South Pole Ice model http://icecube.wisc.edu/~dima/work/WISC/ppc/spice/ Dmitry Chirkin, UW, Madison.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
London Collaboration Meeting September 29, 2005 Search for a Diffuse Flux of Muon Neutrinos using AMANDA-II Data from Jessica Hodges University.
Advertisements

SPICE Mie [mi:] Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison. Updates to ppc and spice PPC: Randomized the simulation based on system time (with us resolution) Added the.
AMANDA Lessons Antarctic Muon And Neutrino Detector Array.
PROGRESS ON WATER PROPERTIES ON TRACKS RECONSTRUCTION Harold Yepes-Ramirez 09/11/2011.
TeVPA, July , SLAC 1 Cosmic rays at the knee and above with IceTop and IceCube Serap Tilav for The IceCube Collaboration South Pole 4 Feb 2009.
IMPACT OF WATER OPTICAL PROPERTIES ON RECONSTRUCTION: HINTS FROM THE OB DATA. A PRELIMINARY STUDY ANTARES Collaboration Meeting CERN, February 07 th -10.
Sean Grullon For the IceCube Collaboration Searching for High Energy Diffuse Astrophysical Neutrinos with IceCube TeV Particle Astrophysics 2009 Stanford.
M. Kowalski Search for Neutrino-Induced Cascades in AMANDA II Marek Kowalski DESY-Zeuthen Workshop on Ultra High Energy Neutrino Telescopes Chiba,
The ANTARES experiment is currently the largest underwater neutrino telescope and is taking high quality data since Sea water is used as the detection.
IceTop Tank Calibration Abstract This report outlines the preliminary method developed to calibrate IceTop tanks using through going single muon signals.
Sean Grullon with Gary Hill Maximum likelihood reconstruction of events using waveforms.
EHE Search for EHE neutrinos with the IceCube detector Aya Ishihara for the IceCube collaboration Chiba University.
IceCube: String 21 reconstruction Dmitry Chirkin, LBNL Presented by Spencer Klein LLH reconstruction algorithm Reconstruction of digital waveforms Muon.
Reconstruction PDF in Inhomogeneous Ice Ribordy & Japaridze Université de Mons-Hainaut AMANDA/ICECUBE Berkeley – March '05.
1 N eutrino E xtended S ubmarine T elescope with O ceanographic R esearch Operation and performance of the NESTOR test detector.
Photon propagation and ice properties Bootcamp UW Madison Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison r air bubble photon.
Response of AMANDA-II to Cosmic Ray Muons and study of Systematics Newt,Paolo and Teresa.
Photon propagation and ice properties Bootcamp UW Madison Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison r air bubble photon.
Standard Candle, Flasher, and Cascade Simulations in IceCube Michelangelo D’Agostino UC Berkeley PSU Analysis Meeting June 21-24, 2006.
Ice Investigation with PPC Dmitry Chirkin, UW (photon propagation code)
Calibrating the first four IceCube strings Kurt Woschnagg, UCB L3 Detector Characterization IceCube Collaboration Meeting, Bartol, March 2004.
Data collected during the year 2006 by the first 9 strings of IceCube can be used to measure the energy spectrum of the atmospheric muon neutrino flux.
CEA DSM Irfu Reconstruction and analysis of ANTARES 5 line data Niccolò Cottini on behalf of the ANTARES Collaboration XX th Rencontres de Blois 21 / 05.
IceCube simulation with PPC Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison, 2010.
South Pole Ice (SPICE) model Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison.
Ice model update Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison IceCube Collaboration meeting, Calibration session, March 2014.
Calibrations Accomplishments in PY03 Plans for PY04 Kurt Woschnagg, UCB L3 lead – Detector Characterization.
IceCube simulation with PPC Photonics: 2000 – up to now Photon propagation code PPC: now.
Feature Extractor: overview and history of recent changes Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison Goal: Given an ATWD or FADC waveform, determine arrival times of some.
IceCube Calibration Overview Kurt Woschnagg University of California, Berkeley MANTS 2009 Berlin, 25 September identical sensors in ultraclean,
Status of the hadronic cross section (small angle) Federico Nguyen February 22 nd 2005  the 2002 data sample and available MC sets  trigger efficiency.
Review of Ice Models What is an “ice model”? PTD vs. photonics What models are out there? Which one(s) should/n’t we use? Kurt Woschnagg, UCB AMANDA Collaboration.
GPU Photon Transport Simulation Studies Mary Murphy Undergraduate, UW-Madison Dmitry Chirkin IceCube at UW-Madison Tareq AbuZayyad IceCube at UW-River.
IceCube simulation with PPC Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison, 2010 effective scattering coefficient (from Ryan Bay)
DirectFit reconstruction of the Aya’s two HE cascade events Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison Method of the fit: exhaustive search simulate cascade events with.
Status of Detector Characterization a.k.a. Calibration & Monitoring Project Year 2 objectives ( → Mar ‘04) 1. Calibration plan (first draft in March.
Muon Energy reconstruction in IceCube and neutrino flux measurement Dmitry Chirkin, University of Wisconsin at Madison, U.S.A., MANTS meeting, fall 2009.
1 Cosmic Ray Physics with IceTop and IceCube Serap Tilav University of Delaware for The IceCube Collaboration ISVHECRI2010 June 28 - July 2, 2010 Fermilab.
EHE Search for EHE neutrinos with the IceCube detector Aya Ishihara Chiba University.
IC40 Spectrum Unfolding 7/1/2016Warren Huelsnitz1 SVD Method described in A. Höcker and V. Kartvelishvili, NIM A 372 (1996) 469NIM A 372 (1996) 469 Implemented.
Photon propagation and ice properties Bootcamp UW Madison Dmitry Chirkin, UW Madison r air bubble photon.
I have 6 events (Nch>=100) on a background of ?
Light Propagation in the South Pole Ice
IceCube Collaboration Meeting Ghent, October 9, 2007
Direct Measurement of the Atmospheric Muon Spectrum with IceCube
The Antares Neutrino Telescope
Recent Results of Point Source Searches with the IceCube Neutrino Telescope Lake Louise Winter Institute 2009 Erik Strahler University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Two Interpretations of What it Means to Normalize the Low Energy Monte Carlo Events to the Low Energy Data Atms MC Atms MC Data Data Signal Signal Apply.
Systematic uncertainties in MonteCarlo simulations of the atmospheric muon flux in the 5-lines ANTARES detector VLVnT08 - Toulon April 2008 Annarita.
(2001) Data Filtering: UPDATE
South Pole Ice (SPICE) model
Response of AMANDA-II to Cosmic Ray Muons and study of Systematics
SPICECUBE.
String 21 Flashers and AMANDA
Freeze-In and Hole Ice Studies with Flashers
Erik Strahler UW-Madison 28/4/2009
Erik Strahler UW-Madison 4/27/2008
IC22 Unbinned GRB Search Utrecht Collaboration Meeting
Karen Andeena, Katherine Rawlinsb, Chihwa Song*a
on behalf of the NEMO Collaboration
Ice Investigation with PPC
Comparisons of data/mc using down-going muons
Experimental setup (SPICE)
Preliminary Comparison of Monte Carlo and 9-string IceCube Data
Claudio Bogazzi * - NIKHEF Amsterdam ICRC 2011 – Beijing 13/08/2011
Unfolding performance Data - Monte Carlo comparison
Atmospheric muons in ANTARES
Summary of yet another Photonics Workshop AMANDA/IceCube Collaboration Meeting Berkeley, March 19, 2005.
Photonics Workshop AMANDA/IceCube Collaboration Meeting Berkeley, March 19, 2005 Going the last mile…
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Presentation transcript:

South Pole Ice model http://icecube.wisc.edu/~dima/work/WISC/ppc/spice/ Dmitry Chirkin, UW, Madison

IceCube in-ice calibration devices 3 Standard candles 56880 Flashers 7 dust logs

Flasher dataset

For muons: folded with Cherenkov spectrum Simulation For muons: folded with Cherenkov spectrum Flasher 405 nm Sample Cherenkov photons from this curve Angular sensitivity

Fitting the data 10 events 4 events 1 event simulated Absolute calibration of average flasher is obtained “for free” no need to know absolute flasher light output beforehand no need to know absolute DOM sensitivity 2.1 3.1 Red: AHA Black: SPICE

Likelihood description of data Sum over emitters, receivers, time bins in receiver Find expectations for data and simulation by minimizing –log of Measured in simulation: s and in data: d; ns and nd: number of simulated and data flasher events Regularization terms:

Dependence on initial seed

Including the dust logger data

Correlation with dust logger data (from Ryan Bay) effective scattering coefficient Scaling to the location of hole 50 fitted detector region

Merged data

Refining the solution

Refining the solution 7% in a 1% in be

Possible reasons for this discrepancy flasher directionality was ignored: cylindrical symmetry of the 6-flasher emission pattern was assumed  checked: simulating flashers with measured directions (6-prong star pattern) reproduces the above result exactly effects of the hole ice on photon propagation were taken only through the angular sensitivity curve  however: resulting ice properties are the same (within uncertainties) for either nominal or hole ice angular sensitivity various issues in recorded waveforms: effects of saturation and undershoot, miscalibration, etc.  already: using the saturation correction. Fine structure of ice layers matters?  under investigation

History of changes 11/19/09 SPICE (also known as SPICE1): first version * seeded with AHA as initial solution * AHA is used for extrapolation above and below the detector * relies on AHA for correlation relation between be(400) and adust(400). 02/01/10 SPICE2: * fixed the hdh bug (see ppc readme file) * seeded with bulk ice as initial solution * dust logger and EDML data is used for extrapolation * dust logger data is used to extend in x and y, taking into account layer tilt. 02/17/10 SPICE2+: * fixed the "x*y" option hit counting in ppc * be(400) vs. adust(400) relation is determined with a global fit to arrival time distributions. 04/28/10 SPICE2x (this page): * improved charge extraction in data: improved merging of the FADC and ATWD charges implemented saturation correction fixed the alternating ATWD bug * updated DOM radius 17.8 --> 16.51 cm (cosmetic change: modifies only the meaning of py) * fixed the DOM angular sensitivity curve (removed upturn at cos(q)=-1).

SPICE models py=3.1 py=2.1

SPICE models

SPICE models

SPICE models

SPICE models vs. AHA

Ratio to SPICE2x 7% uncertainty 5% uncertainty py=2.1 py=3.1

Why does AHA not work? Individually fitted for each pair: best possible fit Points at same depth not consistent with each other! Fits systematically off

Measured properties not consistent with the average! Why does AHA not work? When replaced with the average, the data/simulation agreement will not be as good From ice paper Averaged scattering and absorption Measured properties not consistent with the average! Deconvolving procedure is unaware of this and is using the averages as input

SPICE vs. AHA: horizontal flashers

SPICE vs. AHA: 45 degree flashers

Single muons generated with mmc SPICE AHA

Muon bundles generated with corsika SPICE AHA

Nch of flasher events

Improvement in simulation by Anne Schukraft by Sean Grullon Downward-going CORSIKA simulation Up-going muon neutrino simulation

Unfolded data with only events in the top or bottom preliminary preliminary IC-22 atmospheric neutrino analysis

IC-22 unfolding result preliminary Despite problems in detector simulation, agreement with Bartol muon neutrino flux was demonstrated It was decided that the simulation, namely simulation of the ice, needed improvement before this analysis can proceed to claiming a measurement of the neutrino flux. This problem has been solved!  redo the analysis (with IC-40)

Conclusions and outlook SPICE (South Pole ICE) model: fitted to IceCube flasher data collected on string 63 demonstrated remarkable correlation with the dust logger data therefore was extended to incorporate these data (SPICE2) uses flasher timing information (since SPICE2+) Rapid progress in simulation leads to very good agreement with data: In-situ flasher simulation background muon simulation neutrino simulation Uncertainties on the model are ~ 5% on scattering and ~ 7% absorption  Need to understand remaining ~ 7% disagreement between timing and amplitude distributions Future: measure the wavelength dependence with the standard candle