Workshop On Frontiers In High Energy Physics 2019

This book presents the proceedings of The International Workshop on Frontiers in High Energy Physics (FHEP 2019), held in Hyderabad, India. It highlights recent, exciting experimental findings from LHC, KEK, LIGO and several other facilities, and discusses new ideas for the unified treatment of cosmology and particle physics and in the light of new observations, which could pave the way for a better understanding of the universe we live in. As such, the book provides a platform to foster collaboration in order to provide insights into this important field of physics.

The Higgs boson discovery at the Large Hadron Collider in 2012 relied on boosted decision trees. Since then, high energy physics (HEP) has applied modern machine learning (ML) techniques to all stages of the data analysis pipeline, from raw data processing to statistical analysis. The unique requirements of HEP data analysis, the availability of high-quality simulators, the complexity of the data structures (which rarely are image-like), the control of uncertainties expected from scientific measurements, and the exabyte-scale datasets require the development of HEP-specific ML techniques. While these developments proceed at full speed along many paths, the nineteen reviews in this book offer a self-contained, pedagogical introduction to ML models' real-life applications in HEP, written by some of the foremost experts in their area.

Recent advancements in generation of intense X-ray laser ultrashort pulses open opportunities for particle acceleration in solid-state plasmas. Wakefield acceleration in crystals or carbon nanotubes shows promise of unmatched ultra-high accelerating gradients and possibility to shape the future of high energy physics colliders. This book summarizes the discussions of the 'Workshop on Beam Acceleration in Crystals and Nanostructures' (Fermilab, June 24-25 , 2019), presents next steps in theory and modeling and outlines major physics and technology challenges toward proof-of-principle demonstration experiments.

Frontiers in Physics – FPHY – is now in its eighth year. Up to last year, the journal received a slowly increasing trickle of manuscripts, and then during the summer… Boom! The number of manuscripts we receive started increasing exponentially. This is of course a signal to us who are associated with the journal that we are on the right track to build a first-rate journal spanning the entire field of physics. And it is not the only signal. We also see it in other indicators such as the number of views and downloads, Impact Factor and the Cite Score. Should we be surprised at this increase? If I were to describe FPHY in one word, it would be “innovation”. Attaching the names of the reviewers that have endorsed publication permanently to the published paper is certainly in this class. It ensures that the reviewers are accountable; furthermore, the level of transparency this implies ensures that any conflict of interest is detected at the very beginning of the process. The review process itself is innovative. After an initial review that proceeds traditionally, the reviewers and authors enter a back-and-forth dialog that irons out any misunderstanding. The reviewers retain their anonymity throughout the process. The entire review process and any question concerning editorial decisions is fully in the hands of active scientists. The Frontiers staff is not allowed to make any such decision. They oversee the process and make sure that the manuscript and the process leading to publication or rejection upholds the standard. FPHY is of course a gold open access journal. This is the only scientific publication model that is compatible with the information revolution. A journal’s prestige is traditionally associated with how difficult it is to publish there. Exclusivity as criterion for desirability, is a mechanism we know very well from the consumer market. However, is this criterion appropriate for scientific publishing? It is almost by definition not possible to predict the importance of a new idea – otherwise it would not have been new. So, why should journals make decisions on publishing based on predicting the possible importance of a given work. This can only be properly assessed after publication. Frontiers has removed “importance” from the list of criteria for publication. That the work is new, is another matter: the work must be new and scientifically correct. It would seem that removing the criterion of “importance” would be a risky one, but it turns out not to be. The Specialty Chief Editors who lead the 18 sections that constitute FPHY, have made this selection of papers published in FPHY in 2019. We have chosen the papers that we have found most striking. Even though this is far from a random selection, they do give a good idea of what PFHY is about. Enjoy! We certainly did while making this selection. Professor Alex Hansen (Field Chief Editor)

This volume contains topical papers covering the various aspects of instrumentation in high energy physics. The subjects of the contributions, all previously unpublished, have been chosen to provide an overview of the fundamental processes and of the technological problems encountered in detecting, tracking and identifying charged and neutral particles in modern particle physics experiments.Each contribution offers a concise but complete description of the state-of-the-art regarding the subject, and is addressed to post-doctoral and research staff readers; it will also be found useful as a teaching aid for students and participants in specialized schools and workshops on intermediate and high energy experimental physics.