|
|||
Why isn't the paper publication rate at 10 per year per PI?
Each physics topic requires a large data size. This means we spend nearly one year or more to collect the data for the analysis. Since the data is collected over a long period of time, we have also to spend enormous time for the quality control. Thus, it is nominal for spending 2-3 years per each physics topic. Yes, this is how each graduate student is trained in our field.
 |
For example, I and my colleagues
carried out "Search for Rare Bs → μμ Decay" at CDF.
This experimental signature has been suggested as the best experimental signature to probe
cosmologically-motivated SUSY models in 2002.
In the Standard Model (SM), the branching ratio is 3-4 x 10-9, while
the SUSY models could enhance it by a factor of 10-1000.
We examined 100 trillion proton-antiproton collisions (collected between 2001 and 2007) and searched for di-muon events, setting limits of its decay rate at 5.8 x 10-8, an order of magnitude larger than the SM prediction. This is the world's best limits (published in PRL 100 (2008) 101802), constraining the predictions from SUSY and other theories, thus narrowing the region of searches for new physics. In the future, we will be better able to probe cosmology as the Tevatron produces even more proton-antiproton collisions. |
We have about 100 analysis topics for 700 collaborators. You can naturally understand this, because each analysis topic is carried out by about 7 people (faculty, postdocs and graduate students). Then 50 (33) papers/year for spending 2 (3) years each analysis.
We have about 60 universities in CDF. Thus one CDF paper/year from each institution is on average.
How do you know I am one of principal authors?
 |
The authors are almost always listed in alphabetical order.
However, each paper is always written by much smaller number of people.
Those papers are indicated as the "principal-auther" papers in individual CVs.
See PRL 100 (2008) 101802, for example. The first author is T. Aaltonen. However, this paper was written by a group of 6 scientists - Douglas Glenzinski (Fermilab), Matthew Herndon (Univ. of Wisconsin), Teruki Kamon (Texas A&M Univ.), Vyacheslav Krutelyov (UC-Santa Barbara), Cheng-Ju S. Lin (Fermilab), Michael Weinberger (Texas A&M Univ.). How do you know that T. Kamon or others are one of the pricipal authors? |
In this case, you see it, because:
- T. Kamon was one of a few authors who proposed to carry out this analysis at the Tevatron in another paper.
- The authors gave talks. For example, Vyacheslav Krutelyov (former TAMU grad. student) and Michael Weinberger (TAMU post-doc) gave talks [VK talk, MW talk] at "BEACH 2004" and "Lattice QCD Meets Experiment Workshop 2007," respectively.
- T. Kamon was the thesis advisor for Vyacheslav Krutelyov (former TAMU grad. student) [VK's thesis] who received First Prize for his research presentation in Perspective Conference at Fermilab in June 9, 2004.
- The analysis was featured at web 1 and 2.
And if the thesis is recognized with a award, this is a BIG plus! (e.g., D. Toback's student, P. Wagner's URA thesis award)