1 / 41

Systematics in the Pierre Auger Observatory

Systematics in the Pierre Auger Observatory. Bruce Dawson University of Adelaide for the Pierre Auger Observatory Collaboration. Introduction. Fluorescence - a technique with great rewards, but a lot of work required!

kimberly
Download Presentation

Systematics in the Pierre Auger Observatory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Systematics in the Pierre Auger Observatory Bruce Dawson University of Adelaidefor the Pierre Auger Observatory Collaboration

  2. Introduction • Fluorescence - a technique with great rewards, but a lot of work required! • Will concentrate on energy measurement (e.g. composition has an additional set of systematics) • All good experiments build in CROSS-CHECKS, Auger no exception. Clearly, most important cross-check is the Hybrid nature of Auger, but many others.

  3. The Observatory • Mendoza Province, Argentina • 3000 km2, 875 g cm-2 • 1600 water Cherenkov detectors 1.5 km grid • 4 fluorescence eyes -total of 24 telescopes each with 30o x 30o FOV 65 km

  4. Engineering Array

  5. Simulated Hybrid Aperture “Stereo” Efficiency Hybrid TriggerEfficiency

  6. Hybrid Reconstruction Quality Statistical errors only! • 68% error bounds given • detector is optimized for 1019eV, but good Hybrid reconstruction quality at lower energy statisticalerrors only zenith angles < 60O

  7. Steps to good energy reconstruction • Geometry • Calibration: atmosphere and optical • Analysis • Light collection • Cherenkov subtraction • Fitting function • Missing energy • Fluorescence yield

  8. Geometry Reconstruction • eye determines plane containing EAS axis and eye • plane normal vector known to an accuracy of ~ 0.2o • to extract Rp andy,eye needs to measure angular velocity w and its time derivative dw/dt • but difficult to get dw/dt, leads to degeneracy in (Rp,y) • degeneracy broken with measurement of shower front arrival time at one or more points on the ground • eg at SD water tank positions

  9. Geometry Reconstruction Single FD only Hybrid median Rp error = 350mstrong dependence on angular “Track Length” medianRp error = 20 m • Simulations at 1019eV • Reconstruct impact parameter Rp. Dramatic improvement with Hybrid reconstruction (Will check with stereo events)

  10. Atmosphere Systematics • light transmission corrections(Rayleigh and aerosol scattering)AIM: know corrections to better than 10% • air density profile with height(mapping height to depth; Rayleigh scattering)AIM: know overburden at a given height to better than 15 g/cm2

  11. Distance from pixels to track MC: 1019eV events over full arrayClosest triggering eye

  12. VARIABLE !!

  13. Horizontal attenuation monitors (50km) • Steerable LIDARs - total optical depth • Vertical lasers near centre of array - vertical distribution of aerosols • Cross-checks

  14. Aerosol measurements (John Matthews ICRC 2001)

  15. LIDAR System

  16. LIDAR System Tests near Torino System at Los Leones

  17. Some simulations • Simulations: 1000 1019eV showers landing within Auger full array. Generate with fixed aerosol parameters: • horizontal attenuation length (334nm) al = 25 km • scale height of aerosol layer ha = 1.0 km • height of “mixing layer” hm = 0 km • First, reconstruct events with different aerosol assumptions

  18. Dependence on Aerosol Parameters • (generated with al=25km, ha=1.0km, hm=0km) • reconstruct with 19km 1.0km 0kmDE/E = +8%DXmax = +7 g/cm2 • reconstruct with 40km 1.0km 0kmDE/E = -9%DXmax = -9 g/cm2 • reconstruct with 25km 2.0km 0kmDE/E = +10%DXmax = -2 g/cm2 • reconstruct with 25km 1.0km 0.5kmDE/E = +12%DXmax = +8 g/cm2

  19. Atmosphere Density Profile • Density profile of atmosphere determines mapping from height to depth, and Rayleigh scattering • MC generated with vertical overburden 873 g/cm2andone of the US Standard Atmospheres. Will maintain scale height. • reconstruct with vertical overburden900 g/cm2DE/E = +2.2%DXmax = +19 g/cm2 • reconstruct with vertical overburden845 g/cm2DE/E = - 3.3%DXmax = - 19 g/cm2

  20. Radiosonde • Balloon-borne radiosondes are planned to monitor the atmosphere’s density and temperature profile • First flight in August 2002 at Malargue. • A series of flights in the austral spring, summer, winter and autumn will determine the suitability of re-scaled “standard atmospheres”, and variability.

  21. Optical Calibration

  22. Drum Calibration • 375nm LEDs • NIST calibrated Silicon detector • uniformly illuminates aperture with full range of incoming angles • in future will also use range of colours • absolute calib to 7% now, hope to improve to 5%

  23. Relative calibration Xenon

  24. Laser shots at 3km - cross check on absolute calibration … and also are checking with piece by piece calibration.

  25. Reconstruction

  26. UV-Filter 300-400 nm installed at Los Leones (Malargüe) and taking data 11 m2 mirror camera440 PMTs corrector lens

  27. No coma, good light collection

  28. Hybridevent.Dec 2001- March2002

  29. Light Flux at Camera z=1.9o z=3o optical spot 0.5 deg diam • Aim: to collect all signal without too much noise or multiple scattered light. • Effect of multiple scattered light? Halo? • currently a 10-15% systematic, is being studied

  30. Estimate of Cherenkov contamination Total F(t) photons (equiv 370nm) direct Rayleigh aerosol time (100ns bins) REAL event

  31. Dependence on Cherenkov Yield • MC generated with nominal Cherenkov yield • (easy calculation if you know the density profile of atmosphere and the energy spectrum of electrons) • reconstruct with Cherenkov yield up by 30%DE/E = - 4.8%DXmax = - 9 g/cm2 • reconstruct with Cherenkov yield reduced by 30%DE/E = + 5.3%DXmax = +9 g/cm2 • (These are averages. Clearly, the error for each event depends on its geometry).

  32. CORSIKA Check

  33. Cherenkov correction • clearly depends on more than yield calculation, also… • atmospheric scattering • geometry • important problem that needs study, since all events have some contamination • stereo will be an important aid

  34. PRELIMINARY shower size (arb units)

  35. PRELIMINARY shower size (arb units)

  36. Profile T. Abu-Zayyad et al Astropart. Phys. 16, 1 (2001)

  37. “Missing energy” correction • unavoidable 5% systematic • currently being checked with new CORSIKA Ecal = calorimetric energyE0 = true energy from C.Song et al. Astropart Phys (2000)

  38. Conclusion • can’t provide an error budget now - many of the systematics are under study, and we need real (stereo) data to study many of them • have indicated our goals in terms of two major players - the atmosphere (10%) and optical calibration (5%). These must be obtained early. • cross-checks are vital • then there is the fluorescence yield…

More Related