4.7 Review

From the LHC to future colliders

Journal

EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL C
Volume 66, Issue 3-4, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1244-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CERN TH unit
  2. 'MassTeV' ERC [226371]
  3. European Community [MRTN-CT-2006-035505, MRTN-CT-2006-035657]
  4. DOE [DE-FGO2-96-ER40956]
  5. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-76SF00515]
  6. Science and Technology Facilities Council, UK
  7. STFC [John Adams Institute, ST/H001026/2, ST/G008531/1, ST/H001026/1, ST/G000581/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/G000581/1, John Adams Institute, ST/H001026/2, ST/H001026/1, ST/G008531/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Discoveries at the LHC will soon set the physics agenda for future colliders. This report of a CERN Theory Institute includes the summaries of Working Groups that reviewed the physics goals and prospects of LHC running with 10 to 300 fb(-1) of integrated luminosity, of the proposed sLHC luminosity upgrade, of the ILC, of CLIC, of the LHeC and of a muon collider. The four Working Groups considered possible scenarios for the first 10 fb(-1) of data at the LHC in which (i) a state with properties that are compatible with a Higgs boson is discovered, (ii) no such state is discovered either because the Higgs properties are such that it is difficult to detect or because no Higgs boson exists, (iii) a missing-energy signal beyond the Standard Model is discovered as in some supersymmetric models, and (iv) some other exotic signature of new physics is discovered. In the contexts of these scenarios, the Working Groups reviewed the capabilities of the future colliders to study in more detail whatever new physics may be discovered by the LHC. Their reports provide the particle physics community with some tools for reviewing the scientific priorities for future colliders after the LHC produces its first harvest of new physics from multi-TeV collisions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available