LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for LCD-L Archives


LCD-L Archives

LCD-L Archives


LCD-L@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LCD-L Home

LCD-L Home

LCD-L  March 2011

LCD-L March 2011

Subject:

Next Steps for Lepton Collider Detector R&D Proposals

From:

"Jaros, John A." <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

4 Mar 2011 14:34:44 -0800Fri, 4 Mar 2011 14:34:44 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (27 lines)

                                                                                                                         
This note is to those of you who are planning to submit proposals for detector R&D for future energy frontier lepton ( e+e- or µ+µ+) colliders in response to the DOE's recent Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).

We wrote to you earlier about our intention to organize a consortium proposal for Physics & Detectors at future lepton colliders, called the Lepton Collider Framework Proposal (LCFP). LCFP is broader in scope than just detector R&D and it is actively being worked on. In this note we will only address detector R&D at future lepton colliders, in order to be able to meet the FOA deadline of March 18, 2011. In the future we expect detector R&D to become part of the larger LCFP, but for now we will concentrate on the Lepton Collider Detector R&D (LCDRD) proposal. You can read the LoI we submitted for LCDRD here: http://physics.uoregon.edu/~lc/lcdrd_fy11  .  Many of you responded to our earlier request to forward your LoI's to us, so we would know who is submitting proposals and who might join our consortium. We hope more of you will join us.

We are writing now to explain in more detail how the LCDRD consortium proposal will work, and to enlist your participation in this consortium. If you are interested in joining, we hope you will send us a draft of your proposal by March 11, 2011, and your final proposal by March 16, before the FOA due date.  We need the draft proposals early for our first round assessments and the final proposals in time to be referenced  in the consortium proposal.

We plan to bundle the proposals sent to us, along with an assessment of the priority of each proposal and the level of suggested funding, and to request funding from DOE for the consortium as a whole. We will develop two funding scenarios, one assuming that we receive $1.0M, the other that we get $1.5M for the consortium in year one. This amount will increase in subsequent years. This means that a consortium proposal ( 25 page limit) will be written, which outlines in general the challenges at each lepton collider, provides a 0.5-1 page summary of your proposal and explains how it fits into the overall picture. All proposals submitted to LCDRD will be linked via a WEB page in order to be available for reviewers from DOE. Criteria for setting priorities and some management details are given below. LCDRD will manage the proposals in the future, including dispensing funds as they are provided by DOE, annually reviewing progress and actively soliciting future proposals, and providing whatever materials DOE needs for review of the consortium and the proposals. In some sense, LCDRD is an expansion and an extension of the University Detector R&D project, which included SiD R&D administered by Jim Brau out of the University of Oregon, ILD R&D administered by Graham Wilson, and 4th R&D administered by John Hauptman. It extends that program, which is in its final year, over the next 5 years, FY2011-FY2015. Most importantly, it expands that program to include generic detector R&D driven by detector concepts at all possible future Lepton Colliders, and it will support projects for all the future lepton collider options, ILC, CLIC, and the Muon Collider.
 
Joining a consortium proposal is advantageous for several reasons. This proposal will represent the interests of the Lepton Collider Community, and give the LC community a unified voice in seeking detector R&D funding from DOE.  LCDRD garners strength from the number of proponents it represents; it's a cliché, but there is strength in numbers.   Having a single proposal is desirable because it is efficient and much easier to review a consortium proposal; its existence demonstrates some consensus and self-organization within the community; and the proponents provide management and direction. It also guarantees that internal review and prioritization of the proposals is being done by those in the community most qualified and knowledgeable about lepton collider physics and detectors.

Management of LCDRD will extend the methods used to manage the University Detector R&D proposal mentioned above. Jim Brau, Marcel Demarteau, and John Jaros will serve as co-PIs for LCDRD. They will work with a review board, initially consisting of Ron Lipton, Adam Para, Dan Peterson, and Harry Weerts, to read, prioritize, and suggest funding levels for all the proposals in the consortium. The review board will have representation from those working on ILC detectors, SiD and ILD, those working on CLIC detectors, and those working on Muon Collider Detectors. The board will also serve to decide how funds are to be dispensed, following the guidelines from DOE, which is likely to provide additional review, especially in year one. LCDRD will review progress each year, update proposals, and solicit and bundle new proposals in future years.

There will be several criteria for prioritizing proposals which are based broadly on the desire to understand the challenges of future lepton collider detectors, judge their feasibility and timelines, and initiate R&D critical for their realization.  For detectors at the Muon Collider, it will initially be very important to characterize the experimental environment and the critical physics motivations, and to identify the detector challenges.  Supporting the development of the overall detector concepts for future lepton colliders will be given high priority as will supporting the computing/simulation infrastructure to enable such studies. Last and not least, proceeding with the most critical R&D to establish the various lepton collider detector concepts is judged very important. Completing the R&D that has been identified by the ILC detectors is certainly in this category; beginning this process for CLIC and Muon Collider has very high priority.

We hope you will help make this effort successful by being part of the LCDRD consortium, and that you will submit your proposal to us for bundling into the LCDRD Consortium proposal. We ask you to do the following:

1.	Notify us of your intention to join LCDRD as soon as possible.
2.	Submit a draft of your proposal by March 11, including its suggesting funding level, for our review. Your proposal
      should address the guidelines given in the FOA.
3.	Submit your final proposal to us for bundling by March 16, 2011.

Contacts for LCDRD are Jim Brau ([log in to unmask]), Marcel Demarteau ([log in to unmask]) , John Jaros ([log in to unmask]), and Ron Lipton ([log in to unmask]) .



Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
December 2023
July 2023
May 2023
February 2023
March 2022
December 2021
September 2021
August 2021
June 2021
May 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
October 2020
September 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
January 2020
July 2019
February 2019
December 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
February 2017
October 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
April 2015
March 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
June 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

Privacy Notice, Security Notice and Terms of Use