fermilab budget presentation research program hugh montgomery february 27, 2006

Fermilab Budget PresentationResearch Program

Hugh Montgomery

February 27, 2006

February 27, 2006 2

fPhysics Research Program

• Particle physics -- understand what are the fundamental components of our universe and how they interact.

• Experimental research uses Accelerators– complex of accelerators at Fermilab, Tevatron Collider,

Neutrinos – Large Hadron Collider, CERN, Switzerland.

• Cosmic radiation;– optical telescopes– charged cosmic rays– WIMPS – cold dark matter

• Two theoretical physics groups– particle physics– cosmology.

• All the components of the research program are naturally intertwined.

February 27, 2006 3

fPublication History

February 27, 2006 4

fStrategy• Operate/support our Collider Physics (CDF, D0, CMS)• Operate our Neutrinos (MINOS, MiniBooNE)• Operate our Particle Astro (SDSS, CDMS, Auger)• Maintain leadership in Lattice Project, SciDAC ( Lattice,

Accel. Modelling )

• Support NOvA R&D in the neutrino competition, preparation for CD1, CD2 reviews

• Nurture two selected small enterprises: MINERvA, DES• One very small experiment SciBooNE

• Increase participation in the LC R&D• Plan future high intensity proton program

• Desired initiatives are consistent with Director’s Strategy and Business Plan from 2005

February 27, 2006 5

fThe Physics Research ProgramRESEARCH PROGRAM

FY05 FY06 FY07 PBRFY08 FLAT

TO PBR

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING 24.2 26.0 28.1 27.8CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES 7.9 0.7 0.0 0.0BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0MINIBOONE, FT EXPS 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.4EvA 1.5 5.1 8.9 9.9MINERvA 1.0 1.1 3.2 2.9OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES 1.4 2.5 3.1 2.7NuMI / MINOS 10.2 6.6 6.9 7.2THEORY 6.2 7.6 7.8 8.4DES 2.4 2.6 3.1 2.8OTHER EXPERIMENTAL ASTROPHYSICS 6.1 6.1 6.4 6.7OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT 24.9 23.2 25.0 25.8LHC BASE SUPPORT 4.3 4.9 5.7 5.9LHC PROGRAM 17.8 20.6 21.0 20.5

TOTAL 113.8 109.1 121.3 121.7

RunII Ops Upgrades

CMS

DES

NOvA

MINERvA

DIRECT COSTS

February 27, 2006 6

fPhysics Research Program Budget FY2005-2008

RESEARCH PROGRAM FUNDING TRENDS

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

FY05 FY06 FY07 PBR FY08 FLATTO PBR

$ M

LHC PROGRAM

LHC BASE SUPPORT

OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT

OTHER EXPERIMENTALASTROPHYSICSDES

THEORY

NuMI / MINOS

OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES

MINERvA

EvA

MINIBOONE, FT EXPS

BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT

CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING

DIRECT COSTS

February 27, 2006 7

fPhysics Research Program FY2006 Budget

NOvA ramp

RunII Holding Flat Upgrades Done

DES Held

RESEARCH PROGRAM

FY05 FY06 D

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING 24.2 26.0 1.8CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES 7.9 0.7 (7.2)BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT 3.9 0.0 (3.9)MINIBOONE, FT EXPS 2.2 2.0 (0.2)EvA 1.5 5.1 3.7MINERvA 1.0 1.1 0.2OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES 1.4 2.5 1.1NuMI / MINOS 10.2 6.6 (3.6)THEORY 6.2 7.6 1.4DES 2.4 2.6 0.2OTHER EXPERIMENTAL ASTROPHYSICS 6.1 6.1 0.0OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT 24.9 23.2 (1.7)LHC BASE SUPPORT 4.3 4.9 0.6LHC PROGRAM 17.8 20.6 2.8

TOTAL 113.8 109.1 (4.7)

CMS core rising

DIRECT COSTS

February 27, 2006 8

fCollider Physics• Run II operations continue to do well

– Integrated Luminosity ~ 1.3 fb-1 for each experiment– ~ 1 fb-1 in summer conference results (one last week)– Computing is a challenge but is successful thus far– Run IIB: most upgrades in after shutdown– Note publications– Transition from Tevatron to LHC

• CMS– CD4A a great success– Experiment to be completed (Silicon integration, Pixels for the US)– Transition to operating experiment– Computing Reviews continue to be very positive– Strong impact of physicist/CP team– Transitions from Tevatron experiments– Postdoc recruiting needs to ramp up– LPC appears to be successful so far– FNAL people continue to provide strong leadership

• Run II CMS Synergy

February 27, 2006 9

fTevatron 1 fb-1 Result!

February 27, 2006 10

fCollider Physics – Issues/Actions• Run IIB upgrade projects end, some earned contingency to be

recovered

• Task Force Report– Attempting to respond– Limited by resources

• Operations eat inflation, manpower in operations reduces – We try to apply individuals where need is evident– Attempt to gain with efficiencies, common solutions, common groups

across the two experiments (eg system management of online, farms operations)

– Attempting to maintain strong post-doc cadre

• Run IIB Offline computing continues to rely on:– Lab computing infrastructure: buildings, power and cooling and has

required very considerable investment – in kind computing from collaborations exploitation of which, in turn,

relies on Laboratory Networking investments – Good news: ESNET plans now foresee an upgrade of supplied

infrastructure


fMiniBooNE , Fixed Target Experiments & External Beams

• MiniBooNE Operations going well– More than 7.2 x 1020 pot– Expect results in Summer– Systematic studies included multiple horn settings and

reversed polarity (antineutrinos)

• MIPP– Particle production experiment– Relevant to neutrino oscillations– Experiment completed its Priority 1 and 2 data– Future not evident

• Test Beam– Healthy set of requests ( LHC, SuperB, generic, and ILC)– Operations work well– Attempting to develop plan for improved beam (low energy)– Pressure/requests for increased duty cycle


fNeutrinos• Long Baseline NuMI-MINOS

– Construction projects completed– Operations have started well– Problems with horn and target – Anticipate the first results very soon (1 x 1020 pot)

• MINERvA– NuMI near hall– Neutrino cross sections, physics and LBL projections– Directors CD1 review was very good, submission to DOE 3/2006– CD0 in train? ( EIR complete)– Detector (~$9.2M), Installation(~$1.2M) – No construction in PB – Flat scenario

• SciBooNE – Booster Beam, – Detector was used in K2K– Data will help T2K– KEK Director wrote to Pier

• LArTPC a modest Liquid Argon neutrino initiative


fNeutrinos

• NOvA – sin2213, mass hierarchy

– Next step in Long Baseline neutrino program– R&D in progress– Has CD0 (thankyou), awaiting NuSAG Report– Director’s CD1 Review tomorrow – DOE CD1 Review April 4-6– Target is construction start in 2008 – No construction in PB – Flat scenario


fNOvA Project Funding Needs• 2007

– PED $11M– R&D Need $ 5M

• 2008 – Construction

• Site and Building, $ 44.7 M ($ 37.8 M obligation + 25%

contingency) • Others Elements (Base Cost):

– Scintillator startup $ 7.1 M – Extrusion startup, $ 3.0 M – APDs $ 8.3 M– Block Raiser $ 2.2 M– Project Office $ 0.5 M

• Director’s Review starts February 28


fExperimental Particle Astrophysics• SDSS

– SDSS I complete– SDSSII established, started well, impressive SuperNova yield

• Auger– Largest ground array– Beautiful hybrid capability– Operating well– Stretched for cash but first physics last summer– Definitive Agasa/HiRes resolution should come this year??

• CDMS– Best limits in the world – Starting full operation (5 towers) now cooled down– Looking to future (NSF funding, DOE proposal, FNAL in management,

cryo,and electronics, all at controlled scale, 25 kg)• JDEM

– Some important work for SNAP, mainly physicist effort & electronics• COUPP

– Liquid Bubble chamber for cold dark matter


fExperimental Particle Astrophysics

• DES– Very interesting Dark Energy initiative, exploits FNAL

skills– Scale (~ $20M for instrument) -- possible for this decade– Generic ground based Dark Energy -- CD0– Aiming for construction in FY08

• DOE MIE – FY08: $4.7,FY09:4.0, FY10:1.7M)– Cannot maintain pace in the PB - Flat scenario– Interest in collaboration from UC, U of I, U. Michigan, UK

Consortium (UC London (PPARC), Portsmouth) Spanish Consortium (IEEC (Astrophysics), IFAE & CIEMAT (HEP)), all with contributions.

– We need reading from DETF?

– They need reading from FNAL/DOE to convince to commit.


fPhysics Research Program BudgetFY2006-2008 Incremental Analysis

RunII Ops Flat

No DES

No NOvA Const.

RESEARCH PROGRAM

FY06FY08 FLAT

TO PBR D

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING 26.0 27.8 1.8CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES 0.7 0.0 (0.7)BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT 0.0 0.0 0.0MINIBOONE, FT EXPS 2.0 1.4 (0.6)EvA 5.1 9.9 4.7MINERvA 1.1 2.9 1.8OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES 2.5 2.7 0.2NuMI / MINOS 6.6 7.2 0.7THEORY 7.6 8.4 0.8DES 2.6 2.8 0.1OTHER EXPERIMENTAL ASTROPHYSICS 6.1 6.7 0.5OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT 23.2 25.8 2.5LHC BASE SUPPORT 4.9 5.9 1.0LHC PROGRAM 20.6 20.5 (0.2)

TOTAL 109.1 121.7 12.6

No MINERvA Const.

CMS core rising

DIRECT COSTS


fComputing• Computing for Run II continues to do well

– Production keeps pace with data taking• Improvements to handle higher occupancies• Improvements in calibration methodology

– Analysis pace is also maintained– Flexibility of resources has been important– Record utilization of grid implementations for both

experiments– Large non-FNAL, non-US, in-kind, contributions of computing

• CMS C&S– Hardware installation tempered to match schedule– Deploy analysis computing just-in-time– Staffing has required internal transfers– Impact of team approach (physicists and computing

professionals) is evident• Fermilab installed infrastructure (to Starlight) is

part of operations, ESNET planning situation has improved

• Infrastructure is a continuing issue down the line


fCentral Computing & Networking

• Lattice Project, Fermilab managing across BNL, FNAL and TJNAF, FNAL core support for the infrastructure

• FermiGRID strategy is almost completely implemented, all farms participate, it has become a necessity

• Open Science Grid is becoming increasingly important to a widening range of stakeholders.

• Cyber Security Assist visits went extremely well, they identified several best practices which they are trying to propagate to other labs. It would be nice to see some return on this.


fCentral Computing & Networking

• But …

• Operational and support staff (eg Networking) are under heavy pressure. Especially for Run II, this pinches the scientist leadership opportunities

• It is difficult to improve when budgets are declining and when the outside world continues to attract, and be attracted by, our best people.

• There is reliance also on remote, international computing for Run II, with cooperation on interoperability – our committees warn us that this is vulnerable to LHC competition

• Support for traditional software, for example, simulations, ROOT, GEANT, needs to grow, especially for ILC.

• We are attempting to rationalize DAQ/Controls effort for accelerator work, ILC controls initiatives, and some experiment support


fBudget Need

RESEARCH PROGRAM

FY05 FY06FY07

REQUESTFY08

REQUEST

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING 24.2 27.0 28.1 29.4CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES 7.9 0.7 0.0 0.0BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0MINIBOONE, FT EXPS 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.4EvA 1.5 5.1 12.0 49.9MINERvA 1.0 1.1 4.7 5.8OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES 1.4 2.5 3.1 2.7NuMI / MINOS 10.2 6.6 6.9 7.2THEORY 6.2 7.6 7.8 8.4DES 2.4 3.6 4.6 6.0OTHER EXPERIMENTAL ASTROPHYSICS 6.1 6.1 6.4 6.7OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT 24.9 23.2 25.0 25.8LHC BASE SUPPORT 4.3 4.9 5.7 5.9LHC PROGRAM 17.8 20.6 21.0 20.5

TOTAL 113.8 111.1 127.4 169.5

DIRECT COSTS


fBudget Need

RESEARCH PROGRAM FUNDING TRENDS REQUEST LEVEL

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

FY05 FY06 FY07REQUEST

FY08REQUEST

$ M

LHC PROGRAM

LHC BASE SUPPORT

OTHER DIRECT SUPPORT

OTHER EXPERIMENTALASTROPHYSICSDES

THEORY

NuMI / MINOS

OTHER EXPERIMENTAL INITIATIVES

MINERvA

EvA

MINIBOONE, FT EXPS

BTeV SUPPORT and CLOSEOUT

CDF/D-ZERO UPGRADES

CDF/D-ZERO OPS & COMPUTING

DIRECT COSTS


fSummary• Fermilab continues to hum with activity

– Collider Program remains strong, luminosity is growing– Neutrino Operations have been excellent– CMS participation is strong and strengthening– ILC is evident

BUT• Concern about building a mid-term future experimental

program

• NOvA is supported for PED, needs more for R&D, needs strong FY08 construction start

• MINERvA needs FY07 R&D and FY08 construction• DES needs FY07 R&D and FY08 construction• SciBooNE is at our limit

• No other experimental initiatives are supported

fermilab budget presentation research program hugh montgomery february 27, 2006

Documents