Research Director's Report

19 February 2009


Sakue Yamada

What's going on in the Physics and Experiment Board meeting

Since the LCWS08 meeting in Chicago, the management mechanism for the ILC detector activities is working in its full shape. The most important body for communication and decision making is the Physics and Experiment Board (PEB). It is composed of the representatives of the Letter of Intent (LOI) groups, the conveners of the common task groups and the Executive Board members. Meetings are held regularly every month. As usual, many e-mails are exchanged between the meetings, too.

Structure of the management for ILC physics and detectors.

Each representative reports regularly, so that everybody shares the knowledge on the status of each part of the activity. At this moment, when the LOI due date is getting close, it is particularly meaningful that LOI groups can talk with each other or with the common task groups as well as with the research directorate formally in order to complete their LOIs in a comprehensive way. Questions and issues can be clarified. In every meeting a few agreements are reached so that the LOIs will be written in a more uniform style in order for the International Detector Advisory Group (IDAG) to be able to compare them clearly.

Here is a good example of such an outcome: during the last meeting in January it was proposed that a document on the beam energy and polarisation monitoring be prepared to be referred to by all the LOIs. We quickly reached the agreement that such an arrangement would be better than having similar or the same descriptions repeated in every LOI, since the work was conducted by a group of physicists who do not belong to a particular LOI group. So the Machine Detector Interface (MDI) group, which is in charge of these issues, was requested to contact the expert group to produce such a report in time for the LOI submission. The MDI group took action quickly and the beam monitor expert group agreed to make the effort. They immediately started to assemble already existing work into a proper shape in order to be referred to. It became available by the February PEB meeting.

I find two aspects very encouraging in this operation. One is that the both the Physics and Experiment Board and the MDI group worked very well (as expected). The other is that the important work of the experts on beam energy and polarisation monitoring could be documented in a report and formally installed in the framework of the LOI process. Since the work is related to both accelerator and detector activities, there has been some concern that it might be left behind under other pressing issues for each LOI group. The MDI group has a formal link to the beam delivery system group of the Global Design Effort, and it is the best body in the detector part to consider the matter.

We also discuss other matters, some simpler ones and some more complicated ones. Some common task groups have to work on issues which will take a rather long time. But keeping regular discussions to seek solutions in the PEB will be extremely important. I report today only one recent example. Since my observation is that PEB meeting and the common task groups remain productive, there will be more to report in the future.

-- Sakue Yamada

PDF for printing