1. Photonics Tables Bin Optimization Kyle Mandli Paolo Desiati University of Wisconsin – Madison Wuppertal AMANDA Collaboration Meeting

2. Stephan: comparison between PTD bulk tables and Photonics bulk tables (muon, shower) –Check if Photonics bulk tables are consistent with PTD –New AMASIM release and bulk tables test Thomas: implement PSI interface for Photonics, PTD and NN-fit tables Johan: work with Thomas in PSI and produce Stephan’s test using PSI –Check results consistency with different interface (IceCube) Daan: working on NN-fit procedure of Photonics tables and produce comparison tests with tables themselves –Check if NN fit are a good approximation to speedup simulations Where are we ?

3. Ignacio: implement the zenith bin-wise production –Another simulation speed up possibility Adam,David H.: check memory map feasibility –Yet another simulation speed up possibility Kyle M.: Photonics tables bin optimization –Come up with a binning as a good compromise between good ice description and an acceptable table size Bin optimization is the topic of this talk Where are we ?

4. Light tracking binning: –Photons tracked using 6 parameters: ρ, φ, z, t, θ e, θ a This affects the table size Light source binning: –depth (z) & angle (θ) binning This affects the number of tables Table types: –Point-like ems and muon tables (differential or level1 tables) –Infinite muon tables (extended source or level2 tables) –Time-integrated amplitude PDF tables (.abs, smaller tables) –Integral PDF time tables (.prob, full binning tables) –Differential time probability table http://amanda.wisc.edu/simulation/photoproduction/tables 1-slide tutorial

5. only ice propertiesProduce single tables @ given source locations (z=0): only ice properties Produce this table with different tracking binning in ρ, φ, z, t, (θ e,θ a integrated) –with statistical errors (interfaces do not read errors at the moment) Bin optimization proposed procedure Tableρφzt size/table Ranges0; 4500; 180-450; 4500; 6000 Tab1501890 29.2 MB Tab2451680 18.4 MB Tab3401470 11.0 MB Tab4351260 6.0 MB Tab5301050 3.0 MB Tab625840 1.3 MB Tab720630 0.4 MB Tab815420 0.1 MB

6. Use Time delay distribution @ given source-receiver dist d –Receiver at reference origin –Light sources (10 GeV ems) on z=0, random in circle at a given d Sampling different table projections as in a simulation Mean Amplitude & Mean Time Delay versus distance d –Light sources on z=0, random in disk up to ρ max Perform a statistical test on ems tables –Kolmogorov-Smirnov test between most dense table and the others Calculate max y distance of cumulative histo and the probability that the 2 histograms are generated by a random sampling of the same distribution Use of PSIUse of PSI => advantage of root => still in development (but new release now) Optimization procedure

7. Time delay distribution 20,000 random samples

8. Time delay distribution 20,000 random samples

9. Time delay distribution 20,000 random samples

10. Compare the most dense table with the others –Calculate the probability that tables in each pair is derived by random sampling of the same distribution –Test statistic depends on K-S max distance and number of entries in each histo K-S Test: what we expect tab-pairs Prob Increase bins Increase prob

11. K-S Test

12. Tab pairRel Prob Tab1-2 0.28 (1.00) Tab1-3 1.00 (3.53) Tab1-4 0.09 (0.33) Tab1-5 0.03 (0.1) Tab1-6 0.001 Tab1-7 1.9e-7 Tab1-8 9.7e-17

13. Tab 5 seems to be ~10% consistent with the most dense table Statistical errors from tables (not accessible) and MC simulation Table bins reminder Tableρφzt size/table Tab1501890 29.2 MB Tab2451680 18.4 MB Tab3401470 11.0 MB Tab4351260 6.0 MB Tab5301050 3.0 MB Tab625840 1.3 MB Tab720630 0.4 MB Tab815420 0.1 MB

14. Mean Amplitude & Time Delay vs distance

17. K-S Test

18. Tab pairRel Prob Tab1-2 1.00 Tab1-3 0.19 Tab1-4 0.003 Tab1-5 0.005 Tab1-6 0.001 Tab1-7 7.2e-6 Tab1-8 3.1e-20

19. Given statistical fluctuations and table size: Tab 5 good compromise Table bins reminder Tableρφzt size/table Tab1501890 29.2 MB Tab2451680 18.4 MB Tab3401470 11.0 MB Tab4351260 6.0 MB Tab5301050 3.0 MB Tab625840 1.3 MB Tab720630 0.4 MB Tab815420 0.1 MB

20. A set of tables where only one dimension tracking binning is varied –The test suggests that changing binning in one dimension does not significantly affect the tables precision for a relatively wide range of binning. A set of infinite muon tables to perform the same test –This test was NOT done so far –Would require other tables … The source location binning to be tested (= layers) –NEXT STEP : it requires the generation of whole set of tables Other tests

21. Suggested table with enough precision and reasonable size –We already used this. Not much improvement ! Conclusion on tracking binning Tableρφzt size prob/diffsize abs Tab5301050 3.0 MB0.06 MB Range450180+/- 4506000-- Infinite muon Tables These tables have not been tested (educated guess so far) lρφt size prob/diffsize abs 1003010506.0 MB0.12 MB 503010503.0 MB0.06 MB Range10004501806000--

22. What we used so far Source location binning z_lowz_highz_stepa_lowa_high a_step#tables -400+40020 (40) 018010 (18) 779 With these values we have 779 ems.prob + 779 ems.abs = 1558 ems tables = 2.34 GB 779 mu.prob + 779 mu.abs = 1558 mu tables = 4.67 GB 779 mu.prob + 779 mu.abs = 1558 mu tables = 2.34 GB Total size : ~ 7 GB (4.67 GB)

23. Angular splitting in simulation –Load only the tables corresponding to all z-values and to only the 2 θ-values around the muon track zenith angle Gain a factor 18/2=9 table size to load = 520 MB Use of NN fits of the tables –Do not load any table but use the fit function The function is complicated but <<< 1GB Speed seems to be very competitive versus tables Precision under extensive check Memory mapping –Load tables (or portion of tables) on disk and access them using specific algorithm Under investigation. More complicated than it seems. Size and Speed

24. Produce baseline tables (ems, muon diff tables) –Photon survival probability only with ice properties –Binned in θ a Store those tables : 86 GB but only once ! –Different efficiencies can be included without re-generating tables Include efficiencies, and produce.prob,.abs and.diff Special tables: –UHE, monopole tables : wider ranges (up to 1000 m in z and ρ) –.diff (dP/dt) tables for reconstruction with finer bins and less dimensions –Propose to generate them separately Final Table Production

25. Efficiencies to be included –Like in previous tables production ? Final Table Production ParameterDescriptionWhat is it GLASS_N Glass refraction index Borosilicate glass (P. Sudhoff) GEL_N Gel refraction index “standard gel” n=1.41 (dada_attn.f) QE Quantum Efficiency Hamamatsu 8” (R5912) from catalogue GLASS Glass transmittance Benthos housing (P. Sudhoff) GEL Gel transmittance “standard gel” 100% (dada_attn.f) SENS Angular sensitivity Measurement by CHW (AIR 19960301) HOLE Hole ice model 50cm scattering length OM_CORR Curvature correction 13” benthos housing DYNODE 1 st dynode coll eff 0.7884 PMT Collection area (m^2) 0.0284

26. Lots of progress recently and still on the way Waiting for layered tables: will be on disk next week –Still waiting for me ? I remind that we already have tables ! Efficiencies can be changed faster Start simulation for further tests –Purely interface reading (i.e. PSI) –AMASIM runs: speed –Theta angle binning of muons –NN testing NEED OF PEOPLE CURIOUS ABOUT THE SECRETS OF PHOTONICS Conclusions

27. http://amanda.wisc.edu/simulation/photoproduction/tables Conclusions