back

 

Comparison between sim and data for each DOM

Contents

Summary

FY2005
Wavelength dependence of QExCE
0.Comparison ROMEO and Data at 337nm

FY2006
Wavelength dependence of QExCE
1. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 365nm
2. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 470nm
3. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 520nm
4. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 572nm

The variance of each DOM

Summary

The results of comparison between ROMEO and the DOM calibration data for the FY2005/2006 GDOMs are presented.
As I told in the top page, we used Hamamatsu measured QE for 2005 PMT.

PMT QE measured by Chiba and measured by Hamamatsu agrees each other in the 2006 Golden PMTs.
We therefore use the Chiba numbers only in running ROMEO for this 2006.
Another difference between the 2005 analysis and the 2006 is that the DOM calibration data is available for various wavelengths.

365nm and 470nm agrees within the systematic error while 337nm and 520nm do not.
We searched for the value of the wavelength shift which gives the best agreement between ROMEO and the data for 337 nm wavelength
and knew that we need 4.48nm shift for the agreement.

To define how such a small correction is effective, we compared the photoelectron number generated by two cases, ROMEO without correction and ROMEO with a slight shift. The result showed little difference whether it is corrected of not. As a result,ROMEO and simulation agrees over the wavelength without any correction.
The variance of each DOM was about 10%.

Description of the table

FY2005

 

Wavelength dependence of QExCE

PMTname(The relative difference between the case of without correction and 4.48nm shift)

TA1052(2.8%)
TA1059(3.5%)
TA1062(3.6%)
TA1059(2.9%)
TA1167(2.8%)


Comparison ROMEO and Data at 337nm

PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1052/Shino_Inuzuka 8.29 -1.15 -13.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1059/Shinbei_Inue 7.03 -0.628 -8.9 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1062/Kobungo_Inuta 9.66 -2.355 -24.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1069/Dosetsu_Inuyama 8.34 -1.711 -20.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1167/Genpachi_Inukai 7.74 -1.459 -18.9 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top


shift 4.48nm
PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1052/Shino_Inuzuka 8.29 0.3634 4.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1059/Shinbei_Inue 7.03 0.7262 10.3 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1062/Kobungo_Inuta 9.66 -0.8201 -8.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1069/Dosetsu_Inuyama 8.34 -0.3064 -3.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA1167/Genpachi_Inukai 7.74 -0.08558 -1.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top


FY2006


Wavelength dependence of QExCE

PMTname(The relative difference between the case of without correction and 4.48nm shift)

TA1895(3.5%)
TA2086(2.5%)
TA2146(2.8%)
TA2182(3.1%)
TA2259(2.9%)
TA2349(3.2%)
TA2374(3.2%)


1. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 365nm


PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 15.4 1.297 8.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 17.5 0.144 0.82 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 16.6 0.563 3.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 18.0 0.383 2.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 14.0 2.34 16.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 15.3 0.813 5.3 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 16.0 0.757 4.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top

shift 4.48nm
PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 15.4 1.977 12.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 17.5 0.8454 4.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 16.6 1.247 7.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 18.0 1.1410 6.3 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 14.0 3.019 21.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 15.3 1.512 9.9 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 16.0 1.432 9.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top

2.Comparison ROMEO and Data at 470nm


PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 18.9 -0.951 -5.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 18.0 1.014 5.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 19.0 0.3670 2.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 16.8 0.670 3.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 16.8 1.507 9.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 14.0 2.76 19.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 18.5 -0.504 -2.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top

shift 4.48nm
PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 18.9 -0.8928 -4.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 18.0 1.042 5.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 19.0 0.4058 2.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 16.8 0.7342 4.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 16.8 1.550 9.2 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 14.0 2.812 20.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 18.5 -0.455 -2.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top

3.Comparison ROMEO and Data at 520nm


PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 11.5 1.795 15.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 11.4 2.75 24.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 11.3 2.537 22.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 12.1 2.553 21.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 9.24 3.168 34.3 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 8.21 3.608 43.9 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 11.0 1.711 15.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top


shift 4.48nm
PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 11.5 1.801 15.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 11.4 2.756 24.2 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 11.3 2.576 22.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 12.1 2.576 21.3 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 9.24 3.183 34.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 8.21 3.614 44.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 11.0 1.733 15.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
top


4. Comparison ROMEO and Data at 572nm


PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 5.78 -0.188 -3.2 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 5.41 0.831 15.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 5.24 0.8802 16.8 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 5.93 0.8697 14.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 3.59 0.9522 26.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 3.60 1.057 29.4 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 5.36 0.3301 6.2 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
back

shift 4.48nm
PMT/DOM DOM data[%] QE(sim-data)[%] sim-data
/data[%]		 fig 2DMap(sim - data = diff)
TA1895/IeNeko 5.78 -0.1777 -3.1 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2086/DorobohNeko 5.41 0.8365 15.5 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2146/YamaNeko 5.24 0.8932 17.0 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2182/NoraNeko 5.93 0.869 14.7 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2259/BakeNeko 3.59 0.9547 26.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2349/SuteNeko 3.60 1.064 29.6 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]
TA2374/NemuriNeko 5.36 0.317 5.9 [diff]
[0~168deg]
[180~348deg]


The variance of each DOM

We estimated the photo-electron number for each DOM and found the variance of DOM by DOM.
Suppose the spectrum of the Cherenkov light follows 1/lambda^2, 1000 photons at 310nm.
The follow table shows the estimated photo-electron numbers for each DOM.
From these values , we found the variance of each DOM was 10.1%.


DOM name(PMT) photo-electron#
Shino_Inuzaka(TA1052) 184729
Shinbei_Inue(TA1059) 174624
Kobungo_Inuta(TA1062) 187592
Dousetsu_Inuyama(TA1069) 182304
Genpach_Inukai(TA1167) 184702
IeNeko(TA1895) 196180
ManekiNeko(TA2026) 137143
DorobohNeko(TA2026) 203176
YamaNeko(TA2146) 213156
NoraNeko(TA2026) 209317
BakeNeko(TA2259) 181360
SuteNeko(TA2349) 183942
NemuriNeko(TA2374) 193057
Average 187022
back