Beyond 2015 Simulation Challenge

B2015 Simulation Challenge document (V7)

Info about available simulations

---

3.1 Performance of individual stations

"The following information should be provided. As applicable to the item, quantitative values should be based on the analysis of individual stations using the reconstructed datasets at fixed energies (F) : 1019 eV and 1019.8 eV and for p, He, N and Fe primaries. The target for these metrics is the March meeting, with items (iii) and (v) having highest priority."

1. Strategy for calibrating the new detectors. Expected precision of the relative and absolute calibration to be achieved should be provided. Means for validating the calibration should be discussed.

2. The time resolution of the signal trace(s) and response time of the detector.

3. The resolution and the bias in reconstructing the muonic signal (or electromagnetic signal, as applicable to the upgrade) in individual detector stations. The bias is defined as Delta(Smu)=(Smu,rec - Smu,MC)/Smu,MC and the resolution is given by its variance sigma(Delta(Smu)). These quantities should be shown as a function of the distance, r, of the tank to the shower core for each of the different zenith angles of the simulation sets (F).

All plots for 38 deg

E=10¹⁹ eV E=10^19.8 eV

E=10¹⁹ eV E=10^19.8 eV

4. Lateral distance range and corresponding typical range of signal amplitudes within which the detectors are expected to perform optimally. At a minimum this should include determination of the saturation distance, Rsat, defined to be the radius above which the reconstructed signal has less than a 20% departure from linearity in at least 90% of the events, for showers of 1019.8 eV, for the different angles as given in (F).

Plots for 10^{19.8}, 38 deg, Epos

Proton Iron

Plots for p,He,N,Fe, 38 deg., QGSjet, Epos

E=10¹⁹eV E=10^19.8

1. For a detector which is planned to trigger independently of the existing water-Cherenkov detectors (WCD), or is a modification of the existing WCD, the trigger probability as function of the lateral distance of the detector should be given. In particular, above what distance and below what typical detector signal does the trigger probability fall below 95% and 50%?

3.2 Event-based observables

"The performance of the event reconstruction is of great interest even though such performance measures are only approximate for the time being, because some reconstruction codes are clearly not as mature as others. With that being recognized, the following information should be provided by June. It would be helpful if the different proponents would undertake a first evaluation of items (b), (c), (d) and (e) earlier."

1. Average lateral distribution of measured signals and any other pertinent quantities, for different energy, zenith angles and composition (F)

1. The resolution and bias of the reconstructed Smu (or applicable relevant quantity such as Nmu) of the proposed detector, at an “optimum radius” ropt (see B2015 Simulation Challenge document for more details). As ropt depends on the shower properties, it should be estimated for the fixed energy library (F). In general, ropt will not be 1000 m; in the event that ropt has not yet been determined for the given upgrade proposal, the resolution and bias can be reported taking ropt =1000m or other specified distance.

Bias; All plots for 38 deg.

QGSJet04 Epos

Resolution; All plots for 38 deg.

QGSJet04 Epos

3. The resolution and bias of the reconstructed muon production depth distribution (MPD), for different energies, zenith angles and primary composition (F). The reference is the MPD one would obtain from the muons for a given detection energy threshold, arriving at ground as predicted by Monte Carlo simulation.

4. Scatter plots for each library in (F) to illustrate the correlation and separation power of the different composition sensitive parameters that can be derived with the upgraded array (i.e. Sm, Nm or Sem vs. S(1000), with each shower being one point in the plot).

5. Merit factor for separating primary mass groups, to be derived from simulation sets (F). The primary combinations p-Fe, N-Fe and p-He should be specifically considered. See B2015 Simulation Challenge document for more details. In addition it will be important to consider also the limited energy resolution by deriving the same merit factors including a realistic energy reconstruction using simulation sets (C).

Distributions for rho^MARTA_1000 @ 10^19 and 10^19.8, 38 deg.

QGSJet04 Epos

Merit factor using rho^MARTA_1000_ alone.

click here for the same plots including the ideal case

QGSJet04 Epos

6. The event reconstruction efficiency should be evaluated (F,C). Are there event geometries or other conditions that lead to an improved or much poorer than average event reconstruction?