uncertainties and provide robust cross-checks in order to provide precision calibrations and resolve long- standing discrepancies in past measurements (see Fig.??.) The deployment of a relatively low-cost, large mass detector to the SNS also enables an 127 127 127 opportunistic search for the charged-current neutrino interaction on I, I(νe, e−) Xe∗. The cross section is lower than CEvNS on CsI by two orders of magnitude [?, ?], but produces high-energy electrons (MeV scale) which are easily observable and only suffer from cosmic 127 ray muon backgrounds. The flux-averaged exclusive (to Xe bound state) νe cross section of the interaction on 127I, previously proposed for solar neutrino studies [?], has been measured with 34% uncertainty at a stopped-pion source [?]. Improved cross-section measurements of neutrino-induced interactions with significant momentum transfer could provide a new handle on possible gA quenching, a matter of critical importance for future neutrinoless double-beta decay experiments (e.g., [?]). In particular, recent nuclear models predict a dependence of gA quenching on momentum transfer (e.g., [?]) that could be tested with a stopped-pion neutrino source. We plan to make an improved 127 measurement of the energy-dependent, inclusive, I CC νe cross section and to explore the sensitivity of the NaI array to gA-quenching physics. The predicted charged-current signal, with steady-state background subtracted, can be seen in Fig. 31. The photomultiplier tubes packaged with the existing NaI[Tl] detectors have insuffi- cient gain to observe a CEvNS signal with high efficiency. Hence, the Barbeau’s group is

48 Figure 29: (a) The deployment of the 185-kg array has provided an in-situ measurement of the low-energy CEvNS backgrounds. While these crystals were obtained at no cost, they were not designed with low-intrinsic radioactivity in mind; nevertheless, running in anti- coincident mode, the backgrounds are sufficiently low such that a significant measurement of the Na recoils can be made within 3 years of operations at the SNS. (b) The prototype deployment is currently collecting data for a preliminary search for charged-current neutrino interactions on 127I. The largest background for these interactions are cosmic ray muons. Shown is beam-off data from the detector with 95% efficient veto along with expected signal. ∼

refurbishing the PMT bases to allow higher-gain running, in order to enable observation of lower-energy recoils. A total of 185 kg of NaI[Tl] detectors have been deployed at the SNS as a prototype (see Fig. 28) and have been running since November 2016 to measure environmental and beam-related backgrounds on site and explore charged current neutrino interactions. Several upgrades, including improved shielding and cosmic-ray veto panels, were completed by Sam Hedges in November of 2017. In the next phase, 3.388 tonne will be deployed in high- or dual-gain mode with sensitivity to CEvNS and charged current neutrino interactions (see Fig. 28). Although backgrounds are expected to be higher than for the other detectors, the large amount of target mass will provide a sufficient statistical sampling. Originally envisioned as a means of astrophysical neutrino detection[?], interest in the 127 127 I(νe, e−) Xe∗ reaction has motivated cross-section calculations[?, ?] as well as measurements of the Gamow-Teller strength[?]. A measurement of the reaction serves as a benchmark for calculations and as a probe for gA-quenching effects (see Sec. ??). The COHERENT Collaboration has adapted the MARLEY framework to generate events for the reaction using the predicted Gamow-Teller strength and available level data for the relevant daughter nuclei[?]. The total observed energy of events is produced using a Geant4 model of one of the potential tonne-scale NaI[Tl] detector geometries. Steady- state cosmic ray backgrounds in the 0-50 MeV range are simulated for the same geometry. The predicted energy spectrum is shown in Fig. 31 assuming a background suppression of 6µs 60 Hz from the SNS beam timing, a 99% muon veto efficiency, and a total cross section of 6×.83e 40 cm2. We− will continue to study signatures that can be used to distinguish background events from the non-trivial CC event topologies. Further, we will investigate different transition strength models and nuclear transition models in the MARLEY framework, and incorporate

49 Figure 30: (a) The expected sodium CEvNS signal after 3 years of operations at the SNS is shown, compared to beam related neutron backgrounds (prompt and NINS). The measured intrinsic backgrounds are also included down to 3 keVee, which are the dominant contribution to the statistical uncertainty for any measurement. The iodine recoils are clearly well separated. (b) The arrival time structure of CEvNS signals and beam related neutron backgrounds are similarly shown. The steady-state intrinsic backgrounds are included, with the vertical scale zero-suppressed. a realistic model of the neutral-current response. Germanium Detectors (Barbeau, Li, Raybern, Scholberg, Sinev): more Phil students The COHERENT Collaboration aims to deploy an array of low-background, low-threshold p-type point contact (PPC) germanium detectors, with the aim of sensitively measuring the CEvNS spectrum. Germanium has the advantage of low threshold and excellent energy resolution. A set of detectors comprising an estimated 14.4 kg of Ge will be procured in low-background vendor-supplied cryostats, and deployed in a 160-liter, multi-port dewar. A compact copper, polyethylene and lead radiological shield will encompass the array, and a 4π plastic scintillator muon veto will be used to constrain backgrounds from cosmic-ray induced neutrons generated in the shielding materials (See Figure ??). Barbeau and Scholberg are collaborating with Matt Green (NCSU), the COHERENT Ge group co-convener, and Diane Markoﬀ of NCCU on an NSF Major Research Instrumentation request for an array of Ge detectors, to be submitted as a collaborative Duke/NCCU proposal. This will cover primarily equipment. Raybern has used MCNP to simulate NIN backgrounds in Ge shielding and is expected to help with shielding design for this detector.

50 Figure 31: The predicted total energy of high-energy events in the NaI[Tl] detector array (top). The background-subtracted signal predicted by the MARLEY event generator and Geant4 model of the array with estimated statistical uncertainties (bottom). The total event rate is shown in black, and the red (orange) are events with (without) a neutron in the ﬁnal state.

Phil: Ge calibration, students, etc. Heavy Water Detector (Koros, Raybern, Scholberg): The 10% uncertainty on the SNS neutrino flux will soon become the dominant systematic for∼ precision studies of CEvNS. The Collaboration plans to address this with a 1.3-tonne heavy water detector in Neutrino Alley, taking advantage of the fact that the theoretical uncertainty for the charged-current νe + d p + p + e− reaction is on the order of 2-3% [?, ?, ?]. The improvement in flux uncertainty→ will improve the precision of all COHERENT analyses. A specific example of improvement of the sensitivity to NSI due to heavy water deployment is shown in Fig. 25. In addition to flux normalization, such a detector can also measure CC (and possibly NC) interactions on of relevance to measurements of supernova neutrinos in Super-K and 16 16 ( ) Hyper-K [?], such as the subdominant channel νe + O e− + F ∗ . This interaction is also of relevance for low-energy atmospheric neutrinos (see→ Sec. ??). Undergraduate Jes Koros with grad student Raybern created an event generator for νe d interactions, used to make Fig. ?? [?]. The Duke group is also taking responsibility for− water purification. Inelastic Neutrino Interactions in Argon (Conley, Pershey, Raybern, Scholberg): As described in Sec. 6.3, a wealth of physics and astrophysics will be learned from a supernova 40 40 neutrino burst [?, 30]. The primary interaction observed is expected to be Ar(νe, e−) K, which will give DUNE unique sensitivity to the electron neutrino flavor component of the

51 Figure 32: (a) Heavy water detector concept for neutrino alley. (b) Performance summary of the heavy water detector for two SNS-years for a detector located 20 m from the neutrino source. The statistical precision of the background subtracted measurement integrated above threshold is shown in the black curve. For ﬂux normalization we will use events with energy deposition above 35 MeV where contribution from interaction on oxygen is negligible. supernova burst.

Figure 33: (a) The plot shows examples of the result of a set of fits to a simulated (using SNOwGLoBES) DUNE observation of a core-collapse supernova at 10 kpc, to the parameters related to the total energy released, and the average νe energy Eν . The true parameters lie at the point marked with the black star, and the region representsh i the parameter region that would be determined assuming that the νe cross section is correctly known. The green and red stars and corresponding regions represent the biased measurement that would result 50%. (b) The z-axis represents the bias in the supernova luminosity parameter given an assumed cross section different from the true one; the x-axis represents a cross-section scaling assumed for the fit, and the y-axis represents an assumed true scaling.

However, the physics to be learned from a DUNE supernova burst detection will be limited by the lack of knowledge of the interaction cross section. The cross-section calculations vary by at least tens of percent. Fig. 33 shows the eﬀect of νeCC cross section

52 uncertainty on determination of supernova burst pinched-thermal parameters for a DUNE burst measurement at 10 kpc. These studies demonstrate that an incorrect assumption for the cross section scaling will lead to potentially large biases in determination of supernova neutrino spectral parameters. Better than 10% uncertainty on the cross section is highly desirable.2 Although the COHERENT single-phase LAr detector cannot reconstruct tracks and disentangle complex CC and NC topologies in the same way that DUNE will, even knowledge of the overall cross section will be helpful for interpretation of DUNE data. The tonne-scale LAr detector is expected to see 340 νeCC events per year, as well as 100 inelastic NC events. Another major unknown is∼ the contribution of NC interactions to∼ the supernova burst yield in DUNE. Fig. 34 shows the expected spectrum with the interaction components. The νeCC rates are estimated using MARLEY [?] and Geant4 detector smearing using the SNOwGLoBES software package [?]. The NC event rate and spectrum are estimated using neutrino-induced gamma excitation cross sections calculated by Pekka Pirinen [?]. An inclusive measurement in the tonne-scale LAr detector could be made to 5% percent precision in three years. ∼

Figure 34: Left: CC and NC cross sections in argon. Right: Expected observed energy distribution of inelastic neutrino interactions in argon, incorporating detector smearing estimated using MARLEY and the LAr Geant4 simulation, for the 612-kg single-phase detector.

Grad student Conley has performed extensive studies of cross section uncertainty requirements in DUNE. She plans to transition to COHERENT over the next academic year. She will work on analysis of the 22-kg argon detector to gain experience, although statistics will be small and CC events will likely saturate. She will work on sensitivity optimization of the tonne-scale detector to CC events, and analyze ﬁrst data. Pershey will also contribute to these studies. Neutrino Induced Neutron Interactions (NINs) (Barbeau, Cervantes, Hedges, Rich, Sinev,...) Neutrino-induced neutrons (NINs) result from interactions of neutrinos in lead, iron, or other shielding materials that emit neutrons from the ﬁnal state nucleus. Such neutrons are

2These are results of studies done in the DUNE Supernova Burst Physics Working Group by COHERENT collaborators, although they do not use DUNE-speciﬁc tools.

53 relevant especially for supernova neutrino detection. As secondary goals, COHERENT will perform measurements of the CC and NC cross sections Pb(νe,n), Fe(νe,n), and Cu(νe,n), which result in the emission of background-inducing fast neutrons (“neutrino-induced neutrons”, or NINs). The measurement of this cross section on lead has implications for supernova neutrino detection in the ongoing HALO supernova neutrino detection experiment [?, ?]. The spallation of neutrons from heavy elements is also expected to inﬂuence the nucleosyn- thesis of heavy elements in supernovae [?, ?]. The NIN inelastic signal is also a background for CEvNS, which is another motivation for measurement of these cross sections; see Sec. ??. Detectors dedicated to measuring NINs are described in Section ??. Phil: Nubes Quenching Factors (An, Awe, Barbeau, Hedges, Li,...) Phil Monitoring and Databases (Cervantes, Sinev): As service work, Cervantes and Sinev were responsible for data monitoring, setting up a Grafana graphical interface. Full responsibilities have now been transferred to Sinev, who is responsible for gathering data for all the subsystems: see Fig. 35, which shows integrated protons on target delivered to the detector subsystems so far. Sinev has also taken on the task of compiling a database of detector parameters for physics sensitivity studies. Phil: other service work from group members

Figure 35: Integrated SNS protons on target recorded by each COHERENT subsystem. The Neutron Scatter Camera and SciBath detectors are described in Sec. ??. They have been moved out from Neutrino Alley. The “LS in CsI Shield” refers to the liquid scintillator cell deployed in the CsI detector shield described in Ref. [21]. The Pb and Fe Nubes are described in Sec. ??. “NaIvE (CC)” refers to the NaI[Tl] 185-kg detector running in low- gain CC mode as described in Sec. ??. “CENNS-10” refers to the single-phase liquid argon detector described in Sec. ??. “MARS” refers to the neutron detector described in Sec. ??.

MARS (Raybern) Future COHERENT Activities Most of the activities described in this narrative are ongoing. Speciﬁc future activities will depend on funding.

54 6.3 Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment For DUNE, our primary physics interests relate to neutrino oscillation, proton decay and supernova neutrinos. She is currently served a one-year term as elected representative on the DUNE Executive Committee. Supernova Burst (SNB) Physics (Conley, Pershey, Roeth, Scholberg, Sinev): Scholberg is currently serving as co-convener of the new DUNE Supernova Burst/Low-energy Physics Working Group, which includes SNB as well as other topics such as solar neutrinos. Liquid argon has unique sensitivity to the νe component of the flux [?, 30], and supernova burst sensitivity is a primary physics goal of DUNE; the underground site makes it an exciting prospect. The working group developed general- purpose code, called SNOwGLoBES [?], to produce event rate spectra for given fluxes and parameterized detector responses. This code has Figure 36: Expected time-dependent sig- been made publicly available. nal for the “Garching” flux model from the DUNE/LBNF CDR [31], showing the Photon Detector Simulations (Scholberg, different contributing interaction modes, Conley, Smith) calculated using SNOwGLoBES. Note the DAQ/Data Selection (Pershey, Scholberg) sharp “neutronization burst” of νe at the outset and that νe CC events dominate LBNF/DUNE Project Contributions (Fowler,overall. Scholberg): Jack Fowler is the LBNF/DUNE Systems Engineering manager. The Systems Engineer- ing (SE) group is responsible for the control and maintenance of all of the requirements, interface definition and configuration management for the project. The SE group also performs the integration of the 3D models and drawings from the various stakeholders.

6.4 Super-Kamiokande and T2K The Duke Super-K involvement has traditionally been in “ATMPD” (Atmospheric Neutrino and Proton Decay) group which typically focuses on events with energies that range from greater than about 100 MeV to hundreds of GeV. Scholberg and Walter have been working with this group since 1996, and were involved in the original discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillation in 1998, and have since that time been involved in many ATMPD analyses. The SK detector is currently being upgraded to SK-Gd (SK-Gadolinium), that will enable neutron tagging via neutron capture on gadolinium. This upgrade will boost the sensitivity of several analyses at Super-K. The Super-K tank was opened for PMT refurbish- ment in mid-2018. Pure water ﬁll is nearly complete at the time of this writing, and it is anticipated that the Gd will be added at low concentration in 2019. The Tokai to Kamioka (T2K) experiment is the second-generation accelerator-based neutrino oscillation experiment involving SK. T2K uses the 30-GeV proton synchrotron at the J-PARC accelerator complex located in Tokai as its neutrino source. The immediate physics

55 program of T2K includes measurement of the mixing angle θ13 via νe appearance, precision measurement of the 2-3 mixing parameters governing νµ disappearance and exploration of CP violation in the neutrino sector. Our group’s involvement with T2K has been primarily on the SK side. The Duke group’s activities on Super-K and T2K have been reduced in the past three years. However, we intend to maintain some level of activity. Both experiments offer data for thesis work and postdoctoral publication, and training opportunities. Grad student Baran Bodur has been contributing, and will work full time when he finished classes in summer 2019. Scholberg and Bodur will continue some outer detector (OD) responsibilities. Walter will remain involved at a low level. Postdoc Pershey has joined T2K (although not Super-K) with the aim of working on joint T2K/NOvA long-baseline oscillation analysis. He brings considerable expertise from NOvA. Tau Analysis: (Li, Walter) Zepeng thesis and paper OD PMT Calibration and Data-Quality Monitoring (Smith, Scholberg, Bodur): Scholberg is responsible for SK IV outer detector (OD) calibration constant generation [?] and bad channel selection, and performs regular updates. As a part of SK-Gd upgrade, the detector infrastructure is being renewed by replacing the dead photomultiplier tubes (PMTs), cleaning the detector to keep the water pure, and fixing light and water leaks. The U.S. group has been responsible for replacement and commissioning of the SK outer detector (OD) PMTs. The Duke group has been historically responsible for data quality and calibration of OD PMTs; Scholberg and students have regularly monitored data quality and produced up-to-date OD calibration constants since almost the beginning of Super-K. Scholberg and group members work with S. Mine of UCI and S. Matsuno of U. on laser calibration. In the summer of 2017 Scholberg and Smith updated code for laser calibration analysis in order to characterize fibers that needed to be replaced. Bodur picked up this work in 2018. Bodur spent several weeks at tank-open in the summer of 2018, helping with refurbish- ment of the OD. Pershey and Roeth (although not formally SK collaborators) also spent time at SK to help when the team was short-handed. Bodur is currently working with T. Wester and E. Kearns of BU to characterize the newly-replaced OD PMTs and set high voltages for the required uniform gains. He will be the new responsible person for OD calibration constant generation for SK-v and SK-Gd. Low-Energy Atmospheric Flux analysis (Bodur, Scholberg): 16 On the data analysis side, Bodur is searching for a component of νe O charged current interactions below 100 MeV in the atmospheric neutrino flux. The− atmospheric flux in this region is low, so this cross section has However, it is possible to make a first observation of this interaction, with 60 expected events from 20 years of SK data. There are multiple motivations behind this study. First , this process is a background to the inverse beta decay process used to search for Diffu se Supernova Neutrino Background (DSNB). Second, this process itself is a detection chann el for νe in case of a supernova burst. Finally, this interaction is a probe to verif y the atmospheric neutrino flux at low energies. For the next generation of dark matter d etectors, CEvNS process from these low energy atmospheric

56 neutrinos will be a signiﬁ cant background for WIMP masses above 10 GeV.

Figure 37: Expected event rates for and other atmospheric neutrino interactions as a function of detected energy. Obtained by using the SNOWGLOBES framework, with Honda [?] 16 atmospheric neutrino ﬂux, and theoretical νe O cross section by Haxton [?]. − The dominant background process is the well understood, inverse beta decay. The 16 νe O interaction has a backward peaked scattering, when coupled with anisotropy of low energy− atmospheric neutrinos, a statistical separation between the signal and inverse beta 16 decay background can be obtained. The second most prominent background is the νx O interaction, which is another not yet observed interaction in this energy range. We expect− about 25 interactions of this type, and some of them might be tagged by the observable beta decay of resulting 16N nucleus to 16O with a half-life of 7.13 seconds [?]. Event rates of these three interactions as a function of detected energy can be seen in Figure 37. In addition to neutrino ﬂux related backgrounds, there are also backgrounds due to decay products low energy (below Cherenkov threshold) and spallation products of higher energy muons. Both of these backgrounds can be reduced by following similar strategies used in DSNB searches. 16 Overall, it is possible to isolate some sample events of the interaction νe O, and compare event rate and angular distribution with the theoretical expectations. The− output of this study will be useful for supernova burst, DSNB search and WIMP dark matter physics. T2K/NOvA Long-Baseline Oscillations Pershey T2K/NOvA

6.4.1 Detector R&D Phil: additional activities, IBD, ECA stuﬀ? etc.

57 6.5 Additional Activities Scholberg is the coordinator of SNEWS, the SuperNova Early Warning System and makes a modest contribution to HALO (the Helium and Lead Observatory). These activities are supported by NSF or university funds and involve mainly undergrads, and occupy less than 10% of Scholberg’s research time. Scholberg also collaborates with theorists on phenomenology papers. SNOwGLoBES community tool

6.6 Service to the Particle Physics Community Scholberg served as Secretary/Treasurer of the APS Division of Particles and Fields, and was one of three overall editors of the community document submitted to the European Strategy Group in Fall of 2018. Scholberg has served and is serving on multiple review panels and advisory committees, including the Fermilab Physics Advisory Committee, pick a few. Young DUNE, early career COHERENT Phil

6.7 Future Plans 6.8 Publications and Presentations Selected publications for which Duke group members have played an important role can be found in Appendix 4 - Intensity Frontier References. Presentations by group members can also be found at [?].

6.9 Budget Justification The main change to the Task N budget in this renewal compared to the previous grant is the addition of Phil Barbeau’s group to Task N starting in July 2020, when his ECA ends. We have reduced travel somewhat to Japan to reflect the shift in our effort to new projects. Detailed budget justifications and explanations for Task N can be found in Appendix 7.4.

58 Appendix 1 Biographical Sketches

Biographical sketches are included below for principal investigators:

1. Ayana Arce

2. Phil Barbeau

3. Alfred Goshaw

4. Ashutosh Kotwal

5. Mark Kruse

6. Seog Oh

7. Kate Scholberg

8. Chris Walter

59 Biographical Sketch: Ayana Tamu Arce

Education and Training Undergraduate: Princeton University Physics B.S., 1998 Graduate: Harvard University Physics B.S., 2006 Postdoctoral: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Physics 2006-2009

Research and Professional Experience Associate Professor Duke University 2016-present ATLAS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider Assistant Professor Duke University 2009-2016 ATLAS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider Chamberlain Fellow Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 2006-2009 ATLAS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider Research Assistant Harvard University 1999-2006 Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF)

Publications [1] ATLAS Collaboration, In situ calibration of large-R jet energy and mass in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector, Submitted to: Eur. Phys. J. (2018) [arXiv:1807.09477].

[2] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for heavy resonances decaying to a photon and a hadronically decaying Z/W/H boson in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018), no. 3 032015, [arXiv:1805.01908].

[3] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for supersymmetry in ﬁnal states with missing transverse momentum and multiple b-jets in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, ATLAS-CONF-2018-041, CERN, Geneva, July, 2018.

[4] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for heavy resonances decaying to a Z boson and a photon in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B764 (2017) 11–30, [arXiv:1607.06363].

[5] ATLAS Collaboration, Searches for heavy diboson resonances in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 09 (2016) 173, [arXiv:1606.04833].

[6] ATLAS Collaboration, Combination of searches for WW , WZ, and ZZ resonances in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B755 (February, 2016) 285–305, [arXiv:1512.05099].

[7] ATLAS Collaboration, Identiﬁcation of boosted, hadronically decaying W bosons and comparisons with ATLAS data taken at √s = 8 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 76(3) (2016) 1–47, [arXiv:1510.05821].

[8] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of colour ﬂow with the jet pull angle in tt¯ events using the ATLAS detector at √s = 8 TeV, Phys. Lett. B750 (November, 2015) 475–493, [arXiv:1506.05629].

1 [9] ATLAS Collaboration, Search for high-mass diboson resonances with boson-tagged jets in proton-proton collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 12 (2015) 055, [arXiv:1506.00962].

[10] A. Altheimer et al., Boosted objects and jet substructure at the LHC. Report of BOOST2012, held at IFIC Valencia, 23rd-27th of July 2012, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (March, 2014) 2792, [arXiv:1311.2708].

Synergistic Activities 2018-present Fermilab Physics Advisory Committee Member

2018-present USQCD Scientiﬁc Advisory Board Member

2016-present BOOST International Organizing Committee Member

2016-2018 US ATLAS Physics Support Manager, 2016-2018

2012-present Duke/Triangle University Laboratories Research Experiences for Undergraduates Program co-coordinator

Invited and public lectures public, outreach Creating Space at Mellon-Mays Southeast Regional Conference, Durham NC, 2018

Invited: Experimental Summary at Aspen Winter Conference ”The Particle Frontier” Aspen CO, 2018

Invited, public: Recent results from the Large Hadron Collider at American Association for the Advancement of Science, Boston MA, 2017

Invited: Diboson Resonance Searches at ATLAS Joint Theory/Experimental Physics Seminar, Fermilab, 2016

Invited: Update on LHC Searches: experimental techniques and recent results Lattice x BSM workshop, Argonne National Laboratory, 2016

2 Identiﬁcation of Potential Conﬂicts of Interest or Bias in Selection of Reviewers Collaborators and Co-editors BOCCI, Andrea (Duke); CAMPANELLI, Mario (UC London); CHEN, Chunhui (Iowa State); COCHRAN, James H. (Iowa State); DOGLIONI, Caterina (Lund); FAROOQUE, Trisha (Michi- gan SU); FENG, Minyu (Duke); GOSHAW, Alfred (Duke); KOTWAL, Ashutosh (Duke); KUNIGO, Takuto (Kyoto); LEBLANC, Matthew Edgar (Arizona); LI, Shu (TDLI ); LIANG, Zhijun (Beijing IHEP); LIU, Bo (Iowa State); MILLER, David (Chicago); NACHMAN, Benjamin Philip (Berkeley LBNL); PICAZIO, Attilio (Massachusetts); PRELL, Soeren (Iowa State); RIZZI, Chiara (CERN); SWIATLOWSKI, Maximilian J (Chicago); VOS, Marcel (Valencia); YU, Jie (Iowa State)

Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors and Advisees Graduate advisor Melissa Franklin (Harvard University) Postdoctoral sponsor Shapiro, Marjorie (Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory) Graduate and postdoctoral advisees Students ( 4 total ) : Lei Li (Duke U.), David Bjergaard (Duke U.), Matthew Epland (Duke U.), Michael Eggleston (Duke U.); former postdoctoral scholars ( 1 total ) : Enrique Kajomovitz Mustri (Technion)

Advisory Committees USQCD Scientiﬁc Advisory Board

Fermilab Physics Advisory Committee

3 Biographical Sketch: Alfred T. Goshaw

Professional Preparation Undergraduate: University of Wisconsin Electrical Engineering B.S., 1959 Graduate: University of Wisconsin Physics Ph.D., 1966 Postdoctoral: Princeton Physics 1966-1969 Staﬀ Physicist: CERN Physics 1969-1973

Appointments James B. Duke Professor emeritus Duke University 2019...

James B. Duke Professor Duke University 2000...2018

Professor Duke University 1984...2000

Associate Professor Duke University 1978...1984

Assistant Professor Duke University 1973...1978

Selected Publications from 400 ≈ 1. Searches for heavy resonances decaying to a Z/W/H boson and a photon in p-p collisions at 1 √s = 13 TeV, 36. fb− (2018). 2. (with the ATLAS Collaboration)“Search for heavy resonances decaying to a Z boson and a photon in pp colisions at √s = 13 TeV”, Phys. Letters B764, 11 (2017).

3. (with the ATLAS Collaboration)“Measurements of Zγ and Zγγ prodcution in pp colisions at sqrts = 8 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D93, 120021 (2016).

4. (with the ATLAS Collaboration)“Evidence of W γγ production in pp colisions at √s = 8 TeV and limits on anomalous quartic gauge couplings”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 031802 (2015).

5. (with the ATLAS Collaboration)“Search for Higgs boson decays to a photon plus a Z boson in pp collisions at √s = 7 and 8 TeV”, Phys. Letters B732 8 (2014)7.

6. (with the ATLAS Collaboration) “Observation of a new particle in the search for the Higgs boson”, Phys. Lett. B 176, 1 (2012)

7. (with the CDF Collaboration) “First observation of the all-hadronic decay of tt¯ pairs”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 584 (1997)

8. (with the CDF Collaboration)“Observation of top quark production in pp¯ collisions with the Collider Detector at Fermilab ”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2626 (1995).

1 Synergistic activities Chair US ATLAS Institutional Board (2008 to 2013).

Secretary Treasurer DPF (2007 to 2009).

Co-spokesperson CDF (1997 to 2003).

High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (1996 to 1999).

Chair Fermilab Users Executive Committee(1995 to 1996).

Thesis advisor and postgraduate scholar sponsor 2017 Minyu Feng (current student), Research at the LHC with the ATLAS experiment 2015 Miaoyuan Lui Gauge boson coupling measurements with a W boson plus photons using pp colisions at √s = 8T eV 2008 Jainrong Deng Z γ+X studies in pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.96 TeV 2004 Michael Kirby W γ from pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.96 TeV 2002 Marina Brozovic Study of W/Z production with Direct Photons 1998 Jay Dittmannn W + jet production from pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.80 TeV 1995 Susanne Hauger Z + jet production from pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.80 TeV 1992 Jeﬀrey Elder A study of radiation damage eﬀects on wire chambers 1992 Charles Loomis Soft photon production from pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.80 TeV 1990 Thomas Carter Photon production from pp¯ collisons at √s = 1.80 TeV 1989 Grace Mendez D meson production from 800 GeV/c p p interactions 1987 Charles Wild H adro-production of D mesons in 400 GeV/c pp collisions 1984 Norman Morgan Study of resonance production in π+p collisions at 15.7 GeV/c 1984 Andrea Palonek Photo production of vector mesons in 20 GeV γp interactions 1982 Thomas Glanzman Study of meson production in 15.7 GeV/c π+p collisions 1982 Piermaria Oddone Deuteron-deuteron elastic scattering at 2.2 GeV/c

2 Ashutosh Kotwal Department of Physics Phone: (919) 423-9154 Duke University Fax: (919) 660-2525 Box 90305 E-Mail: [email protected] Durham, NC 27708 URL: https://www.phy.duke.edu/content/ashutosh-v-kotwal

Professional Preparation University of Pennsylvania Electrical Engineering B.S.E., Summa Cum Laude, 1988 UniversityofPennsylvania Finance B.S.Econ.,SummaCumLaude, 1988 HarvardUniversity Physics Ph.D.,1995

Appointments 2014-present Fritz London Distinguished Professor of Physics, Duke University 2012-2015 Associate Chair, Department of Physics, Duke University 2010-2014 Professor of Physics, Duke University 2005-2010 Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University 1999-2005 Assistant Professor of Physics, Duke University 1995-1998 Research Associate in Physics, Columbia University

Fellowships, Awards and Grants – Fellow of the Maharashtra Academy of Sciences, India, 2013. – Dean’s Leadership Award, Duke University, 2013. – Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2012. – Program Director and Principle Investigator of Duke High Energy Physics, 2009-2015. – Fellow of the American Physical Society, 2008. – Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellow, 2000. – Department of Energy Outstanding Junior Investigator Award, 2000.

Leadership Activities – US Coordinator of Future Collider Study Group, 2014-2016. – Head of Future Collider Facilities Group, Fermilab, 2014-2016. – US ATLAS Physics Advisor for LHC, 2013-2014. – Electroweak Physics Co-convener, DPF Study for Long Range Planning, 2013. – Chair, Information Technology Advisory Committee, Duke University, 2012-2013. – Chair and Vice-Chair, DPF Nominations Committee, 2010-2011. – Chair, Fermilab Users Executive Committee, 2008-2009. – Co-leader of the CDF Oﬄine Analysis and Computing Project, 2004-2006. – Co-convener of the CDF Electroweak Physics group, 2002-2004.

1 Committees and Reviews – ATLAS Upgrade Physics Subcommittee, 2013-2015. – DoE Selection Committee, Early Career Award, 2008 & 2013. – Information Technology Advisory Committee, Duke University, 2010-2013. – Reviewer, Physics Letters B and Physical Review Letters.

Selected Publications – M. Aaboud et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Studies of Zγ production in association with a high-mass dijet system in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, J. High Energ. Phys. 2017 (2017) 107. – G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Observation and measurement of Higgs boson decays to WW ∗ with the ATLAS detector”, Phys. Rev. D 92, 012006 (2015). – T. Aaltonen et al. [CDF Collaboration], “A precise measurement of the W -boson mass with the Collider Detector at Fermilab”, Phys. Rev. D 89, 072003 (2014). – G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “A search for tt¯ resonances in the lepton plus jets 1 ﬁnal state with ATLAS using 4.7 fb− of pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 88, 012004 (2013). – G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Search for high-mass resonances decaying to dileptons in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, JHEP 1211 (2012) 138. – T. Aaltonen et al. [CDF Collaboration], “Measurement of the top quark mass with dilepton events selected using neuroevolution at CDF”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 152001 (2009). – T. Aaltonen et al. [CDF Collaboration], “First Run II Measurement of the W Boson Mass at the Fermilab Tevatron”, Phys. Rev. D 77, 112001 (2008). – B. Abbott et al. [DØ Collaboration], “Measurement of the W Boson Mass using Electrons at Large Rapidities”, Phys. Rev. D 62, 092006 (2000). – A. V. Kotwal with M. R. Adams et al. [E665 Collaboration], “Proton and Deuteron Structure Functions in Muon Scattering at 470 GeV”, Phys. Rev. D 54, 3006 (1996).

Collaborators and Other Aﬃliations – The ATLAS collaboration, since 2010 (co-author of 777 publications) – The CDF collaboration, since 1999 (co-author of 431 publications) – The DØ collaboration, since 1995 (co-author of 137 publications) – The E665 collaboration, since 1990 (co-author of 8 publications) – Graduate advisors: F. Pipkin & R. Wilson (Harvard University) – Postdoctoral advisor: P. M. Tuts (Columbia University) – Ph.D. thesis advisees: B. Cerio, H. K. Gerberich, C. Pollard, S. Sen, Y. Zeng – Masters thesis advisees: J. P. Tuttle, R. Shekhar – Postdoctoral advisees: C. P. Hays, B. Jayatilaka, S. Li, K. Pachal

2 Mark Charles Kruse Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0305 Email: [email protected]

EDUCATION

Ph.D., Purdue University, 1996 (Physics). M.Sc., University of Auckland (New Zealand), 1988 (Physics, 1st-class honours) B.Sc., University of Auckland (New Zealand), 1986 (Physics)

RESEARCH AND PROFFESIONAL APPOINTMENTS

2017 - present, Professor of Physics and Bass Fellow, Duke University. 2014 - 2017, Fuchsberg-Levine Family Professor of Physics, Duke University. 2012 - 2014, Fuchsberg-Levine Family Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University. 2007 - 2012, Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University. 2001 - 2007, Assistant Professor of Physics, Duke University. 1996 - 2000, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Rochester (New York). 1990 - 1996, Research Assistant, Purdue University (Indiana, USA).

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS

C. Zhou, M. Kruse (Duke), A. Paramonov (BNL), K. Finelli (Sydney), with the ATLAS collaboration, “Measurement of the ttW¯ and ttZ¯ Production Cross Sections in pp Collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS Detector”, JHEP 1511 (2015) 172.

K. Finelli, M. Kruse (Duke), A. Limosani, A. Saavedra, K. Varvell (Sydney), with the ATLAS collaboration, + ? “Simultaneous measurements of the tt¯, W W , and Z/γ∗ ττ production cross-sections in pp collisions → at √s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, Phys. Rev. D 91, 052005 (2015).

M. Kruse, A. Limosani, C. Zhou (Duke), with the CDF collaboration, “Search for production of an Up- silon(1S) meson in association with a W or Z boson using the full 1.96 TeV proton anti-proton collision data set at CDF”, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 052011.

CDF and DØ collaborations, “Evidence for a particle produced in association with weak bosons and decaying to a b¯b in Higgs boson searches at the Tevatron”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 071804 (2012).

+ D. Hidas, M. Kruse (Duke U.) with A. Abulencia et al. (CDF collaboration), “Measurement of the W W − production cross section and search for anomalous W W γ and WWZ couplings in pp¯ collisions at √s = 1.96 TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 201801 (2010).

D. Hidas, M. Kruse (Duke U.), M. Herndon, J. Pursely (Wisconsin), with A. Abulencia et al. (CDF collaboration), “Inclusive Search for Standard Model Higgs Boson Production in the WW Decay Channel using the CDF II Detector”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 061803 (2010).

S. Carron, M. Kruse (Duke U.), with A. Abulencia et al. (CDF collaboration), ”Cross Section Measurements of High-pT Dilepton Final-State Processes Using a Global Fitting Method”, Phys. Rev. D78, 012003 (2008).

C. Grosso-Pilcher (U. of Chicago), J. Konigsberg (Harvard U.), M. Kruse (U. of Rochester), with F. Abe et al. (CDF Collaboration), “Measurement of the top quark mass and t¯t production cross section from dilepton events at the Collider Detector at Fermilab”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2779 (1998). (My PhD thesis)

1 SELECTED SYNERGISTIC AND LEADERSHIP ACTIVITIES

Team Leader, Duke ATLAS group (2014 - present)

Sir Thomas Lyle Fellow, University of Melbourne (2013)

Bass Fellow, Duke University (2012 - present), for “excellence in teaching and research”

US ATLAS Transition Radiation Tracker Manager (2013 - present)

US ATLAS Outreach and Education Coordinator (2012 - present)

Partner Investigator of the Australian Research Council “Centre of Excellence for Particle Physics at the Terascale”, University of Melbourne (2010 - present)

Member, ATLAS collaboration, Large Hadron Collider (2006 - present) Recipient of the inaugural 2012-2013 Dean’s leadership award

Convener, CDF Higgs Discovery Group (2007 - 2009)

Convener, CDF Top-Quark Physics Group (1999 - 2001)

Member, CDF collaboration, Fermilab (1992 - present)

Public Outreach: several public talks; annual LHC Masterclasses for HS students

COLLABORATORS AND OTHER AFFILIATIONS

Current collaborations: CDF at Fermilab (since 1992), ATLAS at the LHC (since 2006)

Graduate advisor: Prof. Daniela Bortoletto (Oxford)

Postdoctoral advisor: Prof. Paul Tipton (Yale)

Postdoctoral advisees: Prof. Susana Cabrera (2001 - 2004), Dr. Mircea Coca (2004 - 2006), Dr. Valentin Necula (2007 - 2008), Dr. Esben Klinkby (2008 - 2010), Dr. Andrea Bocci (2006 - 2019), Dr. James Beacham (2018 - present)

Graduate advisees: Prof. Sebastian Carron (graduated 2007), Dr. Dean Hidas (2009), Dr. Kevin Finelli (2013), Dr. Clarissa Lee (2014, in Literature), Dr. Chen Zhou (2016), Mr. Douglas Davis (current), Mr. Pingchuan Zhao (current)

Seog H. Oh

PERSONAL Professional address: Physics Department Duke University Durham NC 27708 (919)660-2579 EDUCATION PhD: June 1981. M.I.T. Cambridge, MA Thesis advisor: Prof. Irwin A. Pless BS: May 1976. University of Maryland, College Park, MD Magna Cum Laude with High Honors in physics. HONORS Phi Beta Kappa

PROFESSIONAL INTERESTS Elementary particle physics. Understanding the forces in nature through experiment and modeling. Research and development of detection systems. Computer simulation of detection systems. Development of software for Monte Carlo techniques and data analysis.

PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT 1999- Professor, Duke University 1991-1999: Associate professor (Tenured) Duke University, Durham, N.C. 1984-1990: Assistant professor Duke University, Durham, NC 1981-1983: Research associate M.I.T.,Cambridge, Mass. 1976-1981: Research assistant. M.I.T.,Cambridge, Mass.

ACTIVITIES Duke Institutional board member to the ATLAS collaboration (1994 - 2014) US ATLAS Institutional board member (1995- 2014) ATLAS TRT Institutional board member (1995 - ) ATLAS Inner detector Institutional board member (2000- ) Mu2e Institutional board member (2010- )

SELECTED CONFERENCES/SEMINARS/Colloquium Duke Physics Colloquium – Discovery of Higgs (2013) Project-X workshop – high rate, low mass straw tracker (2012) BNL WW workshop – WW cross section (2012) FNAL wine & cheese seminar – resonance production (2011) DIS 2011 – hyperons and meson production from CDF (2011)

COLLABORATIONS Mu2e, ATLAS, CDF

Selected ATLAS publications

1. Measurement of the Higgs boson mass from the H → γ γ and H → ZZ* → 4 lepton channels with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys Rev D.90 052004 (September, 2014) 2. Search for the Standard Model Higgs boson decay to µ+µ− with the ATLAS detector, Physics Letters B 738, 68-86 (September, 2014) 3. Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1-29 (2012)

Selected CDF publications 1. Production Properties of Ks, K* and phi in MB Events and Ks and Lambda in Jets, PRD (2013) 2. Production of Λ0, Ξ, and Ω Hyperons in ppbar Collisions at Ecm = 1.96 TeV, Phy. Rev. D 86, 012002 (2012) 3. “Search for high-mass resonances decaying into ZZ in pp̅ collisions at √s=1.96 TeV collisions “Phys. Rev. D85.012008 (2012)

Selected Detector Publications 1. “An x-ray mapper for Mu2e experiment” S.H. Oh, C. Wang. Submitted to Nucl. Instr. & Meth. 2. “Mu2e Technical Design Report” Mu2e collaboration, arXiv:1501.05241 (2015) 3. “Performance of a Multi-anode wire straw tube tracker” S.H. Oh, B. Tepera, and C. Wang, Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 797 (2015) 285-289 4. “Multi-anode wire straw tube tracker” S.H. Oh, W.L.Ebenstein, and C. Wang, Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 640 (2011) 160-163

Kate Scholberg

Education and Training McGill University, Montreal Physics B.Sc., First Class Honors, 1989 California Institute of Technology Physics M.S., 1991 California Institute of Technology Physics Ph.D., 1997 Boston University Physics Research Associate, 1996-2000 Research and Professional Experience 2018- Arts & Sciences Professor of Physics and Bass Fellow, Duke University 2013-2018 Professor of Physics and Bass Fellow, Duke University 2012-2013 Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Physics, Duke University 2008-2012 Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University 2007-2008 Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University 2004-2007 Assistant Professor of Physics, Duke University 2000-2004 Assistant Professor of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2002-2004, holder of the Mitsui Career Development Chair at MIT Selected Publications M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics,” Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 3, 030001 (2018). D. Akimov et al. [COHERENT Collaboration], “Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering”, Science (2017) [arXiv:1708.01294]. R. Acciarri et al. [DUNE Collaboration], “Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) and Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) : Volume 2: The Physics Program for DUNE at LBNF,” arXiv:1512.06148 [physics.ins-det]. A. Mirizzi et al., “Supernova Neutrinos: Production, Oscillations and Detection,” Riv. Nuovo Cim. 39, no. 1-2, 1 (2016) [arXiv:1508.00785 [astro-ph.HE]]. A. de Gouvˆea et al. [Snowmass Intensity Frontier Neutrino Working Group], “Neutrinos”, [arXiv:1310.4340 [hep-ex]]. K. Scholberg, “Supernova Neutrino Detection”, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 62, 81 (2012) [arXiv:1205.6003 [astro-ph.IM]]. K. Scholberg, “Prospects for measuring coherent neutrino nucleus elastic scattering at a stopped- pion neutrino source,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 033005 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ex/0511042]. Y. Ashie et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], “A Measurement of atmospheric neutrino oscillation parameters by Super-Kamiokande I,” Phys. Rev. D 71, 112005 (2005). P. Antonioli et al. [SNEWS Collaboration], “SNEWS: The Supernova Early Warning System,” New. J. Phys. 6, 114 (2004) [arXiv:hep-ex/0406214]. Y. Fukuda et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], “Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1562 (1998).

1 Synergistic Activities/Awards – American Physical Society Division of Particles and Fields Executive Committee, Secretary/Treasurer 2016-2018, Member-at-Large 2010-2012 – APS Conference for Undergraduate Women in Physics National Organizing Committee, Chair- Elect 2015 – Nuclear Science Advisory Committee, 2013-2015 – Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5), 2013-2014 – Fellow of the American Physical Society, 2013 – APS Division of Particles and Fields Executive Committee, 2010-2012 – National Science Foundation CAREER Award, 2004-2009 – Department of Energy Outstanding Junior Investigator Award, 2003-2004

Collaborators and Other Aﬃliations Current collaborations: COHERENT collaboration, since 2014 (spokesperson 2014-2017); • DUNE collaboration (formerly LBNE), since 2009; HALO collaboration, since 2008; T2K collaboration, since 2004; coordinator of SNEWS (SuperNova Early Warning System), since 1998

Frequent collaborators from the past 48 months (includes collaborators on publications with • fewer than 10 authors): P. Antonioli (U. of Bologna), M. Bishai (BNL), R. Bollig (TUM, Munich), S. Brice (FNAL), F. Cavanna (FNAL), S. Chakraborty (MPI, Munich), K. Choi (U. of Hawaii), J. Conrad (MIT), A. de Gouvˆea(Northwestern U.), M. Diwan (BNL), H. Duan (NMSU), B. Fleming (Yale), A. Friedland (SLAC), V. Gehman (LBNL), I. Gil-Botella (CIEMAT), M. Goodman (ANL), A. Habig (U. Minnesota Duluth), Y. Hayato (ICRR), A. Hime (PNNL), L. Huedepohl (MPCDF, Garching), H. Janka (MPI Garching), C.K. Jung (Stony Brook U.), T. Junk (FNAL), E. Kearns (Boston U.), S. Kettell (BNL), W. Kropp (UCI), T. Kutter (LSU), J. Link (Virginia Tech), W. Louis (LANL), K. Mahn (MSU), C. Mauger (LANL), G. McLaughlin (NCSU), A. Mirizzi (Bari U.), S. Moriyama (ICRR), Z. Moss (MIT), S. Mufson (Indiana U.), M. Nakahata (ICRR), K. Patton (Arizona State), J. Raaf (FNAL), D. Reitzner (FNAL), S. Ritz (UCSC), A. Rubbia (ETH Zurich), N. Saviano (IPPP, Durham), M. Shaevitz (Columbia), M. Shiozawa (ICRR), M. Smy (UCI), H. Sobel (UCI), J. Strait (FNAL), R. Svoboda (UC Davis), I. Tamborra (GRAPPA, Amsterdam), H. Tanaka (UBC), M. Thomson (Cambridge U.), J. Urheim (Indiana U.), M. Vagins (Kavli IPMU), C. Vigorito (U. of Torino), F. Villante (U. of L’Aquila), B. Viren (BNL), C. Virtue (Laurentian U.), R. Wendell (ICRR), S. Yen (TRIUMF), J. Yoo (FNAL), G. Zeller (FNAL)

Graduate and postdoctoral advisors: B. Barish and C. Peck (Caltech), E. Kearns, J. Stone, • and L. Sulak (Boston U.)

Graduate advisees: G. Carosi (LLNL), M. Swanson (Harvard CfA), R. Wendell (U. Tokyo), • T. Wongjirad (MIT), G. Sinev (current), J. Raybern (current), E. Conley (current), A. Smith (current), B. Bodur (current)

Postdoctoral advisees: J. Cooley (SMU), N. Tanimoto, M. Fechner, R. Wendell (U. Tokyo), • J. Prendki, A. Himmel (FNAL), T. Akiri, E. O’Sullivan (Stokholm U.), D. Pershey (current)

2 CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM WALTER Department of Physics, Box 90305 Duke University, Durham, NC 27708 Phone: 919-660-2535 Email: [email protected]

EDUCATION

California Institute of Technology, Ph.D., Physics 1997 California Institute of Technology, M.S., Physics 1991 University of California at Santa Cruz, B.A., Physics 1989

APPOINTMENTS

July 2017 - Present Professor of Physics, Duke University January 2011 - June 2017 Associate Professor of Physics, Duke University January 2004 - December 2010 Assistant Professor of Physics, Duke University June 2000 - December 2003 Research Assistant Professor, Boston University June 1997 - June 2000 Postdoctoral Research Associate, Boston University Joint Appointment: Visiting Scientist, Institute for Physics and Mathematics of the Universe, University of Tokyo 2008 - Present AWARDS

2009 - NSF CAREER award 2016 Breakthrough Prize in Physics, for the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration 2016 Breakthrough Prize in Physics, for the K2K/T2K Collaborations 2017 Elected Fellow of the American Physics Society

CURRENT AND RECENT LEADERSHIP POSITIONS

LSST DESC: Survey Simulation co-convener (Ending 2018) LSST DESC: Elected Collaboration Council member LSST DESC: imSim Task Force Convener LSST DESC: DESC Commissioning Task Force Convener

RELEVANT RECENT PUBLICATIONS

Z. Li et al., ’Measurement of the tau neutrino cross section in atmospheric neutrino oscillations with Super-Kamiokande’ Phys.Rev. D98 (2018) K. Abe et al., ’Search for an excess of events in the Super-Kamiokande detector in the directions of the astrophysical neutrinos reported by the IceCube Collaboration’, Astrophys.J. 850 (2017)

1 C. W. Walter, “The Brighter-Fatter and other sensor eﬀects in CCD simulations for precision astronomy,” JINST 10, no. 05, C05015 (2015).

SYNERGISTIC ACTIVITIES

2008 - 2018 DOE university and lab grant reviewer 2006 - 2018 NSF reviewer for Frontier, PNA, MRI, Career, university and project grants 2003 - 2013 Organizer for WIN, NuFact, NuInt, and HCP conference series

CURRENT COLLABORATIONS AND OTHER AFFILIATIONS

Web links are shown below for the full list of collaborating colleagues and institutions if available. I was also a member of K2K, T2K, Hyper-K and LBNE since their starts. I withdrew from these long-baseline experiments when I began my work on LSST. Those are omitted for space.

The Super Kamiokande collaboration since 1997 • http://www-sk.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/doc/sk/col sk.html

The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration since 2013 • The LSST Project since 2013 (LSST builder’s status 2018) • THESIS INFORMATION AND GRADUATE ADVISOR

Thesis Advisor: Professor Barry Barish (California Institute of Technology) Thesis Subject: Experimental Particle Physics Thesis Title: A Search for Lightly Ionizing Particles with the MACRO Experiment.

POSTDOCTORAL ADVISORS

Edward Kearns, James Stone, Lawrence Sulak (Boston University)

POST-DOCTORAL RESEARCHERS AND GRADUATE STUDENTS MENTORED

Postdocs: Dr. Naho Tanimoto (2005 - 2008), Dr. Maxim Fechner (2006 - 2008), Dr. Roger Wen- dell (2008 - 2012), Dr. Jennifer Prendki (2010), Dr. Tarek Akiri (2011 - 2014), Dr. Alex Himmel (2011 - 2015), Dr. Erin O’Sullivan (2014 - 2017) Graduate Students: Roger Wendell, Josh Albert, Taritree Wongjirad, Zepeng Li, Emily Phillips- Longley

COLLABORATORS AND CO-EDITORS

Ed Kearns (Boston University), Kate Scholberg (Duke University), Hank Sobel (UCI), T. Nakaya (U. of Kyoto), M. Shiozawa (U. of Tokyo), A. Himmel (FNAL), R. Wendell (U. Tokyo), A. Nomerot- ski (BNL), Dan Scolnic (Duke), Anze Slosar (BNL), Javier Sanchez (UCI)

2 Appendix 2 Research Scientists

Biographical sketches and Research Narratives are included for the following Senior Scien- tists:

1. Chiho Wang

75 Biographical sketch: Chiho Wang Appointments: 01/1996 - present Research Scientist, Physics Department, Duke University. 01/1992 - 12/1995 Research Associate, Physics Department, Duke University. 05/1991 - 12/1991 Post doctoral research associate, Iowa State University. Education: 08/1984 - 05/1991 Ph.D., High Energy Physics, Iowa State University, USA. 09/1980 - 06/1982 M.S., Nuclear Engineering, National Tsing-Hua University. 09/1976 - 06/1980 B.S., Physics, National Tsing-Hua University, Taiwan Awards:  “Dean’s Leadership Award”, Duke University, 2013  “Research Excellence Award”, Iowa State University, 1991. Research Experience:  Mu2e: (2010- ) Straw tracker design, prototype R&D, X-ray scanner for wire position measurement. Level 3 manager.  CDF: Search for WW/WZ resonances (G*/W’/Z’) in the e, nu, 2-jet final state. (2010 PRL)  ATLAS: (1994-2013) Barrel Transition Radiation Tracker (TRT) design, construction, and integration. High rate & aging tests using radioactive sources and nuclear reactor. Cosmic ray and accelerator beam test. X-ray scanner for wire position and gas gain variation measurements. Production & quality control automation. Integration Physicist in TRT barrel assembly. Editor/writer of TRT Barrel detector paper.  CDF: (1995-1996) Run II upgrade on replacement of Central Tracking Chamber with a straw tube tracking system. System design, prototype R&D, and wrote a straw tracker simulation package in CDFSIM.  SDC in SSC Lab: (1992-1994) R&D of straw based outer tracking system. Design, construction and evaluation of prototype chambers. Test and evaluate front end electronics. Beam test at BNL. Developement of an automated electron scanner for sense wire position measurement. EGS simulation for the electron scanner. Served in Endplate Design Committee and Module Assembly Committee.  Fermilab E735: (1986-1991) Construction and commissioning of the scintillator hodoscope system. Development of an integrated PC-CAMAC-VME-FASTBUS-PDP11-VAX multiple front end data acquisition system. Served as DAQ liaison. Development of a VME based trigger processor system. Implementation of trigger-timing logics integrating detector subsystems and DAQ. Configured & managed a VAX (VMS) cluster and a DEC station (ULTRIX) systems at ISU HEP group. GEANT simulation using a DECstation (Unix) farm. Selected Publications:  “The stress relaxation (creep) rate of Mu2e straw tubes” J.S.Bono, J.-F. Caron, S.H. Oh*, C. Wang, Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 902 (2018) 95-102.  “The effect of electrostatic and gravity foce on offset wire inside tube” S.H. Oh, D. Hazineh, C. Wang, Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 888 (2018) 79-87  “An X-ray mapper for Mu2e experiment” S.H. Oh, C. Wang, Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 807(2016)64-68.  “Search for WW and WZ resonances decaying to electron, missing ET, and two jets in pbar p collisions at √s=1.96 TeV”. T. Aaltonen et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett 104, 241801 (2010)  “The ATLAS TRT Barrel Detector” The ATLAS TRT collaboration et al., 2008 JINST 3 P02014. Research Scientist: Chiho Wang Supervisor: Seog Oh (PI) Research Task: Task M

Dr. Chiho Wang has been with us since early 1990, and has been mostly working on detector R&D and construction He worked on the SDC straw detector and ATLAS Transition Radiation Tracker, which was also a straw tube based detector. About five years ago, we joined the Mu2e Straw Tracker group, and he is now a level-3 manager responsible for straws. As he was a main player in past detector work, he is again playing an important role toward the construction of the tracker. His recent work is described in the progress report. As Mu2e is progressing with full speed, his expertise and talents are being appreciated. The panel production is to start within 1.5 years and there are a lot of tasks have to be accomplished before the production, and the following list summarizes his likely tasks for the next three years. a) Design of the panel and assembly fixtures. The panel is the basic unit of the straw tracker consists of 96 straws. He has been involved with the panel design for more than a year. The assembly fixtures are the tools necessary for assembling panels. He is an expert on AutoCAD and Siemens NX. He learned Siemens NX last summer (a quick learner) to work with FNAL engineers. The engineering drawings can be sent out to vendors for the cost estimate and construction. He is a tireless worker and highly regarded by collaborators. b) Continue development and testing the x-ray scanner. The scanner is to measure the wires and straws in the panel. He has been the responsible person for designing the scanner (AutoCAD) and interacting with machinists to make sure that all parts are made correctly. The scanner is about 75 % completed but as like any other projects, the last 25 % would be hardest. There are∼ still several modifications and improvements have to be addressed as we have learned more through operation. He will continue to be the responsible person to make certain that it is ready when the first panel comes off the production line. c) Continue development of LabVIEW software for the scanner. The program controls five components. One is the stepping motors attached to slides, where the x-ray tube is attached. The second is the x-ray HV and current control, the third is to read out the digital level, which measures the x and y beam slope, the fourth is a DAQ reading out the x-ray transmission rate from the x-ray detector and the last is the safety control system consists of photoelectric switches to make certain that the slides do not run into objects. The software written by Dr. Wang will continue to go through a refinement. e) First Duke prototype testing. Before the production starts, the prototypes have to meet the expectations in every way. As discussed in the progress report, we constructed two prototypes. The first prototype is completed and the second one is under assembly. He will continue to be responsible for the prototype evaluation. As we finished the resolution measurement, the upcoming test is the leak test. The leak specification is no more than 0.035cc/min/panel at 1 atm. Depending on how well the prototype was designed and constructed, it could take a few weeks to a few months as searching for and fixing leaks to this level is extremly tedious process. But it will provide valuable information about the design and sealing technique. We also plan to attach real electronics when they become available and measure the transverse and longitudinal resolution (wrt wire). This work likely falls on his lap as well.

77 f) Assembly of the second prototype. As the ﬁrst prototype, Dr. Wang will do most of the assembly. He is an excellent technician as well. This is an exact size as the real panel, and some of the goals of this prototype are to produce and test a panel scanning procedure and to test the panel supporting structure. There will be a stiﬀ learning curve when this panel is scanned. g) Scanning of the production panels. This is one of our main responsibilities during the production. There will be 216 panels plus some spares. He will be the responsible person to oversee the day to day operation and to analyze the data. This will surely keep him busy once the production starts. One related task for him is to come up with a scheme to minimize the time to measure a wire or straw such that the task measuring all panels should take no more than 1.5 years (note that the scanning step is 20 microns). This may require some wire search algorithm depending on how accurately panels are made. With his talent and dedication, I am certain that all these tasks will be completed successfully. It is very likely that more tasks will come our way, and Dr. Wang won’t be hesitant to take them up.

78 Appendix 3 Current and Pending Support

Current Awards

Award Name: Task A: Hadron Collider Physics Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Ayana Arce, Alfred Goshaw, Ashutosh Kotwal, Mark Kruse Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $2,200,000 Award Period: 4/1/16-3/31/19 Number of person-months per year: summer months for faculty members Arce (2.0), Goshaw (1.95) , Kotwal (1.5) and Kruse (2.0) Project Abstract: This is the current award for which this proposal is a renewal

Award Name: Task C: Cosmology Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Chris Walter Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $330,000 Award Period: 4/1/16 - 3/31/19 Number of person-months per year: 1.785 summer months for faculty member Walter Project Abstract: This is the current award for which this proposal is a renewal.

Award Name: Task M: Muon Physics Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Seog Oh Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $630,000 Award Period: Award Period: 4/1/16-3/31/19 Number of person-months per year: 2.0 summer months for Seog Oh Project Abstract: This is the current award for which this proposal is a renewal.

Award Name: Mu2e x-ray scanner Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Seog Oh Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $65,000 Award Period: 10/01/15-9/30/17 Material and engineering design of the scanner Project Abstract: Mu2e project work via Fermilab subcontract.

Award Name: Mu2e tracker panel processing Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Seog Oh

79 Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $1,153,000 Award Period: 1/01/19-12/31/20 Panel component procurement and labor for panel preparation Project Abstract: Mu2e project work via Fermilab subcontract.

Award Name: Task N: Neutrino Physics Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg, Chris Walter Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $1,220,000 Award Period: 4/1/16-3/31/19 Number of person-months per year: 1 and 0.25 summer months for faculty members Schol- berg and Walter Project Abstract: This is the current award for which this proposal is a renewal.

Award Name: DUNE/LBNF Engineering Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $306,787 Award Period: 11/16/18-11/15/19 Number of person-months per year: 12 months for Jack Fowler Project Abstract: DUNE project work via Fermilab subcontract. Includes travel for Fowler. This is expected to be renewed yearly.

Award Name: The SuperNova Early Warning System Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg Organization: National Science Foundation Total Award Amount: $54,841 Award Period: 8/1/15-7/31/19 Number of person-months per year: <0.5 (no salary for PI) Project Abstract: This award funds undergraduates and a small amount of travel for work on the SuperNova Early Warning System, an international network of neutrincpo detectors.

Award Name: WoU-MMA: Collaborative Research: A Next-Generation SuperNova Early Warning System for Multimessenger Astronomy Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg Organization: National Science Foundation Total Award Amount: $104,543 Award Period: 8/1/19-7/31/22 Number of person-months per year: <0.5 (0.25 months salary for PI)

80 Project Abstract: This award funds undergraduates and a small amount of travel for work on the SuperNova Early Warning System, an international network of neutrincpo detectors. This is a collaborative proposal for an upgrade of SNEWS.

Award Name: Consortium for Monitoring and Veriﬁcation Technology Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg Organization: National Science Foundation Total Award Amount: $25,000,000 Award Period: 9/1/19-8/31/24 Number of person-months per year: <0.5 (no salary for PI) Project Abstract: This is a consortium proposal. Support for KS is one graduate student

Award Name: W boson mass measurement at CDF Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Ashutosh Kotwal Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $93,000 Award Period: 5/1/13-3/31/15 Number of person-months per year: 9 months of graduate student Project Abstract: This award has funded graduate student Sourav Sen for one academic year and two summers.

Award Name: Guest Scientist, Fermilab Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Ashutosh Kotwal Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $299,000 (salary with fringes) Award Period: 9/1/14-5/31/15 and 9/1/15-5/31/16 Number of person-months per year: 9 months teaching buyout from Duke Project Abstract: Fermilab has arranged teaching buyout for Kotwal to lead the Future Hadron Collider Physics Study Group. This activity is synergistic with ATLAS research.

Award Name: Silicon Upgrade R&D: Module Testing and Integration Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Ayana Arce, Mark Kruse Organization: Department of Energy, via US ATLAS Operations Program Total Award Amount: $60,000 Award Period: 10/1/2014-9/30/2015 (to be renewed for FY16) Number of person-months per year: 8.4 for Brogan Thomas Project Abstract: To partially support a mechanical engineer at Duke (Brogan Thomas) and equipment for module testing infrastructure.

Award Name: REU Site: Undergraduate Research in Nuclear Physics at TUNL/Duke Uni- versity

81 Award Status: Funded Senior personnel: Ayana Arce Organization: National Science Foundation Total Award Amount: $406,539 Award Period: 4/15-3/18 Number of person-months per year: 0 (Arce) Project Abstract: Four LHC students and eight nuclear physics students are funded annually for a 10-week summer research experience.

Pending Awards

Award Name: CAREER: Charm and the nature of the Higgs Boson Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Ayana Arce Organization: National Science Foundation Total Award Amount: $557,221 Award Period: 6/1/2016-5/31/2021 Number of person-months per year: 1 month (Arce) Project Abstract: ATLAS searches for evidence of Higgs interactions with charm quarks, using substructure and jet tagging techniques as well as exclusive decays to charmonia.

Award Name: The COHERENT Experiment Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Kate Scholberg, Phillip Barbeau Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $3,941,000 (Duke is not a subcontractor) Award Period: 3/1/16-2/28/20 Number of person-months per year: 0 Project Abstract: This proposal in response to the Intermediate Neutrino Program FOA is for equipment and operations of COHERENT. Duke scientiﬁc personnel are deeply involved in this project; however in accordance with the rules of that FOA, support for them is not requested in the INP proposal.

Award Name: Research in High Energy Physics at Duke University Award Status: Pending Senior personnel: Ayana Arce, Phil Barbeau, Al Goshaw, Ashutosh Kotwal, Mark Kruse, Seog Oh, Kate Scholberg, Daniel Scolnic, Michael Troxel, Chris Walter Organization: Department of Energy Total Award Amount: $XXX Award Period: 4/1/16-3/31/19 Number of person-months per year: XX (2 months of summer salary per faculty member) Project Abstract: This request.

82 83 Appendix 4 Bibliography and References Cited

4.1 Energy Frontier References [1] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration],”Search for high-mass diboson resonances with boson-tagged jets in proton–proton collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” CERN-PH-EP-2015-115. June 2015. Submitted to JHEP. AA contact editor, Kajomovitz analysis contact, Li principal analyzer

[2] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], ”Search for WW , WZ, and ZZ resonances in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” ATLAS-CONF-2015-056. August 2015 Kajomovitz contact editor, Li primary analyzer

[3] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Identiﬁcation of hadronically-decaying, boosted W bosons using ATLAS data from 2012,” August 2015. AA subgroup co-leader, Kajo- movitz analyzer

[4] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], ”Identiﬁcation of boosted, hadronically-decaying W and Z bosons in √s = 13 TeV Monte Carlo Simulations for ATLAS,” ATL-PHYS- PUB-2015-033. August 2015. AA subgroup co-leader

[5] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], “Expected Performance of Boosted Higgs ( b¯b) Boson Identiﬁcation with the ATLAS Detector at √s = 13 TeV,” ATL-PHYS-PUB-→ 2015-035. August 2015. AA subgroup co-leader

[6] G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration],“Jet Charge Studies with the ATLAS Detector using √s = 8 TeV Proton-Proton Collision Data.” ATLAS-CONF-2013-086. August 2013. AA, Bjergaard authors

[7] A. Altheimer et al., “Boosted objects and jet substructure at the LHC,” The European Physical Journal C 74 3 (2014), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2792-8. Arce chapter author, Bjergaard principal analyzer

4.2 Cosmic Frontier References [1] Mark Downing, Dietrich Baade, Peter Sinclaire, Sebastian Deiries, Fabrice Christen, CCD riddle: a) signal vs time: linear; b) signal vs variance: non-linear, Proc. SPIE 6276, High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy II, 627609 (June 15, 2006)

[2] P Antilogus et al, The brighter-fatter eﬀect and pixel correlations in CCD sensors JINST 9 C03048

[3] A. Guyonnet, P. Astier, P. Antilogus, N. Regnault and P. Doherty, Evidence for self- interaction of charge distribution in charge-coupled d evices, Astron. Astrophys. 575, A41 (2015) [arXiv:1501.01577 [astro-ph.IM]].

84 [4] A. Rasmussen, P. Antilogus, P. Astier, C. Claver, P. Doherty, G. Dubois-Felsmann, K. Gilmore and S. Kahn et al., A framework for modeling the detailed optical response of thick, multiple segment, large format sensors for precision astronomy applications, Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 9150, 915017 (2014) [arXiv:1407.5655 [astro-ph.IM]].

[5] D. Gruen, G. M. Bernstein, M. Jarvis, B. Rowe, V. Vikram, A. A. Plazas and S. Seitz, Characterization and correction of charge-induced pixel shifts in DECam, These Pro- ceedings, arXiv:1501.02802 [astro-ph.IM].

[6] A. A. Plazas, G. M. Bernstein and E. S. Sheldon, Transverse electric ﬁelds’ eﬀects in the Dark Energy Camera CCDs, JINST 9, C04001 (2014) [arXiv:1403.6127 [astro- ph.IM]].

[7] C. W. Walter, “The Brighter-Fatter and other sensor eﬀects in CCD simulations for precision astronomy,” JINST 10, no. 05, C05015 (2015).

[8] T. Axelrod, J. Kantor, R. H. Lupton and F. Pierfederici, An open source application framework for astronomical imaging pipelines, Proc. SPIE 7740, Software and Cyber- infrastructure for Astronomy, 774015 (2010)

[9] G. M. Bernstein and M. Jarvis, Shapes and shears, stars and smears: optimal measurements for weak lensing, Astron. J. 123, 583 (2002) [astro-ph/0107431].

4.3 Intensity Frontier References We include here publications since 2015 for which group members have made intellectual contributions. For many-author publications, the contribution nature is indicated.

[1] Super-K Collaboration, Li-9 production paper, in preparation. EO on author committee

[2] Super-K Collaboration, Supernova watch paper, in preparation. KS on author committee

[3] Super-K Collaboration, SK IV solar paper, in preparation. AH on author committee

[4] Super-K Collaboration, Search for WIMPs from the Galactic center paper, in preparation. CW chair of author committee

[5] M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 3, 030001 (2018). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.030001

[6] B. Abi et al. [DUNE Collaboration], arXiv:1807.10340 [physics.ins-det].

[7] B. Abi et al. [DUNE Collaboration], arXiv:1807.10327 [physics.ins-det].

[8] B. Abi et al. [DUNE Collaboration], arXiv:1807.10334 [physics.ins-det].

85 [9] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, no. 17, 171802 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.171802 [arXiv:1807.07891 [hep-ex]]. [10] K. Scholberg, doi:10.1142/9789813226098 0008 [11] D. Akimov et al. [COHERENT Collaboration], doi:10.5281/zenodo.1228631 arXiv:1804.09459 [nucl-ex]. [12] D. Akimov et al. [COHERENT Collaboration], arXiv:1803.09183 [physics.ins-det]. [13] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 3, 032003 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.032003 [arXiv:1802.05078 [hep-ex]]. [14] Y. Hayato et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Astrophys. J. 857, no. 1, L4 (2018) doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aabaca [arXiv:1802.04379 [astro-ph.HE]]. [15] K. Scholberg [COHERENT Collaboration], PoS NuFact 2017, 020 (2018) doi:10.22323/1.295.0020 [arXiv:1801.05546 [hep-ex]]. [16] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 98, 012004 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.012004 [arXiv:1801.05148 [hep-ex]]. [17] Z. Li et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 5, 052006 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.052006 [arXiv:1711.09436 [hep-ex]]. [18] C. Kachulis et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, no. 22, 221301 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.221301 [arXiv:1711.05278 [hep-ex]]. [19] K. Abe et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 7, 072001 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.072001 [arXiv:1710.09126 [hep-ex]]. [20] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 1, 012001 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.012001 [arXiv:1708.06771 [hep-ex]]. [21] D. Akimov et al. [COHERENT Collaboration], Science 357, no. 6356, 1123 (2017) doi:10.1126/science.aao0990 [arXiv:1708.01294 [nucl-ex]]. [22] K. Abe et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Astrophys. J. 850, no. 2, 166 (2017) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa951b [arXiv:1707.08604 [astro-ph.HE]]. [23] K. Scholberg, J. Phys. G 45, no. 1, 014002 (2018) doi:10.1088/1361-6471/aa97be [arXiv:1707.06384 [hep-ex]]. [24] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 9, 092006 (2017) Er- ratum: [Phys. Rev. D 98, no. 1, 019902 (2018)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.092006, 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.019902 [arXiv:1707.01048 [hep-ex]]. [25] B. Abi et al. [DUNE Collaboration], arXiv:1706.07081 [physics.ins-det]. [26] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 5, 052001 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.052001 [arXiv:1706.04257 [hep-ex]].

86 [27] K. Abe et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 1, 012003 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.012003 [arXiv:1705.07221 [hep-ex]].

[28] K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 3, 032002 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.032002 [arXiv:1704.07467 [hep-ex]].

[29] V. Takhistov et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], “Search for Nucleon and Di- nucleon Decays with an Invisible Particle and a Charged Lepton in the Final State at the Super-Kamiokande Experiment,” arXiv:1508.05530 [hep-ex]. Accepted for publication in Physical Review Letters. CW contributor to tau decay codes

[30] A. Mirizzi, I. Tamborra, H. T. Janka, N. Saviano, K. Scholberg, R. Bollig, L. Hudepohl and S. Chakraborty, “Supernova Neutrinos: Production, Oscillations and Detection,” arXiv:1508.00785 [astro-ph.HE]. Invited review submitted to Nuov. Cim.

[31] DUNE/LBNF CDR Volume 2: The Physics Program for DUNE at LBNF, http://lbne2-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/ShowDocument?docid=10688 KS author of SNB and related sections

87 Appendix 5 Facilities and Other Resources

In addition to oﬃce space and laboratory space for all group members, Duke University and the physics department supply several invaluable services.

Administrative Support The physics department pays for 6.9 months of our administrative support staﬀ. This person handles grant management, travel reimbursement for all of the group members, administrative organization, etc.

Computing Resources A large public Linux cluster is available to all members of the department and worksta- tions are given to incoming graduate students. An over 700 core condor cluster is available for running batch jobs with preferential priority for those who contribute to the pool such as the HEP group. A tier 3 ATLAS system is supported by the computing staﬀ, as is a polycom video conferencing system which is used by all groups.

Machine Shop The Duke physics department maintains a staﬀed and well equipped machine shop. In addition to many conventional lathes and milling machines the bulk of the work is done on a set of numerically controlled machines including Bridgeport and Daewoo 4 axis vertical machining centers, a Milltronics CNC milling machine and a Bridgeport CNC lathe. The physics department supplies between 200 and 300 hours of free shop time to the HEP group every year. In the last few years, in addition to the small jobs done for our labs, tens of thousands of dollars worth of shop work were performed for (primarily) the Mu2e and LSST experiments with no cost to the projects. There is also a student shop for which students and postdocs are trained and can be certiﬁed for use.

Shared Materials Instrumentation Facility Duke University maintains a Shared Materials Instrumentation Facility (SMIF) which includes devices useful for the testing of electronics for the ATLAS ITk (phase two upgrade tracking detector) electronics research and development. These include an electronic probe station, optical characterization equipment for microelectronics, and a manual wirebonder, as well as space and technical support for the use of these devices. SMIF charges per-hour user fees for faculty projects, and some internal awards are available for initial costs.

Undergraduate Support For ﬁve consecutive years, Duke University has supported undergraduate mentored research in the Duke HEP group with an award of $25,000 annually, as well as additional competitive awards for undergraduates proposing research with the HEP group. These funds support local undergraduate students for summer housing, stipend and travel costs.

88 Appendix 6 Equipment

89 Appendix 7 Additional Budget Requirements

7.1 Task A Budget and Justiﬁcation The senior personnel in this proposal comprise of three faculty and one emeritus faculty. We have six students for our ATLAS eﬀort: Davis, Epland, Eggleston, Feng, Sen, and Zhao. Davis, Epland and Feng are expected to graduate in 2019 and Sen and Zhao are expected to graduate in 2020. We have requested a total of 72 months of graduate student support for six continuing students, who will be replaced by incoming students as they graduate. Our annual budget includes:

Three faculty summer salaries (Arce, Kotwal and Kruse for 2 months each) • Three postdocs (Beacham, Pachal, and new postdoc to replace A. Bocci for 12 months • each)

six graduate students (Davis, Epland, Eggleston, Feng, Sen, and Zhao or their replace- • ments for 12 months each)

partial support for administrative assistant Solis (3 months) • We request $28K to provide COLA for the two CERN-resident postdocs (Beacham and Pachal) at the rate of $1167 per month. The third postdoc to replace senior scientist A. Bocci (who is now supported by CERN, ANL and US ATLAS operations) will be resident at Duke and work on the ATLAS Phase II (HL-LHC) hardware and software. We request $18K to provide COLA for three CERN-resident students. The student COLA rate is $500 per month. We request $63K for Task A travel at Duke for ATLAS. Of this, $10K will support domestic travel for faculty to ATLAS meetings at US national laboratories. $25K will support three trips to CERN per co-PI in order to maintain our involvement in ATLAS physics, operations and upgrade activities, and fulﬁll our shift commitments. $28K will support travel to one international conference per year for postdocs and faculty, and one conference every other year for students, for a total of eleven conference trips. Note that ATLAS travel and COLA expenses have been granted a waiver from indirect cost by Duke University. We budget $60K for remission of fees for the graduate students as a direct cost with no fringe or overhead cost. The ATLAS Tier3 computing cluster, built initially with ARRA funds, is aging. It has provided critical support of our Run 2 analyses and publications. We are well-positioned to have a strong impact in our chosen areas of research with the early Run 3 data. In order to prepare the Tier3 cluster for Run 3 analysis, we request $10K of computing funds, which will not be charged any overhead cost. Our HEP research is also supported by funding from Duke University. For the past ten years the University has provided an annual grant of $30K for computing infrastructure and other instrumentation. Duke University fully supports two computing system administrators, who maintain the HEP Tier3 cluster as part of their departmental duties.

90 The University provides partial salary support for our assistant Solis (5 months). Grad- uate students Feng and Davis received support from Duke University to conduct research at ATLAS. Duke University has also provided startup funds for Arce. These funds have provided graduate student and postdoc support as well as partial summer salary support for Arce. Duke University has also been providing $25K per year for supporting undergraduate research at ATLAS. These funds typically support ten undergraduate students per year, some of whom spend time at CERN in the summer. These students provide notable contributions to our data analysis, publications, and operations support, and many write senior theses leading to graduation with distinction.

7.2 Task C Budget and Justiﬁcation The Task C budget includes Walter at 100% time and two new faculty member Scolnic (50% time on DOE related projects) and Troxel (75% on DOE related projects). We have one continuing grad student (Phillips-Longley) from the previous grant cycle (which funds one graduate student) and are asking for another to work with Walter. We are also asking for additional graduate student support starting in years 2 and 3 for Scolnic and Troxel.

The request in the Task C budget includes:

Three faculty summer salaries: Walter (2 months, Troxel 1.5 months, and Scolnic 1 month in• years 2 and 3) 1.5 postdocs in year one and two, three postdocs in year three. • One graduate student in year one, 3 in year two, 3.5 in year 3. • Partial support for administrative assistant J. Solis (X months) • with postdoctoral and faculty salary increasing by 2.5% annually. Task C is currently funded for one graduate student to work with Walter. He is requesting to add another graduate student to the task. Because task C began in 2016, it took some time to start paying a graduate student (she was finishing teaching and TAing for the start of the grant). There is about half a years support left from that first period which Walter would supplement with university funds to pay for the 1st year of the 2nd graduate student. In year two and three the new graduate student would join Phillips-Longley full time on the grant. Leveraging their startup funds, a new graduate student would be added in year 2 and 3 for Troxel and a graduate student at half time for Scolnic in year three. We also propose adding a postdoc to work with Walter on the LSST project and in the DESC to the grant for this renewal. Leveraging their startups, Troxel proposes to add a postdoc in year 3 and Scolnic for 6 month in year one and two and for 12 months in year three. There are two LSST DESC collaboration meetings a year. At least one a year is always held domestically. All faculty and staff and students plan to attend all DESC collaboration meetings. Scolnic and Troxel will attend one domestic DES meeting per year. Walter also attends the LSST project and community workshop each year along with one to two project commissioning related meetings. All three faculty members expect to attend one to

91 two relevant domestic workshops per year, sometime with one international trip. Graduate students and postdocs are expected to attend relevant collaboration meetings and extended working meetings, and through Walter, some will also work on LSST commissioning related tasks. Walter has been told that all travel to Chile for LSST commissioning will be payed centrally through the project, but domestic project meetings should be funded on this grant. In addition to Walter’s attendance at commissioning meetings in Tucson, SLAC and other LSST project locations, graduate student Phillips-Longley spends extended periods at SLAC helping with LSST camera I&T. So in addition to approximately 5K for Walter, postdoc and graduate students for DESC related travel, 2K for two domestic project related meetings a year have been added to the budget resulting in 7K per person for 28K total. Based on previous experience attending workshops, project and collaboration meetings we have budgeted approximately $1200 per domestic trip and $2000 for international trips. We estimate are needs as being $41K in year 1 (31K Dom, 10K international), $44K in year 2 (32K Dom, 12K international), and $59K in year 3 (43K Dom, 16K international) as startup support for Scolnic and Troxel tails oﬀ. This cost is subdivided as follows:

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Scolnic + PD + Student $13,000 $13,000 $13,000 Troxel + PD + Student $3,200 $18,000 Walter + PD + Students $28,000 $28,000 $28,000 Total Domestic $31,000 $32,200 $43,000 Total International $10,000 $12,000 $16,000 Total $41,000 $44,200 $59,000

There is a budgeted amount listed as “OTHER” of approximately $X K. This is for remission of fees for the graduate student as a direct cost with no fringe or overhead. Our administrative assistant J. Solis works for faculty and group members in all frontiers and her salary is supported through cost-sharing by Duke University. Her X months of salary support is split among the tasks roughly in proportion to eﬀort of faculty (3 months task A, 0.5 months task C, 0.75 months task M and 0.85 months task N). Note that all task C travel expenses have been granted a waiver from indirect cost by Duke University.

7.3 Task M Budget and Justification We propose to continue our Mu2e work, and there are three main efforts. One is the panel component procurement and preparation, another is the mapping of all wires and straws, the last is the calibration and alignment software. The 12 panel pre-production construction has started and the full construction will follow soon. As the panels are assembled and scanned, they will be assembled into planes and stations. Once stations are assembled, they are fitted with electronics and tested before being installed into the tracker frame. Some of us will be at FNAL to help the plane and station assembly and tracker installation as our responsibilities at Duke lessen. The present schedule calls for the end of the tracker installation at the end of 2021, and the data taking starts in 2023. Once the entire Mu2e

92 detector is installed, there will be a period to test the detector using cosmic rays. Using our scan data and cosmic ray data, the tracker will be aligned, and we plan to play a major role in this eﬀort. We believe that we can continue to be key members of the tracking group and make the detector construction and experiment successful.

The requested budget covers 2 months of SO, for the ﬁrst two years, and 2 months of SO and 12 months of CW for the third year. Please note that 7.8 months of CW and 6 months of a research associate equal 12 months of CW. The mu2e project provides the rest of CW as he will supervise both the panel component preparation and scanning work. The University provides the remaining research associates support. The new research associate will mainly augment our software eﬀort. In addition, we want to add a graduate student as the data taking approaches. We added one summer support to the second funding year and a full support to the third funding year.

One faculty summer salary (Oh for 2, 2, 2 months ) One• Senior Scientist (Wang for 7.8, 7.8, 12 months) • One Postdoc (TBD for 6, 6, 0 months) • One Graduate student (TBD for 0, 3, 12 months) • Administrative assistant (J. Solis for 0.75, 0.75, 0.75 months) • 20K per year of travel support is requested. The travel funding is mainly to work on the Mu2e experiment (collaboration meetings, tracker workshops, tracker reviews, tracker assembly and installation) and to visit vendors producing the panel parts. Our administrative assistant J. Solis works for faculty and group members in all frontiers and her salary is supported through cost-sharing by Duke University. Her 5.1 months of salary support is split among the tasks. Note that all task M travel expenses have been granted a waiver from indirect cost by Duke University.

7.4 Task N Budget and Justiﬁcation For this renewal, Task N senior personnel include Kate Scholberg, Chris Walter, and new member Phil Barbeau. Walter’s primary eﬀort and summer salary is now in Task C, although he retains some minor involvement in Super-K. Barbeau’s Early Career award (DE- SC0014249) will end in July of 2020, and at that time his summer salary and students will added to this request. Scholberg’s students are Gleb Sinev, Justin Raybern, Erin Conley, Adryanna Smith and Baran Bodur. Sinev is expected to graduate in fall of 2019, and Ray- bern in spring of 2020. We request support for Smith and Bodur starting in summer of 2019. Support is requested for Barbeau’s graduate students Long Li and Sam Hedges starting in July 2020. Our annual Task N budget includes:

Two faculty summer salaries (Scholberg for 2 months each year, Barbeau for 1.5 months in• 2020 and 2 months in 2021.)

93 One postdoc (Dan Pershey). • Graduate students (12 months each): • Sinev: April 2019-December 2019 • Raybern: April 2019-June 2020 • Conley: April 2019- March 2022 • Bodur: May 2019-March 2022 • Smith: May 2019-March 2022 • Li: July 2020- March 2022 • Hedges: July 2020-March 2022 • Partial support for administrative assistant J. Solis (0.85 months) • Postdoctoral and faculty salary increase by 2.5% annually. Engineer Fowler is fully supported by DUNE project funds, so there is no request for him here. We also budget xx in year 1, xx in year 2 and xx in year 3 for remission of fees for the two graduate students, as a direct cost with no fringe or overhead cost. Our administrative assistant J. Solis works for faculty and group members in all frontiers and her salary is supported through cost-sharing by Duke University. Her 5.1 months of salary support is split among the tasks roughly in proportion to eﬀort of faculty (3 months task A, 0.5 months task C, 0.75 months task M and 0.85 months task N). The Task N travel request includes travel to Japan, Fermilab/CERN and Oak Ridge for personnel involved in Super-K, DUNE and COHERENT respectively, as well as some conference travel. Super-K has two collaboration meetings per year, and T2K has three, all held in Japan. We expect Scholberg and Bodur to attend both Super-K meetings. Furthermore, SK collaborators (Scholberg and Bodur) has approximately two weeks of Super-K shift quota per year, of which each collaborator must personally cover at least half, with the rest covered by other members of the institution. We try to save on travel costs by taking shifts adjacent to meetings, although this does not always work out. (We satisfy our T2K shift requirement by covering shifts at Super-K.) DUNE-related trips are primarily to Fermilab (or other domestic locations) for collaboration and working group meetings, with occasional travel to CERN. COHERENT trips are to ORNL for meetings and shift or deployment work. We include in the budget a request for three trips per year to Japan for Scholberg and Bodur, so as to fulﬁll all of our Super-K responsibilities. We expect Pershey (a T2K-only collaborator) to need to make three trips to Japan per year for T2K meetings and shifts. We estimate a total of three DUNE-related trips per year for Scholberg, Pershey, and Smith, and one for Conley. We estimate three ORNL trips per year for all COHERENT collaborators (Scholberg, Barbeau, Pershey, Sinev, Raybern, Conley, Li, Hedges). In addition

94 we budget for total of 6 international and 12 domestic conference trips per year for ten Task N members, including at least one per year for students, and two per year for the postdoc. We estimate travel costs based on experience as: $2.5K per trip to Japan or CERN, $1K per trip to Fermilab, $0.8K per trip to ORNL, $2.5K for an international conference and $1K for a domestic conference. The total comes to $42.5K international per year for three years, $40.4K domestic for the ﬁrst year, and $37K for the second year, and $34.4K domestic for the third year. Note that all Task N travel expenses have been granted a waiver from indirect cost by Duke University. We include also $5K in each of year 2 and 3 in Materials & Supplies, to support consumables, miscellaneous equipment, and failed component needed for the proposed quenching factor measurements by Barbeau’s group, as well as for consumables, replacement parts and failed components for the continued maintenance of the large NaI[Tl] array deployed as part of the COHERENT experiment, and originally designed, constructed and deployed as part of Barbeau’s Early Career Award (DE-SC0014249).

95 Appendix 8 Data Management Plan

Duke University and the DOE OHEP group is committed to following the project and collaboration Data Management plans as speciﬁed by each experiment. Links or narrative text for the data management policy for each funded or operating experiment can be found below. We do not anticipate producing any data products other than those of the experiments listed below.

ATLAS: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2002139

LSST: https://docushare.lsstcorp.org/docushare/dsweb/Get/LPM-151

T2K: http://t2k-experiment.org/for-physicists/data-management-plan

DUNE: http://www.dunescience.org/data-management/

COHERENT: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~schol/coherent_dmp.pdf (this is the data management plan included in the proposal to the INP FOA)

Super-Kamiokande: See text below:

Data Types and Sources SK detector raw data is comprised of binary information that is readable by SK proprietary code which relies on data bases to properly identify active channels, apply calibration constants, and further organize the information for analysis. Event data is largely background from cosmic rays and radioactive decays, and must be processed by reduction software to select events of interest. Events of interest are then processed further by detailed reconstruction algorithms that identify the characteristics of the events. Equally as important as detector data are large Monte Carlo simulations of various processes that may be observed in the detector data. Likewise, dedicated calibration data are used to understand the performance of the detector. Reconstructed events are used to perform physics analyses such as neutrino obser- vations and the search for proton decay. The results of these analyses are published in peer-reviewed journals.

Content and Format The format of the event raw data as well as the reduced and reconstructed data are binary ﬁles that require proprietary code the fully access and interpret. Subsequent analysis uses summary information stored in the CERN ROOT or ntuple format. The data analysis code is preserved using a versioning and archiving system, currently SVN.

Preservation and Sharing The SK experiment has undergone several phases (SK-I, II, III, and IV), and has collected data since 1996. The SK collaboration treats the collected data carefully and has

96 preserved the raw data on tape backup since the beginning of the SK experiment. The SK collaboration routinely performs new analyses and searches through the entire 20 year data set, generally starting with reduced and reconstructed ﬁles that are kept on redundant disk systems. Due to the complexity of event level data, general access is not practical. Upon request, data tables, content of ﬁgures, chi-squared maps, and other information that facilitates sharing with non-SK researchers has been made available, and will continue to be made available.

Protection SK data do not contain personal or conﬁdential information and do not require special security measures.

Rationale This data management plan is in line with current practices of large particle physics experiments.

97 Appendix 9 Other Attachment

Included is a letter from the LSST director Professor Steven Kahn endorsing Professor Wal- ter’s proposal as described in Task C (see Section 4).