Note that it is not "me who is trying", but more the work of an entire community :)
After this side note, let's go back to your question. The collision parameters are fixed. We know the LHC energy, we know what we collide and we know how many collisions are recorded on disk. Then the rest is to define criteria allowing to select a subset of these collisions, and to make sure that any signal would be included in the selection together with as few Standard Model background as possible.
From the non-observation of any signal through this selection (as there is no sign of new physics in data so far), we can draw conclusive statements on the nature of any potential signal.
Does it clarify?
I was referring to a group of scientists (maybe not the entire community, but definitely a dozen at least) :)
So the nature of the particles that you are colliding, their speed, and trajectories, doesn't vary based on what the community want to try ? They "just" need more data to see something that has less probability than the other events ?
Only the nature and their energy (that's better than speed) of the particles define the machine.
The rest (signals and trajectories) is dictated by quantum field theories. Which quantum field theory to choose tells you which signal to expect. You take the Standard Model as your background, and then your favourite theory as a signal. Then, we do the computations and design strategies about how to filter all collisions to make sure that the selection focuses on the signatures of the considered "signal theory" by keeping the "Standard Model background" small.
Is it clearer?
Yes, it's very clear! Thank you for your answers :)
You are very welcome.
Thanks also for your comment and your question. This is always appreciated!