Maria Gabriella Catanesi ( INFN Bari Italy) 11th ICATPP ConferenceVilla Olmo, Como (Italy) 5-9 October 2009

Input for prediction of neutrino fluxes for the MiniBooNE and K2K experimentsPion/ Kaon yield for the design of the proton driver and target system of Neutrino Factories and SPL- based Super-BeamsInput for precise calculation of the atmospheric neutrino flux (from yields of secondary ,K)Input for Monte Carlo generators (GEANT4, e.g. for LHC or space applications)

HARP physics motivations

Barton et. al.Abbott et. al.Eichten et. al.

Measurements.1-2 pT points3-5 pT points>5 pT pointsExisting measurements @ 1999 (harp proposal)Boxes show importance of phase space region for contained atmospheric neutrino events.Overall quoted errors Absolute rates: ~15%Ratios: ~5%These figures are typical of this kind of detector setup

Running neutrino experiments

Design of future projects

Universit degli Studi e Sezione INFN, Bari, ItalyRutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, UK Institut fr Physik, Universitt Dortmund, GermanyJoint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, RussiaUniversit degli Studi e Sezione INFN, Ferrara, ItalyCERN, Geneva, Switzerland TU Karlsruhe, GermanySection de Physique, Universit de Genve, SwitzerlandLaboratori Nazionali di Legnaro dell' INFN, Legnaro, ItalyInstitut de Physique Nuclaire, UCL, Louvain-la-Neuve, BelgiumUniversit degli Studi e Sezione INFN, Milano, ItalyP.N. Lebedev Institute of Physics (FIAN), Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, RussiaInstitute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, RussiaUniversit "Federico II" e Sezione INFN, Napoli, ItalyNuclear and Astrophysics Laboratory, University of Oxford, UKUniversit degli Studi e Sezione INFN, Padova, Italy LPNHE, Universit de Paris VI et VII, Paris, FranceInstitute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, RussiaUniversit "La Sapienza" e Sezione INFN Roma I, Roma, ItalyUniversit degli Studi e Sezione INFN Roma III, Roma, ItalyDept. of Physics, University of Sheffield, UKFaculty of Physics, St Kliment Ohridski University, Sofia, BulgariaInstitute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Academy of Sciences, Sofia, BulgariaUniversit di Trieste e Sezione INFN, Trieste, ItalyUniv. de Valencia, Spain

Detector layoutLarge AnglespectrometerForward spectrometerLarge Angle Spectrometer:0.35 rad < < 2.15 rad100 MeV/c < p < 700 MeV/cSuper Beams - Nufactories

Forward Spectrometer:30 mrad < < 210 mrad.750 MeV/c < p < 6.5 GeV/cK2K,MiniBoone, Cosmic raysMore details in the NIM paper The Harp Detector @ the CERN PS

Fast readout 103 eventi/PS spill, one spill=400ms. Event rate 2.5KHzAround 106 events/day(very ambitious for a TPC!)

Short Time Scale ! ( february 2000 summer 2001) Make use (where possible) of existing material and/or detectors Cost optimisation Minimize efforts and time-scale

Main features of the Project

The HARP experimentBig parallel effort:Design and construction at the same time

TPC July 2000HARP Construction

Forward Spectrometer July 2000

HARP technical runOctober 2000

August 2001:

A coordinate effort was needed to have a running software in a short time !

2 possible approaches :1Try to produce the results using all the programs that we already have Don't make any general integration having in mind that some work will be lostPostpone the creation of the true Software environment 2Create a Software Architecture ASAPPush on the integration of the different software modulesStop the development with the already used programs

Choice 1 pro & conProNo time spent working in the Organization MatterNo formalisms and defined rules and disciplineConcentration of the efforts only on the primary scope

ConA (large) fraction of the work will be not usable in the future Possible errors due to lack in communications between different programs Possible interferences and conflicts at the integration time

Choice 2 pro & conProA (large) fraction of the work will be usable in the future Optimize the resources and minimize the problems at the integration timeAllows a coherent effort and minimize conflicts

ConTime spent working in the Organization Matterformalisms and defined rules and discipline are a must and a consensus on this point is mandatoryNeed (sometime) specialized manpower

Software: The HARP Strategy Harp was approved in the February 2000 and the data taking was started in summer 2001To optimize quality , developing time and human resources we decided to use software engineering tools and in particular to realize an Architectural Design

This choice was successfully and we build a first running version of the full chain of our software in few months from June to October 2001

But what this practically means ?Use a well tested method to follow the software development from the very early stage (Project and Managements Plans, User and software Requirements) until the final product tests (Test plan and release procedure) The starting point should be always the Software Project Management Plan that describes

1. The objectives to be reached by the program and the organization of the work 2. The task and responsibilities 3. The schedule4. The strategy to minimize risks

the objectives to be reached by the program and the organization of the work User Requirements : define the functionality that the software must have for reach the resultsExample:UR-4: The user shall be able to describe the detector geometry consistently, though allowing different representations, for different applications.Type: capability ( or constrain)Priority: essentialStatus: implementedSRDreferences: SR-19, SR-20, SR-21

SR-1: The software shall run on PCs with Linux operating system. Type: constraint Priority: essential Status: implemented SR-2: The software shall have been developed in C/C++ programming language (at least for the collaboration-wide software).Type: constraint Priority: essential Status: implemented

The Software Requirements derive from the User Requirements and from strategic decisions taken in the collaboration.

What is a Architectural Design ?

The Architecture of a software is realized determining the components (domain decomposition) and the set of dependency relations between the identified elementsEach component is an independent unit of source code and librariesThe connection between the different domains defines the dependences and produces the time sequence for the test and release of the official code Software managment is part of the process

A correct decomposition allows a parallel development of the different peaces of code and the resource optimization

As exampleROOTCLHEPGEANT4DisplayEvent ModelFRAMEDetector DescriptionSimulationReconstruction Detector Response

Task and responsibilities:In general is convenient to match the responsibility assignment to the results of the domain decompositionIn this way will be no ambiguity left between the subcomponents The share of the work is easier and maximize the parallel development reducing conflicts and/or interferencesUnit test , System test and release procedure were defined and implemented Software verification and validation are included User and Software documention are essential parts

The schedule :The schedule was defined on the base of the Domain dependency structure and from the definition of the testing and release procedure For each step of the development you can define a schedule and the result of this effort should be a Software Release.It will evolve in a new one following the same test procedures

ConfigurationSoftware: HARP_DEV , HARP_FILEScode packages + ext.libs + data filesAnalysis: HARP_ANALYSISanalysis package (+ lib, exe)Production: HARP_PRODproduction scripts and executables + run files

The Software is not a static object:The development is organized as cycles For each cycle all the steps should be revised(scopes, schedules etc. etc.)

As example in HARP we have realized until now several cycles to reach different goals Technical Run 2000Start of Run 2001SPSC presentation October 2001Large Angle Analysis may 2002Mock Data ChallengeMigration from Objectivity to Oracle (2003).Full Data and MC Production v7r8

The HARP software components described have been developed and used for detector calibration and performance studies, trigger and background studies, beam particle identification, on-line applications, data quality, and productions for data analysis.DAQ :data acquisition software based on the DATE package (ALICE).

HarpEvent : HARP transient event model, including a structured description of settings, reconstruction objects,based on Gaudi (LHCb)

HarpDD HARP detector geometry and materials data (including alignment and calibration )

DetRep :geometrical representations of the detector (physics applications) based on the GEANT4 solid modelling

EventSelector event selection and data navigation functionality.

Simulation is based on GEANT4.

Reconstruction computation of reconstructed objects at various levels (including KALMAN Filters )

HarpUI event display used also online based on ROOT

DetResponse is the component implementing the digitization of the main detectors.also used for the T9 beam simulation, and for understanding and resolving trigger rate problems.

TPC Track Reconstruction

FW: PID principle

Persistency ObjyHarp HARP persistent event model. It is based on ObjectivityDB database, and mirrors the transient event model.ObjectCnv unpacking of the raw data and the construction of the transient C++ objects used by the physics applications. It can use transparently both online data and stored offline data, as well as MonteCarlo output.

ObjyPersistency is the component implementing the adapter to use the Objectivity or Oracle databases, while allowing the physics applications not to depend at compile time on the I/O solution. In 2003 (following a CERN decision) HARP migrated its data to Oracle, thus an equivalent component implementing HARP persistent event model in Oracle exists. The transition was transparent for the other users/developers

iDSTmySQL is the component implementing the DST concept for distribution in the collaboration. It contains the persistent-capable physics objects (including reconstruction, simulation, geometry, and event model objects). It supports both a neutral file format and Linux mySQL.

The entire software chain can be rerun on the data produced/retrieved in iDSTmySQL without needing to access the Cern mass storage system (CASTOR) and central data-bases (Objectivity, Oracle).

This allows full distribution of the analysis work in the HARP institutes.iDST

Data taking summarySOLID:CRYOGENIC:n EXP:HARP took data at the CERN PS T9 beamline in 2001-2002 Total: 420 M events, ~300 settingstop: simulated track and noise hits in the TPG; middle: highlightedhits are those assigned by the pattern recognition to belong to the same track;bottom: track fitted on the selected hits.

K2K: AlMiniBoone: BeLSND: H2O5%50%100%Replica5%50%100%Replica10%100%+12.9 GeV/c+8.9 GeV/c+1.5 GeV/c

PerformancesAll HARP data (with few exceptions) were successfully reconstructed and analyzed (~ 50 TByte including calibration data)

The same software release (v7r8) was uses without bug fixing to process all data

A factor (5-10) larger of corresponding MC events have been also produced

ProductionsHARP data are reconstructed in production at a rate varying from 0.3 sec/evt/GHz (large angle) to 2.1 sec/evt/GHz (all forward detectors)

HARP data are simulated in production at a rate of 1.7 sec/evt/GHz for both large angle and forward detectors simulation.

These rates allow in all cases more than one million events per day per 10 GHz(i.e. 3 standard processors clocked at 3 GHz).

Far/Near Ratio in K2KHARP gives ~ factor 2 error reduction across all energiesNear DetectorFar DetectorPredicted Flux ShapePredicted Far/Near RatioNear/Far RatioNucl.Phys.B732:1-45,2006 hep-ex/0510039

Miniboone: 8.9 GeV p beam hitting a berillium targetpublished on EPJ C hep-ex/0702024v2

HARP Be 8.9 GeV 5% Target ResultsHarp Forward Spectrometer Acceptance +

Neutrinofactorystudyds/dq cross-sections can be fed into neutrino factory studies to find optimum designWarning the above has fixed integration range, but optimization may be momentum dependentyield/Ekin+-+-

the next step : MICEThe International Muon Ionization CoolingExperiment

From MICE Proposal : The full software simulation and reconstruct ion chain of the TPGwas obtained using the HARP pattern recognition and track fitting programswith minor modifications a)b)c)Hits (including noise)Track findingFitted tracks

TPG: from simulation to prototyping

(R&D)TPG-head module3-GEM amplification stage30 cm Xread-out: ~7x105 hexagonal pads grouped in 3 sets of strips dephased y 120o (Hexaboard)FADC electronics (100 ns sampling time, from HARP TPC Prototype of the ALTRO cipTest bed: cylindrical field cage (80 cm X,150 cm length)Solenoidal B field ~ 0.7 T (max)HARP solenoid: [0,0.7] Tcathode plane: 25 kVfield cagegas:Ar(90%)+CO2(10%) TPG headbeamsourceFull volume: conceptdrift length: 150 cmdiameter: 80 cm XEB

90Sr sourceB~0.07 TVdrift ~ 1cm/msR~27 mmpT~0.57 MeV/csres = 40 mm using the HARP Software

One GEM module on pad planeCompleted stack under HV testE.Radicioni Elba-2006front view

4mm induction gaps Ar/CO2 90/10 Edrift = 160V/cm, T=200m (minimum) HVGEM = 320V HVIND=780V (~2 KV/cm, T maximum)side viewE.Radicioni Elba-2006Large Gems Prototypes:For close detectors T2K ( but also ... LHC,LC )

ConclusionsThe HARP experiment was build in a very short time

To cope with this aggresive schedule we decide to choose for the Software to use software engineering tools and in particular to realize an Architectural Design

This choice was successfully and we build a first running version of the full chain of our software in few months from June to October 2001

A (large) fraction of the work was easily reused in other applications

*****