. .. Observables,

. .. , 129 7.4.1 Irradiation fluence peak constraint

. .. , Conclusion on thin and irradiated sensors, p.145

. .. Active-edge-performance, , p.148

. .. , Conclusions on Active edges sensors, p.154

, Biasing structure and implant design

, Conclusions on the pixel

, Higgs potential for a 125 GeV higgs boson with a vacuum expectation value (vev) of v = 246 GeV

.. .. Gev,

]. .. , Higgs production channels considered at LHC, p.17

, Higgs cross section at 13 TeV proton-proton energy collision for various Higgs masses. (b) Higgs cross sections for a 125 GeV Higgs for different ? s

, Higgs branching ratios

]. .. , 22 2.2 LHC and High Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) timeline [31], p.23

, Right: Distribution of the mean number of interactions per bunch crossing vs luminosity for the 2015-2018 (up to the 12 th of june) pp collision data at ? s=13 TeV

]. .. , 25 2.5 Mass of the Higgs boson obtained by ATLAS experiment with the dataset collected in Run1 and Run2 on the two channels H ? ?? and H ? ZZ ? 4 leptons [36]

. .. , r and z dependency of the radial (Br) and axial (Bz) magnetic field components in the inner detector cavity, at fixed azimuth. (From [6]), p.27

, Inner Detector barrel section

]. .. ,

]. .. ,

. .. , Comparison of d 0 resolution with and without the IBL over the full ? range (a) and at low p T (0.4 GeV to 20 GeV)(b). From [60], p.34

. .. , Comparison of z 0 resolution with and without the IBL over the full ? range (a) and at low p T (0.4 GeV to 20 GeV)(b). From [60], p.34

, Illustration of merged cluster phenomenon. The different colors account for signals from the passage of different charged particles, p.36

, Comparison of track reconstruction efficiency for two track criteria over the full ? range (a) and p T range (b). From [60]

, Charge collection mechanism of an hybrid planar pixel sensor (left) and of a 3D pixel sensor (right)

, For the IBL like module, the thickness of the sensor is 200 µm and the pitch 250 µm × 50 µm; For the ITk-like module, the thickness of the sensor will be around 100 µm and the pitch will be either 50 µm × 50 µm or 25 µm × 100 µm, p.51

, Left) and with Active edge (Right). a is the size of the dead area and d represents the distance between the last pixel and the end of the lateral depletion, p.52

, Defect overview from, vol.83

, The +/? legend indicates if the defect is charged at room temperature. Contributions of the point defects are represented in blue and cluster contributions (extended defects) are represented in red, p.54

, Displacement damage in Silicon for different particles as a function of their energy [84]

]. .. , 57 4.1 Schematic diagram of the radiation damage digitizer physics processes (from [89]). A planar pixel sensor (either IBL planar or B-Layer, Layer1 or Layer 2 planar pixel sensor) bump-bonded to its electronics read-out chip is presented. A crossing MIP creates electron hole pairs along its paths which are moving according to various contributions including drift along the electric field lines, deflection by the Lorentz angle caused by the magnetic field, thermal diffusion and charge trapping implied by radiation damaged induced states in the silicon bulk. Eventually, the remaining induced charge is digitized by the electronics and converted into Time-over-Threshold (ToT), p.60

, For 3D sensor, the top plot is the electrical field before irradiation at 20 V and the bottom plot after receiving a fluence of 5 × 10 14 n eq /cm 2 at 40 V. For planar pixel sensors, 4 fluence configurations are investigated: unirradiated (black line)

. .. , A variation of the defect energy by ±0.4% is presented for a fluence of ? = 2 × 10 14 n eq /cm 2 . Plots a and b (respectively c and d) shows the evolution of the acceptor (donor) energy. The bias voltage is either 80 V (a and c) or 150 V (b and d), TCAD Electric field maps vs sensor bulk depth, p.65

, A variation of the electron and hole capture cross sections ? e,h by ± 10% is presented for a fluence of ? = 2 × 10 14 n eq /cm 2 . Plots a, b, c, and d (respectively e, f, g and h) show the evolution of the acceptor (donor) capture cross sections. The capture cross sections for electrons (respectively holes) are presented in Figure a, b, e and f (respectively c, d, g and h). The bias voltage is either 80 V (a, c, e and g) or 150 V (b, d, f and h), TCAD Electric field maps vs sensor bulk depth

, A variation of the acceptor/donor concentration by ± 10% is presented for a fluence of ? = 2 × 10 14 n eq /cm 2 . Plots a and b (respectively c and d) show the evolution of the acceptor(donor) concentrations. The bias voltage is either 80 V (a and c) or 150 V (b and d), TCAD Electric field maps vs sensor bulk depth

, Summary plot for radiation damage testbeam

, The red and blue curve are the collected charge respectively with/without unsmearing. The pink and green curve are the induced charge by trapped carriers respectively with/without unsmearing. The three plots are considering different numbers of sub-charges (chunks): the left plot shows results for 10 chunks, the middle one for 100 chunks and the right one for 1000 chunks

. .. T->20-gev, The evolution in cluster size in ?, effective angle for the IBL, bias voltage and fluence are plotted in the bottom plots. The following tracks selection criteria is considered, Distribution of the unbiased residuals RMS in the short pixel direction for the four ID pixel layers and the seven Run2 benchmarks considered

. .. T->20-gev, Distribution of the unbiased residuals RMS in the long pixel direction for the four ID pixel layers and the seven Run2 benchmarks considered. The evolution in bias voltage and fluence are plotted in the two bottom plots. The following tracks selection criteria is considered, p.83

, Tracks fake rate for the seven Run2 benchmarks considered. The evolution in bias voltage and fluence are reported in the two bottom plots, p.84

, HL-LHC planned instantaneous peak luminosity (red dots) and integrated luminosity (blue line) [108]

. .. , Fluence simulation in an ITk pixel section [107], p.90

, The red part represents the ITk pixel detector, the blue one represents the ITk strips detector

, Material budget comparison between Run2 in red and ITk layout in blue, vol.107, p.92

, ITk pixel layout simulation from, vol.107

, 2 (inclined barrel rings) and 3 (end-caps rings) and their symmetrics are the Inner pixel system, It is limited by the Inner Support Tube (IST), represented in magenta on the Figure. Part 4 and 5 form the Outer pixel barrel: L2 and L3 are on the same double sided longeron, whereas L4 is on a single sided longeron

, ITk Track efficiency and fake rate compare to Run2 for tt samples

, Comparison of c-jet and light-jet rejection vs b-jet efficiency between Run2 and ITk [107]

]. .. , Comparison of converted photons fractions between Run2 and ITk. Photon conversion identification efficiency for ITk [107

, HH branching ratios coupling

, Section of a pixel sensor, not to scale

. .. /fbk-productions, 104 sensor from the first production, the bias tab is only on one edge of the device. (b) SEM picture of a test trench structure. From [119]

, The black line at the top and on the right is the trench. The shortest distance from the pixels to the trench is 100 µm for all the three sensors. For LPNHE4 there is one GR surrounding the pixel matrix, Microscope picture of corners of the three bump-bonded sensors of the first production: LPNHE5 (left), p.106

, The innermost GR, if present, was kept at ground voltage. The shortest distance from the pixels to the trench is 100 µm. The measurement for the test structure with 2 GRs was taken at a lower temperature with respect to the other two samples, Current-Voltage curves for test structures featuring different number of GRs

, Wafer from the n ? on ? p planar technology production [121] whose layout was mainly based on ATLAS FE-I4 and CMS PSI46 [122] designs. The red rectangle encircles one pixel sensors compatible with the FE-I4 readout chip, p.107

, At the bottom left, part of the bias dot and metal bias line can be seen

, Left: horizontal direction; right: vertical direction. A gaussian fit is superimposed. The (0,0) position correspond to the nominal beam center, CERN IRRAD to irradiate the W80 module, vol.109

, Left plot) and second irradiation step (Right plot). The area reported corresponds to the surface of the pixel module

, Current-Voltage curves of W80 sensor after a fluence of 3 × 10 15 n eq /cm 2 (green markers) and after an cumulative fluence of 1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 (blue and yellow markers). The temperature is indicated in the legend, p.110

, Sensor power dissipation curves of W80 sensor after a fluence of 3×10 15 n eq /cm 2 (green markers) and after a fluence of 1.1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 (blue, yellow and red markers). The green, blue and yellow markers gives results obtained at ?40 ? C

, The Figure (a) presents a large view of one of the corner of M1.4 sensor. In Figure (b) the pixel to edge distances, the edge pitch and the segments dimensions are reported, p.112

, Pixel scheme of the third production

. .. , Current-Voltage curves of M1.4 before and after irradiation, p.114

, Sensor Power dissipation curve of M1.4 before and after irradiation, p.114

, Two wafer technologies are considered: SiSi (a and b) and SOI (a, c and d). The bias range goes from 0 to 200V and the current scale

. .. , ?4 A. The legend compiles the various wafer names, p.115

, ToT scheme with HitDiscCnfg discussion

. .. , Scheme of DESY beam production for testbeam, p.121

, On the abscissa is the pixel column index, on the ordinate axis is the pixel row index. (Left) the beam is focused on the center of the sensor; (right) the beam is focused on the edge, which allows to perform edge efficiency scan. The area where hits are seen is a 1 cm 2 rectangle and correspond to the area of the trigger scintillator

, Right: residual distribution in logarithmic scale of two pixels clusters, fitted with the sum of two Gaussians. Data were taken at CERN-SPS, hence the multiple scattering contribution is small ( 4µm). The threshold was 1400 electrons, the ToT tuning was 7 ToT corresponding to 1400 electrons and the sensor was biased at 40V

, The RMS of the residual is about 11.5 µm. Data were taken at CERN-SPS, hence the contribution from pointing resolution convoluted with the multiple scattering is small (?5µm). The threshold was 1400 electrons, the ToT tuning was 7 ToT corresponding to 1400 electrons and the sensor was biased at 40V

, Right: residual distribution for clusters of 1 pixel cell in Y direction fitted with a box function convoluted with a Gaussian. Data were taken at DESY, hence the multiple scattering contribution is important, p.127

, for various bias points, threshold configurations (1600 or 1400 electrons) and beam tests (CERN or DESY). Edge/Center identifies data taken when the beam was focused at the detector periphery/center. The uncertainties are dominated by the systematics from the reconstruction software, Global hit efficiency for the 2 sensors (LPNHE7 and LPNHE5)

, Hit map of W80. The Down and Up ROI are visible respectively in the left/right plots

, Average ToT profiles for the two ROI. The threshold, ToT tuning and bias voltage are indicated in the legend box

, 131 7.10 average ToT distribution vs fluence for three different bias voltages. The left/right plot is without/with fluence peak constraint. The horizontal/vertical bin label in the legend means that the fluence and average ToT have been extracted from an horizontal/vertical profile of the Down ROI, p.132

, Cluster ToT map (a) and ToT horizontal profiles for the reference DUT (unirradiated)

, ToT gain of 6ToT for 6000 electrons; (b) W80 irradiated at 3 × 10 15 n eq /cm 2 , threshold of 1200e, ToT gain of 6ToT for 6000 electrons; (c) W80 irradiated at 1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 , threshold of 1000e, ToT gain of 6ToT for 4000 electrons. The Mean true ToT value are reported below each plot, ToT distribution for thin sensors with 3 different irradiations and configurations: (a) W30 before irradiation, threshold of 1200e

, ToT distribution for thin un-irradiated sensor (blue) biased at 150 V and for thin irradiated at 3 × 10 15 n eq /cm 2 sensors biased at 600 V (red). The fit consists in a Landau convoluted with a Gaussian

. .. , Average ToT vs Fluence for two sets of tuning: Threshold = 1200 electrons, 6ToT at 6000 electrons (150V un-irradiated and 600V irradiated) and Threshold =1 000 electrons, 6ToT at 4000 electrons (600V), p.136

, ToT distribution (a) for W80 thin sensor irradiated at 1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 . Five bias voltages between 400 V and 600V were considered (black 400 V, blue 450 V, green 500 V, orange 550 V, red 600 V), the threshold was set to 850 electrons, vol.137

, Average ToT distribution vs fluence for 3 different bias voltages. The horizontal/vertical bin label in the legend means that the fluence and average ToT have been extracted from an horizontal/vertical profile of the region of interest, p.138

, The horizontal/vertical bin label in the legend means that the fluence and average ToT have been extracted from an horizontal/vertical profile of the region of interest (Down or Up), average ToT distribution vs fluence for 2 different threshold tunings

, Charge to ToT calibration curves for three sets of tuning and threshold. Curves in black, red and magenta are obtained for the same tuning values (threshold of 1000 electrons and ToT calibration of 6 ToT corresponding to 4000 electrons). Dashed lines represents a ± 500e uncertainty, p.139

, Collected charge vs Fluence for two sets of tuning: Threshold=1200e, 6ToT at 6ke (150V, un-irradiated and 600V, irradiated) and Threshold=1000e, 6ToT at 4ke, 600V

, 21 (a) CCE expected at the end of Run2 with current IBL sensors, compared to (b) charge collected efficiency obtained for 2 sets of fluence at the end of ITK lifetime for the second layer (red), and for the first layer (blue) at mid luminosity course, if production2-like sensors were considered. The lines are the result of a fit with Hecht formula, Charge collection efficiency extrapolation for two sets of tuning: Thresh-old=1200e, 6ToT at 6000e and Threshold=1000e, 6ToT at 4000e

, The red triangles are for sensor irradiated at an average fluence of 1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 and the blue ones at an average fluence of 3 × 10 15 n eq /cm 2 . Threshold and gain are indicated in the upper box

, The blue triangles are for sensor irradiated at 1 × 10 16 n eq /cm 2 and the red ones at 3 × 10 15 n eq /cm 2 . The black square represents data for a thin un irradiated sensor. Threshold and gain are indicated in the box

, Laboratory were the data were taken, device bias voltage and threshold are indicated too. The horizontal dashed line marks the 50%-point efficiency. The devices photograph on top helps in visualizing which physical area of the pixel is related to the efficiency profile, Edge efficiency profiles for LPNHE5, p.146

, Left: 0 GRs; right: 2 GRs. The simulated bias voltage value was 40 V

, Comparison of edge efficiency profile of LPNHE7 for several bias voltages, p.148

. .. , Comparison of edge efficiency profile before and after irradiation of one sensor of the third production (M1.4). Data were taken at DESY, p.149

, The two black dashed lines represents the 2 edge fences, the thin dark line at 20000 µm represents the virtual limit of the last pixel. (a) presents results for a threshold of 1000 electrons and a ToT gain of 8 ToT for 4000 e;(b) presents results for a threshold of 1200 electrons and a ToT gain of 6 ToT for 6000 e, M14 for three bias voltages (90 V, 100 V and 110 V)

, Two dimensional edge efficiency profile for M1.4 at 40 V after irradiation (data taken at CERN-SPS). The white rectangles correspond to trench segments, p.152

, Edge efficiency profiles intersecting respectively the first fence of edge (a) and the second one (b)

, Graphical representation of the simulated 3D structure. The visible part of the mesh grid is superimposed

, Simulation in 3D of the electric field in the edge area for 50V (un-irradiated sensor). The pink color correspond to a null electric field. One can notice that the electric field is 0 in the trench

, of the Holes concentration (b, d and f). The a, b/c, d/e, f plots represent respectively the electric field or hole concentration at a depth of 10/65/120 µm under the surface of the sensor. This simulation was obtained for a bias voltage of 50 V, p.155

, Numerical simulation of the electric field for different trenches in Y. The black curves intersects the innermost staggered trench whereas the red one intersects the outermost ring of trench. The left/right/bottom plots represents the electric field at a depth of 10/65/120 µm under the surface of the sensor, vol.156

, B-hadron decay, salient features. From [145]

, Inclined (b) layouts

, Comparison of the light mis-tag rate vs ? (a) and vs p T (b) for two layout options. The Mv2c20 tagger is here considered. At the bottom the ratio of inclined over extended is presented

, Comparison of the c-jet mis-tag rate vs ? (a) and vs p T (b) for two layout options. The Mv2c20 tagger is here considered. At the bottom the ratio of inclined over extended is presented

, Distribution of two-track vertices (n2t) for b-jets and light flavour jets, with (plain lines) and without (dashed lines) the cleaning step, p.168

, Comparison of the transverse distance between the secondary vertex and the primary vertex associated with/without material rejection and vertex cleaning, p.169

, Light mis-tag rate vs ? (a) and p T (b) with (red markers) and without (black markers) vertex cleaning and material rejection

, Comparison of the secondary vertex mass distribution (a,b), number of two tracks vertices (c,d), energy fraction (e,f), vs ? (a

, SiHitsCuts = 9 and p T Cuts = 900 MeV

, SiHitsCuts = 11 ; p T Cuts =

.. .. Mev,

, Comparison of number of two tracks vertices candidates (a)/ number of tracks per secondary vertex (b) for various tracking cuts scenari ( SiHitsCuts = 7 and p T Cuts = 700 MeV

, SiHitsCuts = 11 ; p T Cuts = 1100 MeV), SiHitsCuts = 9 and p T Cuts = 900 MeV

, Secondary vertex reconstruction rate for b-jets(a), c-jets (b) and light flavour jets (c)

, SiHitsCuts = 9 and p T Cuts = 900 MeV; SiHitsCuts = 11 ; p T Cuts = 1100 MeV. The top/bottom ratio plots represents respectively the ratio of the, vol.900

, Light mistag rate for various tracking cuts tested: SiHitsCuts = 7 and p T Cuts = 700 MeV

, SiHitsCuts = 9 and p T Cuts = 900 MeV

, SiHitsCuts = 11 and p T Cuts = 1100 MeV

, Silicon hits cuts (SiCuts, including the pixel hits and the SCT hits) have been investigated. The black/blue/red curves shows performance for the following couples of SiCuts and PtCuts: 7&700 , 9&900 and 11&1100, Light jet rejection vs b-jet efficiency. Various cuts on p T (PtCuts) and

, Light-flavour jet mis-tag rate vs jet p T for MV taggers for the intermediate ITK layout using Z' samples of masses ranging from 1 TeV to 5 TeV and tt samples. (b) presents a zoom on the p T region around 300 GeV, p.177

A. , Graphical representation of the simulated 3D structure. The visible part of the mesh grid is superimposed

, Graphical representation of the doping regions of the simulated 3D structure. The picture correspond to a region at depth Z=0.2 µm

B. , Efficacité de collection Charge pour les quatre couche du détecteur à pixel d'ATLAS, seul les modules centraux sont considérés. Les variations en termes de fluence et de tension de polarisation sont aussi indiquées, p.190

, Efficacité de collection de charge extrapolée pour deux configurations différentes. Chaque distribution a été extrapolée avec une fonction de Hecht, p.193

. .. , Efficacité en bordure du capteur pour LPNHE5 (pas de GRs -marqueurs pleins) et LPNHE7 (2 GRs -marqueurs ouverts), p.195

, Comparaison de l'efficacité de reconstruction en bordure du capteur avant et après irradiation

, Efficacité intra-pixellaire présentée à l'intérieur d'une demi cellule pour trois capteurs issus des trois productions testées. Trois fluences différentes ont été considérée. Un schéma du pixel est proposée dans la partie haute de la figure

, Taux de Light jets faussement étiqueté comme des jets de b en fonction de ? (a) and p T (b) avec (marqueurs rouges) et sans (marqueurs noirs) suppression de vertex secondaire correspondant à des couches du détecteur, p.199

, Taux de Light jets faussement étiqueté comme des jets de b en fonction de ? (a) and p T (b) pour plusieurs critères de sélection

, Taux de rejet des light jets en fonction de l'efficacité de reconstruction de b-jets

. Bibliography,

M. Aaboud, Observation of Higgs boson production in association with a top quark pair at the LHC with the ATLAS detector, 2018.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01817989

, Observation of H ? bb with the ATLAS detector, 2018.

G. Bachelard, La formation de l'esprit scientifique. Paris: Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, 5e édition, 1934.

O. Brüning, P. Collier, P. Lebrun, S. Myers, R. Ostojic et al., LHC Design Report. CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs. CERN, 2004.

, The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.3, issue.08, p.8003, 2008.

A. Pich, The Standard Model of Electroweak Interactions, 2012.

E. Heather and . Logan, TASI 2013 lectures on Higgs physics within and beyond the Standard Model, 2014.

S. L. Glashow, Partial Symmetries of Weak Interactions, Nucl. Phys, vol.22, pp.579-588, 1961.

S. Weinberg, A model of leptons, Phys. Rev. Lett, vol.19, pp.1264-1266, 1967.

A. Salam, Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions, Conf. Proc, vol.680519, pp.367-377, 1968.

H. Yukawa, On the interaction of elementary particles. i, Proceedings of the Physico, vol.17, pp.48-57, 1935.

N. Cabibbo, Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays, Phys. Rev. Lett, vol.10, pp.531-533, 1963.

M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, CP Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction, Prog. Theor. Phys, vol.49, pp.652-657, 1973.

C. Patrignani, Review of Particle Physics. Chin. Phys, vol.40, issue.10, p.100001, 2016.

R. , Amplitude analysis of B + ? j/??K + decays, Phys. Rev. D, vol.95, p.12002, 2017.

R. , Observation of j/?? structures consistent with exotic states from amplitude analysis of B + ? j/??K + decays, Phys. Rev. Lett, vol.118, p.22003, 2017.

, Observation of five new narrow ? 0 c states decaying to ? + c K ?

, Phys. Rev. Lett, vol.118, p.182001, 2017.

, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Physics Letters B, vol.716, issue.1, pp.1-29, 2012.

, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Physics Letters B, vol.716, issue.1, pp.30-61, 2012.

D. De-florian, Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, 2016.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-01387748

W. and J. Stirling, Progress in Parton Distribution Functions and implications for LHC, Proceedings, 38th International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics, vol.46, pp.46-55, 2008.

J. Haffner, Complexe des accélérateurs du CERN, 2013.

S. Maettig, T. Haller, and . Pauly, Luminosity Measurements with the ATLAS Detector, 2012.

, Luminosity Public Results Run2

, The ATLAS Collaboration. Summary plots from the ATLAS Standard Model physics group

/. Combinedsummaryplots and . Sm/,

, The ATLAS collaboration. Evidence for the H ? bb decay with the ATLAS detector, JHEP, vol.12, p.24, 2017.

, Measurement of the Higgs boson mass in the H ? ZZ * ? 4 and H ? ?? channels with ? s=13TeV pp collisions using the ATLAS detector, 2017.

, The atlas data acquisition and high level trigger system, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.11, issue.06, p.6008, 2016.

, Atlas magnet system, vol.1, 1997.

D. Schaefer, The ATLAS Diamond Beam Monitor: luminosity Detector on the LHC, 2015.

P. Jenni, M. Nessi, and M. Nordberg, Zero Degree Calorimeters for AT-LAS, 2007.

L. Fabbri, Forward Detectors in ATLAS: ALFA, ZDC and LUCID, 2009.

G. Aad, M. Ackers, F. A. Alberti, M. Aleppo, and G. Alimonti, ATLAS pixel detector electronics and sensors, JINST, vol.3, p.7007, 2008.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00316171

, The ATLAS Collaboration. ATLAS insertable b-layer technical design report, 2010.

B. Abbott and . Others, Production and Integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, JINST, vol.13, issue.05, p.5008, 2018.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01729981

S. I. Parker, C. J. Kenney, and J. Segal, 3-D: A New architecture for solid state radiation detectors, Nucl. Instrum. Meth, vol.395, pp.328-343, 1997.

M. Garcia-sciveres, The FE-I4 pixel readout integrated circuit, Nucl. Instrum. Meth, vol.636, pp.155-159, 2011.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00479837

I. Peric, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A, vol.565, issue.1, pp.178-187, 2006.

G. Aad, Operation and performance of the ATLAS semiconductor tracker, JINST, vol.9, p.8009, 2014.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00985529

E. Abat, The ATLAS Transition Radiation Tracker (TRT) proportional drift tube: Design and performance, JINST, vol.3, p.2013, 2008.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00260118

. Atlas-liquid-argon and . Calorimeter, , 1996.

G. Aad, Expected Performance of the ATLAS Experiment -Detector, Trigger and Physics, 2009.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00350536

, Performance of the ATLAS Trigger System in 2015. Performance of the ATLAS Trigger System in 2015, Eur. Phys. J. C, p.77

, 77 pages in total, author list starting page 61, 50 figures, 1 table. Published in Eur. Phys. J. C. All figures including auxiliary figures are, pp.317-76, 2016.

M. Shochet, V. Tompkins, P. Cavaliere, . Giannetti, G. Annovi et al., Fast TracKer (FTK), ATLAS Fast Tracker Technical Design Report, 2013.

M. Elsing, Tracking at the LHC. page lectures given at the university of Friburg, 2016.

, Performance of the atlas track reconstruction algorithms in dense environments in lhc run 2, The European Physical Journal C, vol.77, issue.10, p.673, 2017.

S. Kazama, Object Reconstruction, pp.55-69, 2016.

M. Garcia, -. Sciveres, and N. Wermes, A review of advances in pixel detectors for experiments with high rate and radiation, Reports on Progress in Physics, vol.81, issue.6, p.66101, 2018.

, Track Reconstruction Performance of the ATLAS Inner Detector at ? s = 13 TeV, 2015.

, Improved electron reconstruction in ATLAS using the Gaussian Sum Filter-based model for bremsstrahlung, 2012.

G. Borissov, . Casper, . Grimm, . Pagan-griso, K. Egholm-pedersen et al., Atlas strategy for primary vertex reconstruction during run-2 of the lhc, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol.664, issue.7, p.72041, 2015.

, Performance of b -jet identification in the atlas experiment, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.11, issue.04, p.4008, 2016.

, Measurement of the ? 0 b lifetime and mass in the atlas experiment, Phys. Rev. D, vol.87, p.32002, 2013.

. Pythia, URL home.thep.lu.se/Pythia

, GEANT4: A Simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Meth, vol.506, pp.250-303, 2003.

L. Rossi, P. Fischer, T. Rohe, and N. Wermes, Pixel detectors: From fundamentals to applications, 2006.

G. Lutz, Semiconductor Radiation Detectors

, , 2007.

M. Krammer, Silicon detectors, pp.2010-2021
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/in2p3-00011397

L. Landau, On the energy loss of fast particles by ionization, J. Phys.(USSR), vol.8, pp.201-205, 1944.

S. Terzo, Development of radiation hard pixel modules employing planar n-in-p silicon sensors with active edges for the ATLAS detector at HL-LHC, 2015.

H. Bichsel, Straggling in thin silicon detectors, Rev. Mod. Phys, vol.60, pp.663-699, 1988.

S. Meroli, L. Passeri, and . Servoli, Energy loss measurement for charged particles in very thin silicon layers, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.6, issue.06, p.6013, 2011.

P. Shulek, Fluctuations of ionization loss, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys, vol.4, p.400, 1967.

, Cluster Properties and Lorentz Angle Measurement in the 4-Layer Pixel Detector Using Cosmic Rays, 2015.

S. Ramo, Currents induced by electron motion, Proceedings of the IRE, vol.27, p.584, 1939.

I. Kipnis, A time-over-threshold machine: the readout integrated circuit for the babar silicon vertex tracker, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol.44, p.289, 1997.

G. Lindström, F. Watts, and . Lemeilleur, 3rd RD48 status report: the ROSE collaboration (R&D on silicon for future experiments), 1999.

J. Lange, G. Giannini, S. Grinstein, M. Manna, G. Pellegrini et al., Radiation hardness of small-pitch 3d pixel sensors up to a fluence of 3×10 16 n eq /cm 2, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.13, issue.09, p.9009, 2018.

M. Bomben, A. Ducourthial, A. Bagolini, M. Boscardin, L. Bosisio et al., Performance of active edge pixel sensors, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.12, issue.05, p.5006, 2017.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01554598

M. Bruzzi and M. Moll, , 2007.

, Experimental techniques for defect characterization of highly irradiated materials and structures, The 25th International workshop on vertex detectors, p.33, 2016.

A. Vasilescu, ). Bucharest, and G. Lindstroem, Displacement damage in Silicon online compilation, 2000.

M. Moll, Radiation Damage in Silicon Particle Detectors, 1999.

G. Kramberger, . Cindro, M. Mandic, M. Mikuz, and . Zavrtanik, Effective trapping time of electrons and holes in different silicon materials irradiated with neutrons, protons and pions, 2001.

C. Beteta, M. Atzeni, V. Battista, A. Bursche, B. Dey et al., Monitoring radiation damage in the LHCb Tracker Turicensis, 2018.

, Radiation effects at the LHC experiments and impact on operation and performance

M. Benoit, M. Bomben, R. Carney, G. Giugliarelli, T. Lari et al., Nick Dann, and Cinzia Da Via. Modeling Radiation Damage Effects for Pixel Sensors in the ATLAS Detector, 2017.

A. , Modeling radiation damage to pixel sensors in the atlas detector, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.13, issue.03, p.3046, 2018.

A. Ferrari, P. R. Sala, J. Fassò, and . Ranft, FLUKA: A multi-particle transport code (program version, 2005.

G. Battistoni, S. Muraro, P. R. Sala, F. Cerutti, A. Ferrari et al., The FLUKA code: Description and benchmarking. AIP Conf. Proc, vol.896, p.31, 2007.

, Radiation background simulations for run2

, twiki/bin/viewauth/Atlas/RadiationBackgroundSimulationsRun2#13_TeV_ simulations_corresponding

T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual, JHEP, 2006.

, Summary of ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes, 2012.

T. Sjöstrand, S. Ask, R. Jesper, R. Christianss-en, N. Corke et al., An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun, vol.191, p.159, 2015.

. Synopsys,

F. Moscatelli, D. Passeri, A. Morozzi, R. Mendicino, G. F. Betta et al., Combined bulk and surface radiation damage effects at very high fluences in silicon detectors: Measurements and tcad simulations, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol.63, issue.5, pp.2716-2723, 2016.

V. Chiochia, A double junction model of irradiated silicon pixel sensors for lhc, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A, vol.568, issue.1, pp.51-55, 2006.

J. Idarraga and M. Benoit, Generic Geant4 implementation for pixel detectors. The AllPix Simulation Framework, page, 2006.

, A neural network clustering algorithm for the atlas silicon pixel detector, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.9, issue.09, p.9009, 2014.

H. Project,

S. Mcmahon, P. Allport, H. Hayward, and B. D. Girolamo, , 2014.

, Technical Design Report for the ATLAS ITk Strip Detector, 2017.

, Technical Design Report for the ATLAS ITk Pixel Detector, 2018.

S. Mcmahon, P. Allport, H. Hayward, and B. D. Girolamo, , 2014.

, Collaboration ATLAS. Letter of Intent for the Phase-II Upgrade of the ATLAS Experiment, 2012.

, Draft of Technical Proposal for circulation to ATLAS, Technical Proposal: A High-Granularity Timing Detector for the ATLAS Phase-II Upgrade, 2018.

M. Garcia-sciveres, The RD53A Integrated Circuit, 2017.

. Advacam,

A. , Experimental Studies of hh, 2014.

M. Bomben, M. Bagolini, . Boscardin, G. Bosisio, . Calderini et al., Electrical characterization of thin edgeless n-on-p planar pixel sensors for atlas upgrades, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.9, issue.05, p.5020, 2014.

M. Bomben, Development of Edgeless n-on-p Planar Pixel Sensors for future ATLAS Upgrades, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A, vol.712, pp.41-47, 2013.

E. Vianello, Optimization of double-side 3d detector technology for first productions at FBK, Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, pp.523-528, 2011.

G. Betta, M. Boscardin, M. Bomben, M. Brianzi, G. Calderini et al., The infn-fbk "phase-2" r&d program, Frontier Detectors for Frontier Physics: Proceedings of the 13th Pisa Meeting on Advanced Detectors, vol.824, pp.388-391, 2016.

H. Chr, M. Kastli, W. Barbero, C. Erdmann, R. Hormann et al., Design and performance of the CMS pixel detector readout chip, Nucl. Instrum. Meth, vol.565, pp.188-194, 2006.

H. Spieler, Semiconductor detector systems, pp.1-512, 2007.

A. Chilingarov, Temperature dependence of the current generated in si bulk, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.8, issue.10, pp.10003-10003, 2013.

N. Savic, J. Beyer, A. Macchiolo, and R. Nisius, Investigation of thin n-inp planar pixel modules for the ATLAS upgrade, JINST, vol.11, issue.12, p.12008, 2016.

S. Ronchin, Edgeless planar pixel sensors with atlas and cms designs produced by fbk-cmm, Trento Workshop on Advanced Silicon Radiation Detectors, 2017.

I. Center-karlsruhe,

, The FE-I4B Collaboration. The FE-I4B Integrated Circuit Guide, 2012.

H. Jansen and S. Spannagel, Performance of the EUDET-type beam telescopes, EPJ Techniques and Instrumentation, vol.3, issue.1, 2016.

A. , Gerbershagen on behalf of CERN Experimental Areas Group, 6th beam telescope and test beam workshop, 2018.

R. Diener, N. Meyners, and M. Stanitzki, The DESY II Test Beam Facility -Status and Future. 6th Beam Telescopes and Test Beam Workshop, vol.16, 2018.

R. L. Gluckstern, Effect of multiple scattering on measurement of track momentum and direction, Nuclear Instruments and Methods, vol.56, pp.90271-90277, 1967.

C. Hu-guo, First reticule size maps with digital output and integrated zero suppression for the EUDET-JRA1 beam telescope, International Conference on Technology and Instrumentation in Particle Physics, vol.623, pp.480-482, 2010.

, RCE, the Reconfigurable Cluster Element

M. Backhaus, Development of a versatile and modular test system for ATLAS hybrid pixel detectors, S0168900210028676. International Workshop on Semiconductor Pixel Detectors for Particles and Imaging, vol.650, pp.37-40, 2010.

. Eutelescope,

V. Blobel and I. I. Millepede, Linear Least Squares Fits with a Large Number of Parameters. 3rd LHC Detector Alignment Workshop CERN, 2009.

. Tbmon2,

K. Hecht, Zum mechanismus des lichtelektrischen primärstromes in isolierenden kristallen, Zeit. Physik, vol.77, p.235, 1932.

R. Schwarz, Semi-empirical equations for electron velocity in silicon, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol.30, issue.12, pp.1634-1639, 1983.

A. Ducourthial, M. Bomben, G. Calderini, G. Marchiori, L. Eramo et al., Thin and edgeless sensors for atlas pixel detector upgrade, Journal of Instrumentation, vol.12, issue.12, p.12038, 2017.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01703763

S. Eudaq,

L. Benjamin-philip-nachman, M. Rossini, T. Bomben, A. Lari, A. Macchiolo et al., Pixel Radiation Damage Plots for Workshop, 2018.

I. Connelly, Performance and calibration of b-tagging with the ATLAS experiment at LHC Run-2, 2016.

, Optimisation of the ATLAS b-tagging performance for the 2016 LHC Run, 2016.

, Identification of Jets Containing b-Hadrons with Recurrent Neural Networks at the ATLAS Experiment, 2017.

G. Piacquadio and C. Weiser, A new inclusive secondary vertex algorithm for b-jet tagging in ATLAS, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol.119, issue.3, p.32032, 2008.

, Secondary vertex finding for jet flavour identification with the ATLAS detector, 2017.

, Expected performance of the ATLAS b-tagging algorithms in Run-2, 2015.