Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

MAIA: A new detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The MAIA detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider keeps central-region reconstruction above 95% even under beam-induced background.

desk verdict First dedicated 10 TeV muon collider detector concept; performance numbers are credible within the simulated background but the headline claim is conditional on an incomplete BIB model. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00181 v2 pith:E5RARBBC submitted 2025-01-31 physics.ins-det hep-ex

Charles Bell , Daniele Calzolari , Christian Carli , John Dervan , Karri Folan Di Petrillo , Micah Hillman , Tova R. Holmes , Sergo Jindariani
show 19 more authors
Kiley E. Kennedy Cyrus Kianian Ka Hei Martin Kwok Mark Larson Anton Lechner Lawrence Lee Thomas Madlener Federico Meloni Abdollah Mohammadi Isobel Ojalvo Priscilla Pani Gregory Douglas Penn Rose Powers Benjamin Rosser Leo Rozanov Kyriacos Skoufaris Elise Sledge Alexander Tuna Junjia Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.ins-dethep-ex
keywords muoncolliderdetectorconceptbeam-inducedbackgroundsilicontrackerparticleflowcalorimetryreconstructionefficiency10TeV
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes MAIA, a detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider, and argues that its all-silicon tracker inside a 5T solenoid, high-granularity silicon-tungsten and iron-scintillator calorimeters, and air-gap muon system reconstruct energetic tracks, photons, and neutrons in the central region with efficiencies above 95% even when muon-decay beam-induced background is overlaid. This matters because no predecessor detector design exists specifically for 10 TeV lepton collisions, and the 3 TeV-era designs do not carry over directly, so physics studies at this energy need a baseline concept. The paper's conclusion is that MAIA establishes that baseline, with track momentum resolution approaching 0.1%, impact parameter resolution around 3 µm, and photon energy resolution near 0.5% in the central barrel.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the MAIA geometry itself, specifically the placement of the 5T solenoid outside the silicon tracker: the magnet's material, roughly 4 radiation lengths and 1 interaction length in the transverse direction, acts as a shielding layer that cuts incoming beam-induced background flux into the electromagnetic calorimeter by a factor of ten. Surrounding the tracker are a 50-layer silicon-tungsten electromagnetic calorimeter and a 75-layer iron-scintillator hadronic calorimeter based on a previous high-granularity calorimeter study, plus an air-gap muon system that acts as a stand-alone tagger. Reconstruction is carried by a Combinatorial Kalman Filter track finder with a hit-time window of $[-3\sigma_t, 5\sigma_t]$ around the beam crossing, and by particle-flow clustering for photons and neutral hadrons with region-dependent cell thresholds and mode-based background subtraction. A new overlay algorithm clones fractional background pseudo-events with randomized azimuthal angles to build statistically independent background events for the efficiency studies.

What would settle it

A simulation that adds incoherent $e^+e^-$ pair production at the 10 TeV collision point to the background overlay and recomputes central-barrel track, photon, and neutron efficiencies would settle the claim: if the extra pairs raise first-layer vertex occupancy enough to push any of those efficiencies below 95%, the paper's headline result does not survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a solenoid-outside-the-tracker geometry is the structural choice that lets a lepton-collider-style detector survive the muon-decay background at 10 TeV: the solenoid material reduces the background flux reaching the electromagnetic calorimeter by about a factor of ten, while 30 ps vertex-timing and a hadron-collider-style Combinatorial Kalman Filter keep track finding efficient. With beam-induced background overlaid, track reconstruction efficiency in the central barrel is 96.3%, photon efficiency above 100 GeV exceeds 95%, and energetic neutron efficiency in the barrel exceeds 95% for energies above 300 GeV. The performance holds using out-of-the-box particle-flow reconstruction and coarsely optimized thresholds, and the authors state that further optimization is expected to improve it. The paper presents this as establishing a baseline detector concept for physics studies at a 10 TeV muon collider, not as a final optimized design.

Load-bearing premise

The quoted performance assumes the background from muons decaying along the beamline, processed through a shielding nozzle designed for lower energies, is the dominant source of detector noise, and that the omitted electron-positron pairs produced at the collision point will not substantially raise occupancy in the innermost vertex layers.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A physics program at a 10 TeV muon collider can count on above-95% reconstruction efficiency for energetic tracks, photons, and neutrons in the central region, which is sufficient to begin precision Standard Model measurements and new-physics searches.
  • Placing the solenoid outside the tracker reduces beam-induced background flux into the electromagnetic calorimeter by a factor of ten, a design choice that should carry over to other multi-TeV lepton collider detector concepts.
  • The baseline concept is adequate to support full physics studies, with the understanding that forward-region geometry, endcap tracking, and particle-flow algorithms still require optimization.
  • The required 30 ps vertex timing and high-granularity calorimetry define concrete technology targets for silicon sensors, readout electronics, and calorimeter construction.
  • Central-region track momentum resolution near 0.1% and impact parameter resolution near 3 µm would support precision measurements of Standard Model processes if the detector is built as simulated.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If incoherent $e^+e^-$ pair production at the interaction point is as large as expected at 10 TeV, the innermost vertex layer may need faster timing, thinner sensors, or a larger radius; the 95% central-region efficiencies should be read as conditional on that omitted background.
  • The solenoid-as-shield approach may extend to even higher-energy muon colliders, but the optimal shield thickness depends on the beam-induced background spectrum, so the factor-of-ten reduction is a point estimate for one lattice and one nozzle design.
  • A natural next test is to rerun the single-particle efficiency studies with the 10 TeV-optimized nozzle and with full Standard Model backgrounds, including pair production, to see how much margin remains above 95%.
  • Single-particle efficiencies may overstate jet-level performance, since multiple overlapping objects can combine with background deposits; a dijet or Higgs-strahlung sample would reveal whether particle-flow confusion degrades the central-region numbers.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces MAIA, a detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider, with an all-silicon tracker inside a 5T solenoid, silicon-tungsten and iron-scintillator calorimeters, and an air-gap muon tagger. The performance is evaluated with Geant4 simulations of single-particle gun samples (muons, photons, neutrons) with and without overlay of FLUKA-simulated beam-induced background (BIB). The central result is that, in the central barrel region, reconstruction efficiencies exceed 95% for energetic tracks, photons above ~100 GeV, and neutrons above ~300 GeV even with BIB overlay; resolutions are also reported. The paper closes with a list of future work items, including forward-region optimization, algorithm development, and a dedicated solenoid feasibility study.

Significance. If the reported performance holds in more complete background conditions, MAIA would be a credible baseline detector for a 10 TeV muon collider and an important reference for the IMCC and the wider community. The study uses a professional simulation chain (Key4hep, DD4hep, Geant4, ACTS, Pandora) and is transparent about many of its assumptions, clearly separating measured quantities from extrapolations. Its contribution is a concrete, quantitatively assessed design that identifies the main technology drivers (fine-pitch timing detectors, high-granularity calorimetry, large-bore high-field solenoid) and the most urgent open questions (nozzle optimization, endcap tracking, incoherent pair background). The paper is not a final physics-performance study, but it provides a solid starting point for future detector optimization and physics benchmarks.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III and Sec. VI] The BIB model used for all quoted efficiencies omits incoherent e+e- pair production, which the paper itself states is expected to become sizeable at 10 TeV and could challenge the innermost tracker elements (Sec. III) and that 'since such particles can emerge from the interaction region, they can evade the background reduction' (Sec. VI). Given that the vertex detector already sees up to 1600 hits/cm2 per bunch crossing and the track efficiency claim (96.3% in the barrel) is occupancy-limited, the omission makes the headline 'even with BIB' claim conditional on a background model that the authors themselves characterize as incomplete. The authors should either include a quantitative estimate of the pair-production occupancy in the innermost layers (e.g., from GUINEA-PIG) or explicitly qualify the >95% central-region claims as applying only to the decay-BIB component.
  2. [Sec. II, 'overlay algorithm'] The overlay algorithm clones BIB particles with a randomized azimuthal angle and recombines fractional pseudo-events, and the paper asserts that for 'a large enough number of input pseudo-events, each resulting recombined event for overlay is, to a good approximation, statistically independent.' This independence is an assumption rather than a demonstrated property, and it matters because the track and photon efficiencies are measured after this overlay. The randomized azimuthal cloning implicitly assumes perfect azimuthal symmetry of the BIB, which may not hold exactly for the beam halo or nozzle geometry, and cross-event correlations in the recombined sample could alter the fake-track and cluster contamination rates. The authors should provide a validation that the recombined BIB sample reproduces the hit multiplicity, spatial distribution, and time structure of a full bunch crossing, or at least discuss the expected impact on the reported efficiencies.
  3. [Sec. V.A, track cleaning requirements] The quoted barrel track efficiency of 96.3% with BIB is obtained after imposing the cleaning requirements pT > 1 GeV, |d0| < 0.1 mm, nhits >= 5, and chi2/ndof < 3. These cuts are motivated by rejection of BIB-induced fake tracks, but they also remove real tracks with low pT or large impact parameters, and the paper does not quantify how the efficiency depends on these cut values. Since the abstract's 'energetic tracks' claim relies on these cuts, the authors should either show that the efficiency is stable against reasonable variations of the cuts or explicitly state that the >95% figure applies only after the selected cleaning criteria.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract text in the full manuscript states that efficiencies exceed 95% for 'tracks, photons, and neutrons,' but the earlier abstract in the submission metadata mentions 'charged pions.' Since the study uses neutron and muon guns rather than pion guns, please correct the inconsistency.
  2. [Sec. II, 'overlay algorithm'] The sentence 'the particles in each pseudo-event are cloned with a randomized azimuthal angle to create an overlay dataset that corresponds to multiple bunch crossings, but kept in separate pseudo-events' is slightly confusing; consider rewording to clarify that the cloned particles are not copied within a single pseudo-event but are used to populate multiple independent pseudo-events.
  3. [Sec. V.B, 'Photon energy response'] The paper derives a photon energy response function from no-BIB simulation and then applies it to BIB-overlay samples to correct the measured energy. This is a calibration step, but the paper should state explicitly that the response function is assumed to be identical with and without BIB, and that any BIB-induced shift in the shower development (e.g., from added energy in the same cells) is not corrected by this procedure.
  4. [Sec. VI, 'A dedicated feasibility study is required for the solenoid'] Since the 5T solenoid with 150 cm inner radius is a central element of the design and the paper states that its feasibility has not been demonstrated, it would be helpful to include this assumption in the abstract or conclusions, so that readers do not mistake the simulated magnet for an existing or promptly feasible component.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: MAIA performance is obtained by direct simulation and calibration, with acknowledged background-model limitations but no fitted prediction or self-citation chain that forces the central result.

full rationale

The paper's central results are simulation outputs, not derived quantities: reconstruction efficiencies and resolutions are measured on Geant4/FLUKA samples (single-particle guns with and without BIB overlay), with fully stated reconstruction, matching, and cleaning criteria in Sections II and V. The BIB overlay procedure is computational, not a fit to the claimed efficiency. The photon energy response function (Figure 18a) is derived from no-BIB simulation and used to correct for solenoid material; applying this calibration to BIB-overlaid samples is a standard detector-calibration step, and the paper does not present it as an independent prediction. The nozzle and 3 TeV detector design are inherited from prior work (Refs. [16, 36, 37]) explicitly as baseline inputs, with the paper stating that nozzle optimization for 10 TeV is ongoing; this is a stated limitation, not a circular proof. The acknowledged omission of incoherent e+e- pair production (Sections III and VI) is an external-validity caveat about background completeness, not a case of a result reducing to its own inputs. Self-citations to the 3 TeV muon collider design are used for baseline comparison and geometry inheritance, not as the load-bearing justification of the 10 TeV performance claim. No equation equates a predicted quantity to a fitted parameter by construction. Accordingly, no circular step is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The design rests on a set of simulation and technology assumptions. The performance numbers are Monte Carlo outputs with hand-chosen thresholds and cleaning cuts, not first-principles derivations. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • ECAL variable cell thresholds = Vary by theta and layer (not tabulated)
    Thresholds are set from the simulated BIB energy distribution to reduce background by about 65 percent; they directly affect photon efficiency and energy resolution.
  • Track cleaning cuts = pT > 1 GeV, |d0| < 0.1 mm, nhits >= 5, chi2/ndof < 3
    Chosen to reject fake tracks from BIB; efficiencies after cleaning are quoted as the headline performance.
  • Photon energy response correction = Binned scale factors in reconstructed energy and theta
    Derived from no-BIB simulation and applied to BIB samples; impacts reported photon energy resolution.
  • PFO energy threshold = 20 GeV
    Rejects soft clusters contaminated by BIB; used in neutron efficiency and resolution studies.
  • Truth energy thresholds = 30 GeV (photons and neutrons)
    Applied to exclude low-energy mismatching; affects the denominator in efficiency calculations.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption FLUKA and Geant4 simulations correctly model BIB and detector response
    The performance numbers are entirely based on these simulations, with no test-beam or experimental validation in this paper.
  • domain assumption Muon-decay BIB is the only important background for the quoted efficiencies
    Incoherent pair production and beam halo are not simulated, as stated in Sections III and VI.
  • ad hoc to paper The 5T solenoid with 150 cm inner radius and the 25 um/30 ps tracker are feasible and can be built as simulated
    The paper calls for a dedicated feasibility study of the magnet (Section VI) and assumes advanced pixel timing without a demonstration.
  • ad hoc to paper The overlay algorithm's cloned BIB pseudo-events are statistically independent
    Claimed in Section II without proof; if false, efficiency uncertainties would be underestimated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MAIA: A new detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E5RARBBC

@misc{pith2026250200181,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MAIA: A new detector concept for a 10 TeV muon collider},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E5RARBBC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00181}
}
abstract

Muon colliders offer a compelling opportunity to explore the TeV scale and conduct precision tests of the Standard Model, all within a relatively compact geographical footprint. This paper introduces a new detector concept, MAIA (Muon Accelerator Instrumented Apparatus), optimized for $\sqrt{s}=10$ TeV $\mu^+ \mu^-$ collisions. The detector features an all-silicon tracker immersed in a 5T solenoid field. High-granularity silicon-tungsten and iron-scintillator calorimeters surrounding the solenoid capture high-energy electronic and hadronic showers, respectively, and support particle-flow reconstruction. The outermost subsystem comprises an air-gap muon spectrometer, which contributes to muon identification. The performance of the MAIA detector is evaluated in terms of differential particle reconstruction efficiencies and resolutions. Beam-induced background and incoherent pair production simulations are overlaid to single particle gun samples to assess detector reconstruction capabilities under realistic experimental conditions. Even in the presence of backgrounds, reconstruction efficiencies exceed approximately 95\% for energetic tracks, photons, and charged pions in the central region of the detector. This paper outlines promising avenues for future work, including forward region optimization, opportunities for enhanced flavor tagging and boosted object reconstruction, and technological developments needed to achieve the desired detector performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00181 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Starting from that optimized nozzle version, BIB samples for the 10 TeV collider [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Various spectra of BIB particles as generated by FLUKA are presented. All [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of a simulated BIB event in the MAIA detector with a cutaway of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (21 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the MAIA detector layout, including a closeup of the silicon tracker [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: BIB hits are not uniformly distributed on each tracker plane. Figure 6 illustrates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Hit density in highest average occupancy layers the Vertex detector barrel (left) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Average energy density of simulated BIB hits for each ECAL barrel layer. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Composition of the average BIB hit energy spectrum in selected ECAL regions, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mode of ECAL cell energy as a function of theta and calorimeter layer. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Track parameter distributions with BIB overlaid comparing truth-matched tracks [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Track reconstruction efficiency as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Track reconstruction efficiency in the barrel region as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Track reconstruction efficiency in the endcap region as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Track pT resolution as a function of θ comparing four pT ranges of 0-50 GeV, 50-250 GeV, 250-1000 GeV, and 1-5 TeV. 0 50 100 150 [°] 10 3 10 2 10 1 ( d0 ) [ m m ] Muon Collider Simulation, no BIB Lattice v04 p s = 10 TeV MAIA Detector Concept pT = 0-50 GeV pT = 50-250…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Track d0 resolution as a function of θ comparing four pT ranges of 0-50 GeV, 50-250 GeV, 250-1000 GeV, and 1-5 TeV. was arbitrarily chosen to be sufficiently high its impact was not discernible. In the case of samples with BIB overlay, this minimum threshold is supers…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: As simulated in GEANT4, detector hits from the shower of a photon with an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Photon reconstruction efficiency with BIB overlay. True photons are matched to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: (a) Measured simulated energy response in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Photon energy resolution of reconstructed photons vs true photon energy, split [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: As simulated in GEANT4, detector hits from the shower of a neutron with an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Neutron reconstruction efficiency vs Etrue. These plots are split into the barrel region of the detector as well as the inclusive region which includes the barrel, endcap, and transition regions. 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Neutron reconstruction efficiency vs θtrue. These plot sare split into two batches with Etrue ≥ 250 and Etrue < 250. regions, the samples with the BIB overlay have greater efficiencies than those without BIB. This suggests BIB contamination in the PFOs from this regio…
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Reconstructed neutron energy resolution over true neutron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Reconstructed neutron energy resolution as a function of true neutron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_24.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Neutrino Fluxes at a Muon Collider

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The neutrino flux around a 10 TeV muon collider is about 120 times higher than earlier estimates, with non-negligible additional sources from showers, rock interactions, and collisions.

  2. The muon collider: expected physics, technological solutions, and the prospect of a 21 km ring at the UNK site

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A muon collider in the existing 21 km UNK tunnel could reach 10–13 TeV with conventional magnets and 13–21 TeV with HTS dipoles, around or above the IMCC 10 TeV reference.

  3. Particle Identification at Future Colliders

    hep-ex 2026-08 unverdicted

    A survey of charged-hadron identification concepts for future colliders, summarizing published R&D on Cherenkov imaging, cluster counting, and fast silicon timing, with no new results.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Discovery of a Narrow Resonance in e+e− Annihilation

    SLAC-SP-017 Collaboration, “Discovery of a Narrow Resonance in e+e− Annihilation”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33 (1974) 1406–1408, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.33.1406

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.33.1406 1974

  2. [2]

    Experimental Observation of a Heavy Particle J

    E598 Collaboration, “Experimental Observation of a Heavy Particle J”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33 (1974) 1404–1406, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.33.1404

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.33.1404 1974

  3. [3]

    Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012), no. 1, 1 – 29, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020. 37

    doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020 2012

  4. [4]

    Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30–61, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021, arXiv:1207.7235

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    On the feasibility of future colliders: report of the Snowmass’21 Implementation Task Force

    T. Roser et al., “On the feasibility of future colliders: report of the Snowmass’21 Implementation Task Force”, Journal of Instrumentation 18 (May, 2023) P05018, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/18/05/p05018

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/18/05/p05018 2023

  6. [6]

    Muon Collider Physics Summary

    C. Aim` e et al., “Muon Collider Physics Summary”, 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.07256

    arXiv 2022

  7. [8]

    Muon Colliders

    J. P. Delahaye et al., “Muon Colliders”, 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.06150

    arXiv 2019

  8. [9]

    Muon colliders to expand frontiers of particle physics

    K. Long et al., “Muon colliders to expand frontiers of particle physics”, Nature Phys. 17 (2021), no. 3, 289–292, doi:10.1038/s41567-020-01130-x, arXiv:2007.15684

    arXiv 2021

Show all 54 references
  1. [10]

    A Staged Muon Accelerator Facility For Neutrino and Collider Physics

    J.-P. Delahaye et al., “A Staged Muon Accelerator Facility For Neutrino and Collider Physics”, 2015. https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.01647

    2015 arXiv

  2. [11]

    Detector Performances Studies at Muon Collider

    D. Lucchesi et al., “Detector Performances Studies at Muon Collider”, PoS EPS-HEP2019 (2020) 118, doi:10.22323/1.364.0118

    2020 doi

  3. [12]

    Status of muon collider research and development and future plans

    C. M. Ankenbrandt et al., “Status of muon collider research and development and future plans”, Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams2 (1999) 081001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.2.081001, arXiv:physics/9901022

    1999 arXiv

  4. [13]

    The future prospects of muon colliders and neutrino factories

    M. Boscolo, J.-P. Delahaye, and M. Palmer, “The future prospects of muon colliders and neutrino factories”, Rev. Accel. Sci. Tech.10 (2019), no. 01, 189–214, doi:10.1142/9789811209604 0010, arXiv:1808.01858

    2019 arXiv

  5. [14]

    Muon Sources for Particle Physics - Accomplishments of MAP

    D. Neuffer et al., “Muon Sources for Particle Physics - Accomplishments of MAP”, in Proc. of International Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC’17), Copenhagen, Denmark, 14-19 May, 2017, number 8 in International Particle Accelerator Conference, pp. 1766–1769. JACoW, Geneva, ...

    2017 doi

  6. [15]

    Full Detector Simulation with Unprecedented Background Occupancy at a Muon Collider

    N. Bartosik et al., “Full Detector Simulation with Unprecedented Background Occupancy at a Muon Collider”, Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 5 (2021), no. 1, 21, 38 doi:10.1007/s41781-021-00067-x

    2021 doi

  7. [16]

    Towards a muon collider

    C. Accettura et al., “Towards a muon collider”, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023), no. 9, 864, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11889-x, arXiv:2303.08533. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 84, 36 (2024)]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [17]

    The Key4hep turnkey software stack for future colliders

    P. Fernandez Declara et al., “The Key4hep turnkey software stack for future colliders”, PoS EPS-HEP2021 (2022) 844, doi:10.22323/1.398.0844

    2022 doi

  9. [18]

    The Key4hep software stack: Beyond Future Higgs factories

    Key4hep Collaboration, A. Sailer et al., “The Key4hep software stack: Beyond Future Higgs factories”, in 21th International Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research: AI meets Reality. 12, 2023. arXiv:2312.08151

    2023 arXiv

  10. [19]

    DD4hep: A Detector Description Toolkit for High Energy Physics Experiments

    M. Frank, F. Gaede, C. Grefe, and P. Mato, “DD4hep: A Detector Description Toolkit for High Energy Physics Experiments”, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 513 (Oct, 2013) 022010, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/513/2/022010

    2013 doi

  11. [20]

    GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit

    S. Agostinelli et al., “GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit”, Nucl. Inst. & Meth. A506 (2003) 250–303, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    2003 doi

  12. [21]

    Detector Simulations with DD4hep

    M. Petric et al., “Detector Simulations with DD4hep”, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 898 (2016), no. 4, 042015, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/898/4/042015

    2016 doi

  13. [22]

    LCIO: A Persistency framework for linear collider simulation studies

    F. Gaede, T. Behnke, N. Graf, and T. Johnson, “LCIO: A Persistency framework for linear collider simulation studies”, eConf C0303241 (2003) TUKT001, doi:10.48550/arXiv.physics/0306114, arXiv:physics/0306114

    2003 doi arXiv

  14. [23]

    EDM4hep and podio - The event data model of the Key4hep project and its implementation

    F. Gaede et al., “EDM4hep and podio - The event data model of the Key4hep project and its implementation”, EPJ Web Conf. 251 (2021) 03026, doi:10.1051/epjconf/202125103026

    2021

  15. [24]

    ILC Soft

    “ILC Soft”. https://github.com/iLCSoft

  16. [25]

    Marlin and LCCD: Software tools for the ILC

    F. Gaede, “Marlin and LCCD: Software tools for the ILC”, Nucl. Inst. & Meth. A559 (2006) 177–180, doi:10.1016/j.nima.2005.11.138

    2006 doi

  17. [26]

    Application of Kalman filtering to track and vertex fitting

    R. Fruhwirth, “Application of Kalman filtering to track and vertex fitting”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 262 (1987) 444–450, doi:10.1016/0168-9002(87)90887-4

    1987 doi

  18. [27]

    Track Fitting With Multiple Scattering: A New Method

    P. Billoir, “Track Fitting With Multiple Scattering: A New Method”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 225 (1984) 352–366, doi:10.1016/0167-5087(84)90274-6

    1984 doi

  19. [28]

    Further test for the simultaneous pattern recognition and track fitting by the Kalman filtering method

    P. Billoir and S. Qian, “Further test for the simultaneous pattern recognition and track fitting by the Kalman filtering method”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 295 (1990) 492–500, doi:10.1016/0168-9002(90)90731-K. 39

    1990 doi

  20. [29]

    A Common Tracking Software Project

    X. Ai et al., “A Common Tracking Software Project”, Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 6 (2022), no. 1, 8, doi:10.1007/s41781-021-00078-8, arXiv:2106.13593

    2022 arXiv

  21. [30]

    Overview of the FLUKA code

    G. Battistoni et al., “Overview of the FLUKA code”, Annals of Nuclear Energy 82 (2015) 10–18, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.11.007. Joint International Conference on Supercomputing in Nuclear Applications and Monte Carlo 2013, SNA + MC 2013. Pluri- and Trans-disci...

    2015 doi

  22. [31]

    New Capabilities of the FLUKA Multi-Purpose Code

    C. Ahdida et al., “New Capabilities of the FLUKA Multi-Purpose Code”, Frontiers in Physics 9 (2022) doi:10.3389/fphy.2021.788253

    2022

  23. [32]

    Status of the background and forward muon studies for the 10 TeV collider

    D. Calzolari, “Status of the background and forward muon studies for the 10 TeV collider”,

  24. [33]

    The e+e− pair production at µ+µ− collider

    I. F. Ginzburg, “The e+e− pair production at µ+µ− collider”, 1996

    1996

  25. [34]

    Beam-Beam Simulations with GUINEA-PIG

    D. Schulte, “Beam-Beam Simulations with GUINEA-PIG”, 1998. https://cds.cern.ch/record/382453

    1998

  26. [35]

    10 TeV Center of Mass Energy Muon Collider

    K. Skoufaris, C. Carli, and D. Schulte, “10 TeV Center of Mass Energy Muon Collider”, in Proc. IPAC’22, number 13 in International Particle Accelerator Conference, pp. 515–518. JACoW Publishing, Geneva, Switzerland, 7, 2022. doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2022-MOPOTK031

    2022 doi

  27. [36]

    Muon Collider interaction region and machine-detector interface design

    N. V. Mokhov et al., “Muon Collider interaction region and machine-detector interface design”, 2012

    2012

  28. [37]

    Monte Carlo Driven MDI Optimization at a Muon Collider

    C. Curatolo et al., “Monte Carlo Driven MDI Optimization at a Muon Collider”, in Proc. IPAC’21, pp. 3769–3772. JACoW Publishing, Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2021-THPAB011

    2021 doi

  29. [38]

    SISSA: Machine-detector interface studies for a multi-TeV muon collider

    D. Calzolari and K. Skoufaris, “SISSA: Machine-detector interface studies for a multi-TeV muon collider”, PoS (2022) 063

    2022

  30. [39]

    JACOW: Lattice and detector studies for the MDI of a 10 TeV muon collider

    D. Calzolari et al., “JACOW: Lattice and detector studies for the MDI of a 10 TeV muon collider”, JACoW IPAC 2023 (2023) MOPA090

    2023

  31. [40]

    A High-Granularity Timing Detector for the ATLAS Phase-II Upgrade: Technical Design Report

    ATLAS Collaboration, “A High-Granularity Timing Detector for the ATLAS Phase-II Upgrade: Technical Design Report”,

  32. [41]

    A MIP Timing Detector for the CMS Phase-2 Upgrade

    CMS Collaboration, “A MIP Timing Detector for the CMS Phase-2 Upgrade”,

  33. [42]

    Promising Technologies and R&D Directions for the Future Muon Collider Detectors

    Muon Collider Collaboration, “Promising Technologies and R&D Directions for the Future Muon Collider Detectors”, arXiv:2203.07224. 40

    arXiv

  34. [43]

    The Compact Linear e +e− Collider (CLIC): Accelerator and Detector

    A. Robson et al., “The Compact Linear e +e− Collider (CLIC): Accelerator and Detector”,

  35. [44]

    The Phase-2 Upgrade of the CMS Endcap Calorimeter

    CMS Collaboration, “The Phase-2 Upgrade of the CMS Endcap Calorimeter”, technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2017. doi:10.17181/CERN.IV8M.1JY2

    2017 doi

  36. [45]

    ATLAS tile calorimeter: Technical design report

    ATLAS Collaboration, “ATLAS tile calorimeter: Technical design report”, technical report, CERN, 12, 1996

    1996

  37. [46]

    The Pandora Software Development Kit for Particle Flow Calorimetry

    J. S. Marshall and M. A. Thomson, “The Pandora Software Development Kit for Particle Flow Calorimetry”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series396 (dec, 2012) 022034, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/396/2/022034

    2012 doi

  38. [47]

    CaloGAN : Simulating 3D high energy particle showers in multilayer electromagnetic calorimeters with generative adversarial networks

    M. Paganini, L. de Oliveira, and B. Nachman, “CaloGAN : Simulating 3D high energy particle showers in multilayer electromagnetic calorimeters with generative adversarial networks”, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018), no. 1, 014021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.014021, arXiv:1712.10321

    2018 arXiv

  39. [48]

    Design and optimization of a hadronic calorimeter based on micropattern gaseous detectors for a future experiment at the Muon Collider

    A. Pellecchia et al., “Design and optimization of a hadronic calorimeter based on micropattern gaseous detectors for a future experiment at the Muon Collider”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1068 (2024) 169793, doi:10.1016/j.nima.2024.169793, arXiv:2407.10261

    2024

  40. [49]

    The open science grid

    R. Pordes et al., “The open science grid”, in J. Phys. Conf. Ser., volume 78 of 78, p. 012057. 2007. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/78/1/012057

    2007 doi

  41. [50]

    The pilot way to grid resources using glideinWMS

    I. Sfiligoi et al., “The pilot way to grid resources using glideinWMS”, in 2009 WRI World Congress on Computer Science and Information Engineering, volume 2 of 2, pp. 428–432

    2009

  42. [51]

    doi:10.21231/906P-4D78, https://osg-htc.org/services/open_science_pool.html

    OSG, “OSPool”, 2006. doi:10.21231/906P-4D78, https://osg-htc.org/services/open_science_pool.html

    2006 doi

  43. [52]

    Open Science Data Federation

    OSG, “Open Science Data Federation”, 2015. doi:10.21231/0KVZ-VE57, https://osdf.osg-htc.org/. 41

    2015 doi

  44. [2009]

    doi:10.1109/CSIE.2009.950

    2009 doi

  45. [2018]

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.07987

    arXiv

  46. [2023]

    https://indico.cern.ch/event/1250075/contributions/5342843/

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.