Arxiv:Hep-Ex/0111070V1 22 Nov 2001 Writeup˙Rome: If Even Strong

Home , KEK

arXiv:hep-ex/0111070v1 22 Nov 2001 writeup˙rome: if Even strong. very is pre- measurements from cision estab- evidence indirect experimentally the though been Standard lished not the has in of Model, particles masses Higgs fundamental The the the generates fermions. which masses and mechanism the bosons of gauge generation evidence symmetry of the electroweak direct and of any breaking dynamics of the lack for present one clearest the The is understanding. our many in are gaps there successes great these Despite distances. possible shortest rcs esrmnso h togcoupling strong α the QCD of measurements of being precise examples predictions tested, the thoroughly been Also have Stan- the Model. of dard part electroweak concor- the with excellent dance in the is measurements, analysis energy experimental low and data scatter- ing neutrino with results the Combining parameters. the electroweak the to of determination especially contributions, plementary er ayapcso h oe aebeen level, few with have per-mille the last model to some the the tested, stringently of In aspects many physics. Standard years the particle by of described Model in- adequately through is studies. It decades experimental past and theoretical has the tensive forces in and matter emerged of picture coherent A Introduction 1 s rjc ol eahee sagoa nentoa projec international global a presen as is achieved framework be a could Finally project region. a multi-TeV the to paths hr eiwo h ieetclie ein rsnl und presently designs at collider measurements different anticipated the of the Collide review Hadron of short explo Large accuracies the to be expected of and that the range Model to Standard energy complementary the is the program test in precisely to collider importance linear electron-positron An n rbn h rtnsrcuet the to structure proton the probing and ntttfu xeietlhsk Universität Hamburg, für Experimentalphysik, Institut e + e − , ep and umte to submitted p p ¯ ahnsmkn com- making machines LCRNPSTO-COLLIDERS ELECTRON-POSITRON- ol Scientific World -al rolf-dieter.heuer@desy.de E-mail: abr Germany Hamburg o ulse’ use Publisher’s For .D HEUER R.-D. nOtbr2,2018 28, October on iro etncolliders. fron- lepton energy of the tier at high through measurements and precision collider hadron a in possible energy highest the attaining through scales, scale electroweak alternative. the proposed as another order are gravity same of the scale in energy the is behaviour that way energy a such high in the alter dimen- which space scale sions Extra TeV. a 3 below approximately appear of such must that phenomena suggest new arguments general strong Quite to rise between give forces interactions Alternatively, strong scale. new unification up grand scales the energy to explored bridge presently stable the a from provides Model Standard of are the extension energies Supersymmetric The as emerge increased. Model may Standard which the physics beyond de- the been for have veloped scenarios alternative quantumSeveral the and at realised level. incorporated not not is is gravity QCD, theories, grand and gauge the two electroweak fermions, the the between of unification wide masses the of for explanation range of no is theory There comprehensive matter. a provide not Model does Standard the completed, successfully hsatcei ae nterslsof results the on based is article This new the exploring of ways two are There rsuyi ie nldn osbeupgrade possible including given is study er t. we 0 n 00GVi fcrucial of is GeV 1000 and 500 tween e ihnwihteraiaino such of realisation the which within ted uhalna oldraedsusd A discussed. are collider linear a such etepyisbyn t h physics The it. beyond physics the re .Sm ftemi hsc ol and goals physics main the of Some r. uue huse19 22761 149, Chaussee Luruper W oosa ihenergies. high at bosons 1 For Publisher’s use many workshops on physics and detector confirmed at the quantum level. studies for linear colliders. Much more can Much progress about the possible mass be found in the respective publications 1,2,3,4 range of the Higgs boson, if it exists, has and on the different Web sites 5,6,7,8. Many been achieved in the past around five years. people have contributed to these studies and Lower bounds on the mass have been de- the references to their work can be found in rived through direct searches at LEP run- the documents quoted above. ning with ever increasing centre-of-mass energies until the year 2000. The Standard Model Higgs contribution to electroweak 2 Complementarity of Lepton and observables through loop corrections pro- Hadron Machines vides further indirect information. Although these corrections vary only logarithmically, It is easier to accelerate protons to very high log(M /M ), the accuracy of the elec- energies than leptons, but the detailed colli- ∝ H W troweak data obtained at LEP, SLC and the sion process cannot be well controlled or se- Tevatron, provides sensitivity to M and in lected. Electron-positron colliders offer a well H turn an upper bound for the allowed mass defined initial state. The collision energy √s range. The development of these bounds is is known and it is tuneable thereby allowing shown in figure 1. The 95% upper limit for the choice of the best suited centre-of-mass M of 196 GeV is well within the reach of energy, e.g. for scanning thresholds of parti- H a linear collider with a centre-of-mass energy cle production. Furthermore, polarisation of of 500 GeV. electrons and positrons is possible. In proton collisions the rate of unwanted collision processes is very high, whereas the pointlike na- 800 ture of leptons results in low backgrounds. In addition, a linear collider offers besides e+e− − − 600 collisions the options of e e , eγ and γγ col- 95% limit LEPEW fit lisions which could provide important additional insight. 400 Hadron and Lepton Colliders are complemen-

tary and the present state of knowledge in Higgs mass [GeV] particle physics would not have been achieved 200 without both types of colliders running con- direct currently. search 0 Telling examples from the past are inter- 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 nal consistency tests of the electroweak part year of the Standard Model. In 1994, the preci- 0 sion electroweak measurements of the Z bo- Figure 1. Development over the past years of limits son predicted a mass of the top quark from for the mass of the Higgs boson from direct and in- +18 direct measurements. quantum corrections of M = 178 11 − top ± 19 GeV. The direct measurement at the Teva- tron in the following years yielded Mtop = In general, the physics target of the next 174.3 5.1 GeV. The indirect measurement generation of electron-positron linear collid- ± of M = 80.363 0.032 GeV agrees well with ers will be a comprehensive and high preci- W ± the direct mass measurements from Tevatron sion coverage of the energy range from MZ and LEP of M = 80.450 0.039 GeV. The up to around 1 TeV. Energies up to around 3 W ± Standard Model has been tested and so far to 5 TeV could be achieved with the follow-

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 2 For Publisher’s use

ing generation of colliders. The physics case

e e ! Higgs fb

for such a machine will depend on the results

from the LHC and the linear collider in the H sub-TeV range.

3 Selected Physics Topics

In this chapter, some of the main physics top-

s = 350

800 GeV

ics to be studied at a linear collider will be 500

discussed. Emphasis is given to the study of the Higgs mechanism in the Standard Model, the measurements of properties of supersymmetric particles, and precision tests of Figure 2. The Higgs-strahlung and WW fusion production cross-sections as a function of MH for differ- the electroweak theory. More details about ent √s. these topics as well as information about the numerous topics not presented here can be found in the physics books published in the fb−1, corresponding to about two years of studies of the physics potential of future lin- operation, some 105 events will be produced ear colliders 1,2,3,4. and can be selected with high efficiency and very low background. 3.1 Standard Model Higgs Boson The Higgs-strahlung process e+e− − → The main task of a linear electron-positron ZH, with Z ℓ+ℓ , offers a very distinc- → collider will be to establish experimentally tive signature ensuring the observation of the the Higgs mechanism as the mechanism for Standard Model Higgs boson up to the kine- generating the masses of fundamental parti- matical limit independently of its decay as cles: illustrated in figure 3. The Higgs-strahlung process allows to The Higgs boson must be discovered. • measure the decay branching ratios of the The couplings of the Higgs boson to Higgs boson and to test their dependence on • gauge bosons and to fermions must be the mass of the fundamental particles. The proven to increase with their masses. detectors proposed for linear colliders have excellent flavour tagging capability in order The Higgs potential which generates the • to distinguish the different hadronic decay non-zero field in the vacuum must be modes (see for example9). Therefore, the reconstructed by determining the Higgs branching ratios can be determined with ac- self-coupling. curacies of a few percent, as shown in figure 4. The determination of the Yukawa cou- The quantum numbers (J PC = 0++) • pling of the Higgs boson to the top quark is must be confirmed. provided by the process e+e− ttH¯ at √s −→ The main production mechanisms for of about 800 GeV; for 1000 fb 1 an accuracy Higgs bosons in e+e− collisions are Higgs- of 6% can be expected. strahlung e+e− HZ and WW-fusion The Higgs boson quantum numbers can be − → e+e ν ν¯ H, and the corresponding cross- determined through the rise of the cross sec- → e e sections as a function of MH are depicted in tion close to the production threshold and figure 2 for three different centre of mass en- through the angular distributions of the H ergies. With an integrated luminosity of 500 and Z bosons in the continuum.

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 3 For Publisher’s use

1 Data bb Z H → µµ X

-1 10 + - τ τ 200 gg cc m = 120 GeV SM Higgs Branching Ratio H -2 + - 10 W W

γγ 100 -3 10 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 M (GeV)

Number of Events / 1.5 GeV H

0 Figure 4. The predicted Standard Model Higgs bo- 100 120 140 160 son branching ratios (bands) and the expected experimental accuracies (points with error bars). Recoil Mass [GeV]

V = λv2H2 + λvH3 + 1 λH4. The trilinear Figure 3. The µ+µ− recoil mass distribution in the 4 + − + − Higgs coupling λHHH = 6λv can be mea- process e e HZ µ µ for MH =120 GeV, − → → 500 fb 1 at √s=350 GeV sured directly in the double Higgs-strahlung process e+e− HHZ qqb¯ ¯bb¯b. The fi- . → → nal state contains six partons resulting in a rather complicated experimental signature The Higgs boson production and decay with six jets, a challenging task calling for ex- rates discussed above, can be used to deter- cellent granularity of the tracking device and mine the Higgs couplings to gauge bosons and the calorimeter 9. Despite the low cross sec- fermions. A global fit to the measured ob- tion of the order of 0.2 fb for MH = 120 GeV servables optimises the available information, at √s = 500 GeV, the coupling can be mea- accounts properly for the experimental corre- sured with an accuracy of better than 20% lations between the different measurements for Higgs masses below 140 GeV at √s=500 and allows to extract the Higgs couplings in GeV with an integrated luminosity of 1ab−1 a model independent way. As an example for as shown in figure 6. the accuracies reachable with the newly de- Measurements of Higgs boson properties veloped program HFITTER 1, figure 5 shows and their anticipated accuracies are sum- 1σ and 95% confidence level contours for the marised in table 1. fitted values of the couplings gc and gb to the In summary, the Higgs mechanism can be charm and bottom quark with comparison to established in an unambiguous way at a high the sizes of changes expected from the min- luminosity electron-positron collider with a imal supersymmetric extension to the Stan- centre-of-mass energy up to around one TeV dard Model (MSSM). as the mechanism responsible for the sponta- To generate a non-zero value of the Higgs neous symmetry breaking of the electroweak field in the vacuum, the minimum φ0 = v/√2 interactions. of the self potential of the Higgs field V = 2 λ(φ2 1 v2) must be shifted away from the − 2 3.2 Supersymmetric Particles origin. This potential can be reconstructed by measuring the self couplings of the physi- Supersymmetry (SUSY) is considered the cal Higgs boson as predicted by the potential most attractive extension of the Standard

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 4 For Publisher’s use

0.3 SM Double Higgs-strahlung: e+ e- → ZHH σ [ ] 1.2 fb MSSM prediction:

(SM) (b) 0.2 b < < 1.15 200 GeV mA 400 GeV ● /g b g ● √s = 800 GeV 1.1 ● 400 GeV < m < 600 GeV A 0.1 √s = 500 GeV < < 1.05 600 GeV mA 800 GeV

< < 800 GeV mA 1000 GeV 1 0 100 120 140 160 180 LC 95% CL [ ] MH GeV 0.95 LC 1σ

0.9 Figure 6. The cross-section for double Higgs- strahlung in the Standard Model at √s of 500 and 0.85 mH = 120 GeV 800 GeV together with the experimental accuracies −1 0.8 expected for 1 ab (points with error bars). 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2

gc/gc(SM)

Table 1. Precision of the possible measurements of Figure 5. Higgs coupling determination: The con- the Higgs boson properties. g g tours for b vs. c for a 120 GeV Higgs boson m 120 GeV 140 GeV normalised to their Standard Model expectations as H measured with 500fb−1. mass 0.06% 0.05% spin yes yes CP yes yes Model, which cannot be the ultimate the- total width 6 % 5 % ory for many reasons. The most impor- gHZZ 1 % 1 % tant feature of SUSY is that it can explain gHW W 1 % 2 % the hierarchy between the electroweak scale gHbb 2 % 2 % of 100 GeV, responsible for the W and Z gHcc 3 % 10 % ≈ 19 masses, and the Planck scale M 10 gHττ 3 % 5 % Pl ≃ GeV. When embedded in a grand-uniﬁed the- gHtt 3 % 6 % ory, it makes a very precise prediction of the λHHH 20% 30% 2 ∼ electroweak mixing angle sin θW in excellent concordance with the precision electroweak measurement. In the following, only the min- ticles and R = 1 for sparticles. Spar- p − imal supersymmetric extension to the Stan- ticles are therefore produced in pairs and dard Model (MSSM) will be considered and they eventually decay into the lightest spar- measurements of the properties of the super- ticle which has to be stable. As an example, symmetric particles will be discussed. Stud- smuons are produced and decay through the + − + − + − 0 0 ies of the supersymmetric Higgs sector can be process e e µ˜ µ˜ µ µ χ1χ1 with 1,2,3,4 0 → → found elsewhere . χ1 as the lightest sparticle being stable and, therefore, escaping detection. In addition to the particles of the Stan- dard Model, the MSSM contains their su- The mass scale of sparticles is only ± persymmetric partners: sleptons ˜l , ν˜l (l = vaguely known. In most scenarios some spar- e,µ,τ), squarksq ˜, and gauginosg, ˜ χ˜±, χ˜0. In ticles, in particular charginos and neutrali- the MSSM the multiplicative quantum num- nos, are expected to lie in the energy region + − ber R-parity is conserved, Rp = +1 for par- accessible by the next generation of e e

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 5

For Publisher’s use

cant part of the spectrum should be measure-

−

Õ~ g~

800 Ø +

Ä ¾

~ ~

Õ~ b

b able. In general, at an e e collider produc-

½;¾ ¾ Õ~

Ê;Ä

¿;4

~ tion cross sections are large and backgrounds

½ g

600 ~ are rather small. Masses of sparticles can be

~ ~

Ø Ø

g~ ¾ ½

Õ~

Ä ~ determined from the decay kinematics, mea-

℄

Õ~

· b

400 ~

~ ·

~ sured in the continuum. An example for such

Chargino Pro duction

~ `

Ä mesurements is given in ﬁgure 8. Typical ac-

` ¼

200 ·

~ `

e~ ¾

· curacies are of the order 100 to 300 MeV.

~ ~

e~ ; ~ ; ~ ~

` Ê e ~ ; ~ `

Ê ½ Ê +

e e

¼ ¼

1 1

; ~ ~ ~

½ ½

½ Excellent mass resolutions of the order of 50

MeV+ with an integrated luminosity of 100

e e 1

−1 1

0 0 0

l q q B r

fb can be obtained for the light charginos

1 1

Figure 7. Examples of mass spectra in mSUGRA, and neutralinos through the measurement of

background

GMSB and AMSB models. the excitation+ curves at production thresh-

W W

old, as also shown in ﬁgure 9.

from dijet energy and mass sp ectra and m m

1 1 colliders also supported by the recent measurement of (g 2) 10. Examples of mass − µ spectra for three SUSY breaking mechanisms (mSUGRA, GMSB, AMSB) are given in ﬁg- ure 7.

The most fundamental problem of supersymmetric theories is how SUSY is broken and in which way this breaking is communi- cated to the particles. Several scenarios have

been proposed in which the mass spectra are

GeV GeV m m

generally quite diﬀerent as illustrated in ﬁg-

Figure1 8. Di-jet energy and mass spectra at √s=320

e e B fb

ure 7. High precision measurements of the − − + − R L 1 + GeV and 160 fb for the reaction e e χ˜1 χ˜1 particle properties are therefore expected to ± 0 ′ 0 → → ℓ νχ˜1qq¯ χ˜1. distinguish between some of these scenarios.

The study and exploration of Supersymmetry

Martyn Linear Collider Workshop Sitges May will proceed in the following steps: HU The reconstruction of the mechanism which breaks supersymmetry will give sig- Reconstruction of the kinematically ac- nificant insight into the laws of Nature at • cessible spectrum of sparticles and the energy scales where gravity becomes impor- measurement of their properties, masses tant as quantum effect. Various models like and quantum numbers minimal supergravity mSURGA), gauge mediated SUSY breaking (GMSB), or anomaly Extraction of the basic low-energy pa- • mediated SUSY breaking (AMSB) have been rameters such as mass parameters, cou- proposed. These mechanisms lead to differ- plings, and mixings ent spectra of sparticle masses as was shown Analysis of the breaking mechanism and already in figure 7. The supersymmetric • reconstruction of the underlying theory. renormalisation group equations (RGE’s) are largely independent of the assumed proper- While it is unlikely that the complete ties of the specific SUSY model at high en- spectrum of sparticles will be accessible at a ergies. This can be used to interpret the collider with √s up to around 1 TeV, a signifi- measured SUSY spectra. In a ’bottom up’

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 6 For Publisher’s use

3.3 Precision Measurements

The primary goal of precision measurements of gauge boson properties is to establish the non-abelian nature of electroweak interactions. The gauge symmetries of the Stan- dard Model determine the form and the strength of the self-interactions of the electroweak bosons, the triple couplings WWγ and WWZ and the quartic couplings. Devi- ations from the Standard Model expectations for these couplings could be expected in several scenarios, for example in models where there exists no light Higgs boson and where the W and Z bosons are generated dynam- ically and interact strongly at high scales. Figure 9. Cross section near threshold for the process + − Also for the extrapolation of couplings to e+e− χ˜ χ˜ , 10 fb−1 per point. → 1 1 high scales to test theories of grand unification such high precision measurements are approach, the measured electroweak scale mandatory. For the study of the couplings SUSY parameters are extrapolated to high between gauge bosons the best precision is energies using these RGE’s. reached at the highest possible centre of mass Due to the high precision of the measured energies. These couplings are especially sen- input variables, only possible at the linear sitive to models of strong electroweak sym- collider, an accurate test can be performed metry breaking. at which energy scale certain parameters be- W bosons are produced either in pairs, e+e− W +W − or singly, e+e− Weν come equal. Most interesting, the assump- → → tion of grand unification of forces requires with both processes being sensitive to the triple gauge couplings. In general the total the gaugino mass parameters M1,M2,M3 to meet at the GUT scale (figure 10 (left)). errors estimated on the anomalous couplings are in the rangeof few 10−4. Figure 11 com- Different SUSY breaking mechanisms predict × different unification patterns of the sfermion pares the precision obtainable for ∆κγ and mass parameters at high energy. With the ∆λγ at different machines. high accuracy of the linear collider measure- The measurements at a linear collider are ments these models can be distinguished as sensitive to strong symmetry breaking be- shown in figure 10 for the case of mSUGRA yond Λ of the order of 5 TeV, to be com- (middle) and GMSB (right). pared with the electroweak symmetry breaking scale Λ =4πv 3 TeV. EWSB ≈ In summary, the high precision studies of supersymmetric particles and their properties One of the most sensitive quantities to can open a window to energy scales far above loop corrections from the Higgs boson is the the scales reachable with future accelerators, effective weak mixing angle in Z boson de- possibly towards the Planck scale where grav- cays. By operating the collider at ener- ity becomes important. gies close to the Z-pole with high luminosity (GigaZ) to collect at least 109 Z bosons in particular the accuracy of the measure-

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 7 For Publisher’s use

Figure 10. Extrapolation of SUSY parameters measured at the electroweak scale to high energies. γ γ ∆κ ∆λ

-2 -2 10 10

-3 -3 10 10

-4 -4 10 10 LEP TEV LHC TESLA TESLA LEP TEV LHC TESLA TESLA 500 800 500 800

Figure 11. Comparison of constraints on the anomalous couplings ∆κγ and ∆λγ at diﬀerent machines

2 l a precision of some 6 MeV through a scan of ment of sin θeff can be improved by one order of magnitude wrt. the precision obtained the W W production threshold and with the today 11. With both electron and positron measurements obtained at high energy run- 2 l ning of the collider this will allow many high beams longitudinally polarised, sin θeff can be determined most accurately by measur- precision tests of the Standard Model at the ing the left-right asymmetry ALR = Ae = loop level. As an example, ﬁgure 12 shows 2 2 2 2veae/(ve + ae) with ve (ae) being the vec- the variation of the ﬁt χ to the electroweak tor (axialvector) couplings of the Z boson to measurements as a function of MH for the 2 l present data and for the data expected at a the electron and ve/ae = 1 - 4 sin θeff for pure Z exchange. Particularly demanding is linear collider. The mass of the Higgs bo- the precision of 2 10−4 with which the po- son can indirectly be constraint at a level of × larisation needs to be known to match the 5%. Comparing this prediction with the di- statistical accuracy. An error in the weak rect measurement of MH consistency tests of 2 l the Standard Model can be performed at the mixing angle of ∆ sin θeff = 0.000013 can be expected. Together with an improved de- quantum level or to measure free parameters termination of the mass of the W boson to in extensions of the Standard Model. This is

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 8 For Publisher’s use

of the SLAC Linear Collider, SLC. How- ever, aiming at centre-of-mass energies at the 2 20 χ TeV scale with luminosities of the order of 2000 1034cm−2s−1 requires at least two orders of LC magnitude higher beam power and two orders 15 of magnitude smaller beam sizes at the interaction point. Over the past decade, several groups worldwide have been pursuing differ- 10 ent linear collider designs for the centre-of- mass energy range up to around one TeV as well as for the multi-TeV range. Excel- 5 lent progress has been achieved at various test facilities worldwide in international collaborations on crucial aspects of the collider 0 2 3 10 10 designs. At the Accelerator Test Facility at m h KEK 12, emittances within a factor two of the damping ring design have been achieved. At 13 Figure 12. ∆χ2 as a function of the Higgs boson mass the Final Focus Test Beam at SLAC de- for the electroweak precision data today (2000) and magnification of the beams has been proven; after GigaZ running (LC). the measured spot sizes are well in agreement with the theoretically expected values. The commissioning and operation of the TESLA of particular importance if MH > 200 GeV in Test Facility at DESY 14 has demonstrated contradiction to the current electroweak mea- the feasibility of the TESLA technology. In surements. the following, a short review of the different approaches is given. In summary, there is strong evidence for new phenomena at the TeV energy scale. Only the precision exploration at the linear 4.1 TeV range collider will allow, together with the results obtained at the Large Hadron Collider, the Three design studies are presently pursued: understanding of the underlying physics and JLC 15, NLC 16 and TESLA 17, centred will open a new window beyond the centre- around KEK, SLAC and DESY, respectively. of-mass energies reachable. Whatever sce- Details about the design, the status of de- nario is realized in nature, the linear collider velopment and the individual test facilities will add crucial information beyond the LHC. can be found in the above quoted references There is global consensus in the high energy as well as in the status reports presented at physics community that the next accelera- LCWS2000 18,19,20. A comprehensive sum- tor based project needs to be an electron- mary of the present status can be found in the positron linear collider with a centre-of-mass Snowmass Accelerator R&D Report 21, here energy of at least 500 GeV. only a short discussion of the main features and differences of the three approaches will 4 Electron-Positron Linear be given with emphasis on luminosity and en- Colliders ergy reach. One key parameter for performing the The feasibility of a linear collider has been physics program at a collider is the centre- successfully demonstrated by the operation of-mass energy achievable. The energy reach

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientific on October 28, 2018 9 For Publisher’s use of a collider with a given linac length and a the accelerating structures. The design of certain cavity filling factor is determined by NLC is based on normalconducting cavities the gradient achievable with the cavity tech- using fRF of 11.4 GHz (X-band), for JLC nology chosen. For normalconducting cavi- two options, X-band or C-band (5.7 GHz) are ties the maximum achievable gradient scales pursued. The TESLA concept, developed by roughly proportional to the RF frequency the TESLA collaboration, is using supercon- used, for superconducting Niobium cavities, ducting cavities (1.3 GHz). As an example the fundamental limit today is around 55 for a linear collider facility, figure 13 shows MV/m. the schematic layout of TESLA. The second key parameter for the physics program is the luminosity , given by L n N 2f b e rep e+ = ∗ ∗ HD (1) L 4πσxσy where nb is the number of bunches per pulse damping ring containing Ne particles, frep is the pulse rep- ∗ etition frequency, σx,y the horizontal (vertical) beamsize at the interaction point, and HD the disruption enhancement factor. An important constraint on the choice of the linear accelerator parameters is the effect of beamstrahlung due to the emission of synchrotron radia- positron tion. The average fractional beam energy preaccelerator 1 loss δE is proportional to ∗ ∗ 2 . Choos- (σx+σy ) ∗ ∗ electron-positron collision ing a flat beam size (σx σy) at the inter- high energy physics experiments

≫ 33 km action point, δE becomes independent of the positron source x-ray laser vertical beam size and the luminosity can be e- ∗ increased by reducing σy as much as possi- aux. positron and ∗ ∗ 2nd electron source ble. Since σy ǫyβy this can be achieved ∝ ∗ by a small vertical beta function β and a p y small normalised vertical emittance ǫy at the interaction point. The average beam power Pbeam = √snbNefrep = ηPAC is obtained from the mains power PAC with an eﬃciency η. Equation (1) can then be rewritten as damping ring linear accelerator

ηP δ e- AC E (2) L∝ √s s ǫy electron sources (HEP and x-ray laser) High luminosity therefore requires high efficiency η and high beam quality with low emittance ǫy and low emittance dilution Figure 13. Schematic layout of TESLA ∆ǫ/ǫ f 6 , which is largely determined by ∝ RF the RF frequency fRF of the chosen technology. Table 2 compares some key parameters The fundamental difference between the for the different technologies at √s = 500 three designs is the choice of technology for GeV, like repetition rate frep for bunch trains

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 10 For Publisher’s use

Figure 14. Evolution of superconducting cavity per- Figure 15. Excitation curves of three electropolished formance. The average gradient achieved with single-cell cavities. Gradients well above 35 MV/m TESLA 9-cell cavities produced in industry (ﬁrst test, are reached. no additional processing) is shown as dots.

upgrade in energy up to around one TeV seems possible for all designs. In the NLC with N bunches, the time ∆T between b b case, more cavities would be installed within bunches within a train which allows head the existing tunnel, in the JLC case, the on crossing of the bunches for TESLA but tunnel length would have to be increased to requires a crossing angle for the other de- house more cavities. In the TESLA case, signs. The design luminosity , beam power L a gradient of around 35 MV/m is needed P and the required mains power P il- beam AC to reach √s of 800 GeV within the present lustrate that for a given mains power the su- tunnel length. Higher energies would proba- perconducting technology delivers higher lu- bly require an extension of the tunnel. Such minosity. On the other hand the lower gradi- gradients have repeatedly been reached in ent G requires a longer linac for the same acc tests of single-cell cavities whose surfaces centre-of-mass energy reach. As can be seen have been electropolished not only chemi- from table 2 the X-band machines call for a cally treated. The result of this common ef- beam loaded (unloaded) gradient of some 50 fort from KEK, CERN, Saclay and DESY is (70) MV/m for √s of 500 GeV. Recently, it shown in ﬁgure 15. has been found that high gradient operation of normalconducting cavities results in sur- In summary, all designs are very well ad- face damage of the structures. Intense R&D vanced. The TESLA collaboration has pre- is going on in collaboration between SLAC, sented a fully costed Technical Design Report KEK and CERN in order to understand and in March 2001. The other collaborations are resolve the problem. At present it seems that expected to provide such reports within the the onset of the damage depends on the struc- next years. The construction of a linear col- ture length and the group velocity within the lider with at least 500 GeV centre-of-mass en- cavity 16. ergy, with upgrade potential to around one The TESLA design requires 23.5 MV/m TeV, could start soon. for √s = 500 GeV, a gradient which is mean- while routinely achieved for cavities fabri- 4.2 Multi-TeV Range cated in industry as illustrated in ﬁgure 14. Table 2 also contains the presently To reach centre-of-mass energies beyond the planned length of the facilities 17,16,22,23. An TeV range, up to 3-5 TeV, a two beam accel-

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 11 For Publisher’s use

Table 2. Comparison of some crucial parameters at 500 GeV for the diﬀerent technologies under study, see text for details. TESLA NLC JLC-X JLC-C

frep [Hz] 5 120 150 100 Nb 2820 190 190 142 ∆Tb [ns] 337 1.4 1.4 2.8 bunch crossing head on angle angle angle 10 Ne/bunch[10 ] 2 .75 0.7 1.11 ∗ σx/y[nm] 553/5 245/2.7 239/2.57 318/4.3 δE[%] 3.2 4.7 5.3 3.9 [1034cm−2s−1] 3.4 2 2.64 1.3 L Pbeam[MW ] 22.6 13.2 17.6 12.6 PAC (linacs)[MW ] 97 132 141 220 Gacc [MV/m] 23.5 48 50.2 36 Ltot [km] 33 30 16 linac 19 eration concept (CLIC) with very high accel- tain a large accelerator facility. The model erating fields is being developed at CERN 24. is based on the experience of large experi- The schematic layout of that facility is shown mental collaborations, particularly in particle in figure 16. It is optimised for √s of 3 TeV, physics. Some key elements are listed below: using high frequency (30 GHz) normalcon- it is not an international permanent in- ducting structures operating at very high ac- • celerating fields (150 MV/m). The present stitution, but an international project of design calls for bunch separations of .67 ns, a limited duration; vertical spotsize of 1 nm and beamstrahlung the facility would be the common prop- δ of 30%. For this promising concept a new • E erty of the participating countries; test facility is under construction at CERN which should allow tests with full gradient there are well defined roles and obliga- • starting in 2005. tions of all partners;

partners contribute through components 5 Realisation • or subsystems; The new generation of high energy colliders design, construction and testing of com- most likely exceeds the resources of a coun- • ponents is done in participating institu- try or even a region. There is general consen- tions; sus that the realisation has to be done in an international, interregional framework. One maintenance and running of the accel- • such framework, the so called Global Accel- erator would be done to a large extent erator Network (GAN), has been proposed to from the participating institutions. ICFA in March 2000. A short discussion of the principle considerations will be presented The GAN would make best use of world- here, more details can be found in ref. 25. wide competence, ideas and resources, create The GAN is a global collaboration of lab- a visible presence of activities in all partici- oratories and institutes in order to design, pating countries and would, hopefully, make construct, commission, operate and main- the site selection less controversial.

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 12 For Publisher’s use

Overall Layout at 3 TeV C L I C 37.5 km

13.75 km 10 km 13.75 km

FROM MAIN BEAM Main Beams − 9 GeV/c GENERATION COMPLEX 154 bunches of 4 10 9 e+ e− 20 cm between bunches

e− e+ e− e+ e− MAIN LINAC (30 GHz −150 MV/m) FINAL FINAL e+ MAIN LINAC FOCUS FOCUS Detectors

LASER LASER γ γ e− e−

DRIVE BEAM DECELERATOR ~ 460 MW/m 624 m FROM DRIVE BEAM RF power at 30 GHz GENERATION COMPLEX

Figure 16. Overall layout of the CLIC complex for a centre-of-mass energy of 3 TeV.

ICFA has set up two working groups to called for having in mind a timely realisation study general considerations of implementing as a global project with the highest possible a GAN and to study the technical considera- luminosity and a clear upgrade potential be- tions and inﬂuence on the design and cost of yond 500 GeV. the accelerator. The reports of these working groups can be found on the web 26. Their Acknowledgments overall conclusion is that a GAN can be a feasible way to build and operate a new global The author would like to express his grati- accelerator, although many details still need tude to all people who have contributed to to be clariﬁed. the studies of future electron-positron linear colliders from the machine design to physics and detector studies. Special thanks go to the 6 Summary organisers and their team for a very well or- ganised, inspiring conference as well as for the There is global consensus about the next ac- competent technical help in preparing this celerator based project in particle physics. It presentation. has to be an electron-positron linear collider with an initial energy reach of some 500 GeV References with the potential of an upgrade in centre- of-mass energy. The physics case is excellent, 1. J.A. Aguilar-Saavedra et al, TESLA only a few highlights could be presented here. Technical Design Report, Part III, There is also global consensus that concur- Physics at an e+e− Linear Collider, rent operation with LHC is needed and fruit- DESY 2001-011, ECFA 2001-209, hep- ful. Therefore, a timely realisation is manda- ph/0106315. tory. The technical realisation of a linear col- 2. T. Abe et al, Linear Collider Physics Re- lider is now feasible, several technologies are source Book for Snowmass 2001, BNL- either ripe or will be ripe soon. A fast consen- 52627, CLNS 01/1729, FERMILAB- sus in the community about the technology is Pub-01/058-E, LBNL-47813, SLAC-R-

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 13 For Publisher’s use

570, UCRL-ID-143810-DR, LC-REV- 474, 1996. 2001 Report on the Next 2001-074-US, hep-ex/0106055-58 Linear Collider, Fermilab-Conf-01-075- 3. K. Abe et al, Particle Physics Exper- E, LBNL-47935, SLAC-R-571, UCRL- iments at JLC, KEK-Report 2001-11, ID-144077 hep-ph/0109166. 17. J. Andruszkow et al, TESLA Technical 4. Proceedings of LCWS, Physics and Ex- Design Report, Part II, The Accelerator, periments with Future Linear Colliders, DESY 2001-011, ECFA 2001-209 eds A. Para, H.E. Fisk, (AIP Conf. 18. O.Napoly, TESLA Linear Collider: Sta- Proc., Vol 578, 2001). tus Report, in ref 4 5. Worldwide Study of the Physics and De- 19. T.O. Raubenheimer, Progress in the tectors for Future e+e− Colliders Next Linear Collider Design, in ref 4 http://lcwws.physics.yale.edu/lc/ 20. Y.H. Chin et al Status of JLC Accelera- 6. ACFA Joint Linear Collider Physics and tor Development, in ref 4 Detector Working Group 21. A. Chao et al, 2001 Snowmass Accelera- http://acfahep.kek.jp/ tor R&D Report, http://www.hep.anl. 7. 2nd Joint ECFA/DESY Study gov/pvs/dpb/Snowmass.pdf on Physics and Detectors for a Linear 22. Y.H. Chin, private communication Electron-Positron Collider 23. H.Matsumoto, T.Shintake, private com- http://www.desy.de/conferences/ecfa- munication desy-lc98.html 24. I.Wilson, A Multi-TeV Compact e+e− 8. A Study of the Physics and Detectors for Linear Collider, in ref 4 Future Linear e+e− Colliders: American 25. F. Richard et al, TESLA Technical De- Activities sign Report, Part I, Executive Summary, http://lcwws.physics.yale.edu/lc/ameri- DESY 2001-011, ECFA 2001-209, hep- ca.html ph/0106314. 9. G. Alexander et al, TESLA Technical 26. http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/icfa/ Design Report, Part IV, A Detector for icfa tforce reports.html TESLA, DESY 2001-011, ECFA 2001- 209. 10. H. N. Brown et al. [Muon g-2 Collabo- ration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 2227 11. J. Drees, these proceedings 12. E.Hinode et al, eds., KEK Internal 95- 4, 1995, eds J.Urakawa and M.Yoshioka, Proceedings of the SLAC/KEK Linear Collider Workshop on Damping Ring, KEK 92-6, 1992 13. The FFTB Collaboration: BINP (Novosibirsk/Protvino), DESY, FNAL, KEK, LAL(Orsay), MPI Mu- nich, Rochester, and SLAC 14. Proposal for a TESLA Test Facility, DESY TESLA-93-01, 1992 15. KEK-Report 97-1, 1997. 16. Zeroth Order Design Report for the Next Linear Collider, SLAC Report

writeup˙rome: submitted to World Scientiﬁc on October 28, 2018 14