1. Towards the TDR KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Paris, Feb. 23-24, 2009 Uli Katz ECAP / Univ. Erlangen  My private views  Basis for discussion  Decisions taken n PCC on Wednesday

2. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 2 Milestone dates  25 Feb 2009: PCC - decide on path towards TDR, first design conclusions?  30 Mar – 3 Apr 2009: Athens meeting - focus on few options  29 Jun – 3 Jul 2009: TDR Workshop (CPPM or Catania) - final design decisions, contents of TDR should be clear - draft contributions to TDR required - initiates TDR writing  30 Oct 2009: End of Design Study - we cannot spend DS money after that date

3. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 3 Plans decided in Jul 2008 (PCC, Brussels)  Consider 2 “full designs”  Produce short write-ups by 10 Oct 2008 - serve as input to simulation - are available, date roughly matched  Produce long write-ups by 31 Jan 2009 - contents see next pages - date not matched - we need a concentrated and directed effort to match milestone dates

4. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 4 Plans decided in Jul 2008: Simulation  define the geometrical detector layout;  specify the atmospheric muon background (for depths of 2500m, 3500m, 5000m);  determine the effective area under the condition that the atmospheric muon background is less than 10% of the atmospheric neutrino signal;  apply no cuts on true quantities for sensitivity studies (effective area, angular resolution, etc.);  determine the angular resolution as a function of neutrino energy under the same condition;  study effective areas for a minimal selection requirement (n hits, n=1,5,10), after trigger, and after reconstruction (same condition on the atmospheric muon background as above); as a trigger condition the presence of 5 causally related L1’s (i.e. large hits or local coincidences) should be used.

5. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 5 Plans decided in Jul 2008: Full write-ups … should contain  detector performance; filtering/triggering simulation, resulting limitations;  calibration requirements/possibilities;  power, bandwidth and connectivity requirements;  connectivity and computer/power requirements on shore;  indicative deployment and construction procedures, outsourcing options;  demonstration of CDR compliance;  a Product Breakdown Structure (PBS);  cost and personnel estimates;  a rough planning (including a provisional “Gantt chart”) for construction;  FIT values/availability for/of components, identification of common mode and single point failures (“logical structure”);  implication of distance from shore and depth;  test procedures and infrastructure implied.

6. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 6 Observations  A lot is missing, some crucial issues are in the works  Particularly sensitive points, basis for decision taking: - sensitivity estimates using the full design features - risk analysis - cost estimates - construction planning (  person power needs) - PBS and specification of component requirements  WP coordinators, in cooperation with “full design” responsibles, must - identify subtasks, their timelines and the individuals who do the work - “direct” the work to some extent (priorities, work sharing)  Overall time lines to be determined by PCC  Remember: Full meeting 30 March – 3 April !

7. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 7 Requests  Remember that the “full designs” are not mutually exclusive in all components – please investigate possible cross- combinations (e.g. tower with multi-PM OMs)  Focus on the crucial issues. Stop investing work and other resources into other activities.  Abandon R&D activities as soon as it becomes clear that solutions pursued are inferior.  WP3,4,5: Send clear requests (with deadlines) to WP2,7  WP2,7: Follow closely the development in WP3,4,5 and actively intervene if you can make statements

8. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 8 Cost model  Reminder - Tasks according to contract: A cost model for the KM3NeT infrastructure is developed by WP1, taking also into account distinctions between different sites. This cost model is used by WP2 to relate physics sensitivity and total cost.  The model (i.e. the calculation algorithm) has been presented at the Amsterdam CDR workshop.  The software implementation is still lacking and urgently needed (task accepted by WP1+7): - EXCEL spreadsheets for the time being (~2-3 weeks) - Inclusion in Pisa data base (available at ~4-8 weeks)  Most important: Collect data!

9. KM3NeT-DS WPx Meeting, Feb. 09 U. Katz: Towards TDR 9 Notes  Deadlines! Drafts are incomplete.  Re-discuss/decide simulation requirements in PCC  What prices to use? (list, confidential quotations, estimates, …) Start to get the biggest numbers per DU  Risk analysis is important; evaluate ANTARES consistently!  What if we cannot finish the TDR in time?  Suggest “mixed designs”