SciPost Submission Page
Uncertainty in mean $X_{\rm max}$ from diffractive dissociation estimated using measurements of accelerator experiments
by Ken Ohashi, Hiroaki Menjo, Takashi Sako, Yoshitaka Itow
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Ken Ohashi |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.04645v2 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2022-09-27 14:12 |
| Submitted by: | Ohashi, Ken |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | 21st International Symposium on Very High Energy Cosmic Ray Interactions (ISVHECRI2022) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Experimental |
Abstract
Mass composition is important for understanding the origin of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays. However, interpretation of mass composition from air shower experiments is challenging, owing to significant uncertainty in hadronic interaction models adopted in air shower simulation. A particular source of uncertainty is diffractive dissociation, as its measurements in accelerator experiments demonstrated significant systematic uncertainty. In this research, we estimate the uncertainty in $\langle X_{\rm max}\rangle$ from the uncertainty of the measurement of diffractive dissociation by the ALICE experiment. The maximum uncertainty size of the entire air shower was estimated to be $^{+4.0}_{-5.6}~\mathrm{g/cm^2}$ for air showers induced by $10^{17}$~eV proton, which is not negligible in the uncertainty of $\langle X_{\rm max}\rangle$ predictions.
Author comments upon resubmission
List of changes
Update descriptions in section 4 to avoid confusion.
Add one reference and apply several modifications suggested by the referee.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 1 on 2022-10-1 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:2208.04645v2, delivered 2022-10-01, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.5810
Report
This draft has been improved and the paper should be publlished in the poceeding, but after a few changes of the text.
Requested changes
(1) page 3 just after the chapter 4, Analysis method. A few lines should be written correctly. for example,
In this work, we focus on the effects of the first intercation of air showers. We categorize simulated air showers by collision types at the first intercation and the mean value was calculated. The mean value of Xmax < >, of each categorized samples was calculated as following definition of f and Eq.(1)where i..samples. By changing the fraction f in Eq.1, we have estimated the effect of each fraction.
(2) page 5 line 8 from the top. Total uncertainty for the first intercation considering the result of the ALICE experiment was .. calculated from the 1.6g/cm2 difference bewteen the two models and the uncertainty in the two....
(3) page 5 line 12 from the top. You may need the reference where you have provided the number 2.4.
(4) page 5 line 15. As the difference --> Although the difference