Fluctuation in EAS development and estimates of energy and composition
description
Transcript of Fluctuation in EAS development and estimates of energy and composition
Fluctuation in EAS development and
estimates
of energy and composition
of the primary radiation
by L. Dedenko, SINP, MSU
Yakutsk array1) surface scintillation detectors (SD)
2) detectors of the Vavilov-Cherenkov radiation (VCR)
3) underground detectors of muons (UD)
(with the threshold energy ~1 GeV).
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Detectors readings
• The various particles
• of Extensive Air Showers (EAS)
• at the observation level
• hit detectors
• and induce some signals sampled as
• detector readings in (SD), (VCR)
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Detectors readings
• Some particles (muons, gammas)
• penetrate through some depth h of soil, hit underground detectors
• and induce some signals sampled as
• detector readings• in underground detectors of muons
(UD) (with the threshold energy ~1 GeV).
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Standard approach of energy estimation
• Signal s(600) in SD
• at 600 m from the EAS core
• in the vertical EAS
• is used to estimate • energy E of EAS.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Standard approach of energy estimation
• DATA:
• 1. The CIC method is used to estimate s(600) in vertical EAS from data for the inclined EAS.
• 2. The signal s(600) for the vertical EAS is calibrated with the help of the
• Vavilov-Cherenkov radiation
• 3. E=4.6·1017· s(600), eV
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Standard AGASA approach:Like AGASA:• 1. The CIC method to estimate s(600) for
the vertical EAS from data for the inclined EAS.
• 2. Calculation s(600) for the vertical EAS with energy E:
• 3. E=3·1017·s(600), eV
• 1. L.G. Dedenko et al., Phys. of Atom. Nucl., 2007, vol. 70, No 1, pp. 170-174.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Spectrum•Energy spectra are different for these approaches
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
points ─ Yakutsk data, stars ─ PAO circles ─ Yakutsk like AGASA
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The CIC method
• The constant intensity cut (CIC) method:
• may be systematic error!
• For Yakutsk array the absorption length
• 458 g/cm2
• (to be compared with the simulated average value)
• 340 g/cm2
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
New approach• All detectors readings
• are suggested to be used to study
• the energy spectrum
• and
• the chemical composition
• of the primary cosmic radiation
• at ultra-high energies
• in terms of some model of hadron interactions.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The new approach• For the each one individual EAS
• 1) the energy E and
• 2) the type of the primary particle, (atomic number A), which induced EAS,
• 3) parameters of model of hadron interactions,
• 4) peculiar development of EAS in the atmosphere
• are not known
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The new approach• The goal is to find estimates of
• 1) energy E,
• 2) atomic number A,
• 3) parameters of model of hadron interactions,
• 4) peculiar development of EAS in the atmosphere
• for each individual shower
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The new approachIt has been suggested
for the every one observed EAS
to use all detector readings which should be compared with the simulated ones
• for many simulated individual showers,
• induced by 1) various primary particles
• with 2) different energies
• in terms of 3) various models.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The new approach• The best estimates of
• the energy E,
• the atomic number A and
• parameters of model and
• peculiar development of EAS in
• the atmosphere are searched by the χ2 method.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
The new approach• The best estimates of the
• 1) arrival direction
• and
• 2) core location
• are also searched by the χ2 method.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Simulations• Simulations of the individual shower
development in the atmosphere
• have been carried out with the help of
• the code CORSIKA-6.616 [8]
• in terms of the models QGSJET2 [9] and Gheisha 2002 [10]
• with the weight parameter ε=10-8 (thinning).
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Simulations• The program GEANT4 has been used
• to estimate signals in the scintillation detectors
• from electrons, positrons, gammas and muons
• in each individual shower.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Detector model
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Signals in scintillation detector
• Signals ∆E in MeV in detectors as functions of
• 1) energy E
• and
• 2) the zenith angle θ (cos(θ))
• of various incoming particles:
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Electrons
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Positrons
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Gammas
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Muons
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Minimum of the function χ2• Readings of all scintillation
detectors
• have been used to search for the
• minimum of the function χ2
• in the square with the width of 400 m and a center determined by data with a step of 1 m.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Minimum of the function χ2 These readings have been compared with
calculated responses for E0=1020 eV (201*201 signals) multiplied by the coefficient C.
•
• This coefficient C changed from 0.1 up to 4.5 with a step of 0.1.
• (45 values)
• L.G. Dedenko et al., JETP Letters, 2009, vol.90, No 11, pp. 691-696.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Minimum of the function χ2
• Thus, it was assumed, that the energy of a shower and signals in the scintillation detectors are proportional to each other in some small interval.
• New estimates of energy
• E =C·E0 , eV
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Results of energy estimations
• 16*45=720 • of energy estimates for simulated
showers induced by
• protons, He, O and Fe nuclei
• have been obtained
• for the same sample of the 31 experimental readings of the
• one observed giant shower.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Best estimates: 10**20 eVNuclei № s(600,Θ) C=E/10**20 eV x, m y, m min χ2
1
P 1 27.48 2.04 941 -374 0.88 2 29.64 2.00 965 -406 0.945 3 32.18 1.805 948 -425 1.019 4 27.77 2.27 1011 -421 1.03 He 1 25.11 2.37 956 -408 0.895 2 33.56 1.755 947 -421 0.996 3 27.88 2.085 942 -389 0.949 4 31.33 1.93 955 -439 1. O 1 30.73 1.78 909 -363 0.97 2 31.03 1.86 943 -387 0.942 3 29.90 1.94 940 -393 0.904 4 31.66 1.75 912 -428 0.997 Fe 1 34.12 1.6 905 -353 1.081 2 36.23 1.66 969 -429 1.042 3 33.05 1.745 935 -437 1.051 4 35.02 1.69 975 -389 1.01 DATAYakutsk 53.88 1.1 1055 -406
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Simulations• New estimates of energy E
• of the giant air shower observed at YA
• have been calculated
• in terms of the QGSJET2 and Gheisha 2002 models:
• E≈2.·1020 eV for the proton primaries
• and
• E≈1.7·1020 eV for the primary iron nuclei
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Minimum of the function χ2
• Coordinates of axis
• and
• values of the χ2
• have been obtained
• for each individual shower
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Results of energy estimations• The energy estimates are minimal for
the iron nuclei primaries
• and change inside the interval
• (1.6−1.75)· 1020 eV
• with the value of the χ2 ~ 1.1
• per one degree of freedom.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Results of energy estimations• For the proton and helium nuclei
primaries
• energy estimates are maximal and
• change inside the interval
• (1.8−2.4)·1020 eV
• with the value of the χ2 ~ 0.9
• per one degree of freedom.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Results of energy estimations• For the oxygen nuclei primaries the
• energy estimates are in the interval
• (1.8−2)·1020 eV
• which is between intervals for proton and iron nuclei primaries
• with the value of the χ2 ~ 0.95
• per one degree of freedom.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Results of energy estimations• Dependence of the χ1
2
• per one degree of freedom
• on the coefficient
• C=E/(1020 eV)
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
protons
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
helium nuclei
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
oxygen nuclei
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
iron nuclei
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Reality of the Yakutsk DATA
• The time of sampling signal in the scintillation detectors
• τ=2000 ns
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Fraction of sampled signal: 1-100 m, 2-600 m, 3-1000 m, 4-1500 m
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Energy spectrum
• The HiRes data are used to construct
• 1) the base spectrum
• Jb(E)= A·(E)-3.25,• and
• 2) the reference spectrum
• Jr(E)
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Energy spectrum
• Using new variable y=lgE
• in four energy intervals of yi
• (i=1, 2, 3 and 4)
• 1) 17.<y1<18.65,
• 2) 18.65<y2<19.75,
• 3) 19.75<y3<20.01 and
• 4) y4>20.01
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Spectrum Jr(E) has been approximated by the following exponent functions
• J1(E)=A·(E)-3.25,
• J2(E)=C·(E)-2.81,
• J3(E)=D·(E)-5.1,
• J4(E)=J1(E)=A·(E)-3.25
• Constants C and D may be expressed through A and equations for Jr(E) at the boundary points.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Spectrum Jb(E) has been approximated by the following exponent function
•
• Jb(E) = J1(E)=A·(E)-3.25,
• L.G. Dedenko et al., Phys. of Atom. Nucl.,
2010, vol. 73, No12, pp. 2182-2189.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Spectrum
• The reference spectrum
• is assumed as•
• lgzi=lg(Ji(E)/J1(E)),
• where i=1, 2, 3, 4.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Spectrum• Results of the spectra J(E)
• observed at various arrays
• have been expressed as
• lg z=lg (J(E)/Jb(E))• and are shown
• in comparison with
• the reference spectrum.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
HiRes
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
PAO
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
AGASA
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Yakutsk
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
TA
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Tibet, Tunka-25, Cascade-Grande
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Study of the chemical composition
• Muon density for the primary protons with the energy E:
• ρμ(600)=a·Eb
• b<1• Decay processes are decreasing for higher
energies E.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Study of the chemical composition
• Muon density for the primary nuclei with atomic number A
• ρμ(600)=a·Ac·Eb
• c>0 (c=1-b)• QGSJET2: b=0.895, c=0.105
• For Fe:
• A0.105=1.53
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Study of the chemical composition
• QGSJET2:
• Signal in SD
• s(600)=∆E·(E/3·1017 eV)
• Signal in UD
• k·∆E·ρμ(600)
• Coefficient k=1.3
• Average signal ∆E=10.5 MeV
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Study of the chemical composition
• Muon fraction at 600 m:
• α=k·∆E·ρμ(600)/s(600)• Coefficient k=1.3 takes into account
the difference in the threshold energies and signals in UD
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Signal ∆ Е in underground muon detectors for deph h = 2.5 m: о– 0о, stars– 45о,
solid – 10.5 МeV,dashed – 14.85 МeV.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Signal ∆ Е in underground muon detectors for deph h = 2.5 m: о– 0о, stars– 45о,solid
– 10.5 МeV,dashed – 14.85 МeV.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Signal ∆ Е distributions in underground muon detectors for deph h = 3.2 m
a – Еμ = 1.05 GeV, b – Еμ = 1.5 GeV, c – Еμ = 10 GeV.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Mean signal ∆ Е in underground muon detectors from gammas with various energies for deph h :
● – h = 2.3 м , ○ – h = 3.2 м.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Signal ∆ Е distributions in underground muon detectors from gammas for deph h =2.3 m:
a – Еγ = 5 GeV, b – Еγ = 10 GeV.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Composition: solid-p, dashed-Fe, points-data
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
Conclusion
• Fluctuations in EAS development should be
taken into account to get estimates of
• energy E and • composition (atomic number A) of the primary particles.
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
•Thank you for attention
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW
18.05.2011. IWS. SINP. MOSCOW