“Expected Performances of the JEM-EUSO mission”

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
JNM Dec Annecy, France The High Resolution Fly’s Eye John Matthews University of Utah Department of Physics and High Energy Astrophysics Institute.
Advertisements

Stereo Spectrum of UHECR Showers at the HiRes Detector  The Measurement Technique  Event Reconstruction  Monte Carlo Simulation  Aperture Determination.
Results from the Telescope Array experiment H. Tokuno Tokyo Tech The Telescope Array Collaboration 1.
Recent Results for Small-Scale Anisotropy with HiRes Stereo Data Chad Finley Columbia University HiRes Collaboration Rencontres de Moriond 17 March 2005.
The Pierre Auger Observatory Nicolás G. Busca Fermilab-University of Chicago FNAL User’s Meeting, May 2006.
EUSO: Extreme Universe Space Observatory Jessica Cerny Bancroft-Rosalie School.
A Search for Point Sources of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA-B10 Scott Young, for the AMANDA collaboration UC-Irvine PhD Thesis:
TAUP 2005: Zaragoza Observations of Ultra-high Energy Cosmic Rays Alan Watson University of Leeds Spokesperson for Pierre Auger Observatory
Characterization of Orbiting Wide-angle Light-collectors (OWL) By: Rasha Usama Abbasi.
E.Plagnol - HENA June The EUSO Project ë An overview of the Physics of EUSO ë Detection of UHECR by fluorescence +Cerenkov ë The EUSO detector.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
1 Performance aspects of the instrument M. Bertaina Univ. Torino & INFN EUSO Balloon Phase A Review Meeting, CNES Toulouse, February 2 nd 2012.
- Functional Requirements - Background - Examples of expected Signal Track - An “idea” of angular resolution EUSO-BALLOON DESIGN REVIEW, , CNES.
Orbit Characteristics and View Angle Effects on the Global Cloud Field
The Second International Workshop on Ultra-high-energy cosmic rays and their sources INR, Moscow, April 14-16, 2005 from Extreme Universe Space Observatory.
Very Large Volume Neutrino Telescope Workshop Athens 13 – 15 October 2009 Recent Results on Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays Alan Watson University of Leeds.
Anisotropy Studies in the Pierre Auger Observatory Beatriz Blanco Siffert for the Auger Collaboration Instituto de Física - Universidade Federal do Rio.
Measurement of the UHECR energy spectrum from hybrid data of the Pierre Auger Observatory Presenter: Lorenzo Perrone Università del Salento and INFN Lecce.
A test of HSimulation-HReconstruction chain with low energy CORSIKA showers I.De Mitri, Lorenzo Perrone, M. Settimo Auger Analysis Meeting September 11-14,
Atmospheric Aerosol Measurements at the Pierre Auger Observatory The Pierre Auger Observatory operates an array of monitoring devices to record the atmospheric.
Response of AMANDA-II to Cosmic Ray Muons and study of Systematics Newt,Paolo and Teresa.
Alba Cappa Universita’ and INFN Torino Čerenkov Light Measurements for the EUSO Experiment Rencontres de Moriond – Very High Energy Phenomena in the Universe.
E.Plagnol - TA/TALE feb Acceptance and Counting Rates of EUSO ë Detecting UHECR from space ë The EUSO detector : Who does what. ë Some characteristics.
Energy Spectrum C. O. Escobar Pierre Auger Director’s Review December /15/2011Fermilab Director's Review1.
Multi-TeV  -ray Astronomy with GRAPES-3 Pravata K Mohanty On behalf of the GRAPE-3 collaboration Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai Workshop.
AGASA Results Masahiro Teshima for AGASA collaboration
HiRes 5Y Operations – Program and Context What Physics Will be Done? How Does it Compare With Other Projects?
Hybrid measurement of CR light component spectrum by using ARGO-YBJ and WFCTA Shoushan Zhang on behalf of LHAASO collaboration and ARGO-YBJ collaboration.
The Auger Observatory for High-Energy Cosmic Rays G.Matthiae University of Roma II and INFN For the Pierre Auger Collaboration The physics case Pierre.
EAS Time Structures with ARGO-YBJ experiment 1 - INFN-CNAF, Bologna, Italy 2 - Università del Salento and INFN Lecce, Italy A.K Calabrese Melcarne 1, G.Marsella.
Exploring Laser Light Ruben Conceição. Pierre Auger Observatory Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays Pierre Auger Observatory – Fluorescence Detector Longitudinal.
EUSO Atmospheric Monitoring from Space M.Teshima on behalf of the EUSO collaboration MPI für Physik, München (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut)
Measurement of the UHECR energy spectrum from hybrid data of the Pierre Auger Observatory Presenter: Lorenzo Perrone Università del Salento and INFN Lecce.
AMIGA – A direct measurement of muons in Pierre Auger Observatory
Detecting Air Showers on the Ground
L. CazónHadron-Hadron & Cosmic-Rays interactions at multi-TeV energies. Trento,2-Dez Results from the Pierre Auger Observatory L. Cazon, for the.
Cloud Detection: Optical Depth Thresholds and FOV Considerations Steven A. Ackerman, Richard A. Frey, Edwin Eloranta, and Robert Holz Cloud Detection Issues.
Shoushan Zhang, ARGO-YBJ Collaboration and LHAASO Collaboration 4 th Workshop on Air Shower Detection at High Altitude Napoli 31/01-01/ IHEP (Institute.
1 Cosmic Ray Physics with IceTop and IceCube Serap Tilav University of Delaware for The IceCube Collaboration ISVHECRI2010 June 28 - July 2, 2010 Fermilab.
32 nd ICRC –Beijing – August 11-18, 2011 Silvia Vernetto IFSI-INAF Torino, ITALY On behalf of the ARGO-YBJ collaboration Observation of MGRO J with.
Measurement of the CR light component primary spectrum B. Panico on behalf of ARGO-YBJ collaboration University Rome Tor Vergata INFN, Rome Tor Vergata.
TA-EUSO: First simulation study and status
for Lomonosov-GRB collaboration
HiRes 5Y Operations – Program and Context
The EUSO-SPB mission Valentina Scotti INFN Sezione di Napoli.
ISDC Data Centre for Astrophysics, Geneva
Update on Muon Flux Underground Using Geant4 Simulation
L.L.Ma for LHAASO collaboration Beijing China
Expectation of Cosmic Ray Energy Spectrum with LHAASO
Andrea Chiavassa Universita` degli Studi di Torino
Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS
Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope ACD Final Performance
Comparison of GAMMA-400 and Fermi-LAT telescopes
CALET-CALによる ガンマ線観測初期解析
Ultra High Energy Cosmic Ray Spectrum Measured by HiRes Experiment
Activity Report: Slovakia
Electron Observations from ATIC and HESS
Calculation of detector characteristics for KM3NeT
Pierre Auger Observatory Present and Future
Response of AMANDA-II to Cosmic Ray Muons and study of Systematics
Auger Northern Observatory
30th International Cosmic Ray Conference
Telescope Array Experiment Status and Prospects
Monitoring VHE Extragalactic Sources with ARGO-YBJ detector
Atmospheric muons in ANTARES
The Aperture and Precision of the Auger Observatory
CALET-CALによる ガンマ線観測初期解析
TeV γ-ray survey of the northern sky using the ARGO-YBJ experiment
"Physics and astronomy results with the ARGO-YBJ experiment"
Studies and results at Pierre Auger Observatory
Presentation transcript:

“Expected Performances of the JEM-EUSO mission” A. Santangelo1,2 & M. Bertaina3 IAAT, University of Tübingen, Germany RIKEN, Japan University of Torino, Italy On behalf of the JEM-EUSO Collaboration Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Take home messages: Physics and Astrophysics at E>5×1019 eV But also… Explore new physics in the energy range E≈1020-1021eV Highest statistics and therefore largest exposures at extreme energies But also … lower energies are important for overlapping with ground-based detectors and make a statistically significant comparison! Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

Key observation and instrument requirements Observation area (Nadir) ≥1.3×105 (Horbit/400[km])2 km2 Arrival direction determination accuracy ≤ 2.5° (at E=1020 [eV] and 60° zenith angle) Energy determination accuracy ≤ 30% (E=1020 [eV] and 60° zenith angle) Xmax determination accuracy ≤ 120 [g/cm2] (E=1020 [eV] and 60°zenith angle) Energy threshold ≤ 5.5×1019 [eV] Duty cycle ≥ 17% Lifetime > 3 years (goal: > 5 years) How is defined here the Observation duty cycle How is defined the Instrument duty cycle?

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Part II: Performances Directly referring to posters: F. Fenu et al. ‘ESAF Simulation’, ID592 T. Mernik et al. ‘ ESAF Reconstruction’, ID633 K. Shinozaki et al. ‘Aperture estimation’, ID979 L. Saez et al. ‘Trigger studies in cloudy conditions’, ID1034 P. Bobik et al. ‘ Duty Cycle’, ID886 F. Garino et al. ‘Cloud distribution’, ID398 K. Higashide et al. ‘STM Simulation’, ID1240 Indirectly referring to: Several posters related to the hardware development Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

Which is the annual exposure? Of course it depends on the zenith angle and energy… It is determined by three factors: Determined by the trigger efficiency Determined by the background (and operation) Determined by the cloud coverage Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Duty cycle estimation P.Bobik et al., ID886 defined as the fraction of time in which the nightglow background doesn’t hamper EAS observation Based on the Universitetsky Tatiana satellite G. K. Garipov et al. 2005a, 2005b Scaling of the UV intensity from Tatiana’s to the ISS orbit The JEM-EUSO duty cycle has been estimated for a set of Solar Zenith angles assuming an UV background < 1500 photons/(m2 ns sr) Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 P.Bobik et al., ID886 Duty cycle (2) Note that: Selecting bckg < 1500 photons/(m2 ns sr) with its relative occurrence gives a trigger efficiency curve equivalent to an average bckg of 500 photons/(m2 ns sr) We can also operate at higher background rates (higher energies) Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

Duty cycle: EUSO old estimate C. Berat et al. 2003 F. Montanet et al. 2004 Independent estimate All these results are in very good agreement with and actually better than the conservative value assumed by the JEM-EUSO consortium: 20% Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011

RELATIVE OCCURENCE OF CLOUDS BETWEEN 50 N & 50 S (TOVS DATA) Cloud Coverage F.Garino et al., ID398 Cloud top <3 km 3-7 km 7-10 km >10 km OD>2 17.2 5.2 6.4 6.1 OD:1-2 5.9 2.9 3.5 3.1 OD:0.1-1 2.4 3.7 6.8 OD<0.1 29.2 <0.1 1.2 Optical Depth Do not look at the graphics: it can be improved. Do you have the original table from Lupe? Which is the key conclusion here? See next slide… Occurence of clouds (in %) between 50° N and 50° S on TOVS database. The matrix Optical depth vs. Cloud-top altitude is shown. Confirmed by ISCCP,CACOLO & MERIS database 9 RELATIVE OCCURENCE OF CLOUDS BETWEEN 50 N & 50 S (TOVS DATA) OPTICAL DEPTH CLOUD-TOP ALTITUDE <3 km 3-7 km 7-10 km >10 km >2 17.2 5.2 6.4 6.1 1-2 5.9 2.9 3.5 3.1 0.1-1 2.4 3.7 6.8 <0.1 29.2 1.2 Relative occurrence (%) of clouds between 50 N and 50 S latitudes on TOVS database in the matrix of cloud-top altitude vs optical depth. Daytime and ocean data are used for the better accuracy of the measurement YELLOW  reconstruction possible only for limited range of ZA GREEN  reconstruction possible for every Zenith Angle (ZA) RED  reconstruction severely affected by cloud presence

L.Saez et al., ID1034 OK OK BAD OK Signal attenuated 10 10 Qua sono elencate le situazioni elencate precendeentemente. Signal attenuated 10 L.Saez et al., ID1034 10

Cloud-impact to trigger efficiency L.Saez et al., ID1034, K.Shinozaki et al. ID979 Cloud-impact to trigger efficiency E>5·1019eV Cloud top <3 km 3-7 km 7-10 km >10 km OD>2 90% 65% 35% 20% OD:1-2 70% 45% 25% OD:0.1-1 80% 75% OD<0.1 Optical Depth Average efficiency* = 82% above 50 EeV *A spectral distribution dN/dE∝E-3 is assumed 11

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 L.Saez et al., ID1034, K.Shinozaki et al. ID979 Ratio vs clear sky efficiency ♦ All trig events with cloud impact ▼ Xmax > H_cloud-top OR tau_cloud < 1 Basic conclusion: Energy [eV] In more than 70% of the cases the UV track including Xmax is observable Do we have a significant plot to support the above statement? *Different geometrical conditions for optically thick or optically thin clouds Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 12

Trigger Probability (Zenith angle vs. Energy) q=75 q=60 q=45 q=30 Updated q=15 K.Shinozaki et al., ID979 Full FoV, bckg = 500 ph/m2/ns/sr

Trigger Probability for Central FoV (R<125 km) q=75 q=60 q=45 q=30 Updated q=15 K.Shinozaki et al., ID979

Normalised Aperture: Efficiency PRELIMINARY Better Statistics is needed! 3x1019eV K.Shinozaki et al., ID979

Optics Throughput Spot size QE PMT FS layout Trigger ×2.3 OVERALL NET IMPROVEMENT Optics Throughput Spot size QE PMT FS layout Trigger Trigger Efficiency (%) JEM-EUSO ESA-EUSO ×2.3 Energy (eV) Energy threshold of JEM-EUSO lowered by a factor more than 2 compared to the old ESA-EUSO

Instantaneous Aperture 4.5·105 km2sr 1.5·105 km2sr 4·104 km2sr The new plots (see later) show too many curves: the message is diluted! K.Shinozaki et al., ID979

Annual Exposure (…Nadir) TA×h×k ~14% 60,000 km2sr yr 20,000 km2sr yr 5,000 km2sr yr K.Shinozaki et al., ID979

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Why JEM-EUSO? Large exposure + Full sky coverage 1 MLinsley High energy 50% full efficiency: please explain Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 K.Shinozaki et al., ID979

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Angular Resolution ♦ 7e19 eV ▲3e20 eV × a(deg) × Requirement a<2.5°@ E=1020eV, q=60° Zenith Angle q(deg) End to end simulations show that the requirement is met. Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 T.Mernik et al., ID633

International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 Energy Resolution ♦ log(E/eV)=19.6 ■ log(E/eV)=19.9 ■ log(E/eV)=20.1 × Requirement DE/E<30% @ E=1020eV, q=60° × ΔE/E (%) ZENITH Angle q(deg) End to end simulations show that the requirement is met. DXmax < 70gr/cm2 (Requirement DXmax < 120gr/cm2) OK Beijing, August, 2011 International Cosmic Ray Conference 2011 T.Mernik et al., ID633

Comparison with current observatories Observatory Aperture km2 sr Status Start Lifetime Duty cycle Annual Exposure km2 sr yr Relative to Auger Auger 7,000 Operations 2006 4 (16) 1 7000 TA 1,200 2008 2 (14) 0.2 TUS 30,000 Developed 2012 5 0.14 4,200 0.6 JEM-EUSO (E≈1020 eV) 430,000 Design 2017 60,000 9 JEM-EUSO (highest energies) Tilted mode 35° 1,500,000 200,000 28 All numbers must be updated and changed! Number of events must be given!

Conclusions The JEM-EUSO duty cycle and cloud impact have been thoroughly estimated to be η≈20% and κ > 70%. JEM-EUSO is designed to have a annual exposure about 9xAuger at 1020 eV in nadir mode and 28xAuger at the highest unexplored energies in tilt mode. To reach/approach 1ML integrated exposure it is necessary to operate the mission also in tilted mode. Simulations in nadir mode shows that the energy, angular and Xmax resolution meet the requirements. JEM-EUSO will have enough exposure and reconstruction capability at 3x1019 eV to overlap with current generation observatory. JEM-EUSO is not EUSO! Optics and PMTs QE have been greatly improved and so have been the performances…

THANK YOU!

Hmax & ZA dependence Protons, 1019<E(eV)<1021 QGSjet-II F.Garino et al., ID398