From konigsberg@fnal.gov Wed Jan 2 00:02:27 2008 Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:02:25 -0600 From: Jacobo Konigsberg To: R. Keith Ellis Cc: hcp08-iac@fnal.gov, hcp08-loc@fnal.gov Subject: Re: Request for advice on program [ The following text is in the "WINDOWS-1252" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Dear Keith, Below are my comments. [Monday] I like the idea of an opening talk, suggested by others. It puts the conference in context and there will be new information on LHC and Tevatron schedules. [Tuesday afternoon - SM] I liked Michelangelo?s suggestion to do the W+jets and W+HF together on each talk [Tuesday afternoon]. However, we have learned a lot experimentally about many of these important processes and having just ½ hr assigned to all of them seems very little to me. This allows only for a series of presentations on results and little discussion on methodology and consistency across the results. A talk that looks at all we have and attempts to reach some conclusions [theoretical and MC] could be interesting. Also, not sure what the talk ?SM backgrounds at the LHC? would be about ? seems to me more logical to discuss how to establish the SM at the LHC during the ?prospects for early physics? session. Then on this session, we could try to have a talk on how the ?generic? QCD background is treated on Tevatron high-pt analyses, for example, complementing the W+jets. [Thursday afternoon ? New Phenomena] If we wanted to get ?creative? we might want to consider addressing searches for new phenomena as a function of final state and not as a function of specific model. So we could have talks on ?missing Et + jets?, on ?leptons + X?, on ?photons + X?, "taus" etc. Even if we did not want to change this, we should definitely add a talk on model independent searches. [Friday] As Karl suggested, I also don?t think that having two talks [from CMS and Atlas] covering ?early physics at the LHC ? is really necessary. > I would like you to perhaps consider the possibility of having a session, or a couple of talks, that discuss analysis techniques [applied to real analyses] such as modern multivariate discriminants and matrix-element usage. There is some skepticism in the community on the usage/validity of these techniques and it would be nice to address that. > Another interesting topic is that of state-of-the-art Monte Carlo generators and a talk attempting to summarize what we?ve learned and what we still need to learn would be relevant ? Michelangelo has given a presentation along these lines in the past. > If one wanted to emphasize more the physics in this particular HCP, I would suggest that the [Saturday] LHC upgrade talks are not really necessary ?the SLHC political statement could be made at the intro talk- , nor is the [Friday] Grid computing talk. > The Poster Session suggested by Rino seems like a very good idea, and it will boost attendance by younger people. Best regards and Happy New Year to all, Jaco Konigsbegr On Dec 4, 2007, at 2:46 PM, R. Keith Ellis wrote: > > Dear Colleague, > > Thank you for agreeing to serve on the International Advisory > Committee for the Hadron-Collider Symposium, to be held at the > Eagle Ridge resort in Galena, Illinois, 5/27/08-5/31/08. > > Attached please find a draft outline of the program. > I would be pleased to receive your comments on the outline of > the program especially in the following areas. > > 1) General comments on the outline. > 2) Suggestions for theoretical speakers. > 3) Suggestion for experimental and theoretical summary > speakers. > 4) (Experimental speakers are typically controlled by the > collaborations, but please feel free to comment), > > Your comments on the outline of the program will be most useful if they > are received by December 31, 2007. > > Best wishes, > > Keith Ellis >