From twyatt@fnal.gov Tue Jan 15 08:14:16 2008 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:14:22 +0000 From: Terry Wyatt To: R. Keith Ellis Cc: hcp08-iac@fnal.gov, hcp08-loc@fnal.gov Subject: Re: Draft program 2008-JAN-08 Dear Keith, et al, Sorry for joining the discussion only at this late stage. My comments are organized in three parts. A) Balance between Tevatron and LHC B) Other more minor suggestions on the programme C) Suggestions on possible speakers A) Balance between Tevatron and LHC ----------------------------------- The current programme is not bad, but I think it does need tweaking in a few places for it to give a better balance among current areas of interest. Given the huge amount of data being delivered by the Tevatron and analyzed by the experiments I think we have to increase the time allocated to presentations of Tevatron results (currently 7.25 hours, including the machine status talk). I think this has to come at the expense of the slightly too generous time currently allocated to LHC experiments (9.5 hours, including the machine status and Grid computing talks). I support strongly the plan to have rather extensive talks on the LHC machine, the preparations for commissioning each individual LHC experiment and the prospects for early physics running. I support also the plan to have a talk on Grid computing. Given these talks then I think the balance struck between Tevatron and LHC in the top, SM and B physics sessions is about right (about 1 LHC talk to 3 Tevatron talks). The places where I see the programme as unbalanced is in the Higgs and New Phenomena sessions. Frankly, the Tevatron experiments have many more interesting things to say on these subjects currently than the LHC experiments, but the time allocation is 1 hour:1 hour. In both Higgs and New Phenomena 1 hour is not enough time to cover the relevant results from the Tevatron and the experience to be gained for the LHC experiments in these areas. I make the following concrete suggestions for these two sessions: S5) New Phenomena There should be three 30 minute Tevatron talks 1) Searches in purely leptonic final states (with and without missing ET) 2) Searches in Jet+missing ET final states 3) Searches in lepton+jet final states (with and without missing ET) Sorry to sound like a broken record on this subject (having proposed without success topology-based rather than "physics"-based experimental talks also in past years) but I really think this brings out in a much clearer way the experimental aspects (and, in particular, the lessons to be learned from the Tevatron in preparing for searches at the LHC) There should be one general 30 minute LHC talk on long term prospects for NP searches (given that the near term is covered in session S6). S7) Electroweak Symmetry breaking There should be three 30 minute Tevatron talks 1) Searches for low mass SM Higgs (bb decays) 2) Searches for high mass SM Higgs (WW decays) 3) Searches for BSM Higgs There is much too much to say on SM Higgs searches at the Tevatron for this subject to be covered adequately in the currently foreseen 30 minute talk. There should be one general 30 minute LHC talk on long term prospects for Higgs searches B) Other more minor suggestions on the programme ------------------------------------------------ The 15 minute break on Tuesday morning is too short. I advocate starting at 9:30 in order to allow 45 mins. If that is really considered too early then I advocate taking at least 15 mins from the currently scheduled nearly 2 hour lunch break. We need to schedule a break of at least half an hour in the session Saturday morning. I suggest abandoning the Late breaking news slot and/or shortening the 1 hour long slot currently devoted to LHC upgrade plans. I agree that it would be good to move the ALICE commissioning talk to session S6. I suggest the ALICE speaker be allocated 45 minutes and asked to talk about commissioning of particle ID. Maybe combine talks S3.3 (Experimental results on Diffraction) and S6.5 (LHC plans for forward physics) and have the talk given by someone who know about both HERA results and LHC prospects? I assume the speaker for talk S2.2 should be CDF/Dzero rather than just Dzero? I'd prefer a less loaded title for S2.3 (Prospects for experimental determination of standard model backgrounds at LHC). There is lots of interesting physics to be done in this area at the LHC as well as regarding the SM as a background. I suggest "Prospects for experimental studies of W/Z+jets at the LHC" Suggestions on possible speakers -------------------------------- S1.1 An alternative I'd prefer would be to ask one of the Tevatron machine guys e.g., Valeri Lebedev or Roger Dixon S2.1 Mrinal Dasgupta S3.1 Robert Thorne (I don't think it is appropriate to consider Claire Gwenlan as a candidate if she gave a LP2007 plenary talk) S8.3 I'd advocate Ian Bird being asked, given his new role in leading the WLCG project. An alternative would be to ask Les Roberston: as recently retired head of the WLCG project he might have a good perspective view. S8.4 Steinar Stapnes Cinzia DaVia Regards, Terry. On Jan 8, 2008, at 17:30, R. Keith Ellis wrote: > Dear Colleagues, > > Please find attached the latest draft of our program in which > we have responded to your (sometimes incompatible) suggestions. In our > choice of presentations we would like to favour younger speakers, whilst > maintaining a judicious balance of geographic distribution, gender and > experimental affiliation. In the attached program:- > > 1) The ordering of notations CDF/D0, ATLAS/CMS does not imply any > priority. The CDF/D0 ambiguity will be resolved later, depending > on how their analyses proceed. > We expect the ATLAS/CMS ambiguity (S1.6,S2.3,S5.5,S5.6,S7.5,S7.6) > to be resolved quickly, (maybe a phone call between Karl Jakobs > and Paris Sphicas would suffice?) > > 2) Please feel free to make suggestions for all talks, although > for experimental > talks the speaker's bureaux of the experiments may impose other > solutions. > > 3) Because of the difficulty last year with theory speakers, we would > like to proceed quite quickly. I have provided preliminary > ordered lists. > > 4) Your comments would be most useful if they arrived before Monday > January 14th. > > Best wishes, > > Keith Ellis >