Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 1

• Summary- FP7 & FP6- Design Study submitted in FP6- A Design Study for FP7- Next steps

Raffaele Flaminio

EGO and CNRS/LAPP

FP7 & a Design Study for a3rd generation interferometer

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 2

Framework Programs (FP)• FP’s: multi-year EU programs for funding research and development- started since 1984- goal: develop an European Research Area (ERA)

• FP’s organized around an ensemble of general tools and a few priority themesEx. Marie-Curie fellowships

• Current program: FP6 (2002-2006)

• FP6 budget: 17833 Meuros - Structuring the European Research Area: 2854 Meuros

- Research Infrastructures 715 Meuros

• Under the Research Infrastructure budget is funded ILIAS (including the GWA network and the STREGA joint research activity)

• Under Research Infrastructure are funded Design Studies for new infrastructures:- KM3 underwater neutrino telescope (funded)- European Advanced Gravitational Observatory, EGO (not funded)

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 3

Next Program: FP7• Next Framework Program: FP7 (2007-2013)• Proposed total budget: 72726 Meuros

COOPERATION

Themes (Using all funding schemes. Including international cooperation.)Health 8317Food, Agriculture and Biotechnology 2455

Information and Communication Technologies 12670Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Production Technologies

4832

Energy 2931Environment (including Climate Change) 2535Transport (including Aeronautics) 5940Socio-economic Sciences and the Humanities 792Security and Space 3960

Total COOPERATION 44432IDEAS European Research Council 11862PEOPLE Marie Curie Actions 7129

CAPACITIES

Research Infrastructures 3961Research for the benefit of SMEs 1901Regions of Knowledge 158Research Potential 554Science in Society 554Activities of International Co-operation 358

TOTAL CAPACITIES 7486Non-nuclear actions of the Joint Research Centre 1817TOTAL EC 72726 

Euratom for nuclear research and training activities 3092

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 4

Research Infrastructures in FP7 …. optimise the use and development of the best research infrastructures existing in Europe ……. help to create in all fields of science and technology new research infrastructures of pan-European interest ….…. infrastructures necessary for the European scientific community to remain at the forefront of the advancement of research ….

The FP7 proposal intends the EU to play a catalysing and leveraging role through:• Support to existing research infrastructures: - trans-national access - integrating activities;- research e-infrastructure• Support to new research infrastructures, - construction of new infrastructures and major updates of existing ones - design studies to promote the creation of new research infrastructures by funding exploratory awards and feasibility studies.

Intention of the European GW community to submit a proposal for the design study of a third generation interferometer

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 5

Last design study proposal (FP6)• European Gravitational waves advanced Observatory design (EGO)

• Proponents: all the GW experimental groups Virgo, GEO, Auriga, ROG, MiniGrail, …

• Broadband Gravitational Wave Observatory (frequency range from about 1 Hz to 10 kHz)

• An hybrid observatory hosting several type of detectors: interferometer and resonant (dual and/or sphere)

• Sensitivity 100 times better than first generation detectors

1 10 100 1000 1000010-25

10-24

10-23

10-22

10-21

10-20

10-19

10-18

10-17

10-16

adv. LIGO adv. Virgo LCGT

h(f)

[1/s

qrt(

Hz)

]

Frequency [Hz]

EGO ( ITF, Dual) Virgo LIGO GEO600 Tama

from M. Punturo

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 6

EU evaluation (I)• The evaluation was positive:

European added value (Threshold 3/5; Weight 1) 4.1 S&T excellence (Threshold 3/5; Weight 1) 4.4 Relevance to the objectives of the scheme (Threshold 3/5; Weight 1) 4.0 Quality of the management (Threshold 3/5; Weight1) 4.0 Overall remarks (Threshold 3.5/5) 4.1

• But not sufficient ….

“Further to my letter of 28 May 2004, I would like to inform you that the Commission has decided on 4 August 2004 that no financial contribution could be made available to your proposal ….This decision was motivated by the fact that your proposal was ranked too low on the priority list to allow it to be funded, given the limits of the budgetary resources available”

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 7

EU evaluation (II)“the fact that the design study is proposed by a single consortium that results form the merging of all these teams is a very promising step forward”

“not clear that this proposal identifies and focuses on an optimized scientific and technical strategy: the design study bifurcates into two parallel R&D efforts, one with interferometers, and the other in large bar-type or spherical resonant masses …”

“The primary goal of the proposal i.e. to achieve broadband extreme sensitivity (1Hz to 10 kHz), might be questioned: one might consider that the frequency response of the instrument should be chosen on the basis of the characteristic of the potential sources.”

“One should be careful however that the program be driven by the science rather than by technology”

“some points in the proposal remain unclear, e.g. …, why three distinctive cryogenic test laboratories are really required.”

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 8

What to do for FP7?• Discussion at the last meeting of the executive board of the GWA networkPerugia, September 30th, 2005M.Cerdonio, K.Danzmann, V.Fafone, R.Flaminio, J.Hough, G.Losurdo, H.Lueck, F.Menzinger, B.Mours, M.Punturo, G.A.Prodi, B.S.Sathyaprakash, S.Rowan, B.Willke

• Agreement to propose a design study of a 3rd generation laser interferometer

• Goal: sensitivity 100 times better than 1st generation interferometers

• The bar community will participate but spheres and duals will not be studied in FP7 (comes to late anyway), will be assumed as existent

• Some of this changed last week: e-mail from M. Cerdonio

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 9

What to do for FP7?• Possible contents of a design study for a third generation interferometer - Reduction of thermal noise required:

cryogenics, better materials (silicon), better coatings, … coating less optics?- Reduction of shot noise required:

kW lasers, MWatts stored in the interferometerreduce losses in optics, thermal compensation

radiation pressure becomes a real problemheavier mirrors (100 kg?)

need for squeezing and QND measurements- Fight against Newtonian noise and environmental noise:

underground detector- Push seismic wall below 1 Hz:

better seismic isolation, longer pendulums (100 m?)- Longer arms (10 km?)- Triangular shape (LISA like)- …..

• But very important to start from potential GW sources (science driven proposal)

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 10

What to do for FP7?Other suggestions/decisions made in Perugia

• Need before proposal information on angular resolution with single site for low-frequency sources due to orbit and rotation of earth

• Pass to WG2 as action item

• Need before proposal estimate of Newtonian noise deep underground

• Suggest that WG3 takes coordination of proposal

• Present plans at FP7 preparation meeting in Munich with speakers Danzmann (Present status of the field), Losurdo (Infrastructures) and Cagnoli (R&D and Future)

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 11

What’s next ?• 2005- The Commission published its official proposals for the Seventh Framework Programme for EU research on 6 April 2005. This is then to be treated by the Co-decision process of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. - The negotiations on the EU's financial perspectives for the next seven years, 2007 - 2013, will be pursued in 2005. Building on the guidelines agreed by the European Council in December 2004, work will continue with the aim of reaching political • 2006- Final administrative stages in the co-decision process for adoption of FP7. - End of FP6.- FP7 is to be launched at the end of 2006.• 2007 - Calls for proposals under FP7- First FP7 projects to be launched

But remember FP6: started in 2002 ….. and first call for Design Study proposals was in 2004

We are not in an hurry …. but we should be prepared

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 12

ApPEC/ILIAS coordination• Attempt to organize coordinated actions in the field of astroparticle for FP7

• Preliminary meeting in Munich last spring (GW community represented by G.Cagnoli)

• Next meeting: Munich, November 23rd - 25th, 2005

• All the fields of Astroparticle physics will be represented

• Request of three talks about GW- Status of present projects (K.Danzmann)- R&D projects (G.Cagnoli)- Needs for a future infrastructure (G.Losurdo)

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 13

Munich meeting: agendaDate Time Title Speaker

9:00am Welcome TBA

9:15am Introduction ("ILIAS") Bijan Saghai (CEA, Saclay)

9:40am Introduction ("HEAPNet") Tiina Suomijarvi (IPN, Orsay)

10:05am ApPEC TBA

10:35am Cosmology and Grvitational waves (Theory) B.S. Sathyaprakash (Cardiff University)

11:00am Coffee Break

11:30am Gravitational waves (Experimental Status & projects) Karsten Danzmann (MPI-AEI Hannover)

12:00pm Noise reduction in Gravitational waves detectors (R&D) Geppo Cagnoli (University of Glasgow)

12:30pm Gravitational waves detection (Infrastructures) Giovanni Losurdo (INFN Florence)

1:00pm LUNCH

2:30pm Cosmic rays and high energy neutrinos (Theory) Subir Sarkar (University of Oxford)

3:00pm Cosmic ray observation (Experimental status and projects)Gianni Navarra* (INFN Torino)

3:45pm Observation of high energy neutrinos (Experimental status & projects) John Carr (CPPM, Marseille)

4:30pm Coffee Break

5:00pm Photodetectors (R&D) Masahiro Teshima (MPI Munich)

5:25pm Radio detection (R&D) Ad van Den Berg (KVI, Groningen)

5:50pm Acoustic detection (R&D) Lee Thompson (University of Sheffield)

6:15pm Atmospheric monitoring (R&D) Jan Ridky (IOP Prague)

6:45pm Discussion

7:00pm Adjourn

Wed

nesd

ay,

Nov

. 23

rd

European Astroparticle Physics Town-Meeting, Nov. 23rd-25th, 2005, Munich

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 14

Munich meting: agenda9:00am Underground labs (Infrastructures) TBA

9:30am Low background techniques (R&D) TBA

10:00am Double β deacy and Low energy neutrinos (Theory) Amand Faessler (Universitaet Tuebingen)

10:30am Double beta decay (Experimental Status & projects) Andrea Giuliani (INFN Milan)

11:00am Coffee Break

11:30am Direct Neutrino Mass Measurement (Experimental Status & projects) Christian Weinheimer (University of Muenster)

12:00pm Neutrino detectors (R&D) TBA

12:30pm Dark matter (Theory) Carlos Munoz (Universidad Autonoma de Madrid)

1:00pm LUNCH

2:30pm Dark matter (Experimental Status & projects) Hans Kraus (University of Oxford)

3:00pm Bolometers (R&D) Jules Gascon (IPN-Lyon)

3:30pm Noble gas detectors for DM (R&D) Vitaly Kundryavtsev (Univ. of Sheffield)

4:00pm Large volume detectors (proton decay...) (R&D) Andre Rubbia (ETH, Zurich)

4:30pm Coffee Break

5:00pm ASTRONET TBA

5:30pm RADIONET TBA

6:00pm OPTICON TBA

6:30pm Discussion

7:00pm Adjourn

Thu

rsda

y, N

ov.

24th

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 15

Munich meeting: agenda

9:00am Gamma observation on the ground (experimental status and projects) Manel Martinez (IFAE Barcelona)

09:45am Space observations (experimental status and projects)

10:35am Space detectors (R&D) Alessandro Petrolini (INFN Genova)

11:00 Coffee Break

11:30am FP7, ESFRI… TBA

12:00pm Astroparticle Physics Roadmap Christian Spiering (DESY)

1:00pm Lunch

02:30pm Access to observatories Aldo Morselli (INFN Roma 2)

3:00pm Discussion on public data

3:30pm Discussion on FP7 proposals

4:30pm Coffee Break

5:00pm Adjourn

Frid

ay,

Nov

. 25

th

Palma de Mallorca, October 24th, 2005 16

FP7 preparation meeting

Agenda explanation from B. Saghai

“The "Experimental status & projects" is expected to give an overview of the field and introduce very briefly the future plans.”

“Those plans are supposed to be presented under the "R&D" topic with the relevant number of speakers.”

“Finally, in "Infrastructures" talk, we expect to learn about the present status of different infrastructures (strong and weak points) and especially to learn about future (say within 10 years scale) improvements or constructions.”