1. 1 WP2Monday 16 April 2007 modify pass=wp20407 Introduction (15') P. Coyle (CPPM) Status of Sirene (30') E. Presani (Nikhef) Graphical User Interface for Sirene (30') S. Meester (Nikhef) lunch break Application of Icecube software framework to water detectors (30') C. Kopper (Erlangen) Status of Mathematica based detector optimisation studies (40') F. Jouvenot (Liverpool) Summary of the Erlangen detector simulations (30') R.Shanidze, S. Kuch (Erlangen) Preliminary studies of the KM3NeT physics sensitivity (20') R.Shanidze, S. Kuch (Erlangen) coffee break Differential Sensitivity to Extragalactic Point Sources (10') R. White, S. Bradbury (Leeds) Sensitivity of KM3NeT to mSugra Dark Matter (20') H. Motz (Erlangen) Simulation Studies of KM3 architectures (30') A. Tsirigotis (HOU) Calibration of km3 with EAS (20') A. Leisos (HOU)

2. 2 Work Package 2 Meeting: Physics and simulation Paschal Coyle General Assembly Pylos, 16/4/07

3. 3 WP2 Web Page  Access to a linux PC farm and computing environment with working antares-based code is available at CCLyon  Links to source and documentation of pilot project software (maintained by pilot project responsables)  Same approach with KM3NET software under development (SIRENE, Mathematica,...)  Definition of ‘ICECUBE in the sea’ reference detector  written document  geometry definition file (Antares format)  Deliverables: Benchmark neutrino fluxes http://km3net.in2p3.fr

4. 4 Reference Detector (ICECUBE in the sea) Geometry Inter-storey separation 17 m Inter-line separation 125 m Positioning of lineshex. lattice Number of lines 80 Number of OMs per storey1 Orientation of OMsDownwards Number of storeys per line60 Height of first storey100 m Site Characteristics Depth of sea bed2450 m Absorption length (Appendix A)60 m Light Scatteringignored Baseline counting rate50 kHz Bioluminescence burstsignored Refraction index at 450 nm (Appendix B)1.35 OM Characteristics-10 inch Hammatsu Photocathode sensitive area500 cm 2 Angular acceptance of the OMflat disk (prop. to cos  ) Combined efficiency (see Appendix C)20% (quantum*collection, 400-700nm) gain at 2500 V 2*10 8 pulse amplitude at working gain (5*10 7 )60 mV Transit time60 ns Transit time spread (  )1.5 ns Pulse rise time5 ns Pulse width (FWHM, SPE)12 ns Detection threshold0.3 SPE Charge resolution (Gaussian)30% Front end electronics 2 pulse separation 12 ns Dynamic rangelinear 0-20 SPE, saturated A sanity check for the new softwares-not a serious design

5. 5 Atmospheric neutrinos [Brunner] Dark matter: [Lavalle] Sun (not earth, not CG) 10 GeV-1 TeV Astrophysics sources: [Shanidze]1-100 TeV HESS galactic Diffuse flux: [Spurio] WB, MPR bounds 10 TeV-10 PeV Gamma Ray Bursts: [Petrovic] 10 TeV-10 PeV WB EHE: [Aublin, Kouchner] GZK>1EeV Deliverables: Benchmark Neutrino Fluxes + 1st YEAR REPORT

6. 6 Deliverables II +14 months : first versions of simulation software packages Event generators Neutrino interactionsgenneu/genhenANIS Atmospheric muonscorsika/MUPAGE Muon propagationMUM/MUSIC Detector response KM3/geasimSIRENMCGEN Cherenkov light production Light propagation PMT & Front end electronics Calibrations CALIBOB Timing, amplitude Positioning, absolute pointing Reconstruction RECOMCRECO

7. 7 Deliverables III +16 months : CDR contributions Description of software packages Event generator, Detector response, Calibrations Event selection, Reconstruction First results on detector architecture First results on site comparison First results on calibration studies need up to date documentation for the various softwares please start to release internal notes

8. 8 WP2 will also build the Physics Case Preliminary Physics case to be presented in the CDR Include comparison with existing planned experiments small editing group soon to be defined: Aharonian, …..

9. 9 Optimization condition Compare various detectors which can be built and operated with the same budget difficult to do but necessary and important NEED Cost model and costs: WP1, WP3, WP4, WP5 Without full reconstruction in presence of realistic background the misleading conclusions could be drawn  Optimal S/B for benchmark fluxes  Maximal neutrino effective area  Best angular resolution for muon neutrinos  Best energy resolution for muon neutrinos Comment on Optimization Criteria

10. 10 Key Optimization Questions What Physics has priority DM, HESS, UHE, ?energy range What size of detector 1 km3 vs 5 km3 energy range, cost 3D grid of active detector elements WP5Distances between storeys, energy range, Distances between structuresangular resolution, cost Line vs tower Dense core vs empty core Number of structures OM orientations WP4Upwards useful?-UHE, shadow of moonenergy range, bkgd rejection, Horizontal, downwards, 45degreescost Overlap PMT size, multiplicitiesbkgd rejection, bandwidth, WP3Number per storeycost Large vs many small PMTs Coincidence of 2 small vs 1 large Readout schemeenergy range, bgkd rejection, WP3/4Offshore vs onshore triggerbandwidth, cost Waveform vs SPE Dynamic range of front end Calibrationcost charge time-light beacons positioning-acoustic vs light pointing-moon, surface array

11. 11 Optimisation ‘Guidelines’ Document Encourage the various groups to adopt the same methods and types of plots for presentation of optimisation results definition of neutrino effective area definition of muon effective area definition of relevant plots effective areas vs true nu energy (none, trigger, recon) e vs true nu energy effective areas vs true nu energ CPPM, ERLA

12. 12 Contributions Source modelling: INFN, CEA, DUBLIN Atmospheric muons: INFN Galactic (CR) neutrinos: INFN, UK, CEA Galactic (HESS) sources: Erlangen, IN2P3, CEA, INFN Dark matter: INFN, Erlangen, IN2P3, UK, FOM Diffuse flux:INFN, Erlangen Extragalactic pt sourceUK, IN2P3 GRBs:Erlangen, FOM UHE:UHA-GRPHE, APC Neutrino flux generator: INFN software: FOM, IN2P3 Multi-PMT geometry: FOM Directional PMT:INFN simulation of triggerINFN, FOM, Demo, HOU, Erlangen, IN2P3 Reconstruction algorithms: Erlangen,INFN, IN2P3, HOU, FOM, CEA Time,position calibration: UK, Valencia, Erlangen, INFN Absolute positioning : INFN(moon), HOU(surface array) Optimisation of design:ALL physics and analysis software calibration

13. 13 Which Energy Range ? Astronomy  Point sources 1TeV-1PeV  Diffuse flux 10TeV-10PeV  GZK 1EeV-100EeV Particle Physics  Neutralinos10GeV-1TeV Difficult to have a detector with optimal behaviour over 8 orders of magnitude !  Separate optimisations for low/medium/high energies  How much does one gain or lose in the physics?