WP2: Physics Analysis and Simulation

• Objectives & Priorities

• Deliverables & Milestones

• Manpower

• Optimisation considerations

P. Coyle, J. Brunner, CPPMarseille

Objectives & PrioritiesPriority Objectives

1 1 Define benchmark neutrino fluxes

2 1 Development of event selection software

3 1 Development of simulation software

4 1 Development of reconstruction software

5 1 Definition of data format, storage, distribution

6 1Comparison of detector geometries in terms of physics sensitivity

7 2Comparison of candidate sites in terms of physics sensitivity

8 1 Development of calibration strategies

Deliverables & Milestones6 months : benchmark neutrino fluxes and energy range

(+uncertainties)• Astrophysics

•sources - galactic SNR:RXJ1713, VELA-Jr

uquasars: LS5039CR interactions with gas near GC

- extragalactic AGNs, GRBs, starburst galaxies… •Diffuse flux WB bound

• Dark matter •Sun, earth, galactic centre, IMBHs

• EHE •GZK (Sigl)•Top-down models

• Exotica•monopoles, nuclearites cross-section modifications at EHE•Lorentz invariance ……•Neutrino decay•decoherence

Web page resource of relevant papers

Deliverables & Milestones

14 months : first release of simulation software packages

•Event generators•Neutrino interactions•Atmospheric muons•Muon propagation

•Detector response•Cherenkov light production•Light propagation•PMT & Front end electronics (needed dynamic range?)

•Calibrations•Timing, amplitude•Positioning, absolute pointing

Deliverables & Milestones

16 months : CDR contributions

•Description of software packages•Event generator, Detector response, Calibrations•Event selection, Reconstruction

•Scheme for data format, storage, distribution•First results on detector architecture•First results on site comparison•First results on calibration studies

Deliverables & Milestones

34 months : TDR contributions

•Description of final software packages•Event generator, Detector response, Calibrations•Event selection, Reconstruction

•Scheme for data format, storage, distribution•Final results on architecture optimization•Final results on site comparison•Final results on calibration systems

ManpowerFTEM

total

FTEM

requested

Personnel

total

Personnel

requestedtotal

IN2P3 144 72 900 354 930

CEA 250 36 650 171 821

Erlangen 36 36 193 193 (*2) 274

INFN 252 108 225112.5(+42 travel

+21.5 cons)

352

FOM 108 306 317

Sheffield 42 18 13357 (*2)(+5 travel)

172

Basic request: 1-2 position for 3 years per institute

Optimization goals

3D grid of active detector elements(distances, distribution)(string, tower, dense core, empty core)

OM orientationsPMT size, multiplicities

(e.g. large versus small PMTs)(coincidence versus high pulses)

Maximal neutrino effective area (volume) over full parameter space

Best angular resolution for neutrinosBest energy resolution for neutrinosOptimal S/B for some standard signals (E-2)

Optimization criteria

Optimization condition

Ideally: Compare various detectors which can be built and operated with the same budget

difficult to do

Or: Compare detectors withSame number of OMsSame number of floorsSame number of total eff. area of PMTs….

Choice to be made to allow fair comparison

Choice of parameter space

Which energy range ?

AstronomyPoint sources 1TeV-1PeV Diffuse flux 10TeV-10PeVGZK 1EeV-100EeV

Particle Physics Neutralinos 10GeV-1TeV

Difficult to have a detector with optimal behaviourover 8 orders of magnitude !

Separate optimisations for high/low energies?

Choice of parameter space

Which angular range ?

Classic: Upward going hemisphere Highest energies no atm. muon BG: full sphere Opacity of Earth: close to horizon calibration with moon shadow

OM arrangements depend on these choices

Downward lookingAntares likeUp/down symmetrichorizontal

Choice of parameter space

Which particle type ?

Cosmic neutrino fluxes arrive at earthwith about 1/3 fraction of e

At high energies earth opacity increases further fraction

Distinction in a neutrino telescopeCC[ (-)] long muon trackCC[e (-e,h)], NC narrow, contained showerCC[ (-e,h)] above PeV double bang

Complementary in Resolution:

Energy Angle Muon mediocre excellentShower excellent mediocre

Choice of parameter space

Site parameters influence result

Absorption length of waterLight diffusion in waterDepth (atmosph. muon background)Noise light (bioluminescence level)

Optimized detector geometry in one site might be different from detector in another site

Need feedback from WP5

For the WP2 session at 11/04 in Erlangen I would like to have a short presentation from each institute which intends to participate in this work package.

In this presentation you should:- redefine the physics and software projects to which you would like to contribute- describe the current state of this work- estimate possible contributions for the first year of KM3NET- make reference to the "Objectives" and "Milestones" of the contract document (WP2) This round of introduction talks will be followed by presentations of"first results" as some of you have already started to do KM3Net related analyses.

          KM3net kickoff meeting Erlangen

Date/Time: from Tuesday 11 April 2006 (09:00) to Thursday 13 April 2006 (18:00)

Location: Erlangen

Description: Details

Tuesday 11 April 2006 14:00->18:00

  Tuesday 11 April 2006 WP2 (14:00->18:00) Loc

ation:

Erlangen

 14:00 Introduction (20') Paschal Coyle (CPPM)

 14:20 Status+Plans CEA/DAPNIA (20') Luciano Moscoso

 14:40 Status+Plans INFN (20') Marco Circella

 15:00 Status+Plans NIKHEF (20') Els De Wolf (NIKHEF)

 15:20 Status+Plans Erlangen (20') Rezo Shanidze (University Erlangen)

 15:40 Status+Plans Great Britain (20') Fabrice Jouvenot (University Liverpool)

 16:00 Status+Plans Valencia (20')

 16:20 Status+Plans Greece (20')

 16:40 Coffe break

 17:00 KM3Net Simulations (20') Sebastian Kuch

 17:20 HESS sources for KM3 (20') Christian Stegmann

 17:40 Shower reconstruction (20') Ralf Auer| HELP

Organisational IssuesSteering committee institute representatives

General Mailing list, webpage

Physics benchmark fluxes

more ambitious? SA=5km2, PMs 10,000

Common software framework-ROOT, C++, java? (rewrite Km3)

Adopt antares software as standard (freely available)

Monte Carlo generation to sea level (Corsika)-geometry independent

Agree on relevant quantities for optimisation – neutrino effective area - neutrino effective volume

Optimisation-priority to muons

Reconstruction algorithms- geometry independent? (optimise pdfs?)

Site specific parameters –wp5

All data to shore vs L1 trigger

Calibration simulation-less advanced, more work? -investigate optical positioning (rather than acoustic)

Next meeting

Software Framework

Interfaces to other WPs

WP1 – Cost Model software

WP3 – simulation of front-end costs

WP4 – simulation of data filter costs

WP5 – site parameters

source Distance

(kpc)

E

(GeV)

Nμ

(km-2 yr-1 )

Reference

SNR RX J1713.7

Sgr A East

SNR RX J1713.7

6

8

6

104

105

104

~40

~140

~10

Alvarez-Muñiz & Halzen 2002

Alvarez-Muñiz & Halzen 2002

Costantini astro-ph/0508152

E Flux Sensitivity of the KM3NeT n Telescope

requirement:10 hits/event

80% duty cycle

flux

Very preliminary !

KM3NeT sensitivityestimated for

23 events flux = flux / 2

Microquasars: LS5039, LS I=61 303

LS5039 observed by HESS Index=2.12±0.15, up to 4 TeVAharonian et al, astro-ph/0508298

LS I+61 3033-5 muon type/km2/yrChristiansen et al., astro-ph/0509214

severe absorption of >100 GeV gamma-rays

( + starlight e+e-) up to a factor 10 to 100

higher initial luminosity

severe radiative (synchrotron and Compton)

losses difficult to accelerate electrons to

multi-TeV energies

Conclusion: TeV gamma-rays of hadronic origin

Extrapolation from HESS

observation: 3-6 neutrinos/yr/km2

Aharonian, Montaruli et al., Astro-ph/0508658

Interaction of CRs with Gas Clouds at GC

CR interactions in clusters of galaxies with IR photons also detectableDeMarco et al, astro-ph/0511535

AMANDA

KM3NET

CR density much higher than local density in solar systemevidence for young sourceof high energy CRs near GC-SNR?Arharonian et al, Nature 2006

neutrino signal from CR interactions detectable in KM3NET- enhancement in direction of GCCandia, Astro-ph/0505346

Measured UHECR flux provides most restrictive limit:

- optically thin sources: nucleons from photohadronic interactions escape

-CR flux above the ankle (>3 ·1018eV) are extragalactic protons with E-2 spectrum

E2F < 4.5 10-8 GeV /(cm2 s sr) Waxman & Bahcall (1999)

Magnetic fields and uncertainties in photohadronic interactions of protons can affect the bound, as these effectsrestrict number of protons able to escape Mannheim, Protheroe & Rachen (2000) CR rate evolves with z

CR rate evolves with z

Upper Bounds on Extra-Galactic fluxes

ICECUBE/KM3

MPR

CR rate evolves with z

Extragalactic: Starburst Galaxies

Radio observation of starburst galaxies imply a robust lower limit on the extragalactic neutrino background flux ~wbLoeb, Waxman astro-ph/0601695

M82 -xray

                

M82 -radioGalaxies undergoing large-scale star formation.-strong IR emission-strong radio emission from SNRs

Best studied: M82, NGC253

NGC253: TeV detection reported by CANGAROO

Possible source of UHECRsTorres, Anchordoquiastro-ph/0505283

3.2Mpc

Detection directe spin-independent cross-section

Télescopes a neutrino très compétitive et complémentaire au détection directe

ANTARES/KM3: Dark Matter (neutralino)

/km3e.g. mSUGRA model

A0=0, >0, tan=10,

M1/2=0-800 GeV,

M0=0-1000 GeV

+ wimph2 < 1

+ LEP constraint

efficient capture in the sun best sensitivity to spin dependent scattering

Neutrino telescope flux de soleil

Bertin, NezriOrloff 02

Dark Matter – Intermediate Mass Black Holes

Mini-spikes around IMBHsMimbh=105Msoleil

Sources concentrated towards galactic centre

Sensitive only to annihilation cross-section-complementaryTo sun search

KM3NET: 10 sources with >20 events/year

Bertonehep-ph/0603148

Armengaud, Sigl APPEC ROADMAP

Tau neutrinos

104 ly

Flavour Ratios: Experimental Signatures

E = 10 TeV E = 375 TeV

~300m for 10 PeV

e

Icecube simulationBeacom et al., hep-ph/0307025 v3 sept 2005

Horizontal MuonElectron ShowerTau (lolipop, double bang)

Particle Physics: Lorentz Violation, Decoherence

Hooper et al., hep-ph/0506091

Lorentz violationPion source

Decoherenceneutron source

Lorentz violation Atmospheric oscillations

Anchordoqui et al., hep-ph/0506168

E2 dependence

icecube

Neutron source (npee)may explain CR correlationsfrom GC & Cygnus

Anchordoqui et al., hep-ph/0510389

From angular depencenceof e/ ratio

Sudden onset

VERY LONG BASELINE

Particle Physics: Modification of (N) at High Energies

KK GravitonsTeV string resonancesscopic black holesp-Brane productioninstantons

increased cross-section

e.g. angular distribution above500 TeV in model of BHproduction astro-ph/0202081

SM

xmin=1

xmin=3

Amanda, Baikal2002

2007

AUGER

Anita

Amanda,Antares, Baikal, Nestor

2012

km3

Auger +new technologies

2004

RICE GLUE

Flux Diffus: Limites et Sensibilités

RICE AGASA

C. S

pie

ring

, J. P

hy

s. G

29

(20

03

) 8

43

Gamma Ray Bursts(Waxman & Bahcall)

Extragalacticp sources

(Mannheim et al.)AGN Jets

(Mannheim)

Topologicaldefects (Sigl)

GZK neutrinos(Rachen & Biermann)

WB98