1. Anita-lite UCLA-based Simulation Amy Connolly April 7 th, 2005

2. ANITA note #33 shows how to set the inputs to Anita- lite values Anita-lite payload  2 antennas  Cant angle = 10 ±, separated by 22.5 ± Anita-lite path from GPS data Anita-lite system temperature as measured from data Model channel behavior – same a Jiwoo Bandwidth 400 MHz – 1200 MHz (Ped’s HP400) Trigger threshold = 4.5 £ V RMS Settings Different Anita-lite Simulation

3. Anita-lite flight path Average ice depth within horizon is  ANITA-lite path: 1470 m  Circle at 80 ± S: 1990 m At 10 19 eV, [V  ] eff is ~20% lower than for balloon path along circle at 80 ± S. Pick balloon latitude, longitude, and altitude at random from one of 25000 seconds along balloon path

4. Modeling ANITA-lite Channels and Trigger Signal summed across bandwidth for horiz. (H) and vert. (E) polarizations for each antenna separately: E pol. of 1 st antenna: Channel 3 on H,V ! LCP, RCP: RCP of 2 nd antenna: 3/3 of remaining channels required to satisfy:

5. Anita-lite System Temperature Average system temperatures across (most of) bandwidth (400 MHz-1000 MHz): Ch1Ch2Ch3Ch4 669 K 891 K695 K644 K RX1RX2 680 K669 K We add noise fluctuations to full-bandwidth signal

6. Effective V ¢ sr Sensitivity curves now in agreement at high energies Thresholds disagree by ~1/2 an order of magnitude Ratio of Anita-lite to Anita sensitivities Surpasses 1/3 at high energies

7. Deriving a Limit Sensitivity  =E dN/dE/dA/dt/d  Where: = interaction length in water = 6.02 days  = 60%

8. Limit

9. Conclusions Code is available to run in Anita-lite mode with the right settings UH and UCLA’s simulations look like they’re starting to converge  Thresold difference of ~1/2 order of magnitude