CORSIKA 8 meeting

Tuesday Mar 10, 2020, 4:00 PM → 5:30 PM Europe/Berlin

DFNconf room: 

DFNconf video system: Room Name: CORSIKA, Number: 97958319

With your browser under Windows, MacOS, Linux:

1. https://conf.dfn.de/webapp/conference/97958319

2. By telephone (audio only):
   Call 0049 30 200 97958319

3. Via Skype for Business:
   97958319@vc.dfn.de

4. By a mobile smart phone.
   You have to install the Pexip App beforehand: Please enter: 97958319@conf.dfn.de
   
   

Meeting password (if asked) is 1234

---

Fallback VIDYO:
https://vidyoportal.cern.ch/join/oSNNTkKni5

Meeting: https://indico.kit.edu/event/751/

Next meeting: https://indico.kit.edu/event/774/

 

Max

Update on C8/C7 validation. New:

- FixChi

- UsStd. atmo (Lindsey)

- QGSJetII.4

For QGSJetII.4 validation of spectra at ground for 0deg p showers are ~5% low for pi, K and mu, while there is a slope for protons.

For SIBYLL the spectra are shifted/scattered more (+-15%) and there is a slope for protons and muons.

-> Need to investigate further. Still not well enough understood yet.

Anatoli

New comparisons on generator level (CRMC/MCEq) reveal almost perfect agreement. There are a few slight offsets, but they are almost certainly linked to different decay/stability definitions. On generator level agreement is on the %-level.

But one question arised: for e.g. qgsjet masses, howto best keep consistent? How to adjust for different particle masses in different models. There is not yet any consensus on this. None of the codes we checked on-the-fly does anything "reasonable" here. Maybe the effects are not big? At least we all seem to make it consistently "wrong". 

CORSIKA7 release

Contents:

- make conex and corsika more consistent

- fixes in CoREAS

- Strange baryon bugs

- FLUKA2020

- Jürgen's improvements.

Still need to check:

- Cherenkov "T" matrix

First consequences, for Sibyll:

2% less muons all energies, slight change of Xmax, maybe E-dependent 1..2 g/cm2

 

We discussed that we will highlight the CORSIKA Collaboration, and how we all contributed to the new release also of C7.

 

Matias:

There are real physical differences in particle ratios between sibyll and e.g. qgsjetII. Also in sibyll this is quite energy dependent, while it should not really be. This is "mimiking" a potential collective effects at higher energies, but they are not implemented neither in SIBYLL nor in QGSJet. It may be interesting to investigate why SIBYLL behaves like this.

 

 

1 Introduction

Speaker: Ralf Ulrich (KIT)

2 Discussion

Ongoing developments:

• EmCa

• PROPOSAL

• strange baryon bug

• Stack interface

• Processes interface

spectra_fixhei.pdf