1. The Status of the OPERA experiment II
Toshiyuki Nakano

2. Target Tracker signals of Rock muon (2006/08/18 05:25:46 GMT)
Top　View
Side　View
MuFlux = 1m2/h (1/M)
08/18- 2weeks
10/19- 3weeks
174969(NGY)

3. Changeable Sheet Interface plate TT to Brick(ECC)
Brick Tagging specially for NC-like event.
CS Doublet
~10cm
BRICK:
ECC
Sub-mm res.
T.T. 2.6cm pitch
Must be low back ground -> Doublet, Refreshed in GS
Must be high efficiency
Very huge Scanning load -> 1300cm2/day

4. Exposure : August 17 to 30 (4.5days ×2) 20×15 CSD have been installed.
7.6 x 1017 POT Total
20×15 CSD have been installed.

5. Position of CS in whole TT surface
top
Detector front view
~1/10 of Detector cross section
Corridor side
Rock side
bottom mm

6. Target Tracker signals of Rock muon (2006/08/18 05:25:46 GMT)
Top　View
Side　View
OPERA films 300 set of CSD
MuFlux = 1m2/h (1/M)
08/18- 2weeks
10/19- 3weeks
174969(NGY)

7. Arrived on Sep. 4th in Japan. Started scanning immediately.
174969(NGY)
Arrived on Sep. 4th in Japan.
Started scanning immediately.

8. 174969(NGY)
11.5x6cm2

9. Automatic Emulsion Scanning System
“S-UTS”

10. ,120,627 Micro Track

11. CS Doublet cross section
Fourfold coincidence
CS Doublet cross section
Reconstruction Conditions :
D(qcs1-q1,2) < rad
D(qcs2-q3,4) < rad
D(qcs1-qcs2) < rad
D(rcs1-rcs2) <10 mm
Emulsion 45mm
BASE
200mm
BASE
Emul
Emul q1 q2 q3 q4
qcs1
qcs2 Dr

12. EV174969 Scanning result (11.5 x 6.0 cm2)
CS ,120,627 Micro Track
CS ,520,647 Micro Track
CS ,743,432 Micro Track
CS ,934,974 Micro Track
8 tracks were reconstructed: dq,dr < 10mrad,10mm (qCS1-qCS2)
By applying TT selection,
dqX<50mrad & dqY < 50mrad
Remained 1 candidate track out of 8
Confirmed by Eye Scan.

13. Eye Scan Result Event 174969 scanned by Eyes B+B+C+C B+B+C+F C+F+C+C
F+F+C+F
C+F+F+C
F+C+C+F
T+T+T+T
Fake candidate by Automatic,
but EASY to distinguish by eyes
B: Black track (heavy)
C: Compton (very low momentum)
F: Fog (Random coincidence grains)
T: True track (Real Track)

14. EV174969 Found Track parameters Comparison to the TT prediction
X= cm , Y= cm
tan(qX) = , tan(qY)=
PH = ( )
tan(dqX)(1-2) = -2.1mrad, tan(dqY)(1-2) = -1.2mrad
dX(1-2) = 6.7mm, dY(1-2) = -0.3mm
(1-2) means CS pl1 to pl2 difference
Comparison to the TT prediction
dX = -1.81cm, dY = -0.59cm (Em Track - TT pred.)
dqX = 0.5mrad, dqY = 35.0mrad

16. 2006/08/27 07:48:42(GMT) 4m 7m
Top　View
Side　View
(NGY)

17. (NGY)

18. (NGY)
8x6cm2

19. ,649,555 Micro Track

20. EV9516652 Scanning result (8.0 x 6.0 cm2)
CS ,708,814 Micro Track
CS ,649,555 Micro Track
CS ,699,617 Micro Track
CS ,407,695 Micro Track
3 tracks were reconstructed: dq,dr < 10mrad,10mm (qCS1-qCS2)
By applying TT selection
dqX<50mrad & dqY < 50mrad
Remained 1 candidate track out of 3
Confirmed by Eye Scan

21. Eye Scan Result Event 9516652 F+F+B+B C+F+C+C T+T+T+T
B: Black track (heavy)
C: Compton (very low momentum)
F: Fog (Random coincidence grains)
T: True track

22. EV9516652 Found Track parameters Comparison to the TT prediction
X= cm , Y= cm
tan(qX) = , tan(qY) =
PH = ( )
tan(dqX)(1-2) = 4.0mrad, tan(dqX)(1-2) = 2.7mrad
dX(1-2) = -7.9mm, dY(1-2) = 9.3mm (X-ray alignment)
(1-2) means CS pl1 to pl2 difference
Comparison to the TT prediction
dX = -1.55cm, dY = -0.55cm (Em Track - TT pred.)
dqX = -9.3mrad, dqY = 6.6mrad

24. All tried predictions on CSD
Event#
Event
Type
distribution
POS.
X (cm)
Y (cm)
aX (rad)
aY (rad)
Most probable CSD
124528
Nuint
NGY
-105.6
-212.2
-0.071
0.182
06-09
174969
Rock
-249.0
-254.1
-0.134
0.017
02-20
-164.5
-225.5
0.023
0.030
04-13
-11.8
-130.2
0.080
0.069
13-01
-25.8
-189.8
0.101
08-03
-81.8
-146.4
-0.053
0.165
12-07
-236.7
-154.7
-0.019
0.089
11-19
Found 4 out of 7 predictions
⇒ Should be checked efficiency

25. All these Fake were rejected by eye check
CSD background component in full scanned angular space. (without TT angle cut)
Manual check result summary
CSD with KCl(14hours) (total scanning area ~ 880cm2)
fog+fog
fog+cmpton
cmpton+cmpton
Black+Black 11 52 6 1
Fake total : ( )/2=35 → 16/400cm2
Normal CSD (total scanning area ~ 280cm2)
fog+fog
fog+cmpton
cmpton+cmpton
Black+Black 1
Fake total : ( )/2=2 → 3/400cm2
All these Fake were rejected by eye check
⇒ Hopeful to use for Brick Tagging

26. Emulsion Scanning System “SUTS”

27. Follow Shot　Optics

28. Non-stop tomographic image taking (follow shot method)
Use Ultra High Speed Camera
Up to 3k frames per second.  Max 100views/sec～60cm2/h
Image taking by follow shot
No go-stop operation to avoid a mechanical bottleneck.
FOV Motion and Blur are canceled by moving lens

29. Real-time Image Filtering and Packing Processor
Arrange readout segments to lines
FIR filters
Ring frame buffers
Spatial filter and Pixel Packing
LVDS Camera Interface
LVDS Output Interface
Camera In

31. SUTS block diagram MASTER PC Camera front end image processor Slave PC
1.3GB/s
MASTER PC
Camera front end
image processor
Slave PC
Camera
MB/s
Stage
Track recognition
Slave PC
6-10MB/s
Lamp
Slave PC
Piezo driver
Piezo

32. Track recognition board
SUTS
Track recognition board
Processing speed : Up to 30cm2/h/board
Internal Band width 21Gbyte/s/FPGA
×11

33. Scanning Efficiency Check
Sample : double refreshed half size OPERA film exposed cosmic rays
Scanning area ID B
10mm x 10mm pl 1 2 3 4
Pick up prediction tracks
(pl1-pl2-pl4)
Search pl3 for basetrack (2sufaces)
window : dx,dy < +-3micron
dthx,dthy < +-70mrad ne
Exist or not
Cosmic ray
Base Track Eff. Corresponds to sqrt of CSD eff.

34. Angle displacement window : dx,dy < +-3micron
dthx,dthy < +-70mrad

35. Base Track angle resolution
X proj q< X proj 0.1<q< X proj 0.2<q< X proj 0.3<q<0.4
3.2mrad
3.6mrad
3.7mrad
4.4mrad
Y proj q< Y proj 0.1<q< Y proj 0.2<q< Y proj 0.3<q<0.4
3.5mrad
3.2mrad
3.7mrad
4.1mrad

36. Base Track position resolution
micron
micron

37. Base Track Efficiency 90% (= 81% @CSD) window : dx,dy < +-3micron
dthx,dthy < +-70mrad
90% (=
Ph sum cut
0.0<=angle<0.1 : 16
0.1<=angle<0.2 : 16
0.2<=angle<0.3 : 14
0.3<=angle<0.4 : 14
0.4<=angle : 13

38. Base Track Efficiency 90% (= 81% @CSD) window : dx,dy < +-3micron
dthx,dthy < +-100mrad
90% (=
Ph sum cut
0.0<=angle<0.1 : 16
0.1<=angle<0.2 : 16
0.2<=angle<0.3 : 14
0.3<=angle<0.4 : 14
0.4<=angle : 13

39. Efficiency Summary
Expected typical scanning efficiency is >80% with a doublet
>95% for one surface.
Why we found only 4 out of 7 ?
The not found events are very close to edge.
Fall in the gap between CSDs
Fluctuation due to low statistics

41. Conclusions and Prospects
Succeeded to connect TT to Emulsion.
We found 4 out of 7 events.
3 not found events are predicted on near edge
By using fourfold coincidence, the candidates are very few. No background tack were detected without TT cut by eye scan.
Usable for ‘Brick Tagging’
Scanning efficiency is ~80% for the moment
Study reduce requirement like 3hits out of 4 surfaces
Studies for distortion, thickness and plate setting is going on.
Edge part efficiency will be confirmed.
Constructing Scanning facilities.