Observation of “the knee” in cosmic ray energy spectrum with underground muons and primary mass composition in the range 1015–1017 eV

Bakatanov, V. N.; Novoseltsev, Yu. F.; Novoseltseva, R. V.

doi:10.1016/s0927-6505(99)00074-2

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar combinations of surface and underground detectors have been used e.g. by EAS-TOP and MACRO at the Gran Sasso [81] and at the Baksan underground laboratory [82]. Such methods are potentially very attractive for composition (b) Sibyll2.1 Figure 5: Unfolded fluxes from GAMMA [64] and KASCADE [65] using two different interaction models.…”

Section: N E -N µ Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurements of the cosmic ray composition with air shower experiments

Kampert

Unger

2012

Astroparticle Physics

432

434

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we review air shower data related to the mass composition of cosmic rays above 10 15 eV. After explaining the basic relations between air shower observables and the primary mass and energy of cosmic rays, we present different approaches and results of composition studies with surface detectors. Furthermore, we discuss measurements of the longitudinal development of air showers from non-imaging Cherenkov detectors and fluorescence telescopes.The interpretation of these experimental results in terms of primary mass is highly susceptible to the theoretical uncertainties of hadronic interactions in air showers. We nevertheless attempt to calculate the logarithmic mass from the data using different hadronic interaction models and to study its energy dependence from 10 15 eV to 10 20 eV.

show abstract

Section: N E -N µ Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurements of the cosmic ray composition with air shower experiments

Kampert

Unger

2012

Astroparticle Physics

432

434

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 of [42] where ln A is displayed for four interaction models). At present qgsjet and venus seem to be favored [42], but it is clear that these Monte Carlo simulations are crucial to extract observables [8,[43][44][45]. To sum up, from direct experiments and ground arrays, we can confidently present the following results: there is no break in spectra before a few hundreds of TeV [1] where usual cosmic ray acceleration is at work.…”

Section: Data: Behaviour At the Kneementioning

confidence: 98%

Heavy nuclei enrichment of the galactic cosmic rays at high energy: astrophysical interpretation

Maurin¹,

Cassé²,

Vangioni‐Flam³

2003

Astroparticle Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A substantial increase of the mean logarithmic mass ln A of galactic cosmic rays vs energy has been observed . We study three effects that could explain this trend i) different source spectra for protons and heavy nuclei ii) a selective nuclear destruction in flight of heavies iii) a gradient of the source number and chemical composition in the galactic disk. We take advantage of the diffusive cosmic ray propagation model developed at LAPTH to study specifically the geometrical aspects of the propagation and extend it to high energy. Using a simple modeling of the spectral knee around 10 15 eV, a bump in ln A appears. This feature is smoother when the spectral index of protons is steeper than Fe's. We analyze the effects of the rigidity dependence of the diffusion coefficient and the scale height of the confinement halo and we show that ln A is most sensitive to the first parameter. Pure geometrical effects are less determining than the diffusion coefficient spectral index. Subsequently, we conclude that the physics of cosmic ray confinement is the essential cause of the heavy nuclei enrichment until ∼ 10 15 eV.

show abstract

“…Before applying the parameterization in the context of underground muon rates, it is instructive to look at the case where the primary cosmic-ray energy is fixed, as can be achieved with coincident measurements of air showers with a surface array and an underground muon detector. Examples of experiments with this capacity are EAS-TOP and MACRO at Gran Sasso [20], the Baksan Underground Laboratory [21], SPASE-AMANDA [22,23] and the IceTop and IceCube detectors at the 2 https://github.com/verpoest/muon-profile-parameterization Fig. 3.…”

Section: Surface-underground Coincident Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%