Vitillo Phdthesis Presentation DAMPE 2011

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 125

1 Cosmic Rays in the Universe

2 DArk Matter Particle Explorer


Cosmic-ray detection in space
The detector
3 Silicon-Tungsten Tracker Converter (STK)
Metrology of the STK
Calibration of the STK on-ground and on-orbit
4 Measurement of the Proton Flux
Introduction to the flux measurement
Candidate proton sample selection
Efficiencies and associated systematics
Monte Carlo Unfolding
Results
5 Conclusions and outlooks
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 2
Cosmic Rays in the Universe
The puzzle of atmospheric ionization and the discovery of
Cosmic Rays

Already in 1785 Coulomb was


investigating why charged
electroscopes, once insulated, could
discharge;

The observations of Wilson, Wulf and


Pancici brought Hess to perform the
discovery of the cosmic radiation.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 4
Cosmic-ray production

Galactic Sources
Supernova
Remnants (SNR)
Pulsars
Extra Galactic
Sources
Active Galactic
Nuclei
Dark Matter
annichilation
χ+χ̄ → SM+SM
Photos from www.nasa.gov and https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap040908.html, scheme from
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/40

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 5
The Evidence of Dark Matter

F. Zwicky in 1933 discovered DM The “Bullet Cluster”


from the observations of rotation
curves of velocity versus radial

dence for DM
distance for stars and gas in spiral
galaxies.
ves

Begeman et al., MNRAS 249 (1991) Clowe et al., APJ (2006) 109-113

X-ray picture that disentangles the


dr interacting baryonic plasma matter
1 (red and yellow) from the
r2 collisionless DM (blue)
Begeman et al., MNRAS 294 (1991)
ting
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 6
Experimental observations of cosmic rays

The Flux φ in [E, E+dE] of a cosmic-ray


species is defined as: Cosmic Ray Spectra of Various Experiments

104
N(E, E + dE)

Flux (m2 sr GeV sec)-1


LEAP - satellite

Φ(E, E + dE) = (1) 102 (1 particle/m2-sec)


Proton - satellite

∆T × A × dE Yakustk - ground array

Haverah Park - ground array

Akeno - ground array


10-1
AGASA - ground array

with N(E, E + dE) the number of cosmic -4


Fly’s Eye - air fluorescence

HiRes1 mono - air fluorescence


10
rays in [E, E+dE], ∆T the observation HiRes2 mono - air fluorescence

HiRes Stereo - air fluorescence

10-7 Auger - hybrid

time, A the geometrical acceptance.


-10 Knee
10 (1 particle/m2-year)

All-electron spectrum 10-13

Nature (2017) 522:63-66


10-16

10-19

FN

CE
10-22 Ankle

AL

RN
(1 particle/km2-year)

Te

LH
va

C
tro

(1
10-25

4T
n
(2

eV
T
(1 particle/km2-century)

)
eV
)
10-28
9 10 13 15 16 18 19 20
10 10 1011 1012 10 1014 10 10 1017 10 10 10
Energy (eV)

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 7
Existing proton flux measurements
JETP 108 (2018) 5
PRL 114 (2015) 171103

NUCLEON (2018)

AMS-02 (2015)

Apj 839 (2017) 5

CREAM (2017)
The proton flux was measured
with great precision at low energy.
At high energy an unexpected
“knee” seems to appear, but the
uncertainties in this region are
very high ⇒ additional
measurements are needed.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 8
DArk Matter Particle Explorer
The experimental challenge

Stratospheric balloons, like ATIC and CREAM, were pioneers of the space
detection of cosmic rays: they had several pros but also cons, for example
the exposure time limited to some months.

Long payloads ⇒ really strong demand for a detector that could acquire
cosmic rays outside of the atmosphere for many years, like for example
PAMELA, AMS-02, CALET, NUCLEON.

4 THE PAMELA COLLABORATION O. ADRIANI ETC.


PAMELA
AMS-02 CALET

Fig. 1.: The PAMELA instrument: a schematic overview of the apparatus.

The DAMPE detector is designed to pursue this task.


Furthermore PAMELA is well suited to conduct studies of cosmic-ray acceleration and
propagation mechanisms in the Galaxy, solar modulation effects, the emissions of Solar
Stefania
Energetic Vitilloinside the heliosphere and investigate the Measurement
Particles (SEPs) particles in the of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 10
The DArk Matter Particle Explorer
Overview Layers Strips Copy Num SD and Hits

DAMPE was launched on December 17 2015 and named as “Wukong”.


➔ Material: EJ-200,10mm thick
Type-A
➔ Wrapping material: Tyvek
➔ Dimention(body):
Type-B Type-A: 824mm×28mm×10mm
Type-B: 824mm×25mm×10mm y x A Plastic Scintillator
Strips Constructed in Geant4(length shortened)
PSD
|Z|, γ anticoincidence strip Detector (PSD);
z
STK A Silicon-Tungsten
6 tracking, |Z|, γ conversion
Today's Date Sub Topic 3
tracKer (STK);
A BGO calorimeter
Neutron Detector (BGO);
Elements Test and ECAL Building A boron-doped plastic
Energy fields : 2~60 MeV

NUD
scintillator serving as
Energy resolution : <25%@30MeV
e/p separation BGO ECAL a NeUtron Detector
E, e/p separation
Weight:12.4 Kg (NUD);
Power:0.5W

Astropart. Phys. 95 (2017) 6-24

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 11
Plastic Scintillation Detector (PSD)

The PSD provides the


measurement of the absolute
value of the charge of the incident
particles up to Z = 26;
2 double-layers, each one
composed by 41 plastic scintillator
bars 884 mm × 28 mm × 10 mm;
one double-layer is segmented in
the X coordinate, the other in the
Y.

Y. Yu et al., Astropart. Phys. 94 (2017) 1-10, Y. Zhang et al.,


Proceedings of The 35th International Cosmic Ray Conference 2017,
Pos(ICRC2017) 168

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 12
The Bismuth Germanium Oxide imaging calorimeter (BGO)

Performances
14 layers, 7 along the x axis and 7
along the y axis alternatively, to
allow a 3D reconstruction of the
shower development.
Each layer: 22 BGO bars,
25 mm × 25 mm × 600 mm, total
active area of 60 cm × 60 cm.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 13
Silicon-Tungsten Tracker
Converter (STK)
The Silicon-tungsten TracKer converter

STK has been designed to measure charged particle tracks, to measure the
gamma-ray direction through conversion into e+ e− pairs and to measure the Z
of cosmic rays. y x
z
STK consists of: Charged particle
!
7 support planes, 3 with 1mm
thick tungsten inside, forming W
converter
6 tracking double layers;
192 ladders, 16 on each
sensitive face (12). Each Each ladder is r/o by 6 VA 140 ASIC chips.
ladder is made by 4 SSD 1 ladder has
320µm × 9.5µm × 9.5µm. 768 strips; VA Chip

every other
strip is
read-out,
for a total VA chips of one ladder that read
the 6×64 strips.
of 384.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 15
Metrology of the STK - the tungsten plates
After the trays, tungsten and ladders production for STK, these various
components were measured to ensure the high quality of the detector.
We started from selecting the tungsten plates for three planes of STK,
each of those equipped with 16 188 × 188 mm2 plates.
TRAY Assembly
An X-ray scan was performed of the plates assembled in the trays.

CFRP plate Top

Al honeycomb

CFRP frame

Tungsten plates

CFRP plate Top

Size Sizemax.dev θ (◦ ) θmax.dev (◦ ) t tmax.dev


188.00 0.050 90:00:00 00:01:00 1.00
10# 0.05

Table 1: Design values and maximum accepted deviations from the design
parameter for a tungsten plate (t stands for thickness). The lengths are
expressed in mm.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 16
Planarity of the STK trays

100 points on the top and bottom surface of each tray were measured.
These measurements were performed before and after a thermal cycling
on each tray at 50◦ for eight hours.

Y-axis circle (base)

Y-axis

Circle 1 (base)

Origin circle (base)


X-axis

X-axis circle (base)

1 The thermal cycling does not affect the surface of the trays.
2 The planarity appears to be contained within 0.35 mm for each tray,
inside the tolerance of 0.4 mm.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 17
Ladders and planes production

Linearity top side Linearity bottom side


Entries 192 Entries 192

Mean 3.62 Mean 2.743


35
25 RMS 1.717 RMS 2.281

30

20
25

15 20

15
10

10

5
5

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
linearity [μm] linearity [μm]

The average alignment error is less


than 4 µm, much better than the
required 40 µm.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 18
Final STK assembly

We performed a detailed cross-check, with an analysis that calculates the


distance between the facing measured points after the assembly.
We made a sketch of the final assembly of the STK, using the information
given by the planes metrology and that concerning the trays and the
ladders separately.

The residual misalignment of the ladders on the plane is corrected at software


level, and described in NIM A 893 (2018) 43-56.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 19
Calibration of the STK

Clusters associated to the particle tracks provide a measurement of the particle


charge (dE/dx ∝ z2 ) and a calibration of the signal in the ladders of the STK
is necessary to ensure a good discrimination between different charges. It
consists of two steps:

1 equalizing the response of all the chips that read-out the silicon ladders
(VA equalization);
2 correcting the cluster amplitude in dependance of the impact position of
the particle on the sensor and on its impact angle (charge-loss correction).

Strategy:
We studied the response of the STK on-ground with cosmic muons (Z = 1) and
then we applied the method developed on-ground to orbit-data for
all signals in STK (VA equalization);
proton and helium charges in case of the charge-loss correction;

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 20
VA gain on-ground and equalization procedure

The chip signal should not depend on the read-out region.


We verified this assumption with cluster signals of vertical particles, in two
different read-out regions.

Energy ladder 60 X VA 0 Energy ladder 60 X VA 1


Entries 1491 Entries 1759
80 Mean 68.54 100 Mean 69.45
RMS 27.07 RMS 27.33
70 χ2 / ndf 89.27 / 80 χ 2 / ndf 90.59 / 80
Prob 0.224 Prob 0.1962
LWidth 4.764 ± 0.378 80 LWidth 5.316 ± 0.346
60 53.52 ± 0.44
MPV 54.09 ± 0.48 MPV
Area 2882 ± 78.5 Area 3452 ± 85.7
50 GWidth 8.793 ± 0.603
GWidth 9.425 ± 0.739 60
Entries 667 Entries 816
40 Mean 54.08
Mean 55.2
RMS 27.89

S1
RMS 28.44 40
30 χ 2 / ndf 46.28 / 62
χ2 / ndf 63.64 / 67

η=
Prob 0.5939 Prob 0.932
20 LWidth 5.122 ± 0.439 LWidth 5.64 ± 0.40
20 MPV 36.62 ± 0.43
MPV 38.01 ± 0.52

S1 +S2
10 Area 1234 ± 51.3 Area 1591 ± 58.6
GWidth 4.364 ± 0.928 GWidth 1.622 ± 1.567
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
ADC counts ADC counts

Energy ladder 60 X VA 2 Energy ladder 60 X VA 3


Entries 2068
Entries 1911
Mean 65.31
100 Mean 66.69
RMS 26.53 120 RMS 26.98
χ2 / ndf 84.5 / 79 χ 2 / ndf 61.62 / 81
Prob 0.3154 Prob 0.9464
80 LWidth 4.503 ± 0.308 100 LWidth 4.833 ± 0.288
MPV 52.12 ± 0.43 MPV 50.34 ± 0.36
Area 3755 ± 89.0 Area 4143 ± 93.5
GWidth 9.157 ± 0.531 80 GWidth 7.852 ± 0.478
60
Entries 843 Entries 1022
Mean 50.45 60 Mean 49.37
40 RMS 26.53 RMS 25.91
χ2 / ndf 49.3 / 67 χ2 / ndf 64.51 / 66
40
Prob 0.9485 Prob 0.5288
LWidth 4.475 ± 0.348 LWidth 4.297 ± 0.299
20
MPV 35.14 ± 0.42 20 MPV 34.36 ± 0.36
Area 1605 ± 58.1 Area 1979 ± 64.7
GWidth 3.214 ± 0.753 GWidth 3.629 ± 0.704
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Energy ladder 60 X VA 4
ADC counts

Entries 2353
Energy ladder 60 X VA 5
ADC counts

Entries 2038
A correction factor is computed for the
Mean 67.17 Mean 64.24
120 RMS 26.47 RMS 25.3

different impact positions:


χ2 / ndf 93.25 / 78 100 χ2 / ndf 88.38 / 81
Prob 0.1148 Prob 0.2691
100 LWidth 4.922 ± 0.296 LWidth 4.38 ± 0.29
80 MPV 50.39 ± 0.41
MPV 52.12 ± 0.40
Area 3997 ± 91.7
80 Area 4691 ± 100.0 GWidth 8.886 ± 0.539
GWidth 9.115 ± 0.498
60 Entries 922
Entries 1191
60 Mean 48.37
Mean 49.46
RMS 27.28 RMS 26.25
χ2 / ndf 38.67 / 71 40 χ2 / ndf 62.4 / 61
40

Eq.param.(η)
Prob 0.9994 Prob 0.4262
LWidth 4.649 ± 0.257 LWidth 4.79 ± 0.44
20 MPV 34.04 ± 0.31 20 MPV 33.16 ± 0.49
Area 2346 ± 70.3 Area 1784 ± 61.8

corrfactori (η) = (2)


GWidth 2.381 ± 0.671 GWidth 2.812 ± 1.405
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
ADC counts ADC counts

MPVi (η)
Cluster charge distribution in the 6 VAs of one ladder for η region 0
(read-out strip) and η region 1 (floating strip). Each distribution is ⇒ The correction factors are the same
fitted with a Landau convoluted with a Gaussian noise function [1].
in both regions, as expected.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 21
Application of the VA equalization

The correction factors were applied to the cluster charge distribution in the
read-out and in the floating region of each i -th VA, with i =1,...1152 in the
following way:
ADCi (corr) = ADCi · corrfactori (0). (3)
Maximum after and before VA corr (η region 0) Maximum after and before VA corr (η region 1)

400
Entries 1152 Max E in all FM VAs (MIPs) before VA eq Entries 1152
Max E in all FM VAs (MIPs) before VA eq 350 Mean 35.22
Mean 56.2
350 RMS 0.5631 RMS 0.9428
Max E in all VAs (MIPs) after VA eq
Max E in all VAs (MIPs) after VA eq χ2 / ndf 64.54 / 23 χ2 / ndf 78.63 / 35
300
Prob 8.223e−06 Prob 3.372e−05
300 375.6 ± 14.5
Constant 389.5 ± 15.2 Constant
Mean 56.22 ± 0.01 250 Mean 35.21 ± 0.01
250 Sigma 0.2782 ± 0.0069 Sigma 0.2781 ± 0.0064

Entries 1086 Entries 1086


200
56.82 Mean 35.67
200 Mean
2.091 RMS 1.591
RMS
150 χ2 / ndf 60.1 / 43
χ2 / ndf 58.04 / 51
150 Prob 0.04326
Prob 0.2317
Constant 77.43 ± 3.05
Constant 57.5 ± 2.3
100 Mean 35.63 ± 0.04
Mean 56.73 ± 0.06 Sigma 1.317 ± 0.032
100 Sigma 1.781 ± 0.046
50
50
0
0 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46
50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 ADC count
ADC count

Two conclusions:
1 The chip properties do not change with the read-out region.
2 The VA correction factors of both η regions can be used. For statistics
reasons we adopted η = 0.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 22
Charge collection in all the STK ladders on-ground
The charge collected in the STK ladders depends on the impact position and the
hit angle of the particle on read-out and on floating strips.
After equalizing the response of all the VA chips, it was possible to
combine the behavior of all 192 ladders.
The cluster charge distribution in STK was simultaneously studied as a
function of η and impact angle, with a maximum inclination of 35◦ in
|θx,y |.
Energy vs η for all ladders after VA eq and before η corr (-4.97° < θ < -2.46° && 2.46° < θ < 4.97°) Energy vs η for all ladders after VA eq and before η corr (-20.00° < θ < -17.48° && 17.48° < θ < 20.00°)
xz,yz xz,yz
xz,yz xz,yz
h2Energyladders_vs_EtaAll_beforeEta192
200 h2Energyladders_vs_EtaAll_beforeEta192
ADC

200

ADC
Entries 1028959 Entries 432187
180 Mean x 0.4999 Mean x 0.5015
Mean y 180
57.59 Mean y 66.38
160 RMS x 0.2311102 RMS x 0.2787
RMS y 160
30.41 RMS y 29.34
140 140 10
120 120

100 10 100

80 80
1
60 60

40 40
1
20 20

0 0 10−1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
η η

As example we show the cluster charge as a function of η, for


2.5◦ < |θx,y | < 5◦ (left), and for 17.5◦ < |θx,y | < 20◦ (right). The most
probable value of the cluster charge distribution in each η bin is also shown as
the black points.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 23
Charge-loss correction on-ground

The corrected cluster charge will be computed in the following way:

ADCcorr = ADC · corrparam . (4)

corrparam = µGaus /MPV(η, θx,y ) (5)


where µGaus is the mean value of the gaussian fit of the gain of the STK VA in
the read-out region, corrected for the path length inside the silicon.

Example: cluster charge as a function of η, for


Cluster charge of all ladders integrated over η and impact angle.
0◦ < |θx,y | < 5◦ .

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 24
VA equalization on-orbit
We selected |Z| = 1 in STK using
Smax before VA eq. (01-02/2016)
the combined information of all Smax after VA eq. (01-02/2016)
µ = 52.02 ± 0.05
the clusters associated to the 102
before
σbefore = 1.65 ± 0.04
RMSbefore = 1.77
track;
µ = 52.06 ± 0.01
after
The signal of the cluster is 10 σafter = 0.36 ± 0.01
RMSafter = 0.56
corrected for the path length
inside the silicon.
1
Energy ladder 112 VA 0 Z = 1 Energy ladder 112 VA 1 Z = 1
5000 5000
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
4000 4000 SMax [ADC]
3000 Smax = 52.42 ADC 3000 Smax = 52.20 ADC
2000 2000 Smax before VA eq. (01-02/2016)
1000 1000 Smax after VA eq. (11-12/2017)
µ = 52.02 ± 0.05
00 00 before
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cluster Charge [ADC] Cluster Charge [ADC]
102 σbefore = 1.65 ± 0.04
RMSbefore = 1.77
Energy ladder 112 VA 2 Z = 1 Energy ladder 112 VA 3 Z = 1
5000 5000
4000 4000
µ = 52.52 ± 0.01
after
3000 3000
Smax = 52.42 ADC Smax = 52.20 ADC
10 σafter = 0.46 ± 0.01
2000 2000
RMSafter = 0.69
1000 1000
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Cluster Charge [ADC] Cluster Charge [ADC]

Energy ladder 112 VA 4 Z = 1 Energy ladder 112 VA 5 Z = 1


5000 1
5000
4000
4000
3000 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
3000 Smax = 52.10 ADC
Smax = 52.18 ADC SMax [ADC]
2000 2000

1000 1000
Plots in The on-orbit calibration of DArk Matter Particle Explorer,
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
submitted to Astroparticle Physics.
Cluster Charge [ADC] Cluster Charge [ADC]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 25
Charge collection in STK for p and He on-orbit
We used more than one year of Proton
on-orbit data, adding the PSD
identification for the charge.
r
PSDx + PSDy
PSDglobal =
2 · EMIP
(6)
A sample of events containing
tracks with 5 or 6 reconstructed
points is selected. Helium

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
PSDglobal [a.u.]

PSD global distribution in PSD. Red is marked the selection region


for proton and helium. Right: cluster charge as a function of η for S. Vitillo and V. Gallo., Proceedings of The 35th International
the selected sample of protons and helium nuclei for Cosmic Ray Conference 2017, Pos(ICRC2017) 240

5 < |θx,y | < 10 . ◦
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 26
Charge collection in STK for p and He on-orbit

The dashed line correspond to Proton


the cluster charge value at
which we want to correct;
The correction value is the
MPV gain for vertical impinging
particles of each charge.
Only ladders relative to the first
point of STK were used to Helium
compute the correction.

Example fit of the cluster charge distribution for helium at 3D plots for 25◦ < |θx,y | < 30◦
η ∈ [0.38, 0.40].
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 27
Charge-loss correction on-orbit for p and He

1 The correction factors for proton and helium in the first point of
STK were computed for various inclinations within the range
0◦ < |θx,y | < 35◦ , with 5◦ step;
2 These correction parameters were applied to the cluster charge in
ADC (∝ energy loss dE/dx of the particle) of all the 192 STK
ladders.
corrparam = MPV(Zi )/fun(ηZ i , θx,y ) ⇒ ADCcorr = ADC · corrparam

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 28
Tracker charge performance for proton and helium


ST ∝ Z ⇒we can obtain the
To obtain the average charge preliminary charge resolution:
value that combines all the
measurements of the clusters σp (c.u) σHe (c.u)
belonging to the track, we used 0.04 0.07
the truncated mean ST defined as:
P#clu
i=1 Si − SMax
ST = (7)
#clu − 1
where Si is the signal of cluster i
and SMax is the maximum signal
among the clusters associated to
the track.

Charge resolutions
The charge resolutions have improved after the charge-loss correction by
≈ 13% for protons and ≈ 21% for helium nuclei.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 29
Measurement of the Proton Flux
Definition of particle flux
Np (E, E + dE)
Φ(E, E + dE) = (8)
∆T × AGeom × dE
Np (E, E + dE) is the number of candidate protons selected minus the
background events between E and E+dE, unfolded with the selection
efficiency ε in the same energy interval:
1 X
Np (E, E + dE) = P(E |Emeas,i ) · Np, meas,i (9)
ε(E, E + dE) i

∆T is the effective data collection time (called live time) of DAMPE for
the analyzed data during 1/01/2016-30/06/2018: 5.95 ·107 s, equivalent
to 689 days.
AGeom is the geometrical acceptance of DAMPE, dE is the energy bin.

Monte Carlo simulation:


1 Two physics lists of the Geant 4 toolkit were studied: QGSP FTFP BERT
and FTFP BERT.
2 Additional samples of proton MC [100, 200]TeV and [200, 1000]TeV were
simulated, combining the DPMJET model with the FTFP.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 31
Preselection of events

Example events after the preselection


Erec in BGO > 20 GeV (no
geomagnetic cutoff corr.);
BGO acceptance cut (BGO
track inside first and last layer
of BGO);
Emax layer
Etotal
< 0.35 (side events
removal);
the bar with the highest
energy deposition in the BGO
1 is asked to have
coordinates x, y lower Display in the XZ and YZ view of a
than |280| mm; particle that released an energy of 26 GeV
2 should not be the first or (top figures) and 41 GeV (bottom figures)
the last in the first three in the calorimeter. The energy in the
BGO layers; BGO and the PSD is in MeV.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 32
STK track selection
1 BGO-STK match
STK track with χ2 /ndof < 25 and at least one cluster in the first
plane;
∆(θSTK , θBGO ) < 25 ◦ ;
the difference between the projection of the STK track and the BGO
track on the first BGO layer is less then 60 mm;
the difference between the projection of the BGO track on the first
STK track point and the first STK track point should be lower than
200 mm.
The multiplicity in the reconstructed 2D STK tracks complicates the
combination of them in 3D tracks for the track reconstruction
algorithm ⇒ additional check based on the χ2 and the # of clusters
of the track.
2 STK-PSD match
PSD fiducial cut: the size of PSD should contain entirely the STK
track;
we select the PSD bar crossed by the STK track in both XZ and YZ
views. The charge of the PSD bar is corrected for the light
attenuation in the PSD bar and the allignment;
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 33
Example events after the pre- and the STK track selection

1 The number of reconstructed tracks in STK can be large due to the


interactions of the primary cosmic ray before the calorimeter.

2 On the other hand, if the particle interacts only in the BGO, the chance
to not activate the trigger used in the analysis is higher.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 34
Trigger and charge selection

1 We require the activation of the high energy trigger (HET);


2 the cluster charge of the first point of STK has to be lower than 600
ADC, (it reduces the presence of |Z| > 2 particles);
3 a cut on the difference between the charge measured by the two layers of
PSD is applied, after smearing in an accurate way the charge signal in
PSD for proton and helium in MC.
4 the energy in the first two BGO layers has to be smaller than the sum of
the energy in the third and in the fourth layer of the BGO
(EL0 + EL1 < EL2 + EL3 );
5 remove the electron component in CR using the combined information of
longitudinal and transversal shower shape in the BGO (variable ζ in the
following);
6 the proton sample is selected in the PSD as a function of the
reconstructed energy, taking into account the helium background.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 35
Effective acceptance of the selection steps

Trigger and charge selection


Preselection and STK track selection
0.1

Effective Acceptance [m2×sr]


BGO Acceptance
0.6 Emax bar /E tot < 0.35
Effective Acceptance [m2×sr]

BGO max lateral 0.09 HET


n.tracks > 0 ADCFP < 600
0.5 track selection 0.08
PSD Fiducial 1.0 < PSDx -PSDy <1.3
No PSD bar fired 0.07 EL0+EL1 < EL2 + EL3
0.4
0.06 ζ > f (Erec)
ζ
Z sel for p
0.3 0.05
0.04
0.2
0.03
0.1 0.02
0.01
0 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 0
True Energy [GeV] 3 5
102 10 104 10
True Energy [GeV]

HE trigger: asks for a threshold of ∼ 10 MIPs in each hit bar of the first
three layers of BGO and a threshold of ∼ 2 MIPs in each hit bar in the
fourth layer (with a density ρBGO = 7.13 g/cm3 , a MIP in 2.5 cm of BGO
loses ∼ 5.7 MeV.)
The BGO has a thickness that corresponds to 32 X0 and 1.6 λ.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 36
Electron contamination
Template fit example and overall view

e/p discrimination with ζ (a


combination of lateral and
longitudinal shower shape), the
same variable validated and used
in Ambrosi et al. Nature 552
(2017) 63-66.

The background from electrons is negligible.


Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 37
Helium contamination
The PSD measurement associated to the selected track on XZ and YZ is defined as:
s
dE PSDx + PSDy
PSDx(y) = × L (10) PSDglobal = (11)
dx PSD hit x(y) 2

PSDglobal for 562.34 GeV < Erec < 1000.00 GeV


2400 DATA
2200 MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium
2000

1800
MC Proton The binning in energy is chosen
1600

1400
according to the flux
1200

1000
measurement.
800

600

400
A signal region compatible with a
200

0
low helium background at all the
0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDglobal [ MeV]

PSDglobal for 31622.78 GeV < Erec < 56234.13 GeV


reconstructed energies was chosen.
25 DATA 5

Helium contamination [%]


MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium 4.5
20 MC Proton
4
3.5
15
3
2.5
10
2

5
1.5
1
0 0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDglobal [ MeV]
0 3
102 10 104
BGO Energy [GeV]
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 38
High Energy Trigger efficiency (HET)
Unbiased trigger: signals in the Nevt (UB and HET)
εHET = (12)
first two BGO layers greater than Nevt (UB)
Note: the UBT is pre-scaled with a ratio 512 : 1, in the latitudes
∼ 0.4 MIPs in each hit BGO bar. [−20◦ , 20◦ ]. At higher latitudes, with a ratio 2048 : 1.

Data and Proton MC QGSP Data and Proton MC FTFP


Efficiency

Efficiency
1 p MC QGSP 1 p MC FTFP
p Data p Data

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
Data/MC

Data/MC

1.8 1.8
1.6
BGO Energy [GeV] 1.6
Energy [GeV]
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1 1
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
3 3
102 10 104 102 10 104
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 39
Track reconstruction efficiency in STK for protons
With the PSD measurements of this
Selection trough BGO and PSD selection, it is possible to select a pure
proton sample, both in data and in MC.
1 The BGO preselection cuts of
slide 28 are applied; 1.1

Efficiency
1.08 STK track reco for p
2 events not in the SAA region; 1.06
p MC
p Data
1.04
3 activation of the HET;
1.02

4 BGO-PSD match (summary): 1

0.98
at least one PSD bar has to
0.96
be hit in x and in y; 0.94

the projection of the BGO 0.92

track is geometrically 0.9

Data/MC
1.06

contained in the PSD; 1.04


1.02
1
the sample has to pass the 0.98
0.96

cuts described on slide 31. 0.94


102 10
3
BGO Energy [GeV]
104

⇒The track reconstruction efficiency does not affect the track selection
efficiency calculation.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 40
Track selection efficiency in STK for protons
The compatibility of the chosen
STK track associated to a proton
with the proton analysis
requirement od slide 29, is used to
estimate the track selection
efficiency.
1.2 p MC
Efficiency

p Data
1

0.8

0.6
The difference is less than 5%
0.4
below 100 GeV and ∼1% above.
0.2 Since the difference is not
0
constant in energy, we unfolded it
1.3
Data/MC

1.2
1.1
to compute the systematic error
1
0.9 related to the track selection
0.8
0.7
102 10
3
104 10
5 efficiency.
BGO Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 41
Charge selection efficiency in PSD

Independent Z = 1 selection in the two layers of PSD, helium background


subtracted.
PSDx PSDy
1.05 1.05
Efficiency

Efficiency
p MC p MC
1 p Data 1 p Data

0.95 0.95

0.9 0.9

0.85 0.85

0.8 0.8

0.75 0.75

0.7 0.7
Data/MC

Data/MC
1.1 1.1
1.08 1.08
1.06 Energy [GeV] 1.06
1.04 1.04
1.02 1.02
1 1
0.98 0.98
0.96 0.96
0.94 0.94
0.92 0.92
0.9 3 0.9
102 10 104 102 103 104
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

Systematic error less than 1% Systematic error less than 1%


Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 42
Energy response in BGO from MC

P
Nrec,i = i Mij Npri,j , where Mij is the bin
to bin migration matrix.
Method description (FTFP)
Energyrec BGO
Ratio =
Energytruth
106

Reconstruced energy (GeV)


10−2
105

104

10−3
103

102

10−4
10

1 3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10
MC true energy (GeV)

- Gaussian fit of the Ebgo/Eprimary at the end of the selection


- So far only E The
> 100 ratio
GeV are considered
decreases since∼we
from haveata E
0.48 Ebgo>20GeV
truth = 50 cut,
GeVtherefore
to ∼ 0.3theat Etruth =
ower energy have truncated distribution (-> next run w/o E > 20 GeV cut)
100 TeV ⇒ an unfolding procedure is necessary (we adopted that one
- Here two fit examples are shown
following G. D’Agostini, NIM A 362 1995, 487).

3
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 43
Systematics related to the Unfolding
Validation of the method
1 We convoluted the AMS energy spectrum (evaluated in the chosen bins)
with the migration matrix of the selection (DAMPE response matrix)
obtaining a“pseudo-data” reconstructed spectrum.
2 The pseudo-data reconstructed spectrum is unfolded and compared to the
input spectrum. ⇒The pseudo-data spectrum in truth energy is the same
as the input spectrum so that no systematic bias is applied to the final
measurement due to the unfolding procedure.

14 ×10
3

Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7s-1m-2sr-1)


Pseudo Data
Number of Events

107
AMS-02 in DAMPE bins, extrapolated after 350 GeV
13
6 AMS-02 (2015)
10

12
5
10

11
104

10
3 10

102 9

3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10 8
Reconstructed Energy (GeV)
102 103 104 105
True Energy (GeV)
Left: AMS-02 proton flux spectrum in DAMPE bins convoluted with the DAMPE response matrix. Right: unfolded pseudo-data spectrum
(blue) compared to the input spectrum (black), calculated from the AMS-02 spectrum.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 44
Effective acceptance for protons and selected events

Number of Entries
7
10
Acceptance 6
10

5
10
Effective Acceptance [m2×sr]

0.035
4
10
0.03
3
10
0.025

2
0.02 10

0.015
3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10
0.01
BGO Energy [GeV]

0.005
Energy [GeV] Events
0
102 103 104 105
True Energy [GeV] 24.9 (8.033 ± 0.003) · 106
54.2 (6.739 ± 0.003) · 106
Obtained from MC applying the 171 (9.68 ± 0.01) · 105
same selection as to flight data; 542 (1.354 ± 0.003) · 105
Systematic uncertainty obtained 1714 (2.10 ± 0.01) · 104
from the difference in trigger, 5419 (3.16 ± 0.06) · 103
track selection and charge 17135 (3.63 ± 0.19) · 102
selection efficiency between data 54186 (29 ± 5)
Total number of proton events collected in 30 months: 1.59006 ·107
and MC:
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment
. 45
Error breakdown

18
Error [%] 16 Statistical
Trigger (HET)
14 Charge slection
12 Track selection
PSD smear
10 MC until 251 TeV
8

3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy [GeV]

Flux statistical errors less are than 2% below 10 TeV, so the accuracy is
defined by the systematic errors on the trigger, track and charge selection.
The validity of the MC after 300 TeV is under investigation and it was
decided to use the MC sample until 251 TeV.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 46
Proton spectrum measured by DAMPE with this analysis

18000

DAMPE, this work


Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7 s-1 m-2 sr-1)

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy (GeV)

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 47
Proton spectrum measured in this analysis in comparison with
other experiments

24000

22000 ATIC02 (2009)


PAMELA (2011)
Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7 s-1 m-2 sr-1)

20000
AMS-02 (2015)
18000 CREAM III (2017)
NUCLEON (IC) (2018)
16000
NUCLEON (KLEM) (2018)
14000 DAMPE, this work
12000

10000

8000

6000

4000
3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy (GeV)

The DAMPE data confirms the spectral hardening at ∼ 300 GeV observed by
ATIC02, CREAM, PAMELA and AMS-02, and reveals a spectral softening
above ∼ 10 TeV that is much more clear now in the current measurements
scenario.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 48
Conclusions and outlooks
Cosmic-ray detection with DAMPE

Many detectors on the ground, on balloons and in space already made a


lot of efforts to improve cosmic-ray measurements, and several are
currently continuing them.

We saw how the DAMPE detector is designed to pursue this task, in particular:
1 only the best components were chosen during the construction of the
DAMPE Silicon Tungsten tracKer (STK), starting from selecting the
tungsten plates and measuring the planarity of the trays, evaluating also
the effects of thermal cycles on them;
2 all the silicon ladders were tested after the production and individually
characterized, so that a final selection could be made to choose the best
samples.
STK calibration
The signals of the read-out chips of the silicon ladders were calibrated
with an analysis based on ground and orbit data.
A charge-loss correction of the tracker response was performed on-ground
and on-orbit.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 50
Proton flux measurement with DAMPE

We performed an analysis based on 30 months of data from DAMPE,


dedicated to calculate precisely the proton flux.
MC events were studied, simulated with two physics lists and a systematic
comparison between data and MC using all the studied distributions for
protons allowed to select the list that matched most closely the data and
consequently the systematic uncertainty.
The proton flux measured with this analysis, allowed to improve the
current knowledge of the energy dependence of the proton spectrum,
which is the key element in understanding the origin, propagation and
acceleration of cosmic rays in the Universe.

Outlooks
This softening should be rigidity dependent and be visible in all other
nuclear species, like for the hardening [2].
Looking at the flux of other nuclei species above 10 TeV will give a clearer
picture. Future space missions, like HERD [3], plan to contribute to the
cosmic-ray flux measurements, reaching energies up to 1 PeV.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 51
THANKS FOR THE ATTENTION!

track DAMPE in real time


www.n2yo.com/?s=41173
backup

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 53
564 Cosmic-ray propagation
The acceleration of high energy particles

(a) (b)

Fig. 17.1 Illustrating the collision between a particle of mass m and a cloud of mass M: (a) a head-on collision; (b) a following
collision. The probabilities of head-on and following collisions are proportional to the relative velocities of approach of
the particle and the cloud, namely,First
v + V cos θ for (a)Fermi
order and v − acceleration
V cos θ for (b). Since v ≈ c, the probabilities are
proportional to 1 + (V/c) cos θ where 0 < θ < π.
* + Z π/2
∆E V 2V
17.3 Fermi 2 cos–2 original
= acceleration θ sin θdθversion
= . (13)
E c 3 c
0

⇒ N(E)dE ∝ E−2 dE. (14)


The Fermi mechanism was first proposed in 1949 as a stochastic means by which particles
The fact thatwith
colliding we clouds
observe a spectral
in the interstellarindex
medium ∼ 2.7
ofcould be in cosmic torays
accelerated highinstead
energies of a2
comes(Fermi,form 1949). We first consider
the influence of theFermi’s
magneticoriginal version
field of the
inside thetheory,
sourcethe problems
and many it
encounters and how it can be reincarnated in a modern guise. The analysis contains a
types number
of possibles shocks (parallel or perpendicular to the magnetic field).
of features which are important for particle acceleration in general. In Sect.17.4,
the modern version of first-order Fermi acceleration is described.
Stefania Vitillo In Fermi’s originalMeasurement
picture, charged particles
of the Proton Flux in are reflected
Cosmic from
Rays with ‘magnetic
the DAMPE mirrors’ as-
Experiment 54
The silicon ladder: working principle and bonding scheme

One SSD in section:

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 55
Position resolution in STK

Position resolution
measured for the
candidate protons in data
(top) and the proton MC
(middle) for the X and Y
layers of the STK.
The first layer is relative
to the STK point closer to
PSD.

Picture taken from A. Tykhonov et al., NIM A 893

(2018) 43-56

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 56
Data acquisition in STK

The 192 ladders of the STK are electronically read-out by 8 Tracker Readout
Boards (TRB). Each ladder is connected with flexible cables to a TRB and each
TRB reads out one quarter of each STK sensible layer for a total of 24 ladders.
Submitted to ‘Chinese Physics C’

Ladder TFH

x
y z

TRB

Fig. 2Ladder arrangement and connection of 6 X-view layers


Scheme of the connection between the
ders are connected via flexible cables to the Tracker Readout Boards(TRBs)
ladders (the silicon wafers glued on the
he tracking planes, where the ADCs, monitor circuits, high-voltage generator and Figure representing the location of the
are situated. The TRBs are in charge of data acquisition and status monitoring of
tracker front-end hybrid TFH) read-out
cker. On one hand they receive triggers and configuration commands from payload
TRBs respect to the assembled STK.
by a TRB.
other hand, they transfer scientific data and house-keeping data back. There are
all at four vertical sides of the STK, as presented in the Fig.3. Each TRB reads out one
rs of all six layers at the same side, as the Fig.2 shows. The system block diagram is
4.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 57
Calibration in STK

A calibration run is used to compute the intrinsic noise of channel i as:


v
u N
u1 X
σi = t (ADCij − pedi − CNj )2 (15)
n i=1

where pedi is the pedestal calculation for each channel i of STK:


N
1X
pedi = ADCij (16)
n j=1

ADCij is the ADC value in the channel i for the event j, and n = 1024. The
CNj is the common noise, attributed to the common behavior of the channels
of the same chip, mainly due to the fluctuating bias voltage. For the event j
the CN is defined as:
Nch
1 X
CNj = (ADCij − pedi ) (17)
Nch i=1

where Nch is the number of channels per chip (64). Noisy channels (strips in
short circuit that give always a large ADC value) are excluded from this
computation as well as a potential signal, requiring ADCij − pedi > 30 ADC.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 58
Monitoring the noise in STK from the beginning of the DAQ

Ratio of channels in % with σ ≤ 5 (green filled triangles), 5 < σ ≤ 10 (empty


blue triangles) and σ > 10 (empty blue circles) as function of time for the
192 ladders × 6 VA × 64 read-out strips = 73728 STK channels.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 59
The temperatures in STK from the beginning of the DAQ

Radiators (top left) and ladders (top right) temperatures. The average
difference between the two temperatures is plotted as a function of the time
period in the bottom left panel. The distribution of these differences is shown
as a histogram in the bottom right plot.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 60
The Neutron Detector (NUD)

The NUD performs The reaction between neutrons,


electron/hadron separation based produced in the shower in the BGO and
on the different number of the boron in the NUD is:
neutrons produced in the shower;
10
B + n →7 Li + α + γ (18)
It is composed by four units each
one 30 cm × 30 cm × 1 cm large producing a delayed photon.
of boron-loaded plastic scintillator;

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 61
BGO track reconstruction

A center of gravity method (CoG) is used to obtain the coordinates of the


impinging particle with the energy information taken from the BGO bars.
Emax−1 · xmax−1 + Emax · xmax + Emax+1 · xmax+1
x(y)CoG l = . (19)
Emax−1 + Emax + Emax+1

Eq. 19 can be generalized in case more bars are used in the CoG computation.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 62
Energy resolution

The BGO has a thickness that corresponds to 32 X0 and 1.6 λ

Electrons Protons

Left: energy resolution for vertical and tilted electrons impinging DAMPE. The
simulation for the two cases is shown in black and the vertical electron beam
test data is shown with red points. Right: energy resolution for protons
crossing vertically DAMPE.
Pictures taken from Astropart. Phys. 95 (2017) 6-24

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 63
Data acquisition and trigger logic scheme

Y. Liu et al., Proceedings of The 35th International Cosmic Ray


Conference 2017, PosICRC(2017) 232

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 64
On-board triggers

With a density ρbgo = 7.13 g/cm3 , a MIP in 2.5 cm of BGO loses ∼ 5.7 MeV.
1 Unbiased trigger: signals in the first two BGO layers greater than ∼ 0.4
MIPs in each hit BGO bar.
2 MIP triggers: signals greater than ∼ 0.4 MIPs in each hit bar is required
in the first two (second two) and penultimate two (last two) BGO layers.
It aims to select particles crossing all the BGO layers without interacting.
3 HE trigger: asks for a threshold of ∼ 10 MIPs in each hit bar of the first
three layers of BGO and a threshold of ∼ 2 MIPs in each hit bar in the
fourth layer.
4 LE trigger: similar to the HET, it requires an energy deposition in the
first four layers of BGO, but with a threshold of ∼ 0.4 MIPs in the first
two layers and ∼ 2 MIPs in layers three and four.

The UB, MIP and LE triggers are pre-scaled with the ratios of 512 : 1, 4 : 1, 8
in the lat.s [−20◦ , 20◦ ]. At higher latitudes, the prescale ratios are 2048 : 1
and 64 : 1, respectively for the UB trigger and the LE trigger. The MIP
triggers are disabled.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 65
X-ray scan at CERN
X-Ray Scan
At CERN

A = 5 m, B = C = 0.5 m
2-3 minutes of exposure
Ax =
30 5 m,
40 cm Breusable
digital =C= films0.5 m;
films scanned with resolution 50µm/pixel, can be increased but then it takes too
2-3 minutes of exposure
much time to scan (15 minutes per film) and file size is too big (500 MB per file)
12
30films
×cover
40 cmthe whole tray
digital reusable films
one tray can be scanned in 2 hours (with 50µm resolution)
films scanned with resolution 50µm/pixel, 12 films cover the whole
tray.
Ruslan Asfandiyarov, University of Geneva DAMPE Group Meeting, June 17, 2014

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 66
Trays metrology: planarity of the trays

Figure 1: Location on the top surface of the 100 points measured for tray 11
after the thermal cycling. The blue square shows the reference plane, the two
green planes are the tolerance surfaces (zmin,max = ±0.200 mm). Points with z
coordinate more negative than that of the reference plane (but in the
tolerance) are shown in light grey, more positive in black. Points on the
tolerance plane are marked with a cyan circle and points outside the tolerance
planes are marked in red.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 67
Ladder Metrology [1/3]

Lower line Upper line Both lines


hdist0 hdist1 hdist
Entries 8 Entries 8 Entries 16
3 2 3
Mean 3.319e − 08 Mean −1.19e− 09 Mean −0.5625
RMS 3.017 RMS 3.256 RMS 3.151
1.8
2.5 2.5
1.6

1.4
2 2
1.2

1.5 1 1.5

0.8
1 1
0.6

0.4
0.5 0.5
0.2

0 0 0
−40 −30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30 40 −20 −15 −10 −5 0 5 10 15 20 −20 −15 −10 −5 0 5 10 15 20
residuals (µm) residuals (µm) residuals (µm)

LGFM013

81 µ m 64 µ m 82 µ m
94.161 mm 94.161 mm 94.160 mm 94.160 mm
94.298 mm

94.298 mm

94.298 mm

94.298 mm
94.300 mm

94.300 mm

94.299 mm

94.300 mm
Si 4 Si 3 Si 2 Si 1

94.160 mm 94.162 mm 94.160 mm 94.161 mm

97 µ m 55 µ m 87 µ m

Geneva/Ladders/LGFM013B26-01-2015-08-52-11.dat

Residual distribution between the measured points on one ladder and their design values for respectively the points measured on the top
side, the bottom side and the two sides together. Bottom: display of the information obtained from the measured points (the four crosses
on each SSD).

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 68
Ladder Metrology [2/3]

LGFM013 - Upper line

y(mm)
94.308

94.306

94.304

94.302

94.3

94.298

94.296

94.294
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
x(mm)

LGFM013 - Lower line


y(mm)

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

− 0.002

− 0.004
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Geneva/Ladders/LGFM013B26-01-2015-08-52-11.dat
x(mm)

LGFM013 - Thickness
hthick
5 Entries 16
Mean 701.3
RMS 12.26

0
600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 800
thickness ( µ m)

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 69
Ladder Metrology [3/3]

Thickness Thickness RMS


hthickness hthicknessRMS

Entries 192 Entries 192


14 18
Mean 673.9 Mean 12.08
RMS 34.35 RMS 10.47
16
12

14

10
12

8
10

8
6

6
4

2
2

0 0
600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 800 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
thickness [µm] thickness RMS [µm]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 70
List of variables stored and analyzed of each ladder

Variable Units
Separation between 1st and 2nd SSD on top side mm
Separation between 2nd and 3rd SSD on top side mm
Separation between 3rd and 4th SSD on top side mm
Linearity top: The RMS of the distribution of the residuals (diff.
between the measured point and the design point) µm
Linearity bot: The RMS of the distribution of the residuals (diff.
between the measured point and the design point) µm
Separation between 1st and 2nd SSD on bottom side mm
Separation between 2nd and 3rd SSD on bottom side mm
Separation between 3rd and 4th SSD on bottom side mm
The average thickness µm
The RMS of the average thickness µm

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 71
Cluster-finding algorithm in STK

The raw data in one STK ladder is made by ADC signals present in
the 384 channels (6 VA × 64 channels).
Among the 384 channels, the algorithm looks for “seeds” in which
S/N > 4 and S/N > 1.5 on the neighbor channels.
If moving away from a neighbor channel, the signal encountered is
five times higher than the noise, the cluster is split in two.
A center of gravity of the channel number weighted with the signal ratio in
all channels i belonging to the cluster is used to get the cluster coordinate:
P
iSi
CoGStkj = Pi . (20)
i Si
Once the clustering is performed, the track reconstruction can start.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 72
Particle track reconstruction

An indicative region to start the track algorithm is given by the BGO track
direction that is computed slightly differently than described on slide 57.
The BGO track is projected to the PSD and the track finding algorithm
starts from the closest STK cluster to PSD. This cluster is called “seed”.
The track is reconstructed by the seed and the BGO track with a Kalman
filter algorithm.
A χ2 /ndof test is performed, where ndof corresponds to the number of
hits of the track, and a threshold rejects candidate tracks according to its
value.
The seed is removed from the cluster list and the Kalman filter starts to
look for an other track until the seeds in the first layer of STK are all
used. Then the seeds in layer 2 and 3 are used in the same way. For the
last three layers an inverse track finding method is used, looking for seeds
in layer 6, 5 and finally 4.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 73
VA gain on-groud

Maximum for η region 1


Entries 1086
Mean 35.67
90 RMS 1.591
χ2 / ndf 60.1 / 43
Prob 0.04326
Maximum for η region 0 80 Constant 77.43 ± 3.05
Entries 1086 Mean 35.63 ± 0.04
70 Sigma 1.317 ± 0.032
80 Mean 56.82
RMS 2.091
χ2 / ndf 58.04 / 51 60
70 Prob 0.2317
Constant 57.5 ± 2.3 50
Mean 56.73 ± 0.06
60
Sigma 1.781 ± 0.046
40
50
30

40 20

30 10

0
20 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
ADC count
10
∆ (corr factors)
0
30 40 50 60 70 80
ADC count
160 Entries 1152
Mean 0.005702
140 RMS 0.03149
In Eq. 2, Eq.param.(0) = 56.73 ADC, 120
χ 2 / ndf
Prob
17.1 / 22
0.7577
Constant 148.7 ± 5.6

Eq.param.(1) = 35.63 ADC and 100 Mean


Sigma
0.005572 ± 0.000905
0.03043 ± 0.00071

80
MPVi (η) is the most probable value of 60

the cluster charge in the i-th VA. 40

20

0
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 74
Daily events acquired by DAMPE

Data set: 01/01/2016- 30/06/2018, excluding the days 8-13/09/2017 due to an intense solar flare and 29-30/12/2017 due to a high
voltage reset in the detector. During 22/02/2016, the STK σ was updated and the normal data acquisition was suspended. During the
days 23-24/02/2016, the STK pedestals were monitored in latitude, resulting in a lower rate of acquired events. An extended electronics
linearity calibration in the BGO and in the PSD took place in the days 07-09/09/2016, occupying a significant part of the data taking time.
During the first two months of data acquisition the unbiased trigger (UBT) was not enabled, resulting in a lower trigger rate. The analysis
does not suffer from this since it does not require the UBT. For the trigger efficiency study we used the UBT only when it was enabled.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 75
Live time calculation

∆T = (Tlast ev. − Tfirst ev. ) − (TSAA last ev. − TSAA first ev. )−
(21)
−(Nev. − Nev. SAA ) · TDT − Top.

TDT = 3.0725 ms is the dead time


of the detector after acquiring one
event and Top. is the additional
time used for the various
operations in which no event is
acquired.
DAMPE crosses on average for
one hour every day the SAA
region and the mean live time per One orbit of DAMPE corresponds to
day is 18.35 hours. ∼ 90 minutes.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 76
MC samples used (GEANT)

particle Energy range MC QGSP events MC FTFP events


p 1 - 100 GeV 4.926·108 4.8815·109
p 100 GeV - 10 TeV 7.8139 ·108 5.0 ·108
p 10 TeV - 100 TeV 1.15265 ·106 1.00485 ·108
He 10 GeV - 100 GeV 1.0088 ·108 1 ·108
He 100 GeV- 10 TeV 1.53428 ·106 -
He 100 GeV- 1 TeV - 1 ·108
He 1 TeV - 10 TeV - 9.9088 ·107
He 10 TeV - 100 TeV 1.046 ·107 9.9995·107
He 100 TeV - 200 TeV - 2.0052·107
e 1 GeV - 100 GeV 4.996·108 -
e 100 GeV - 10 TeV 1.3374·108 -

Table 2: Summary of the number of events used for protons, helium nuclei and
electrons in various energy ranges and for the two different physics lists.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 77
MC samples used (GEANT+DPMJET)

particle Energy range MC DPMJET+FTFP (CRMC) events


p 100 TeV - 200 TeV 5.01282·106
p 200 TeV - 1000 TeV 5.4291·105

Table 3: Summary of the number of events simulated for protons in the two
ultra-high energy rangee for the DPMJET+FTFP physics lists.

We used the FTFP sample until 100 TeV in combination with the CRMC
sample until 251 TeV.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 78
High energy MC validation

The comparison of the CRMC sample with the FTFP sample was
performed at lower energy, through the energy deposition ratio
(reconstructed energy divided by true energy) as function of the primary
energy of the particle.
The agreement between the two samples is quite good in the overlap
region and this validates the use of the CRMC sample.
CRMC website: https://web.ikp.kit.edu/rulrich/crmc.html
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 79
PSD difference cut

Data Proton MC
20 GeV < E < 100 GeV 100 GeV < E < 250 GeV 250 GeV < E < 500 GeV
0.022
0.025 0.018
0.02

0.018 0.016
0.02
0.016 0.014

0.014 0.012
0.015 0.012
0.01
0.01
0.008
0.01 0.008
0.006
0.006
0.005 0.004
0.004

0.002 0.002

0 0 0
−5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5
∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ]

500 GeV < E < 1000 GeV 1000 GeV < E < 5000 GeV 5000 GeV < E < 7000 GeV
0.014
0.016 0.045

0.012 0.04
0.014

0.01 0.035
0.012
0.03
0.01 0.008
0.025
0.008
0.006 0.02
0.006
0.015
0.004
0.004
0.01
0.002
0.002 0.005

0 0 0
−5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 −4 −2 0 2 4
∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ]

7000 GeV < E < 9000 GeV 9000 GeV < E < 15000 GeV E > 15000 GeV
0.045
0.045 0.04
0.04
0.04 0.035
0.035
0.035 0.03
0.03
0.03
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.015
0.015 0.015
0.01
0.01 0.01
0.005
0.005 0.005
0
0 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 −4 −2 0 2 4 −4 −2 0 2 4
∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ] ∆(PSDx -PSDy ) [ Mev ]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 80
PSD spectrum

6
10

5
10

4
10

3
10

102
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
PSD global MeV

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 81
Example events after all the cuts except the charge selection
in PSD

1 Events with fewer secondaries are selected.

2 The measurement in PSD is not clear due to secondary particles in the


event. This event is rejected with the final selection

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 82
Correction in the PSD for protons and helium nuclei

The MC simulation and the data were used to study the response of protons
and helium nuclei in the two layers of PSD. The demands in the selection listed
in section 2 were modified after the requirement of the trigger and the electron
rejection, removing all the PSD related cuts. In order to select a proton and a
helium sample without the charge information in PSD, we ask that:

1 the cluster charge in the first point of STK (STKFP ) belongs to the
interval [20, 120] ADC for protons and [120, 600] ADC for helium to help
the particle identification;
2 for E ∈ [20, 250] GeV #tracks < 4, E ∈ [250, 5000] GeV #tracks < 6, E
> 5000 GeV #tracks < 15, where E is the reconstructed energy in the
BGO, and #tracks refers to the number of tracks in the event.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 83
Distributions examples for protons

PSDy for 133.35 GeV < Erec < 177.83 GeV PSDy for 5623.41 GeV < Erec < 7498.94 GeV
14000 χ2 / ndf 1916 / 40
30
χ2 / ndf 57.56 / 53
Constant 6.718e+04 ± 2.633e+02 Constant 88.84 ± 6.24
MPV 1.428 ± 0.000 MPV 1.663 ± 0.021
12000
Sigma 0.07902 ± 0.00027 25 Sigma 0.1865 ± 0.0131

10000
20

8000
15
6000

10
4000

5
2000

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Eney × pathlength( MeV ) Eney × pathlength( MeV )

PSDy for 133.35 GeV < Erec < 177.83 GeV PSDy for 5623.41 GeV < Erec < 7498.94 GeV
1200 χ2 / ndf 121.1 / 37 χ2 / ndf 249 / 124
Constant 5677 ± 69.2 Constant 1432 ± 19.8
MPV 1.443 ± 0.002 250 MPV 1.816 ± 0.006
1000 Sigma 0.09566 ± 0.00106 Sigma 0.258 ± 0.003

200
800

150
600

100
400

200 50

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Eney × pathlength( MeV ) Eney × pathlength( MeV )

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 84
Evolution of the Landau fit parameters on the PSD distribution

MPVx as a function of Energy MPVy as a function of E


3 3
MPVx MeV

MPVy MeV
p MC FTFP+CRMC p MC FTFP+CRMC
2.8 2.8

2.6 Data 2.6 Data

2.4 2.4

2.2 2.2

2 2

1.8 1.8

1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1 3 5
1 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

σx as a function of Energy σy as a function of E


0.8 0.8
σ x MeV

σ y MeV
p MC FTFP+CRMC p MC FTFP+CRMC
0.7 0.7
Data Data
0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

3 5 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 85
Observed differences and correction procedure adopted for the MC

Energy [GeV] DiffpMPV Diffpσ DiffHeMPV DiffHeσ


[133, 177] ∼1 % ∼17 ∼0.5 % ∼ 8%
[1000, 1333] ∼4% ∼36% ∼ 1% ∼12%
[1778, 2371] ∼6% ∼38% ∼2% ∼16%
[5623, 7498] ∼8% ∼38% ∼4% ∼27%
It was decided to apply a correction for PSDx(y) in MC defining:

p0 = fMPV Datax(y ) (Erec )


s0 = fσDatax(y ) (Erec )
p1 = fMPV pMCx(y ) (Erec )
s1 = fσpMCx(y ) (Erec )
The corrected PSDx(y) measurement for the MC will be then:
⇒ PSDx,y (corr ) = (PSDx,(y ) − p1 )s0 /s1 + p0 .

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 86
Distributions examples for protons after correction

PSDy for 133.35 GeV < Erec < 177.83 GeV PSDy for 5623.41 GeV < Erec < 7498.94 GeV
14000 χ2 / ndf 1916 / 40
30
χ2 / ndf 57.56 / 53
Constant 6.718e+04 ± 2.633e+02 Constant 88.84 ± 6.24
MPV 1.428 ± 0.000 MPV 1.663 ± 0.021
12000
Sigma 0.07902 ± 0.00027 25 Sigma 0.1865 ± 0.0131

10000
20

8000
15
6000

10
4000

5
2000

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Eney × pathlength( MeV ) Eney × pathlength( MeV )

PSDy for 133.35 GeV < Erec < 177.83 GeV PSDy for 5623.41 GeV < Erec < 7498.94 GeV
χ2 / ndf 158.8 / 37 χ2 / ndf 351.5 / 124
1400 Constant 6806 ± 82.4 400 Prob 1.223e− 23
MPV 1.426 ± 0.001 Constant 2190 ± 29.4
1200 Sigma 0.0798 ± 0.0008 350 MPV 1.652 ± 0.003
Sigma 0.165 ± 0.002
300
1000

250
800
200
600
150

400
100

200 50

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Eney × pathlength( MeV ) Eney × pathlength( MeV )

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 87
Evolution after the smear procedure
MPVx as a function of Energy MPVy as a function of E
3 3
MPVx MeV

MPVy MeV
p MC FTFP+CRMC p MC FTFP+CRMC
2.8 2.8

2.6 Data 2.6 Data

2.4 2.4

2.2 2.2

2 2

1.8 1.8

1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1 3 5
1 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

σx as a function of Energy σy as a function of E


0.8 0.8
σ x MeV

σ y MeV
p MC FTFP+CRMC p MC FTFP+CRMC
0.7 0.7
Data Data
0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

3 5 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

Once smeared the MC to data, we validated the correction on the MC


sample selected for the flux measurement.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 88
Electron contamination: definition of ζ

ζ is a combination of lateral and longitudinal shower shape that with a


calorimetric detector is very useful to discriminate different particles inducing
electromagnetic or hadronic showers. It is defined starting from the RMS of the
energy deposition in each of the BGO layers:
21
X
RMSBGO Lj = E(ibar , Lj )[Hitpos (ibar , Lj ) − Poscore j ]2 (22)
ibar =0

where Poscore j is the weighted average of the position of the bar with the
maximum energy and the two neighbors in the BGO layer j. So we can define ζ:
13
X E13 1
ζ= (RMSBGO Lj )4 · · (23)
Lj =0
Etot 8000000

where E13 is the deposited energy in BGO layer 13 (if it is 0 we look for layer
12, 11 ... until we find a layer that has energy different from 0) and Etot is the
total energy deposited in BGO.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 89
Electron contamination: template fits

⇒ after 3 TeV the electrons in this selection are much less then 0.1% in the
templates, much more negligible than at lower energy.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 90
Helium contamination: template fits

PSDglobal for 177.83 GeV < Erec < 316.23 GeV PSDglobal for 5623.41 GeV < Erec < 10000.00 GeV
DATA DATA
18000 MC Proton+Helium 180 MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium MC Helium
16000 160
MC Proton MC Proton
14000 140

12000 120

10000 100

8000 80

6000 60

4000 40

2000 20

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDglobal [ MeV] PSDglobal [ MeV]

PSDglobal for 1000.00 GeV < Erec < 1778.28 GeV PSDglobal for 17782.79 GeV < Erec < 31622.78 GeV
DATA 45 DATA
800 MC Proton+Helium MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium 40 MC Helium
700 MC Proton MC Proton
35
600
30
500
25

400
20

300 15

200 10

100 5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDglobal [ MeV] PSDglobal [ MeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 91
Helium background estimation from Toy MC
To use correctly the error on the background when computing Np − Nb , we
generated 1000 PSD global distributions for data with bin content a random
number extracted from a Poissonian distribution with mean the real data
content in the bin;
5
Helium contamination [%]

4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0 3
102 10 104
BGO Energy [GeV]

1000 template fits per bin ⇒ Gaussian distribution of the background


percentage for each energy bin with µ the real percentage.
⇒ the σ will give use the statistical error on the background.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 92
(E0 + E1 )/(E2 + E3 ) for various energy intervals for data and
proton MC QGSP

20 GeV < E < 100 GeV 100 GeV < E < 250 GeV 250 GeV < E < 500 GeV

0.035
0.018
p MC QGSP 0.025
p MC QGSP p MC QGSP
0.016 0.03

0.014 p Data 0.02


p Data 0.025
p Data
0.012
0.02
0.01 0.015

0.008 0.015
0.01
0.006
0.01
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.002

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

500 GeV < E < 1000 GeV 1000 GeV < E < 5000 GeV 5000 GeV < E < 7000 GeV
0.045
0.06
0.04 p MC QGSP p MC QGSP 0.1 p MC QGSP
0.035 0.05
p Data p Data 0.08 p Data
0.03
0.04
0.025
0.06
0.03
0.02

0.015 0.04
0.02

0.01
0.01 0.02
0.005

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

7000 GeV < E < 9000 GeV 9000 GeV < E < 15000 GeV E > 15000 GeV
0.16 0.2
0.14
p MC QGSP 0.14
p MC QGSP 0.18 p MC QGSP
0.12 0.16
p Data 0.12 p Data 0.14 p Data
0.1
0.1 0.12
0.08
0.08 0.1

0.06 0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04 0.04
0.04
0.02 0.02
0.02

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 93
(E0 + E1 )/(E2 + E3 ) for various energy intervals for data and
proton MC FTFP

20 GeV < E < 100 GeV 100 GeV < E < 250 GeV 250 GeV < E < 500 GeV

0.016 0.035
p MC FTFP 0.025 p MC FTFP p MC FTFP
0.014 0.03

0.012 p Data 0.02 p Data p Data


0.025
0.01
0.015 0.02
0.008
0.015
0.006 0.01
0.01
0.004
0.005
0.002 0.005

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

500 GeV < E < 1000 GeV 1000 GeV < E < 5000 GeV 5000 GeV < E < 7000 GeV
0.045
0.12
0.04 p MC FTFP 0.06 p MC FTFP p MC FTFP
0.1
0.035
0.05
p Data p Data p Data
0.03
0.08
0.04
0.025
0.06
0.02 0.03

0.015 0.04
0.02
0.01
0.01 0.02
0.005

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

7000 GeV < E < 9000 GeV 9000 GeV < E < 15000 GeV E > 15000 GeV
0.2
0.12
p MC FTFP 0.14 p MC FTFP 0.18 p MC FTFP
0.1 0.16
0.12
p Data p Data 0.14 p Data
0.08 0.1
0.12

0.08 0.1
0.06
0.06 0.08

0.04 0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02

0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3 E0+E1/E 2+E3

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 94
Check STK track selection efficiency

Preselection cuts listed in slide 28;


the proton MC PSD mesurement
events acquired not in SAA (only is ”smeared” in the same way like
data); in the flux analysis;
the activation of the HET; x y PSD +PSD
we extract PSDglobal = 2
at least one PSDhit on x and on and apply the difference cut
the y view; (∆(PSDx − PSDy ) ∈ [−1, 1.3]);
projection from BGO to PSD EL0BGO +EL1BGO < EL2BGO + EL3BGO ;
inside [-380,380] mm;
the BGO track should be not more
the distance of the projection far than 40 mm from the bar with
BGO-PSD to a PSDhit has to be the maximum energy deposition in
less than 40 mm. Among those the first 4 layer of BGO
distances, we consider only the
PSD hit that has the minimum the electron component in CR is
distance from the BGO-PSD removed with the ζ variable
projection; information.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 95
PSD spectrum for the STK track efficiency study

6
10

5
10

104

3
10

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
PSD global [ MeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 96
Difference between the projection of the BGO track on the first four layers of BGO
and the position of the BGO bar with the maximum energy in that layer

∆(proj -MaxBGO ) for layer 0 ∆(proj -MaxBGO ) for layer 1


BGOtrack bar BGOtrack bar

−2 p MC QGSP p MC QGSP
10 −2
10
p MC FTFP p MC FTFP
p Data p Data
−3 −3
10 10

−4 −4
10 10

−5 −5
10 10

−6 −6
10 10

− 200 − 150 − 100 −50 0 50 100 150 200 − 200 − 150 − 100 −50 0 50 100 150 200
∆ [mm] ∆ [mm]

∆(proj -MaxBGO ) for layer 2 ∆(proj -MaxBGO ) for layer 3


BGOtrack bar BGOtrack bar

p MC QGSP p MC QGSP
−2 −2
10 p MC FTFP 10 p MC FTFP
p Data p Data
−3 −3
10 10

10− 4 10− 4

−5 −5
10 10

−6 −6
10 10

− 200 − 150 − 100 −50 0 50 100 150 200 − 200 − 150 − 100 −50 0 50 100 150 200
∆ [mm] ∆ [mm]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 97
Systematics due to the track efficiency: method

To evaluate the systematic error in one truth energy bin of the track selection,
Eq. 9 is modified to:

Np track (E, E + dE)


Φ(E, E + dE) = (24)
∆T × AGeom × dE

where
1 X
Np track (E, E + dE) = P(E |Emeas,i ) · Rtrack · Np, meas,i (25)
ε(E + dE) i

and Rtrack is the ratio in track selection efficiency observed between data and
proton MC.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 98
Systematics due to the track efficiency

Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7 s-1 m-2 sr-1) 16000 DAMPE

DAMPE with systrack


14000

12000

10000

8000

6000
3
102 10 104
Energy (GeV)

The difference in the flux measurement due to the difference in the track
selection efficiency for data and proton MC varies from 4.3% at 50 GeV and
reduces progressively reaching a constant 1% after 2 TeV. This difference is
taken into account in the final flux measurement.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 99
Helium contamination in PSDx : template fits

PSDx for 31.62 GeV < Erec < 56.23 GeV PSDx for 562.34 GeV < Erec < 1000.00 GeV
3
× 10
400
DATA 2000 DATA
MC Proton+Helium MC Proton+Helium
350 1800
MC Helium MC Helium
MC Proton 1600 MC Proton
300
1400
250
1200
200 1000

150 800

600
100
400
50
200

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDx [ MeV] PSDx [ MeV]

PSDx for 1778.28 GeV < Erec < 3162.28 GeV PSDx for 10000.00 GeV < Erec < 17782.79 GeV
300 90
DATA DATA
MC Proton+Helium 80 MC Proton+Helium
250 MC Helium MC Helium
MC Proton 70 MC Proton

200 60

50
150
40

100 30

20
50
10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDx [ MeV] PSDx [ MeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 100
Helium contamination in PSDy : template fits

PSDy for 31.62 GeV < Erec < 56.23 GeV PSDy for 562.34 GeV < Erec < 1000.00 GeV
3
× 10
DATA 2500 DATA
400 MC Proton+Helium MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium MC Helium
350 MC Proton 2000 MC Proton

300

250 1500

200
1000
150

100
500
50

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDy [ MeV] PSDy [ MeV]

PSDy for 1778.28 GeV < Erec < 3162.28 GeV PSDy for 10000.00 GeV < Erec < 17782.79 GeV
DATA 90 DATA
300 MC Proton+Helium MC Proton+Helium
MC Helium 80 MC Helium
MC Proton MC Proton
250 70

60
200
50

150 40

30
100

20
50
10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
PSDy [ MeV] PSDy [ MeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 101
Helium contamination in PSDx and in PSDy : overall view

PSDx PSDy
5 5
Helium contamination (PSDx) [%]

Helium contamination (PSD ) [%]


4.5

y
4.5

4 4

3.5 3.5

3 3

2.5 2.5

2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1

0.5 0.5

0 3 0
102 10 104 102
3
10 104
BGO Energy [GeV] BGO Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 102
Z > 2 removal efficiency with STK

We consider only the energy 1.05 p MC

Efficiency
p Data
released by the particle in the first 1
point of STK, so that it is not
0.95
affected from the presence of the
tungsten in layer 2, 3 and 4 of the 0.9

tracker; 0.85

very large cluster charge cut; 0.8

negligible systematic error below 0.75

10 TeV;
0.7

Data/MC
1.04
ADC in STK FP for 1778.28 GeV < Erec < 3162.28 GeV 1.03
1.02
1.01
1
p MC 0.99
0.98
102 0.97
p Data
0.96
0.95 3
102 10 104
BGO Energy [GeV]

10
After 10 TeV, the difference appears to
be more important even if the
1 statistical uncertainties are large⇒
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
STK FP [ADC] helium contamination.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 103
Systematic uncertainty related to the PSD smear [1/2]
We varied the PSD proton charge selection to

PSDglobal < (funsel (Erec ) + 0.55). (26)

Changing the selection with this tighter cut, changes the helium background
computation (assuming that the electron contamination is negligible as before).
We fitted MC proton and helium templates to data and for this cut we
computed the helium contamination in reconstructed energy bins. The total
efficiency as a function of the true energy of the particle (from MC) will be
affected as well.

−3
×10
5
Helium contamination [%]

Efficiency
0.9
4.5
0.8
4
0.7
3.5
3 0.6

2.5 0.5

2 0.4

1.5 0.3

1 0.2

0.5 0.1

0 3
0
102 10 104 102 103 104 105
BGO Energy [GeV] True Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 104
Systematic uncertainty related to the PSD smear [2/2]

16000 DAMPE
Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7 s-1 m-2 sr-1) DAMPE tighter PSD
global
cut
14000

12000

10000

8000

6000
3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy (GeV)

The difference in the flux is of less than 1% until 7.8 TeV. For higher energies
the difference starts to be bigger reaching a maximum of ∼ 6% at 49 TeV.
This difference was taken as systematic uncertainty on the final measurement
related to the smear.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 105
Estimate the contribution from protons to the unfolded flux
until 100 TeV

Projection for 15848.92 GeV < E < 25118.87 GeV Projection for 25118.87 GeV < E < 39810.71 GeV
rec rec

0.018
0.014 χ / ndf
2
0.001427 / 2
0.016
χ2 / ndf 0.001225 / 3 Prob 0.9993
0.012 0.09362 ± 0.52954
Prob 1 Constant
0.014
Constant 0.08854 ± 0.54467 MPV 1.118e+05 ± 4.685e+05
0.01
MPV 6.222e+04 ± 2.225e+05 0.012 Sigma 2.961e+04 ± 3.257e+05
Sigma 1.551e+04 ± 2.503e+05
0.008 0.01

0.008
0.006
0.006
0.004
0.004
0.002
0.002

0 3 5 6 3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10 1 10 102 10 104 10 10
MC true energy (GeV) MC true energy (GeV)

Projection for 39810.71 GeV < E < 63095.76 GeV Projection for 63095.76 GeV < E
rec
< 100000.00 GeV
rec
0.02
0.003
0.018
χ2 / ndf 5.113e− 07 / 0
0.016 0.0025
Prob 0
0.014 χ2 / ndf 0.0004791 / 1 Constant 0.01728 ± 0.43765
Prob 0.9825 0.002 MPV 2.296e+05 ± 6.351e+06
0.012 Constant 0.11 ± 0.67 Sigma 5.091e+04 ± 2.803e+05
MPV 1.96e+05 ± 1.06e+06
0.01
Sigma 5.188e+04 ± 3.979e+05 0.0015
0.008
0.001
0.006

0.004
0.0005
0.002

0 3 5 6
0 3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10 1 10 102 10 104 10 10
MC true energy (GeV) MC true energy (GeV)

Projection on the truth energy axis of the migration matrix for several
reconstructed energy bins. The distributions are fitted with a Landau function.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 106
R 100 TeV
fproj dE
Cont. = R 0
1000 TeV
(27)
fproj dE
0

Reconstructed energy range [TeV] Cont. [%]


10- 15.84 92
15.84- 25.11 84
25.11- 39.81 67
39.11- 63.09 22
63.09- 100 2

Table 4: Contribution to the flux measurement until 100 TeV of the


reconstructed energy intervals after 10 TeV.

As expected, the percentage is getting smaller and smaller as the


reconstructed energy increases, but until 63 TeV, the contribution until
100 TeV is still high.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 107
Spectral unfolding

X
N(Eeffecti ) = P(Eeffecti |Ecausej )N(Ecausej ). (28)
j

P(Eeffecti |Ecausej ) is obtained from the ratio between the selected events in MC
and the total generated events:
N(Eeffecti |Ecausej , sel)
P(Eeffecti |Ecausej ) = . (29)
Ngen(Ecausej )

P(Eeffecti |Ecausej )P(Ecausej )


P(Ecausej |Eeffecti ) = P (30)
l P(Eeffecti |Ecausel )P(Ecausel )

1 X
N(Ecausej ) = P(Ecausej |Eeffecti )N(Eeffecti ). (31)
εj i
For the first iteration a trial spectrum with a spectral index of -2.7 is assumed
and a χ2 test is performed between the N(Ecausej ) events at each iteration.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 108
Efficiency and χ2 evolution

 2
ncbins
2
X Nnow
j − Nbefore
j
χ =  q 
j Nbefore
j

102
Efficiency

0.001

0.0008 10

χ2/ndf
0.0006

0.0004

0.0002 10− 1

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
102 103 104 105 Number of iterations
True Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 109
Statistical error calculation

The statistical error on the true number events in bin j N(Ecausej ) was
calculated in two ways:

1 following the method described in G. D’Agostini NIM A362(1995),


487;
2 with a toy MC method, generating 10000 proton counts
distributions with content in each bin given by a Poissonian
distribution with mean equal to the entry of the real selected proton
counts histogram. Once unfolded and divided by the geometrical
acceptance, the flux in each bin will follow a Gaussian distribution
with σ the statistical error in that bin.

We compared the two methods on one and two years of data with the
ratio between the two.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 110
20 20
statistical error [%]

statistical error [%]


18 18
Stat. Error 1 year Stat. Error 2 years
16 Toy MC 16 Toy MC
14
bayes 14
bayes
raw entries raw entries
12 12

10 10

8 8

6 6

4 4

2 2

0 3 5
0 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
Energy [GeV] Energy [GeV]

Bayes error Toy error


1.8 1.8
ratio 1y/2y

ratio 1y/2y
1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1 1

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

3 5 3 5
102 10 104 10 102 10 104 10
Energy [GeV] Energy [GeV]

Only with the toy MC method the result was ∼ 1.4 and we adopted it for
30 months of data.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 111
Statistical error for 30 months of on-orbit data

24
Stat. Error [%]

22
20
18 Sta. Error in 30 months
16 toy MC (data unfolded)
14
raw data (not unfolded)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0 3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 112
Interaction study
The reason of the difference in the energy deposited in PSD was understood in
terms of the position along the z axis of the primary particle interaction in
DAMPE.

We selected two samples using the same cuts listed used but with a
different trigger requirement. For one sample we ask the activation of the
standard high energy trigger (HET) and for the second sample it is
required the MIP trigger (at least one of the two MIP triggers) excluding
the HET.
The MC has access to all the information regarding the original simulated
particle, also where it interacts (or “stops”) in DAMPE.
Stop Z, 1778.28 GeV < E < 2371.37 GeV Stop Z, 56234.13 GeV < E < 74989.42 GeV
truth truth
Entries 62361
h_StopZ_enebin_26 Entries 13715
h_StopZ_enebin_38
800
p MC MIPT Mean 164.2 180 p MC MIPT Mean 171
Entries
RMS 24331
73.93 Entries
RMS 11860
67.88
p MC HET p MC HET
700
Underflow
Mean 3.1380 160 Underflow
Mean 52.58 0
401
Overflow 14 Overflow
RMS
Integral 100.3
6.235e+04 140 RMS
Integral 92.23
1.331e+04
600
120
500
100
400
80
300
60

200 40

100 20

0 0
− 300 − 200 − 100 0 100 200 300 400 − 300 − 200 − 100 0 100 200 300 400
stop z [mm] stop z [mm]
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 113
Selecting different samples in DAMPE

The MIP trigger aims to select also


particles that do not interact with
DAMPE, however the percentage of
non interacting protons remains very
low (it is only of few percent above 50
TeV) and it can be used to select a
sample interacting only in the BGO.
At ∼ 100 GeV data and MC seems
to deviate of a maximum of 6%.
The ratio is given in reconstructed
energy and we do not know if
there is a direct connection
between this difference and the
measured proton flux. However,
an analysis based on the MIP Remind MIP triggers: signals greater than ∼ 0.4 MIPs in each hit
bar is required in the first two (second two) and penultimate two
trigger can help in this direction. (last two) BGO layers.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 114
Cross-check with a parallel proton flux analysis
Assuming that the proton flux is isotropic at the studied energies, the
data in the latitude range [-20◦ , 20◦ ] allows us to perform a nearly
independent proton flux measurement.
In this case in Eq. 8 ∆T is 1.138·107 s, equivalent to 131 days.

We decided to perform an analysis using the MIP trigger in a less tight way,
applying the cuts described in slide 28, 29, and changing only partially the cuts
of slide 31. We require at this stage:

1 the activation of at least one of the MIP triggers (we will refer to the MIP
trigger sample for simplicity, as in the previous section);
2 the first-point STK cluster charge measured by the tracker is asked to be
less than 600 ADC to reduce the contribution of |Z| higher than 2
particles;
3 to use the combined information of longitudinal and transversal shower
shape (same cut as with the HET sample using ζ) in order to remove the
electron component in cosmic rays;
4 select the proton sample as function of energy.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 115
Effective acceptance of the two samples

Effective Acceptance [m2×sr]


0.14

0.12

0.1

0.08
MIPT
0.06
ADCFP < 600
0.04 Xtrl > funxtrl(Erec)

Z sel for p
0.02 MIP

0 3 5
102 10 104 10
True Energy [GeV]

Notes
Requiring the HET reduces of ∼ 1/3 the effective acceptance at lower
energy, for higher energies this reduction decreases but the acceptance
seems not to reach any plateau.
The MIP sample, not vetoing the activation of the HET, still shows a
dependence of the energy when we select the proton sample (to keep the
helium contamination low in the selection).
a PSD smear is needed not vetoing the HET in the MIP sample
(otherwise not).
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 116
Raw data and migration matrix using the MIP sample

Reconstruced energy (GeV)


Num. events

5
105
10

10−2
104 104

3
10
103

102 10−3
102

10

10
1
10−4
3
10 102 10 104
Energy [GeV] 102
3
10 104 10
5
rec BGO
MC true energy (GeV)

Left: selected proton events with the MIP trigger in the period
(01/01/2016-30/04/2018) as a function of the reconstructed energy.
Right: migration matrix for the selected MIP sample.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 117
Proton flux measured with the MIP sample

16000 DAMPE

Flux × E2.7 (GeV1.7 s-1 m-2 sr-1)


DAMPE MIPT analysis
14000

12000

10000

8000

3 5
102 10 104 10
Energy (GeV)

The proton flux measured with the MIP sample is up to 5% higher than
that measured with the HET sample until 5 TeV.
Above the difference is reduced with respect to the standard HET proton
flux.
⇒ This difference can be due to the modeling of the interaction cross-section,
however it is not clear in which specific part it is due only on that.
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 118
Reconstructed energy spectrum

Number of Entries
7
10

6
10

5
10

4
10

3
10

2
10

3 5 6
1 10 102 10 104 10 10
BGO Energy [GeV]

Total number of proton events collected in 30 months: 1.59006 ·107 .

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 119
Events acquired in reconstructed energy bins

Energy [GeV] Emin [GeV] Emax [GeV] Events


24.9 10 31.6 (8.033 ± 0.003) · 106
54.2 31.6 100 (6.739 ± 0.003) · 106
171 100 316 (9.68 ± 0.01) · 105
542 316 1000 (1.354 ± 0.003) · 105
1714 1000 3162 (2.10 ± 0.01) · 104
5419 3162 10000 (3.16 ± 0.06) · 103
17135 10000 31623 (3.63 ± 0.19) · 102
54186 31623 100000 (29 ± 5)

Table 5: Number of proton candidates reconstructed in the various energy


ranges.

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 120
Proton Flux measured by DAMPE with this analysis
Energy [GeV] Emin [GeV] Emax [GeV] φ ± σstat ± σsys
−3
49.8 39.8 63.1 (283 ± 0.09 +21
−17 ) · 10
78.9 63.1 100 (80.8 ± 0.04 −4.9 ) · 10−3
+5.6

−3
125 100 159 (23.2 ± 0.01 +1.6
−1.4 ) · 10
198 159 251 (66.4 ± 0.04 −4.1 ) · 10−4
+4.4

314 251 398 (19.0 ± 0.03 ± 1.2) · 10−4


−5
498 398 631 (54.8 ± 0.08 +3.5
−3.3 ) · 10
789 631 1000 (16.05 ± 0.04 −0.98 ) · 10−5
+1.00

−5
1251 1000 1585 (4.69 ± 0.02 +0.29
−0.28 ) · 10
1983 1585 2512 (14.09 ± 0.06 −0.87 ) · 10−6
+0.86

−6
3142 2512 3981 (4.36 ± 0.03 +0.27
−0.26 ) · 10
4981 3981 6310 (1.30 ± 0.01 ± 0.08) · 10−6
7895 6310 10000 (3.81 ± 0.06 ± 0.24) · 10−7
12512 10000 15849 (1.10 ± 0.02 ± 0.72) · 10−7
19830 15849 25119 (2.99 ± 0.08 ± 0.18) · 10−8
31429 25119 39811 (0.73 ± 0.03 ± 0.06) · 10−8
49812 39811 63096 (0.19 ± 0.01 ± 0.02) · 10−8
78946 63096 100000 (0.49 ± 0.05 ± 0.06) · 10−9
Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 121
Reconstructed energy spectrum

1011
E2.7 × Number of Entries (GeV1.7)

raw data events in 32 bin/dec

raw data events in 2 bin/dec

10
10

9
10

3 5
102 10 104 10
BGO Energy [GeV]

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 122
Multiple populations of sources

Front. Phys. 8 (2013) 748

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 123
The DAMPE Collaboration

China
Purple Mountain Observatory, CAS
University of Science and Technology of
China
Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS
Institute of Modern Physics, CAS
National Space Science Center, CAS
Italy
INFN Perugia and University of Perugia
INFN Bari and University of Bari
INFN Lecce and University of Salento
INFN LNGS and Gran Sasso Science Institute
Switzerland
University of Geneva

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 124
T. Anticic et al., Energy straggling and multiple scattering in silicon
strip detectors, Nuclear Instrument and Methods in Physics Research
A 374 (1996) 309-314
M. Aguilar et al., Observation of the Identical Rigidity Dependence
of He, C, and O Cosmic Rays at High Rigidities by the Alpha
Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station, Physical
Review Letters 119 (2017) 251101
S. Zhang et al., Introduction to the High Energy cosmic-Radiation
Detection (HERD) Facility onboard China’s Future Space Station,
Proceedings of the 35th International Cosmic Ray Conference (2017)
PoS(ICRC2017)1077

Stefania Vitillo Measurement of the Proton Flux in Cosmic Rays with the DAMPE Experiment 125

You might also like