A N I T A Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna

Science Objective: A Balloon- borne Ultra-high energy Neutrino Observatory

NASA Beyond Einstein themes:

• Test fundamental laws of high energy physics & astrophysics

• Probe particle acceleration A cutaway view of Antarctic ice sheet: ANITA observations penetrate deep into the ice itself. Balloon flight path is shown. processes near massive black hole event horizons Science Payload: 36 Dual-Polarized Antennas covering 0.2-1.2 GHz • Test the nature and origin of the highest energy cosmic rays, via the first observation of their cosmogenic neutrino partners.

Mission Overview: A long-duration

balloon mission over Antarctica M. Rosen, Univ. of Hawaii Solar ANITA Panels Gondola & • First flight in 2006-2007, two additional Payload flights in 08-09, 09-10. Each Flight: ~15 days. Baseline Mission plan: 45 days total flight time Antenna array Overall height ~ 7m • Radio-frequency monitoring of Antarctic ice sheet from ~40 km altitude • Array of quad-ridged horn antennas views • Flights are circumpolar due to continuous ice sheet out to horizon at D ~ 680 km wind circulation around south pole • Utilize Askaryan effect in neutrino • Neutrino cascades within ice sheet produce cascades: radio pulse mechanism tested strong Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) which at accelerators propagates through ice. Antarctic ice is • ~10o azimuth resolution via antenna transparent to radio waves up to ~1 GHz beam gradiometry within antenna clusters • Ice sheet becomes a neutrino “converter:” • ~3o elevation resolution by interferometry neutrinos enter and radio waves come out. between top & bottom antenna clusters • Effective telescope area: ~106 km2 ! • Pulse polarimetry to get additional information on neutrino direction ANITA

Balloon Gondola / Launch vehicle

• Balloon gondola plus science payload mass = 1840 kg (4050 lbs). Dual gondolas planned for 1yr turnaround. • Power requirements = 1 kW, solar photovoltaic panels • Gondola is anti-rotation stabilized, sun-pointing • Long-duration balloon launch from Typical Antarctic long-duration balloon launch McMurdo Station, Antarctica • No deployments or articulations Mission Management necessary during flight Principal Investigator: P. Gorham, joint position as senior staff member at JPL, and Prof. Science Team: Combining Neutrino of Particle Astrophysics, University of astronomy, High Energy Cosmic Hawaii at Manoa rays, & Ballooning expertise Project Management & Instrument Development: Jet Propulsion Laboratory P. Gorham1,8 (PI), S. Barwick2, J. Gondola development: UC Irvine Beatty3, D. Besson4, D. Antarctic Balloon Operations: National Cowen3, M. DuVernois5, K. Scientific Balloon Facility (NSBF) Liewer8, C. Naudet6, D. Polar Programs: National Science Foundation Saltzberg6, D. Seckel7 , G. Varner1 Schedule & Cost 1. Univ. of Hawaii; 2. UC Irvine; 3.Penn State Univ.; 4.Univ. of Initial Flight Dec. 2006 / Jan. 2007 Kansas.; 5.Univ. of Minnesota; 6.UCLA; 7.Univ.of 2nd Flight Dec. 2007 / Jan. 2008 Delaware/Bartol; 8.NASA Jet 3rd Flight Dec. 2008 / Jan. 2009 Propulsion Lab. Initial Data release April 2009 Collaborators: Phase A/B $7.1M J. Clem, P. Evenson, (Bartol), S. Phase C/D $17.1M Coutu (Penn State), F. Halzen (UW Madison), D. Phase E $3.4M Kieda (Utah), J. Learned, S. Balloon launch costs $4.3M Matsuno (Hawaii). Total (FY2003 $) $31.9M Contents

1SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 1 1.1 Scientific Goals and Objectives ...... 1 1.1.1 Primary NASA Science Themes...... 1 1.1.2 Relation to Past, Current, and Future Investigations and Missions...... 3 1.1.3 Basis for ANITA...... 4 1.1.4 Baseline Mission Overview...... 13 1.1.5 Measurements and Analysis Approach...... 14 1.1.6 Data products & Science Results...... 14 1.1.7 Quality and Quantity of Data to be Returned...... 14 1.2 Science Implementation...... 14 1.2.1 Instrumentation...... 15 1.2.2 Baseline Mission Design...... 17 1.2.3 Minimum Mission ...... 18 1.2.4 Data Analysis and Archiving...... 19 1.2.5 Science Team...... 19

2MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 21 2.1 General information...... 21 2.1.1 Launch windows & flight duration...... 21 2.1.2 Allowed Altitude and Latitude Range...... 21 2.2 Telemetry...... 21 2.3 Background Interference...... 23 2.3.1 Anthropogenic Backgrounds...... 23 2.3.2 EMI Background Survey...... 24 2.3.3 Mitigation strategies for interference...... 24 2.4 Status of ANITA under PI funding and ROSS SR&T Grant...... 25 2.5 Development, Integration, & testing...... 26 2.5.1 RF payload...... 26 2.5.2 Control & data acquisition system...... 26 2.5.3 Instrument integration...... 26 2.5.4 Gondola...... 26 2.5.5 Gondola/instrument integration...... 27 2.5.6 Antenna calibration...... 27 2.5.7 Environmental test & Engineering test flight...... 27 2.5.8 Flight delivery...... 28 2.5.9 Ground systems & calibration...... 28 2.6 Resource budgets...... 28 2.6.1 Mass ...... 28 2.6.2 Power...... 28 2.7 Attitude control & knowledge...... 29 2.8 Mission Technology...... 30 2.8.1 Heritage & maturity of mission elements...... 30 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 32 3.1 Management approach ...... 32 3.1.1 Management organization...... 32 3.1.2 Decision-making process...... 33 3.1.3 Teaming arrangements...... 33 3.1.4 Risk Management...... 33 3.2 Project Schedule...... 34 3.2.1 Instrument and Gondola Development, Integration, Calibration, and Testing. 37 3.2.2 Data Analysis, Production, Reporting...... 38

4 ANITA COST AND COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY 38 4.1 Project costs...... 38 4.2 Methodology...... 38 4.2.1 Project cost estimate...... 38 4.2.2 Cost Models...... 40 4.3 Contributed Costs...... 40 4.4 Budget Reserve Strategy...... 40

5Required NASA OSS Budget Tables & WBS 41

6 ANITA EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH 43 6.1 Relationship to Mission...... 43 6.2 Goals and Objectives...... 43 6.3 Evaluation of the ANITA EPO Success...... 44 6.4 Dissemination strategies...... 44

7NEW/ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY,&SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES 44

8APPENDICES 45 8.1 Letters of Endorsement...... 45 8.2 Statement of Work and Funding information...... 47 8.3 Curriculum Vitae ...... 49 8.4 Draft International Participation Plan/Compliance with Export Rules...... 63 8.5 Assignment of Technical Responsibilities between US and International Partners. . 63 8.6 Orbital Debris Generation Acknowledgment Statement...... 63 8.7 NASA PI proposal team information...... 63 8.8 Abbreviations & Acronyms ...... 64 8.9 References ...... 65

2 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 1 1SCIENCE INVESTIGATION Although there is general agreement that par- 1.1 Scientific Goals and Objectives ticle acceleration near the massive black holes The primary objective of the Antarctic Impul- at the centers of AGN is almost certain to pro- sive Transient Antenna (ANITA) mission is to duce neutrino emission that is closely tied to the extend the reach of NASA observatories into MBH accretion rate [2], the level of emission the realm of high energy neutrino astronomy, is under intense debate. If accelerated protons in concordance with the vision of the theme of can escape from the sources to become ultra- NASA’s Structure and Evolution of the Universe high energy cosmic rays, then the high energy (SEU) 2003 roadmap, to test the fundamental neutrino fluxes are tied to the cosmic ray flux laws of high energy physics and astrophysics. via an important relation first noted by Wax- Neutrinos and gravity waves are the only di- man & Bahcall [3], and are likely to be low– rect astrophysical messengers which reach earth mostly inaccessible to existing neutrino tele- unattenuated through space at all energies. At scopes. A similar, less stringent, limit comes the highest expected energies, neutrinos are ex- from bounds on the extragalactic gamma-ray pected to have Lorentz gamma factors in ex- background from EGRET [4]. If the sources cess of 1022,based on the recent estimates of are optically thick, absorbing most other radia- neutrino mass [1]. Such extreme particle kine- tion from near the MBH, then the neutrino fluxes matics and the conditions under which they are may be much higher. ANITA aims to achieve produced are far beyond what can be obtained sufficient sensitivity to test either case. at any present or future earth-based accelerator. Moreover, there are general and compelling ANITA measurements will thus probe both the reasons why neutrinos may provide the most nature of the sources of these extreme particles, penetrating particle messengers for not only the and the fundamental interactions of high energy regions near black holes, but over much of the physics at extreme scales. visible universe at very high energies. At pho- ton energies above 10-100 TeV, the cosmic in- 1.1.1 Primary NASA Science Themes. frared background radiation itself begins to ab- 1.1.1.1 SEU Beyond Einstein Primary sorb and scatter even these penetrating gamma Theme: Massive Black Holes & High Energy rays, and photon astronomy becomes restricted Physics. Neutrinos are the most penetrating only to galactic sources. Yet we know that the form of radiation known, and are unaffected high energy acceleration processes associated by magnetic fields or intense radiation fields, with ultra-energetic sources such as AGN and which may deflect charged particles and scatter gamma-ray bursters extend to energies at least X- and gamma-rays repeatedly. In the accretion 7 orders of magnitude beyond this photon cut- disks that channel and accelerate matter through off. If we are to fully understand massive black the event horizons of black holes, conditions holes and their relationship to the ultra-high en- are such that neutrinos are one of the few, if not ergy cosmic rays we will need direct detection the only, messenger particles that can escape and characterization of the high energy Greisen- unscattered and unabsorbed with information Zatsepin-Kuzmin (GZK [5, 6]) neutrinos that are about the innermost regions. In the accretion predicted to be strongly correlated to them [7]. disks surrounding Massive Black Holes (MBH), ANITA also has a unique opportunity to almost certain to be the engines for Active constrain black hole phenomenology in inner Galactic Nuclei (AGN), bulk particle accel- space, via a process now understood to be well eration is an observational fact, and neutrino within the realm of possibility in current parti- emission an inevitable consequence of the cle physics models. If spacetime itself consists decay of pions produced in the colliding matter. of macroscopic hidden dimensions beyond the 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 2

balloon at ~37km altitude

cascade produces UHF−microwave EMP antenna array on payload

antarctic ice sheet 1−3km earth 0.1−100 EeV neutrinos

refracted RF ~700km to horizon ice cascade 1−3 km observed area: ~1.5 M square km 56 ν Cherenkov cone

Figure 1: Left: Schematic of the ANITA concept. Right:Neutrino models and limits along with estimated single-event sensitivity (SES) of ANITA for the baseline 45 day total exposure, assuming 75% observing efficiency. The AGN band is based on Mannheim [2] and covers a range from 0.1-1 of the nominal flux. The Waxman/Bahcall bound [3] is tied to the UHE cosmic ray flux and give a theoretical upper limit for optically thin sources, but does not apply for thick sources or top-down models. GZK neutrino flux range is given by ref. [7]. The GLUE and RICE limits are current experimental bounds on the neutrino fluxes.

3spatial and 1 temporal that we know [8, 9], to Hawking radiation and will immediately de- an immediate and plausible consequence of this cay in a spectacular shower of particles. Detec- geometry on particle physics is the opportunity tion of such events, for which ANITA will have for production of black hole states in high en- sensitivity far beyond any earth-based acceler- ergy particle interactions [10, 11], a possibility ator, would be a stunning and profound confir- that has generated intense interest in the CERN mation of a process that will have wide-ranging Large Hadron Collider, which will begin oper- physics and astrophysics implications. ation late this decade and could produce such ANITA, as an Antarctic long-duration bal- states in hadron collisions [12, 13]. loon flight, will synoptically observe the Antarc- The presence of the almost certain GZK tic ice sheet out to a horizon approaching neutrino background from high energy cosmic 700 km, giving a neutrino detection volume ray collisions with the cosmic microwave back- of order 106 km3. ANITA will search for ra- ground radiation in intergalactic space could dio pulses that arise from electromagnetic cas- lead to interactions in Antarctic ice in which a cade interactions of the high energy neutrinos neutrino could produce a black hole of a mass within the ice. Such radio pulses, recently con- equal to that of several thousand atoms [14, 15] . firmed in accelerator experiments, easily propa- Such a microscopic black hole is highly unstable gate through the ice due to its remarkable radio 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 3 transparency. Fig. 1 gives a schematic view of ANITA does not have the atmospheric neutrino the concept of ANITA, indicating the basic ge- “noise” of the lower-energy neutrino detectors ometry for the coherent Cherenkov radio pulse such as AMANDA with which to calibrate its produced by the cascades in Antarctic ice, and sensitivity, the very lack of any known terres- the synoptic view of the balloon payload. trial or cosmic-ray physics background is also ANITA will act as a pathfinding mission for what will give ANITA its power as a neutrino high energy neutrino astronomy, because it will observatory. achieve extremely high sensitivity in a relatively Given the high difficulty and cost of instru- short time frame. The mission will provide menting even a small portion of the effective an early view of the potential neutrino fluxes observed fiducial volume that ANITA can mon- from many possible sources. Because neutri- itor, our proposed mission is a fraction of the nos can escape freely from sources in which cost of large ground-based neutrino observato- all other forms of radiation can be heavily ab- ries now planned. ANITA is an extremely cost sorbed, ANITA will be sensitive to energy from effective approach toward a difficult but scien- astrophysical objects that may not be observable tifically compelling problem. in any other way. As a pathfinding mission with high sensi- Fig. 1 shows a plot of various neutrino tivity but only modest resolution and precision, models, limits, and the estimated sensitivity of ANITA will by no means displace the need for ANITA for the baseline 3 LDB flights. ANITA more precise tracking detectors once the fluxes will achieve a remarkable 2-3 order of magni- are established. Rather, it enables careful and tude improvement over existing limits on neu- informed design of future detectors which will trino fluxes in the energy regime it explores. We help to optimize their use of costly resources and stress that the GZK neutrino fluxes shown which ultimately enhance their science return for a rel- ANITA begins to significantly detect on this atively modest early investment. timescale are predictions of great importance to both high energy physics and our understanding 1.1.2 Relation to Past, Current, and Future of cosmic-ray production and propagation. A Investigations and Missions. ANITA will be non-detection of these fluxes by ANITA would the first NASA mission to directly address the itself be a breakthrough which would shake sev- problem of high energy neutrino astronomy, and eral foundational theories in this field. as such there are no direct relations to any prior In addition, any instrument which achieves or planned NASA missions. However, there such a significant increase in sensitivity over are clear scientific connections with the science prior missions has great potential for discov- goals of several planned OSS missions. At ery, and the predictions of AGN neutrino present, ANITA is approved under the NASA fluxes would produce unmistakable signatures OSS Space Research and Technology (SR&T) in ANITA data. Despite the small statistics program in Particle Astrophysics. In proposing of the event numbers discussed here, even a to the SMEX program, the ANITA team seeks handful of events can be considered a signifi- to lower the mission risk, significantly improve cant detection in this field. For example, both the quality of this technically challenging instru- the RICE and GLUE experiments have convinc- ment, and thus significantly elevate the science ingly demonstrated rejection of anthropogenic return to NASA OSS. backgrounds to a level where their limits are Because AGN massive black hole accre- based on zero candidate signal events, with ther- tion disks are one of the most probable mal noise and other calibration signals ensuring non-cosmogenic sources of ultra-high energy their instruments’ realtime sensitivity. Although neutrinos, ANITA will provide information 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 4 and constraints on black hole physics that OWL, however, since the ISS orbit is lower than are complementary to measurements for both that planned for OWL. Constellation-X and LISA. For example, if ANITA is of great importance to both of ANITA detects a strong flux of diffuse back- these missions. Measurements of the GZK neu- ground neutrinos with AGN characteristics, it trino flux will be particularly sensitive to the cut- might imply a large population of optically thick off energy associated with the GZK process. If sources, and first-order measurements of the the results suggest a strong super-GZK compo- neutrino energy spectrum could suggest the pop- nent of cosmic-ray events, it would help to pro- ulation density, a measurement which would vide more compelling arguments that these mis- have direct relevance to estimates of source sions are not only likely to succeed, but will strengths and spectra for both Constellation-X achieve high resolution measurements of the and LISA. If gamma-ray bursters produce in- super-GZK spectrum. If the results suggest that tense hadronic acceleration and are also associ- the spectrum steepens above the GZK energy, ated with the formation of a black hole, detec- it would be a compelling reason to put effort tion of associated neutrino bursts, could signifi- into lowering the energy threshold, and perhaps cantly constrain the nature of the burst energet- sharpening the angular resolution in an effort to ics. resolve the potentially nearby sources of the cos- ANITA has direct relevance to one NASA mic rays in the vicinity of the GZK cutoff. OSS mission presently under conceptual study: the Optical Wide-area Light collectors (OWL) 1.1.3 Basis for ANITA. mission [16]. OWL would fly one or more 1.1.3.1 Theoretical Basis. The concept of spacecraft in low-earth orbit to sense the ni- detecting high energy particles through the co- trogen fluorescence emission from high energy herent radio emission from the cascade they cosmic ray air showers and neutrinos above 1020 produce can be traced back nearly 40 years eV. Each spacecraft employs a large optical tele- to Askaryan [18], who argued persuasively for scope with a 1 sr field of view, and a photon- the presence of strong coherent radio emission counting focal plane able to sense both position from these cascades, and even suggested that and time-of-arrival of the photons, thus yielding any large volume of radio-transparent dielectric, a 3-dimensional image of the shower. At LEO such as an ice sheet, a geologic saltbed, or the altitudes, OWL can have an effective aperture lunar regolith could provide the target material of order 107 km2 sr, although its duty cycle will for such interactions and radio emission. In be limited to of order 10% in the same way that fact all of these approaches are now being pur- ground-based fluorescence detectors are limited. sued [19, 45, 46]. OWL has an important pre-cursor mission Although significant early efforts were suc- that is presently in phase-A study for deploy- cessful in detecting radio emission from high ment in 2008 on the Columbus module of the energy particle cascades in the earth’s atmo- International Space Station, funded by the Euro- sphere [21], it is important to emphasize that pean Space Agency. This mission, known as Ex- the cascade radio emission that ANITA detects treme Universe Space Observatory (EUSO) [17] is unrelated to air shower radio emission. Par- involves an Italian-Japanese-US collaboration, ticle cascades induced by neutrinos in Antarc- and may have a NASA contribution through a tic ice are very compact, consisting of a “plug” Mission of Opportunity now in Phase A study. of charged particles several cm in diameter and EUSO is basically a single-spacecraft version of ∼ 1 cm thick, which develops at the speed of OWL, although with smaller optics and effective light over a distance of several m from the ver- aperture. Its energy threshold is comparable to tex of the neutrino interaction before dissipating 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 5 into residual ionization in the ice. The resulting from νmin to νmax, of: radio emission is pure coherent Cherenkov ra- πh 1 diation with a particularly clean and simple ge- w = α L 1 − ν2 − ν2 ometry, providing a high information content in c n2β2 max min the detected pulses. In contrast, the radio emis- (2) sion from air showers is a complex phenomenon where α  1/137 is the fine structure constant, entangled with geomagnetic and near field ef- h and c are Planck’s constant and the speed of fects, leading to destructive interference in the light, and n and β are the medium dielectric con- detected signal. Attempts to understand and ex- stant, and the particle velocity relative to c,re- ploit this form of air shower emission have been spectively. For a collection of N charged parti- frustrated by this complexity since its discovery cles radiating coherently (e.g., with mean spac- in the mid-1960’s. ing small compared to the mean radiated wave- 2 Surprisingly little work was done on length), the total energy will be Wtot = N w. Askaryan’s suggestions that solids such as ice In solid dielectrics with density comparable to could be important media for detection until the ice or silica sand, cascade particle bunch is mid-1980’s, when Markov & Zheleznykh [49] compact, with transverse dimensions of several revisited these ideas and confirmed the theo- cm, and longitudinal dimensions of order 1 cm. retical basis. More recently Zheleznykh [50], Thus coherence will obtain up to several GHz or Dagkesamansky & Zheleznykh [51], Zas, more. 18  × 8 Halzen, & Stanev [52], and Alvarez-Muniz˜ & For a 10 eV cascade, Nex 2 10 ,and Zas [53] have taken up these suggestions again L  6 minthe vicinity of shower maximum and have confirmed the basic results through in a medium of density ∼ 0.9 with n ∼ 1.8 more detailed analysis. Of greater significance, as in Antarctic ice. Taking the mean radio fre- aset of experiments at the Stanford Linear quency to be 0.6 GHz with a bandwidth of 600 × −9 Accelerator center have clearly confirmed the MHz, the net radiated energy is Wtot =6 10 −8 effect and explored it in significant detail. J, a fraction 3.6 × 10 of the total energy of the cascade. This energy is emitted into a re- Energy Threshold & Sensitivity. The coherent stricted solid angle defined by the Cherenkov radio Cherenkov emission in a particle cascade − cone at an angle θ defined by cos θ =(nβ) 1, arises from the ∼ 20% electron excess in the c c and a width determined (primarily from diffrac- shower, which is itself produced primarily by tion considerations) by ∆θ  c sin θ /(¯νL). Compton scattering and positron annihilation in c c The implied total solid angle of emittance is flight. For a cascade of energy Ec,thetotal Ωc  2π∆θc sin θc =0.36 sr. numbers of electrons and positrons N − near e+e Since the pulse is produced by coherent su- shower maximum is of order the cascade energy perposition of the amplitudes of the Cherenkov expressed in GeV, or radiation, it is completely band-limited over the specified frequency range and excites a single Ec temporal mode of the receiver, with character- Ne+e−  (1) 1 GeV istic time ∆t =(∆ν)−1,orabout 1.6 ns in our case here. Radio source intensity in ra- 18 which, for Ec =10 eV, gives Ne+e− ∼ dio astronomy is typically expressed in terms 109.The radiating charge excess is then of or- of the flux density Jansky (Jy), where 1 Jy = −26 −2 −1 der Nex  0.2Ne+e−.Single-charged-particle 10 Wm Hz .Theenergy per unit solid −8 Cherenkov radiation gives a total radiated en- angle derived above, Wtot/Ωc =1.67×10 J/sr ergy, for tracklength L over a frequency band in a 600 MHz bandwidth, produces a peak flux 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 6

6 density of Sc =4.6 × 10 Jy at a distance of 600 km. The sensitivity of a radio telescope is deter- mined by its size and the thermal noise back- ground, called the system temperature Tsys.The rms level of fluctuations in this thermal noise is given by

kT ∆S = √ sys Wm−2 Hz−1 (3) Aeff ∆t∆ν where k is Boltzmann’s constant and Aeff is the effective area of the antenna, including beam il- lumination efficiency (typically ∼ 0.6). Note that in our case,√ because the pulse is band- limited, the term ∆t∆ν =1.ForANITA, we expect a single onboard antenna to have an effective area of 0.25 m2 at 600 MHz. For Figure 2: Simulation of a 1 EeV cascade radio observations of ice the system temperature is pulse as detected in a portion of the ANITA an- dominated by the ice thermal emissivity with tenna array at a distance of 600 km. The θ, φ T ≤ 250 K(assuming ∼ 80 K amplifier sys labels indicate the angular offset of the antenna noise figure). The implied rms noise level is thus with respect to the on-axis antenna. ∆S =1.6 × 106 Jy. These simple arguments show that the expected threshold for cascade de- tection is of order 1018 eV even to the edges of solid angle of the detector/fiducial volume, the the observed area viewed by ANITA. rate of background events, and the total time of Using a detailed Monte Carlo simulation observations. Since the highest flux models for which deals more rigorously with the effects of neutrino fluxes predict an isotropic intensity dis- neutrino propagation and interaction, and the tribution, we assume this case in our proposal. geometric effects of refraction and detector re- The observed volume at any given point along sponse, we find that the flux sensitivity is com- the ANITA flight path will depend on the alti- parable to the first-order estimate above. De- tude, depth of ice, and ice transparency. tected pulses from this simulation are plotted in Typically the observed volume to 0.5 km Fig. 2, showing the pulse shape for a 1 EeV cas- depth at an altitude of 37 km is ∼ 0.7 × 106 cade detected at a distance of 600 km, with an km3 water equivalent (ρ  0.9 gm cm−3 for po- assumed system noise temperature of 280 K. In lar ice). At a neutrino energy of 5 × 1018 eV, this event, at least 9 of the 36 antennas in the ar- which will on average produce a 1018 eV cas- ray detected the pulse, allowing for geolocation cade after accounting for inelasticity, the neu- of the pulse origin via the gradient in the ampli- trino cross section has risen to the point where tude and phase. only relatively short (≤ 300 km) chords through Minimum Detectable Flux. The minimum de- the earth’s crust are still allowed. This effective tectable flux at a given energy will depend on the restriction in upcoming angles for the neutrino total fiducial volume observed by ANITA, the produces a corresponding restriction in event neutrino cross section at the given energy, the in- nadir angles as observed at the detector, al- tensity distribution of the source, the acceptance though somewhat relaxed by refraction through 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 7 the surface. At 5 × 1018 eV only about half of These are estimated for a single flight of aver- the total volume in the field of view yields de- age duration (15 days), for the full 3-flight mis- tectable events, and most of these are nearer the sion (about 45 days exposure), and for the case horizon. of 3 maximal length flights totaling 100 days. Foragiven volume element near the surface, All of the estimates assume 75% exposure over the emission solid angle which survives total in- ice, and the sensitivity of ANITA in these cases ternal reflection is of order 10-20% of the orig- is sufficient to constrain all of the proposed neu- inal 0.36 sr. Accounting for transmission losses trino models.Although the event numbers are through the ice and local surface, and beam ef- small in several cases, these totals compare very ficiency at the detector, the average acceptance favorably with estimates for existing or planned solid angle per volume element is reduced to ground-based neutrino detectors, and will suf- ≤ 10−2 sr at this energy. The effective vol- fice to produce the first significant constraints on umetric aperture is thus ∼ 3000 km3 sr w.e. these models. at E =5EeV. Using an average total neu- ν Comparison to Ground-based Neutrino Ob- trino cross section at this energy of σν = .34 × − servatories. Several large scale ground-based 10 31 cm2 per nucleon, the minimum detectable high energy neutrino observatories are now op- flux in 10 days observing time is MDF = − − − − erating or in construction or advanced planning 2 × 10 17 cm 2 s 1 sr 1.Thisresult assumes stages. Among these are the Antarctic Muon no physics background, which is a plausible as- and Neutrino Detector Array (AMANDA) [54], sumption at these high energies. The range of now operating for several years at a depth of predicted fluxes for GZK neutrinos above 5 EeV − − − − 1-2.5 km in the ice at the South Pole; and is 0.8−4.0×10 17cm 2 s 1 sr 1,indicating that the ANTARES [55] and NESTOR [56] arrays, ANITA could begin to detect such fluxes within which are in construction at depths of several asingle flight. km in the Mediterranean sea. A larger planned array is the IceCube project [57], which will Table1:Predicted event numbers from various build upon the AMANDA concept with a goal neutrino models for different ANITA flight times, of achieving of order 1 km3 of instrumented vol- ≥ with 75% of flight time over deep ( 1 km) ice ume in the ice, optimized for an energy range assumed. from 10 TeV up to 10 PeV, at a cost of up to $240M and scheduled full operation in 2010. Exposure: 15 45 100 Model: days days days All of these systems detect optical Cherenkov emission from the secondary GZK ν, min [7] 1.5 4.5 10 muons produced in the same neutrino interac- GZK ν, max [24] 6 18 40 AGN ν, min [24] 9 27 60 tions that initiate the electromagnetic cascades AGN ν,max [2]) 20 60 130 that ANITA will detect. These muons have TD ν, min [26]) 2.3 7 15 ranges of uptotensofkm,and detectors TD ν, max [25] 285 855 1800 such as AMANDA can thus detect a neutrino interaction at significant distances from the vertex of the interaction by tracking the result- The results of this simulation are used earlier ing muon, which follows the direction of the to plot the sensitivity levels in Fig. 1. In Table 1 original neutrino. This approach yields high we list the event numbers for various neutrino angular precision and is the most cost-effective models which provide upper and lower bounds approach to detection of neutrinos from TeV around the selected models shown in Fig. 1. to PeV energies. The effective volume of a 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 8 cubic km instrumented detector which uses the Twoofthe investigators on the team muon tracking approach is thus extended to (Gorham and Saltzberg) have performed three roughly the product of the cross-sectional area experiments along these lines, the first at the Ar- of the detector times the muon range, which gonne Wakefield Accelerator (AWA) in the fall varies from several km in ice at TeV energies of 1999 [58], and more recently at the Stanford to several tens of km at EeV energies, where it Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) in the sum- flattens out [57]. mer of 2000 [59]and 2002 [44]. Because of the Because of this saturation of the muon range importance of these measurements with respect at EeV energies, the effective volume of a muon to the ANITA effort, we digress here to discuss tracking array also saturates at these energies. these in some detail, focusing on the later, more Forthe planned cubic km array IceCube, this complete experiments at SLAC. implies an effective neutrino aperture of order SLAC experiments. The cascades used in this 30 km3 sr at 1 EeV, about an order of magnitude experiment were initiated by intense bunches less than ANITA at the same energy. Thus the of pulsed gamma-rays. The gamma-rays were muon tracking system matches a 45 day ANITA produced via bremsstrahlung from the primary exposure after of order 1.5 years of effective ex- electrons in the linac. In the discovery ex- posure time, also known as live-time. periment, a large silica sand target and anten- At 10 EeV, however, the muon tracking ar- nas were placed in a gamma-ray beamline in ray effective volume has increased only slightly the Final Focus Test Beam facility at SLAC (due mainly to increased muon detection effi- in August 2000. The apparatus was placed ciency) but the ANITA volume has increased by 30 m downstream of bremsstrahlung radiators another order of magnitude due to the quadratic that produced a high-energy photon beam from rise of radio emission power from the Askaryan 28.5 GeV electrons. The results from this dis- effect. The muon tracking array now requires covery experiment have been published recently more than a decade to match the ANITA 45 day in Physical Review Letters [59], to which we re- livetime. This brief comparison thus illustrates fer the reader for more details. the power and cost-effectiveness of the ANITA In the 2000 experiment the dielectric-filled approach for EeV neutrino detection. target was a 1 × 1 × 4 mcontainer built largely 1.1.3.2 Experimental basis: Accelerator Mea- from non-conductive materials such as wood surements. Although it is not presently possi- and plastic which was filled with 3200 kg of ble to produce EeV cascades in terrestrial ac- dry silica sand. The sand target was rectangular celerators, electromagnetic showers with com- in cross section perpendicular to the beam axis, posite total energies in this range can be eas- butthe vertical faces on both sides were angled to facilitate transmission of radiation arriving at ily synthesized by superposing gamma-rays of ◦ energies above the pair-production threshold. If the Cherenkov angle (about 51 in silica sand at the gamma-ray bunch is small compared to the microwave frequencies). In the 2002 follow-on wavelength of the radio emission (true for most experiment, the sand was replaced by synthetic pulsed linacs), the resulting showers will differ rock salt, which has a higher dielectric constant from natural EeV showers only logarithmically, and lower loss tangent than silica sand. due to the details of the initial interaction. How- Fig. 3 (top) shows a typical pulse profile (in- ever, since the bulk of the radio emission arises set) and a set of measured peak field strengths from the region of maximum shower develop- for pulses taken at different points along the ment, the differences in radio Cherenkov emis- shower in the 2000 experiment. The plotted sion are modest and easily quantified. curve shows the expected profile of the to- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 9 tal number of particles in the shower, based on the Kamata-Nishimura-Greisen [59] approx- imation. Here the field strengths have been scaled in the plot to provide an approximate overlay to the relative shower profile. Clearly the pulse strengths are highly correlated to the particle number profile. Since the excess charge is also expected to closely follow the shower profile, this result confirms Askaryan’s hypoth- esis. Pulse polarization was measured with an S- band (2 GHz) horn directed at a shower position 0.5 m past the shower maximum. Fig. 3 (mid- dle) shows the pulse profile for both the 0◦ and 90◦ (cross-polarized) orientations of the horn. The lower two panes of this portion show the de- rived degree of linear polarization and the angle of the plane of polarization, respectively. Be- cause of the vector correlation of the pulse po- larization with the shower velocity vector and the Poynting flux vector, it is possible to use the angle of the polarization to track the shower axis. An example of this is shown in Fig. 3 (bottom), where the angle of the plane of po- larization is plotted at three locations with re- spect to the shower axis, showing the high cor- relation with the predicted angle. This feature of radio Cherenkov emission will help to im- prove ANITA’s ability to reconstruct the shower axis without the usual triangulation methods used in optical ring-imaging Cherenkov detec- tors, which do not measure the polarization. Fig. 4 (top, left pane) shows a typical se- quence of pulse field strengths versus the total shower energy, which was varied both by chang- ing the beam current and the thickness of the bremsstrahlung radiators. The fitted linear rise of field strength with beam current is consis- tent with complete coherence of the radiation, implying the characteristic quadratic rise in the Figure 3: Top: Shower RF field strength profile corresponding pulse power with shower energy. with typical pulse (inset). Middle: Polarization The lower half of Fig. 4 shows a similar result measurements of a typical RF Cherenkov pulse for the 2002 experiment, but now covering a at 2 GHz. Bottom: Correlation of plane of po- much wider range of energy, plotted as pulse larization with antenna offset from shower axis. power instead of field strength. The Askaryan 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 10 estimates of the combined systematic and statis- tical uncertainties. Note that the figure compares absolute field strength measurements to the pre- dictions and the agreement is very good. In summary, there is clear experimental evidence that Askaryan’s hypothesis is con- firmed and that the predicted emission from high energy cascades is present in the expected amounts. This lends strong support to exper- iments, including ANITA, designed to exploit this effect for high energy neutrino and cosmic ray detection.

Figure 4: Top left: Coherence of RF Cherenkov at 2 GHz, measured during 2000 SLAC experi- Figure 5: Field attenuation lengths in ice as a ment. Top right: absolute field strength and pre- function of temperature and frequency [48]. diction from Cherenkov. Bottom: Coherence of radiated power over the 0.2-1.2 GHz band. 1.1.3.3 Experimental Basis: Related experi- ments. process is found to be quadratic over four or- RICE. The Radio Ice Cherenkov Experiment ders of magnitude in shower energy–covering (RICE) [45] functions as a subelement of the precisely the range of interest for ANITA. larger AMANDA array. AMANDA, for which Fig. 4 (top, right pane) shows the spectral one of the ANITA co-investigators (S. Barwick) dependence of the radiation, which is consis- is the spokesman, is the first high energy neu- tent with the linear rise with frequency that is trino telescope to operate effectively in the TeV also characteristic of Cherenkov radiation. Also to PeV energy range, and has demonstrated the shown is a curve based on a parameterization of effectiveness of precision embedded tracking Monte Carlo results [52]. The uncertainties are Cherenkov arrays for these energies. 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 11 RICE forms a subarray of antennas in a vol- cies. ume above the main optical array, about 250- 400 m deep in the ice, along the AMANDA supply cables. RICE is among the first exper- iments to attempt to exploit the Askaryan effect and has demonstrated that the noise levels in the upper layers of the ice are consistent with am- bient thermal noise. RICE extends the reach of AMANDA up to EeV energies, although it is probably too small at present to achieve lim- its which can constrain GZK neutrinos in the near future. The most relevant aspects of RICE to ANITA are measurements of the attenuation length of the ice over a bandpass that matches fairly well with ANITA. RICE finds a lower limit on the attenuation length in this band of at least 500 m. Antarctic radar. For many years radar tech- niques have been used with great success to map out the Antarctic land masses beneath the ice, even at depths of more than 3 km. The atten- uation length in ice is found to have a strong dependence on temperature, with attenuation in- creasing rapidly as the ice approaches its melt- ing temperature. In general, this is only impor- tant in the coastal glaciers or near the bottom of the ice sheets where the ice is affected by Figure 6: Top: Measured South Pole ice thermal coupling to the underlying land mass. In Fig. 5 noise temperature vs. frequency, determined we show several curves of the attenuation length from the ratio of a single 50 µssample of nadir for different temperatures for typical Antarctic (ice) antenna noise vs zenith (∼ 20 Ksky)noise. sheet ice, with extrapolations to higher frequen- Bottom: Solar spectrum thermal noise derived cies. in the same manner as above. Typical temperatures in the deep polar ice sheets are cold, with average temperatures in RF noise. In January of this year, ANITA per- the upper 1.5 km measured to be below −50◦ at sonnel were able deploy a broadband, ANITA- Vostok station [48] with little variation. Nearer like, dual-polarized antenna system at the South the coast in the shallower portions of the sheet, Pole station in several locations, in one case at measurements of the average temperature of the adistance of 6.6 km from the station in a ski entire sheet down to ∼ 1 km give −30◦.Itis hut. In this effort, dubbed the South Pole Im- thus evident that radio propagation in the ice pulsive Noise (SPIN) experiment, low-noise re- overmost of the Antarctic ice sheet should ex- ceiver system was used to record ambient ther- ceed several hundred m attenuation length, and mal and impulsive backgrounds over a several in the deeper ice sheets approaches 1 km attenu- hour period at each location. While the noise ation lengths, particularly at the lower frequen- near the station was fairly high as expected, once 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 12 the SPIN location was moved out to the ski hut, which optimize the detection and recognition of the impulsive backgrounds found in this exper- band-limited, polarized pulses. This experience iment became very low–in fact, in only one pe- is especially valuable in terms of recognition riod, just after 4 p.m. local time when a satel- and mitigation of radio frequency interference lite uplink from the South Pole station became which is a ubiquitous problem in all of radio as- active, were any significant impulsive triggers tronomy. seen at all. Since, next to McMurdo station, To date, GLUE has set only limits in the en- the South Pole station is the most active dur- ergy regime it explores, based on a first pass ing austral summer, these results provide strong conservative analysis of the data, with no pulse evidence that ANITA will operate in low-noise events surviving the cuts for the first 50 hours of conditions. live-time. In addition to impulsive triggers, the SPIN 1.1.3.4 FORTE: A Space-Based precursor of experiment measured ambient thermal noise ANITA. The Fast On-orbit Recording of Tran- levels, including both the underlying ice and the sient Events (FORTE) satellite [65], launched in solar spectrum, over the frequency range from August 1997, was designed and built through 0.2-1.2 GHz. The results of this are shown acollaborative effort of Los Alamos National in Fig. 6, where both the derived ice and so- Laboratory and Sandia Laboratory, with a pri- lar spectra are shown. Despite some probable mary goal of studying impulsive optical and ra- residual calibration uncertainty in the shape of dio transients that may be relevant to interna- the ice spectrum, both are consistent with ambi- tional nuclear treaty verification. The mission ent noise at the thermal floor as predicted, and is non-classified and has a strong atmospheric these measurements lend further support to the physics program in studies of lightning and re- ANITA sensitivity estimates. lated upper atmosphere and ionospheric events. GLUE. The GLUE experiment [19], a collab- The satellite was launched into a nearly circular ◦ oration of JPL and UCLA, utilizes two space- orbit at 800 km altitude and 70 inclination. craft telecommunications radio telescopes in the The system has recorded over 4 × 106 im- Goldstone facility of the NASA Deep Space pulsive transient events, including new forms of Network to observe the lunar regolith in search lightning, and may in fact also be sensitive to ra- of radio pulses from cascades in the energy re- dio emission from giant cosmic ray air showers. gion above 1020 eV. GLUE bears many simi- Fig. 7 shows global VHF noise levels recorded larities in the technique to ANITA. For exam- by FORTE in two bands between 30-40 MHz. ple, multiple antennas, polarizations, and fre- It is significant that some of the lowest recorded quency bands are used to isolate the desired sig- levels appear over the Southern Ocean and along nal pulses from any terrestrial or other back- the Antarctic coast. This latter fact is of im- ground interference. In both experiments the portance to ANITA, since a majority of the an- effective detection volume arises from synoptic thropogenic noise sources in Antarctica are in observations of a large spatial region, with radio coastal camps. The fact that FORTE observes pulses originating within the material (regolith RF noise consistent with Galactic thermal noise or ice) below the observed surface. levels is encouraging for ANITA, since interfer- Many of the present design concepts in the ence in the 30-50 MHz band is usually much ANITA RF processing can be traced to tech- higher than in the bands of interest for ANITA. niques that have been perfected by several of FORTE provides an excellent example of the the proposers for the GLUE project. In particu- ability of a synoptic antenna to operate effec- lar this applies to the development of approaches tively in the presence of noise over a wide ra- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 13

Figure 7: AFORTE compilation of global VHF noise levels, in mV per m per MHz (1 mV/m = 2.6 nW/m2), as observed from an 800 km altitude. The lowest levels (green) are consistent with Galactic background noise, and occur in the Southern Ocean and along the Antarctic coast. dio bandwidth, and demonstrates that systems markable transparency of Antarctic ice to radio which seek to isolate specific impulsive events waves makes this experiment possible, and the from a wide variety of anthropogenic noise can enormous volume of ice that can be simultane- operate quite effectively. ously monitored leads to an unparalleled sensi- FORTE can in principle trigger on neutrino- tivity to neutrinos in the energy range of 0.1 to induced EMP events, but because of its much 100 EeV. higher altitude and more limited frequency ANITA will obtain a total of 45 days live- range, FORTE’s energy threshold is much time during our baseline mission. A conserva- higher than that of ANITA. This ability has tive approach has been adopted toward achiev- been recently exploited in analysis by N. Lehti- ing the planned 45 day live-time, basing this nen [68] who analyzed 3.7 days of FORTE live- total on 3 Antarctic flights, each of which time over the Greenland ice sheet and was able achieves an average of 15 days of live-time. to reject all but two one of the observed impul- Clearly a more cost-effective approach will be sive triggers, and thus set a strong upper limit to make use of multiple orbits around the pole on the flux of neutrinos in the 1022 eV range, if possible; this has now been demonstrated well above most of the flux models of interest in the remarkable 31.8-day flight of the Trans for ANITA, but still able to constrain the Z-burst Iron Galactic Recorder (TIGER) payload in the model for high energy cosmic rays. 2001/2002 season. We anticipate that a live- 1.1.4 Baseline Mission Overview. ANITA time approaching 100 days is possible with three will make use of radio emission from the sec- ANITA flights under optimal conditions. ondary electromagnetic cascade induced by a During the flight, ANITA will maintain a neutrino interaction within the polar ice sheet to nominal altitude of 37 km; however, loss of even detect neutrino events anywhere within a mil- up to 10 km of altitude would not constitute mis- lion square km area viewed by the instrument sion failure unless the balloon flight path did not from the 37 km altitude of the balloon. The re- remain over the ice sheet. The reason for this is 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 14 that a lower altitude and the corresponding loss neutrino candidates for which the science team of viewed volume of ice is compensated for by will determine the best-fit energy of the cascade, increased sensitivity at lower energies. and the direction of the original neutrino that 1.1.5 Measurements and Analysis Ap- caused it. The resulting sky map and energy proach. ANITA will provide measured distribution of neutrino events can then be an- geolocated positions, estimated energy, and alyzed for the properties of the parent source derived track direction in celestial coordinates population, analogous to the way that signifi- for a set of candidate neutrino-induced cascades cant information about the sources of Gamma- above an energy of about 3 × 1017 eV. The ray Burst events was determined prior to direct basic analysis approach will be to establish a identification of the sources. In ANITA’s case, matched-filter type of template for rejection however, we stress a compelling detection of the of all spurious interference and thermal noise neutrino events would itself be a powerful sci- triggers, based on models and instrument entific event, providing the bulk of the scientific calibration data. ANITA is unusual for a NASA justification. The energy and angular informa- astrophysics mission because the expected tion then adds further significant value and re- numbers of detected events from neutrino EMP finement to the results. These goals and their re- within the ice is far smaller than that due to lation to the measurement, instrument, and mis- background, and background rejection will be sion requirements, are outlined in Table 2. fundamental to all data analysis. We anticipate 1.1.7 Quality and Quantity of Data to be background rejection factors of order 104, Returned. Table 3 summarizes the main data based on our experience achieving background quality capabilities we expect for ANITA cas- rejection factors 1-2 orders of magnitude higher cade radio pulse measurements. As we shall de- in high energy physics experiments, upon which scribe below, we expect the instrument to pro- much of the ANITA hardware and trigger logic vide a randomly triggered noise sample for all is based. antennas about once per minute during the total If no candidate events are confirmed, careful flight time. The rates for actual neutrino events estimates of the sensitivity from the on-orbit cal- are expected to be as low as less than several ibration, combined with the science team’s ice events in 45 days, or as high as several thousand. properties and topography studies, will be used In any case the bulk of the data set will consist of 4 to derive a firm upper limit to the flux density an extensive archive of about 3×10 noise sam- of the neutrinos in this energy regime. This is ple events, each of order several tens of Kbyte, done by estimating the effective fiducial volume and a subsample of processed candidate events. of the observed ice over the actual balloon track, The net size of the archive is estimated to be less and combining this with the antenna and trigger than 10 Gbyte. efficiency and collecting area. The methods to 1.2 Science Implementation. One of do this have been proven in the team’s extensive the key features of our science implementation experience with other neutrino detectors of all is the plan to build two identical complete in- kinds. strument/gondola packages, to insure readiness 1.1.6 Data products & Science Results. of the balloon payload in successive flight years. The raw data products produced by ANITA are Balloon payloads cannot normally be recov- the detected events themselves, sorted into qual- ered and refurbished in time to fly in succes- ity groups according to the likelihood that they sive years. Because of the high science value of originate from a neutrino cascade. This raw data a quasi-continuous yearly data stream, and the archive will form the basis for a processed set of higher level of efficiency that has been demon- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 15

Table2:Science traceability matrix for ANITA objectives, data products and science results.

Detailed Science Objectives Scientific Measurement Instrument Functional Mission Functional & Expected Results Requirements Requirements Requirements (top level) GZK neutrino detection. Achieve 300K thermal Antenna/rcvr T< 80K. T< 250K ambient. noise limit. ≥ 1 GHz spectral range EMI avoidance. Distinguish EMP Dual-polarization data. Ground/flight calibration. from background. 2π antenna array. Flight path over ice. Observe max. ice volume Altitude ≥ 30 km. 45 days total flight time. 0.1-100 EeV neutrino ∆E/E ≤ 1 High linearity/dynamic range. ≤Few km geolocation. spectrum. ≤ 50%range resolution. Ice topography, temperature. Low-resolution EeV 15◦ azimuth. 10% Antenna gain calibration. Balloon pointing neutrino Sky map. ≤ 2◦ elevation. 1nsevent timing. knowledge ≤ 1◦.

Table3:Estimated performance capabilities of ANITA instrument for cascade measurement

Parameter Description Estimated value θ reconstruction event nadir angle  2◦ at θ  85◦ φ reconstruction azimuth using amplitude ratio ≤ 12◦ Track reconstruction based on polarization plane ∼ 10◦ error box fractional range resolution near horizon ≤ 50% energy uncertainty measured field is lower limit ∆E/E  1 Effective aperture at 3 × 1018 eV volumetric aperture 1260 km3 sr Expected trigger rate Thermal noise triggers ≤ 0.02 Hz Event size 288 total channels/event ∼ 30 Kbyte Maximum archive size 10 times expected trig rate 10 Gbyte

2 strated by JPL in the past in spacecraft programs aperture Aeff are related by Aeff = Gλ /(4π). where identical paired systems were built, we For ANITA, an antenna with a beamwidth that have adopted this approach to maximize the sci- varies only slowly with frequency is preferred, ence return for program cost within the cap. The so that there will be complete beam-overlap of impact of this approach to mission implementa- adjacent antennas at all frequencies of interest. tion is detailed in a later section. 1.2.1.1 Antennas. ANITA will use a dual- 1.2.1 Instrumentation. The ANITA instru- linearly-polarized quad-ridged horn antenna as ment is fundamentally a broadband antenna the baseline design. Alternative antennas are cluster which is arrayed in such a way as to be under investigation, and one of the benefits of optimized for pulse detection and characteriza- the NASA SR&T program that is presently sup- tion. The requirement for synoptic observation porting ANITA research and development is that of all of the ice visible from the balloon pre- it allows for early investigation of this critical scribes a nearly 2π field of view, implying rel- component. atively low-gain antennas. This competes with The beamwidth of the antenna chosen is the need for maximum sensitivity which other- about 60-70◦ with a gain of approximately 10 wise dictates antennas with the highest possible dBi at around 300 MHz. By arranging a cylin- gain, since the gain G and effective collecting drically symmetric array of 2 levels of 8 anten- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 16 10◦ nas each, with a downward cant of about ,we sun rotator achieve complete coverage of the horizon down to within 40◦ of the nadir, virtually all of the ob- SIP PV omni array servable area. The antenna beams in this config- uration overlap within their 3 dB points, giving quad−ridge horns ~2m 2 x 8 antennas/cluster redundant coverage in the horizontal plane. A second array of 16 antennas on the lower por- 7.5m payload PV array tion of the payload provides a vertical baseline SIP, batteries, electronics for establishing pulse direction in elevation an- gle; an additional cluster of nadir-pointing an- tennas complete the total. ~2.8m

The frequency range for the antennas is 0.2 nadir cluster (four antennas) to 1.2 GHz. The lower limit of the range is ~4.7m primarily dictated by limitations of the gondola Crush pads and landing struts not shown size and the requirement to have overlapping beams, and the upper end of the frequency range Figure 8: Layout of the ANITA payload showing is set by the fact that the radio attenuation of the antenna geometry. the ice is believed to increase rapidly above 1 GHz or so. Because the EMP from a cascade is known to be highly linearly-polarized, we con- vert the two linear polarizations of the antenna neutrino cascade, since it is directly related to into dual circular polarizations using standard range. The elevation angle resolution that can 90◦ hybrid techniques. This is important since a be achieved for a pair of antennas separated by  linearly polarized pulse will produce equal am- baseline B is of order ∆θ λmin/(2B sin α), plitudes in both circular polarizations, and thus where λmin is the shortest wavelength detected some background rejection is gained by accept- in the pulse, and α is the angle of the arrival ing only linearly-polarized signals. direction of the pulse with respect to the base- line. For λmin =0.3 mand a 3.7 m baseline, we 1.2.1.2 Antenna Array Geometry. Figure 8 expect ∼ 2◦ resolution near the horizon, which shows that basic layout of the gondola and the corresponds to a fractional range resolution of antennas. There are three separate antenna clus- about 50% at the horizon, improving rapidly to ters. The two horizon-view clusters consist of about 10% near the edge of the nadir field of two azimuthally offset rings of 8 antennas each. view. For the Askaryan process the cascade en- ∼ ◦ The two ring clusters view to within 40 of ergy resolution ∆E/E ∝ ∆R/R because the the nadir. A cluster of 4 antennas at the bottom detected field strength falls off as R−1.There is of the instrument then complete the coverage at however no strong motivation to improve the en- the nadir. For the two sets of ring clusters at ergy resolution beyond this level, since there is the upper and lower portions of the gondola, the an inherent uncertainty of this same order due to vertical offset is just under 4 m, and provides the unknown inelasticity of the original neutrino abaseline for pulse-phase interferometry of the interaction. A factor of 2-3 energy uncertainty received impulse. at these high energies would have little effect on Geolocation of the pulse direction is accom- the science impact of the measurements. plished by different methods in elevation and az- Azimuth angle will be determined with a imuth. Elevation angle is the most important coarser resolution by amplitude measurements parameter for determination of the energy of a of adjacent antennas which both detect the 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 17 pulse. The beam amplitude pattern of the an- which has a distinct phase and amplitude across tennas will be calibrated before launch to 3-5% the band. accuracy, and this should provide resolution of Measurement of the plane of polarization of ◦ about 1/5 of a beam (∼ 12 )bylooking at the the pulse is also an important part of the avail- amplitude ratio in antenna pairs. able information, since for a cascade, the plane 1.2.1.3 RF Detection & Digitization System. of polarization is defined by the track of the ini- Figure 9 shows the basic layout of the detec- tial particle and the Poynting vector of the ra- tion and digitization system for ANITA. The diation. Thus any measurement of the polar- dual linear polarization signals from the antenna ization vector of the pulse gives direct informa- are converted to dual circular polarization by an tion on the projected track direction of the in- internal hybrid (not shown) and these signals cident particle. This was indicated earlier by are then fed into a first stage low-noise ampli- the lower portion of Fig. 3, where such mea- fier (LNA). The LNA is not aggressively cooled, surements were demonstrated in a SLAC exper- since the system noise temperature is several iment. The precision in radians of this measure- hundred K due to the ice in the field of view. ment is of order 1/SNR per antenna. Combin- An amplifier noise temperature of ≤ 80Kisas- ing signals from several antennas we expect to ◦ sumed. Additional amplifier stages then bring achieve precision of ≤ 10 for this measure- the voltages up to a level appropriate for digital ment on each event. Combining this with the sampling, and the signal is split to provide for constraints on the track geometry from the other both the trigger and data recording paths. range and angle measurements should give com- parable overall resolution on the absolute parti- An external Field-Programmable Gate Array cle direction. (FPGA) sequences the accepted triggers. This FPGA will also be used to zero-suppress noise Once the trigger logic has generated a coin- triggers and channels containing only noise to cidence, the digitizer is enabled and all of the improve the effective telemetry bandwidth. signals stored in the switched capacitor array (SCA) ring buffer are digitized, prioritized, and We estimate that a trigger based on majority then submitted to the telemetry, which is dis- logic over several antennas (as in Fig. 2 above) cussed further in the mission implementation can achieve a threshold of order 2σ above the section below. thermal noise level for each antenna. At this level the rate of accidental triggers is of order 1.2.2 Baseline Mission Design. The 1every3-4 minutes. This basic trigger rate is ANITA mission is unusual for astrophysics provides a quasi-continuous monitor of instru- missions in its reliance on the Antarctic ice as ment health with no risk of data contamination. the Cherenkov radiator in an enormous scale In fact, thermal noise triggers will not have the of detector. The onboard antenna clusters by required characteristics to emulate the true cas- analogy play the role of photomultipliers in a cade signals, for several reasons: (1) Thermal Cherenkov or scintillation counter, by collecting triggers will not obey spatial and temporal clo- the secondary emission from the medium in sure relationships among antennas. (2) Thermal which the particle of interest interacts. For this noise will not be correlated between polarization reason one of the primary mission constraints channels. (3) The antenna pattern of the trigger is that ANITA spend as much time as possible will be random for a thermal noise trigger, and with a field of view containing only deep ice. the individual antenna response functions will Fortunately this constraint is not a major re- be uncorrelated. (4) Thermal triggers will not striction for the mission, since in fact the typi- be able to reproduce the Cherenkov spectrum, cal flight path for a circumpolar Antarctic flight 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 18

LNA 2nd stage AMP/Fan−out Trigger comparator & logic LCP [X36] thr QR horn antenna thr RCP [X36] 2.5 GHz SCA Analog in enable & ADC DAC

FPGA BUS Dual− > Data pipeline inter− Ported > trigger sequence face > multiple hit logic Memory TDRSS host > trigger pattern telemetry BUS computer

antenna trigger & SCA data [X36] GPS LATCH > clock > Lat/Lon/altitude

Figure 9: Block diagram of the ANITA detector system. One antenna sub-block is included.

spends 100% of its time over the ice. This is to execute more than one circumpolar orbit dur- shown in Fig. 10. The plot shows the coastal ing a mission, and flight durations in the near boundary of Antarctic ice, and indicates the av- future are expected to approach 30 days. Our erage balloon flight path by a circle that crosses mission plan will be to take advantage of such McMurdo Station (the launch site). A series of improvements if possible, but we budget for 3 fields-of-view of the balloon are indicated by the flights of 15 days each to achieve our 45 day smaller circles that are centered along the flight goal. path. On the bottom pane of the figure we show 1.2.3 Minimum Mission The minimum data for the average and range of depths encoun- mission for ANITA will involve scaling back tered within several hundred km of the flight to a single Antarctic flight of assumed duration path. These indicate the distance to the horizon 10-15 days. Construction of a second complete which occurs at about 680 km for a 37 km al- instrument to enable 1 year turnaround for titude. Approximately 70% of the field of view repeated flights in successive years would also is of the ice sheet with average depth of order be omitted from the mission plan. The science 2kmormore.Another 15% occurs over shal- impact of descoping from the baseline to the lower coastal ice or over the ice shelves, with minimum mission is significant, since the risk depths of several hundred meters to 1 km. The of little or no science return is significantly ele- balance of the observed field of view is of the vated. The flight may be aborted due to weather Ross and Weddell seas. The ice depth averaged or instrument malfunction, and the instrument overthe entire flight path is 1500 m, with an es- may be damaged or lost. However, if the failure timated average temperature of -40 C, implying risks are avoided and the mission successfully an average attenuation length of 0.5 km. achieves at least a 10 day livetime (2/3 of the The average mission duration for one cir- average single-LDB flight time), ANITA will cumpolar flight is to date just under 15 days. We still achieve significant science results in the note that recent Antarctic flights are attempting possible detection of GZK neutrinos and im- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 19 ties for up to 3 × 104 recorded triggers in a 45 day total exposure, whether over 1 or up to three flights. Each event will consist of the direct time series of each IF channel for each polarization of each antenna that participated in the trigger, along with adjacent antennas that had geometric coverage capable of detecting some of the pulse power. Thus of order 1/3 of the antennas will be recorded for each trigger, giving 24 distinct pulse profiles, each of order 100 ns long around the recorded pulse. In addition to this each trig- ger will record the balloon altitude, geographic McMurdo Station location, and UT time from GPS measurements, as well as the ambient noise levels for each an- tenna so that the exact threshold can be estab- lished. Telemetry constraints will prevent direct telemetry of a large cluster of triggers, but par- ticular care will be taken to maintain the abil- ity to record pulse pairs within several hundred microseconds of each other, since such events could be associated with tau neutrino interac- tions. The ANITA team will establish two indepen- dent archive and data analysis centers among the participating institutions, one on the west coast, at either UC Irvine or UCLA, and a second at either Penn State or Bartol Research Institute Figure 10: Top:Map of Antarctic ice boundary with the University of Delaware. The activi- with balloon flight path (blue) several balloon ties and schedule for data products release for fields of view (purple), and the mean limits of the these data centers is as follows: 1. Archiving of fields of view (red) shown. Bottom: a plot of the raw data: Coincident with telemetry relay from average and rms values of the ice depth along NSBF Palestine. 2. Release of snapshot (first aseveral hundred km swath along the nominal pass calibrated) data set: Within 3 months of re- LDB path, which begins and ends at McMurdo ceipt of telemetry. Calibration files will also be station. The ice depth averaged over the entire available at this time. 3. Release of fully cali- flight path is 1700 m. brated and filtered data set and neutrino candi- date event cluster: Within 6 months of receipt of telemetry. This sequence will be followed after portant constraints on all current neutrino flux each Antarctic flight. models. In this respect the minimum mission is 1.2.5 Science Team. To conclude this sec- adescope that adds risk, but does not diminish tion, we summarize the science team, a di- the potential science return that is possible with verse and talented combination of ballooning ANITA. experts, experimental neutrino physicists, and 1.2.4 Data Analysis and Archiving. The astrophysicists, in Table 4. data will consist of measured complex quanti- 1 SCIENCE INVESTIGATION 20

Table4:ANITA Science Team Co-investigators & collaborators

Investigator, Capabilities, Role or Source of Institution Experience responsibility support Principal Investigator Prof. P. Gorham (PI) Radio science; GLUE, Science Oversight, NASA SS1 JPL & Univ. of Hawaii Astroparticle physics scientific integrity Co-Investigators: Prof. S. Barwick AMANDA Spokesman, Gondola development NASA SS1 UC Irvine Neutrino astronomy payload integration Prof. J. Beatty High energy Cosmic rays, Gondola development; NASA SS1 Penn State Extensive ballooning trigger & data analysis Prof. D. Besson RICE project, RF background study, NASA SS1 Univ. of Kansas Antarctic experiments Antarctic support Prof. D. Cowen High energy Neutrinos, Realtime/offline ; NASA SS1 Penn State IceCube experiment Software devel. Prof. M. DuVernois High Energy Cosmic rays Gondola development NASA SS1 Univ. of Minnesota Extensive ballooning trigger & data analysis Dr. K. Liewer Radio Science; GLUE System Engineering NASA JPL flight project development RF configuration Dr. C. Naudet Radio Science; GLUE Code development, NASA JPL Ground systems devel. Ground/flight systems Prof. D. Saltzberg High energy physics, RF pulse calibration, NASA SS1 UCLA RF pulse measurement UCLA data archive Prof. D. Seckel RICE project, Modeling & analysis, NASA SS1 Univ. of Delaware Neutrino astrophysics U. Del. data archive Dr. G. Varner Electronics, Detector RF& Trigger NASA Univ. of Hawaii ASIC development hardware Collaborators: Dr. J. Clem High Energy cosmic rays, trigger development ... Bartol Research Inst. hardware development support Prof. S. Coutu HE Cosmic ray & neutrino, Gondola development; ... Penn State Univ. Extensive ballooning trigger & data analysis Prof. P. Evenson HE Cosmic rays RF Background study, ... Univ. of Delaware Balloon & payload Antarctic support Prof. F. Halzen Neutrino astrophysics, Radio pulse modeling, ... Univ. of Wisconsin Radio emission theory GZK neutrino theory ... Prof. D. Kieda GZK cosmic rays, GZK neutrino models, ... Univ. of Utah modeling & analysis neutrino spectral analysis ... Prof. J. Learned Neutrino astrophysics, Monte Carlo modeling, ... Univ. of Hawaii Experimental techniques Calibration analysis ... Dr. S. Matsuno Neutrino astrophysics, Software Development, ... Univ. of Hawaii Experimental techniques Trigger system ...

(1) NASA SS indicates up to 2 months NASA Summer Salary support is requested for 9-month faculty whose research time during the regular term is supported by their institution. 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 21 2MISSION IMPLEMENTATION patterns ensure that the flight path remains be- ◦ In this section we address aspects of the pro- tween 73-82 S, with a high probability that it posed investigation which deal with the execu- remains close to the launch latitude of McMurdo ◦ tion of the program as a balloon mission. These station at 78 S. A flight path which strays north ◦ include unusual requirements levied on the mis- below 75 Swill begin to lose some effective sion by the science goals, as well as issues in observed volume of ice, but even a flight path the development of the instrument which have that circuits the extreme northern limits of the mission implications. range above will retain 50-60% of its observed ice volume. Anomalies in the flight path may 2.1 General information. We have thus produce some degradation of mission goals provided a mission synopsis above. Here we but not a mission failure. describe in more detail some of the specifics of the mission profile. Table 5 summarizes these, 2.2 Telemetry. The highest link band- and we address them individually here. width presently available for Antarctic flights 2.1.1 Launch windows & flight dura- is the TDRSS link at 6 Kbits/s. The SMEX tion. The National Scientific Balloon Facility AO has indicated the planned availability of a (NSBF), in cooperation with the National higher bandwidth TDRSS channel through use Science Foundation (NSF), is the managing of a High Gain Antenna (HGA). For the pur- organization for Antarctic balloon flights. poses of this proposal we take a conservative The balloon launch window in Antarctica is approach in using the standard TDRSS link, but constrained by the need to conduct operations the availability of the HGA will potentially add in austral summer, and the NSBF indicates a significant improvements to ANITA’s risk pro- launch window running from Dec. 1 to comple- file and science return. tion of the mission by Feb. 1. We propose our For each trigger we sample all of the anten- first flight for the 2006-2007 window. Typical nas to ensure collecting all possible information. Antarctic LDB flights average about 15 days in We thus have 36 antennas with 2 polarization duration, with multiple circuits possible with channels each, giving 72 channels to be sam- permission from NSBF. pled. The sample rate is 2.5 Gsamples/s, and 2.1.2 Allowed Altitude and Latitude Range. we record 100 ns per channel with 12-bit reso- Under normal conditions the altitude for an lution, giving of order 30 Kbyte per event, in- Antarctic balloon varies between 35-40 km. For cluding ancillary data. Thus a selected trigger most balloon missions, this is a critical parame- rate of 1 event per minute can be supported with ter since the balloon is used to elevate the pay- a 50% link margin remaining; this is well above load above the atmospheric overburden. In the the ambient thermal noise trigger rate. Some case of ANITA, the atmosphere is irrelevant, additional margin on the link (of order a factor and the balloon elevation provides the synoptic of 2) will be obtained by data compression, and viewing area. Thus, although we are assuming careful buffering of the events will ensure cap- nominal flight altitudes in our estimates of the ture of event clusters. The local data recording mission sensitivity, the science return is not a will also be capable of capturing event clusters strong function of altitude. which exceed the telemetry capacity; in these In contrast, the range of latitude covered in cases an event selection will be done locally the flight is of significance, since a flight path in software and a subset of the events will be that fails to remain over the ice for most of sent to telemetry while the remainder will be the mission will reduce the observing efficiency. archived on board. However, under normal launch conditions, wind TDRSS telemetry can be maintained on a 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 22

Table5:General Mission Information

Parameter value Launch dates & flexibility 12/06-1/07, 12/07-1/08, 12/08-1/09 Mission duration 15 days each flight, 45 days total Orbit type Circumpolar Antarctic Balloon altitude 25-40 km latitude nominally 78◦ S Latitude latitude range 73-82◦ S Latitude launch vehicle Long-duration He gas-filled balloon

near continuous basis. We anticipate using this designated science center as well. We intend option for ANITA to support the highest possi- to make use of this option by establishing a ble trigger rate. In Table 6 we summarize fea- mission science operations center, probably at tures of the telemetry downlink. All transmit- UCLA to benefit from a heritage of mission op- ted data is archived on the Standard Instrumen- erations in prior collaborative efforts between tation Package (SIP) which is procured from the UCLA and JPL. This center will provide for NSBF. In addition, we will provide redundant near-realtime monitoring of data quality and in- onboard storage for all transmitted data as well formed decisions during the execution of the as additional archived engineering and excess mission. event cluster data. The event cluster storage in particular will exceed the telemetry capacity by Table7:Uplink information afactor of 10 overall. Parameter value Table6:Downlink information INMARSAT-C rates 256 bytes/15 min TDRSS rates 256 bits/s Parameter value Line-of-sight 333 Kbaud Data volume 43 Mbytes/day L/S band link Bit error rate 3 × 10−5 Onboard storage ≥ 40 Gbyte Power available In NSBF SIP Command uplinking has several aspects for communications which require some explanation. During the ini- Data dumps per day near-continuous tial portions of the flight, a line-of-sight link TDRSS telemetry is established with the ground control center Data destination NSBF data center, at McMurdo station, with relatively high band- Palestine, TX width. This bi-directional link allows for rapid Science Data UCLA Mission transfer of engineering and health data which is destination operations center critical to an early assessment of the mission sta- tus and health. In our case, we will plan to ex- ercise this link to provide dense samples of an- TDRSS telemetry is received at the NSBF tenna cluster information to establish that the re- control center in Palestine, TX. There are pro- ceiving system is functioning correctly and that visions for optional data retrieval at a user- the antenna time series appear normal. The du- 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 23 ration of this period should be of order 1 day. diation falls steeply at frequencies above 100 Clearly this effort requires a skilled team on site MHz, and although such events may occasion- in Antarctica which is distinct from the science ally trigger a system like ANITA, the spec- team which will be receiving the data at the U.S. tral characteristics will be unmistakably differ- mission operations center. ent from the ice cascade emission, the arrival di- Once the mission has passed this period, the rection (from above the horizon) will give fur- uplinking will be through TDRSS telemetry at ther rejection of this unlikely background. much lower rates. We do not anticipate any 2.3.0.2 Snow Electrification. Snow electrifi- reprogramming necessary during this phase of cation and apparent bulk discharges associated the mission, but the architecture will provide the with this process have been reported anecdo- possibility of restructured software triggering if tally in Antarctica for snow during intense storm it is deemed necessary by risks posed from po- events [69] and wind-driven surface snow [70]. tential RF interference. We discuss these possi- In the former case, the background electromag- bilities in the following section. netic noise levels were noted to rise a factor 2.3 Background Interference. Be- of 100 during some events, over the 3-30 MHz cause ANITA will operate with extremely high (HF) radio band. The level of possible interfer- radio bandwidth over frequencies that are not ence over the VHF and UHF bands is at present reserved for scientific use, the problem of radio unknown for either case, although wind-driven backgrounds, both anthropogenic and natural, snow EMI was found to be negligible in one set is crucial to resolve. We have noted above that of experiments [70]. Since storms are generally the thermal noise floor provides the ultimate rare and often confined to coastal areas during background limitation, in much the same way the Antarctic flight season, we do not anticipate that photon noise provides the ultimate limit a major problem from this source, but we in- to optical imaging systems. Here we briefly tend to continue to monitor this as a potential address backgrounds from other sources, some risk during the coming Antarctic seasons, dur- of which are treated in more detail in a later ing which we expect to have ANITA personnel section. at McMurdo or the South Pole every year. 2.3.0.1 Lightning & Cosmic Ray Air Shower 2.3.1 Anthropogenic Backgrounds. Back- backgrounds. Lightning is known to produce grounds from man-made sources do not in gen- intense bursts of electromagnetic energy, but eral pose a risk of being mistaken for the sig- these have a spectrum that falls steeply with fre- nals of scientific interest, because there are no quency, with very little power extending into the known anthropogenic sources (other than cali- UHF and microwave regimes. Lightning is also bration sources specifically designed for our ex- unknown on the Antarctic continent, although it periment) which can emulate the expected sig- does occur over the Southern Ocean [66, 67]. nals. However, man-made sources can pose a We do not expect lightning to comprise a sig- risk of interfering with the operation of the in- nificant background to ANITA. strument. We discuss such issues in more detail Cosmic ray air showers at energies above in the mission implementation section below. 0.1 EeV also produce an electromagnetic pulse, Interference from man-made terrestrial or or- known from observations since the late 1960’s. bital sources is a ubiquitous problem in all of ra- Although these pulses may have a weak com- dio astronomy. In this respect ANITA will have ponent associated with the Askaryan effect, the to face a variety of potential interfering signals dominant emission comes from synchrotron ra- with various possible impacts on the data acqui- diation in the geomagnetic field. Again this ra- sition and analysis. 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 24 2.3.1.1 Satellite signals. Fortunately for Since the antenna effective area approaches ANITA, satellite transmit power is generally 1m2 at the low end of the band, ANITA could low in the bands of interest. For example, therefore tolerate up to a 1 MW transmitter at the GPS constellation satellites at an altitude or near the horizon, or a 5 kW transmitter near of 21000 km, have transmit powers of order the nadir. Most of the higher power radar and 50W in the 1227 MHz and 1575 MHz bands, other transmitters in use in Antarctic are primar- with antenna gains of 11-13 dBi. The implied ily at the South Pole and McMurdo stations. The power at the earth’s surface is -160 dBW m−2 South Pole station is not in ANITA’s view dur- maximum in the 1227 MHz band. The implied ing a typical flight, and McMurdo station will field strengths for ANITA are of order 0.2 only be in view during brief periods during the µVm−1.These levels are easily filtered with flight. tunable notch filters for the satellite frequencies 2.3.2 EMI Background Survey. As part of interest. of the 2002 Space Research and Technology All earth-orbiting satellites are constrained NASA-OSS grant under which ANITA research by the International Telecommunications Union and development is ongoing, a piggyback pay- (ITU) to maintain a power level that produces no load has been accepted by NSBF and scheduled more than -154 dBW/m2 at earth. These power for an Antarctic flight in the 2002-2003 Antarc- levels are weak enough that they will not sat- tic season. The flight payload has been desig- urate ANITA LNAs even if they are not pre- nated Anita-lite, and will fly as an integrated filtered. Since they are narrow-band signals they system aboard the Trans-Iron Galactic Recorder cannot produce the broadband EMP events that (TIGER) payload. Anita-lite will fly a pair of ANITA will be sensitive to. However, an im- ANITA prototype antennas, a prototype trigger portant aspect of the ANITA front end will be system, and commercial digitizers to sample the afilterbank that removes these and other known impulsive background noise from the balloon al- narrow-band signals prior to launch. This will titudes. Significant effort will be required to reduce the effective system temperature which reduce interference from the host payload, but would otherwise be increased somewhat by the once this is done, Anita-lite will provide impor- integrated effects of narrow-band carrier signals tant data for reducing the risk to the primary diluted across the ANITA bandwidth. ANITA instrument. 2.3.1.2 Terrestrial signals. The primary risk To complement the Anita-lite measurements, for terrestrial signals is not that they trigger the we have (as noted in a previous section) al- system, since they will almost certainly do so ready performed ground-based Antarctic mea- on occasion. Such triggers are easily recog- surements of impulsive and thermal ambient nized in post analysis since they cannot repro- backgrounds from the South Pole Station, and duce the characteristics of the cascade pulses. the results have to date been encouraging, indi- The greater issue for ANITA occurs if there is a cating that backgrounds in Antarctica appear to strong transmitter in the field of view which sat- be extremely low, probably among the lowest on urates the LNA, causing its gain to droop so that earth. We will continue to perform additional the sensitivity in that antenna is lost. Our present ground-based tests over the next several years LNA design will tolerate up to about 10 dBm as experiments of opportunity, since part of the output before saturation, with in input stage gain ANITA team (Barwick, Besson, Cowen) are of order 25 dB. Thus a signal of 10µWcoupled scheduled to be in Antarctica for other projects. into the antenna would pose a risk of saturation 2.3.3 Mitigation strategies for interference. and temporary loss of sensitivity. We conclude this section by describing sev- 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 25 eral strategies we plan to employ for mitiga- 2.4 Status of ANITA under PI funding tion of RF interference problems. As we have and ROSS SR&T Grant. As noted in an noted, these will be adapted as our knowledge earlier section, ANITA is currently well beyond base of the actual RF environment in Antarc- aconceptual phase, having been selected for an tic increases, and will be finalized following the Antarctic LDB flight under the Research Op- background survey described above. We note portunities in Space Science (ROSS) 2002 Par- that these techniques are in many cases highly ticle Astrophysics Space Research & Technol- developed, either due to our experience with the ogy Program, which began in NASA Fiscal year analogous GLUE experiment, or in developing 2003 (October 2002). In addition, several as- other low-noise radio astronomical instrumenta- pects of ANITA have been under study and de- tion. velopment since mid-2001, funded out of the PI’s startup support at the University of Hawaii. The most effective mitigation strategy in our Before discussing the plans for ANITA develop- system will be the requirement for extremely ment under the Explorer program, we present a broad-band coincidence of a trigger event across summary of the current state of development. multiple antennas, multiple frequency bands, Efforts to develop ANITA to date have and dual polarizations. These requirements ef- focused on better understanding of the 1) fectively force any interfering signal that can Askaryan pulse process; 2) optimal antennas for trigger to appear very similar to the signal its detection; 3) low-power digitizers for very of interest, a subnanosecond, highly-polarized high bandwidth, transient signals; 4) character- pulse. Such pulses are quite difficult to produce izing the Antarctic environment and ice trans- in pure form in practice. Although there are missivity for radio waves; 5) investigating the high-frequency radar systems that employ such high frequency electromagnetic properties of pulses, these are primarily used in microwave graphite composite structures for the gondola; systems above 5 GHz. High-power switching and 6) development of ground-truthing calibra- transients can produce pulses but they are never tion signals for determining instrument sensitiv- completely isolated or band-limited, and tend to ity during the flight. Much of the efforts recently produce spectra that fall off at higher frequen- have been driven by the selection of the ANITA- cies. lite EMI background survey payload for a pig- Another source of potential interference trig- gyback flight aboard the host TIGER payload gers for ANITA will occur when a narrow or for this year’s LDB season in Antarctica. moderately broadband persistent signal appears With respect to 1), the PI and Prof. Saltzberg within one or more of the trigger sub-bands and completed a second, more detailed measurement the additional power effectively raises the ther- of the Askaryan radiation at SLAC in the sum- mal noise of the band to a higher level. Our mer of 2002, as noted in an earlier section. An- response to this is to enforce a so-called noise- tenna studies continue and will be accelerated riding threshold similar to that of FORTE for in the near future as a new 90 m3 anechoic our digital comparators. This will allow that chamber, funded out of the PI’s startup support, particular channel to ride up with the increas- comes on line by early summer of this year. The ing noise level and thus not increase its rate of digitizer development is detailed below, and ini- threshold crossing events. The threshold level tial Antarctic EMI studies were described above will be recorded at a slower rate to ensure that (the SPIN experiment). Initial evaluation of in- the sensitivity and energy threshold of the in- tercalated graphite as a gondola material looks strument can be established as a function of time quite promising, and we have established initial in post-analysis. contact with NASA researchers regarding adap- 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 26 tation of this material for structural applications. be used, with care for thermal and low-pressure Finally, preparations for a ground-truthing sys- considerations. For cases where the latter issues tem for ANITA-lite have brought us well up the need to be addressed for a given part or compo- learning curve for what will be required to suc- nent we anticipate a modest environmental test cessfully develop and deploy a pulser system at program as part of the RF payload development. either McMurdo or an outlying station such as 2.5.2 Control & data acquisition system. Vostok, and plans for such a deployment for this The onboard computer will be a standard PCI- year are moving steadily ahead. bus based system flown already on other balloon It is fair to say that, although the ROSS award missions. We do not anticipate any unusual re- will only have been fully active for 6-8 months quirements to be levied on this computer during prior to the possible Explorer selection, ANITA the flight. We plan a pair of redundant systems will have benefited from well over a 18 months on board with the capability to software swap worth of steady development and study work, to the second processor if necessary, via ground as well as considerable prototyping of hardware. communication through the SIP. These will be The advantage of this to the current proposal is developed under the direction of Prof. Beatty at that it significantly reduces both schedule and Penn State, with help from Bartol and UM. cost risk. Conversely, the advantage of mov- 2.5.3 Instrument integration. The instru- ing from the ROSS to the Explorer program is ment integration of RF payload and control/data clear: a much-enhanced science return at much- acquisition will be completed at JPL. Because reduced mission risk. much of the structural backbone of the complete 2.5 Development, Integration, & test- system resides with the gondola, which will not ing. ANITA may be grouped into several be available during this phase, the antennas and well-defined subelements that can be separately electronics will be designed in modules with in- developed at different institutions and then later terface requirements that allow them to be tested integrated. For purposes of tracking the mis- separately before they are later brought to higher sion development, we define these subelements level integration with the gondola. primarily by their hardware divisions. Fig. 11 2.5.4 Gondola. The gondola systems, con- provides a schematic description of the planned sisting of the strongback frame of the balloon- flow of integration for ANITA. craft, the power system, solar panels, wiring, 2.5.1 RF payload. The RF payload consists and other miscellaneous ancillary components, of the antennas, the RF conditioning system will be developed and integrated through UC (consisting of low-noise amplifiers, filters, and Irvine with engineering support from both JPL secondary amplifiers), and the digitizers. This and UH. UCI may subcontract a portion of these system will be developed at both JPL and UH, subelements to other university partners, but the taking advantage of the lower university labor complete integration will take place in a UCI costs. The system will be integrated at JPL prior high bay. to delivery to the ballooncraft at UCI, includ- There are several subelements of the gondola ing some environmental testing for subcompo- system which are likely candidates for subcon- nents if necessary. The balloon environment tract work or procurement from other institu- and launch requirements do not mandate space- tions; among these are the NSBF SIP, the anti- qualified parts, nor are there any extreme vi- rotation and onboard navigation system. The bration or shock conditions to be survived, so solar panels are likely to be procured from the in general off-the-shelf equipment and standard same vendor who developed the high efficiency electronic circuit development techniques can panels for the Deep Space One project. If 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 27

digitizers trigger JPL JPL UH RF payload antenna cal. antennas

RF Engineering flight 1 conditioning instrument test flight UH (Ft. Sumner) power system control &

JPL data environ. test solar panels system recover, recover refurbish, SIP upgrade UCI wiring flight 2 complete UCI frame ship to NSBF ballooncraft Palestine UCI flight software recover gondola Ship to NSBF mass storage McMurdo computer flight 3

PSU/UD/UM avionics Assess RF noise, make EMI background final changes

UH survey (SR&T) UCLA archive & Operations Center UCLA Cmd/Cntrl data products

GSE software deploy in Antarctica

UCLA / KU external calibration

Figure 11: Flow diagram of the development, integration and testing plan for ANITA. more conventional panels are shown to meet the level will have taken place and thus the final power needs of the project, they can be procured calibration will be designed to address the ma- through the NSBF. jor issues of the complete antenna array. We 2.5.5 Gondola/instrument integration. anticipate that the individual antenna beam pat- The integration of the gondola and the instru- terns will be modified by the cluster array con- ment will take place at UC Irvine. This phase figuration. Thus we plan to calibrate the en- of the development program will involve both tire integrated package with all gondola com- mechanical, electrical, and computer integra- ponents in place, so that the final beam pattern tion as the antenna modules and instrument of the complete system will be known over the electronics and computers are installed, and the entire frequency band of interest, from 0.2 up telemetry interface to the computer is made. An to 1.2 GHz. During this calibration sequence alternative here would be to move the gondola we will also make measurements of the emis- package to JPL and perform the integration sions from the instrument in an anechoic cham- there. Prof. Barwick has an agreement in place ber, with the potential at this point of performing with UCI Administration for the use of the high additional electromagnetic shielding to mitigate bay during this period of instrument integration. self-interference problems. 2.5.6 Antenna calibration. Final antenna 2.5.7 Environmental test & Engineering calibration will take place at the JPL mesa an- test flight. Once the antenna calibration is tenna range, which has complete capabilities for complete we plan to perform a complete en- both anechoic chamber and free space calibra- vironmental test of the instrument only, using tion from VHF through microwave frequencies. one of the larger JPL chambers, with capability Some early antenna calibration at the modular for complete low-pressure and solar illuminance 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 28 testing. This test will primarily be a confirma- viewing during the line-of-sight period of the tion test, since individual parts will have under- flight. If it is deemed necessary, additional self- gone such tests prior to final integration. contained systems will be deployed along the A test flight in Ft. Sumner, New Mexico, is probable flight path to enable further calibration planned for September 2005 as a check out of sequences during the mission. the entire package. The flight will retire risks as- 2.6 Resource budgets. sociated with the basic functions of the system, 2.6.1 Mass Engineering estimates of the such as computer or electronics failure, failure mass requirements are shown as an allocation, of the ballooncraft subsystems, etc. However, based on the preliminary instrument and gon- it will provide only basic functional data on in- dola model, in Table 8. The current best es- strument performance since the RF interference timates (CBE) are based on minimal efforts at environment will be much worse than that at the lightweighting the gondola frame or electron- South Pole. Anthropogenic RF noise over the ics systems, and we anticipate that we will gain continental US is on average up to 1000 times back some margin as the design proceeds and higher that in quiet regions of the earth such addresses some specific lightweighting opportu- as in Antarctica, and it will be difficult to find nities. any portion of the flight path from Ft. Sumner where the balloon would not be in direct view of 2.6.2 Power. ANITA power requirements amulti-kW transmitter of some kind. To reduce (Table 9) are relatively high for a balloon mis- hardware risk only a portion of antennas and the sion because of the large number of channels photovoltaic array may be flown during the en- that must be amplified and digitized. We pro- gineering flight. pose to use a solar array of high efficiency (triple-junction) cells in conjunction with a 2x 2.5.8 Flight delivery. Following this final concentrator. The concentrator is not required test and a period of potential refurbishing or nec- but reduces the cost by reducing the total num- essary modifications, we ship the complete sys- ber of cells required. The concentrator has a tem to Palestine where it undergoes final prepa- relatively flat response in one dimension out to ration for shipping to McMurdo for the follow- ±10◦ and then drops rapidly. This axis would be ing December. along the direction that is stabilized. The solar 2.5.9 Ground systems & calibration. Par- array would have a cosine response in the other allel to these other efforts are the development dimension. The variations in the solar height of a ground data system, including the sci- during a flight will introduce variations in the ence data center at UCLA, and a deployed ex- power by less than 2%. Our baseline PV array ternal calibration system, developed at UCLA is rated for 1.4kW, but we expect a derating of and UH. The ground data system makes use ∼ 10% due to thermal inefficiency. Our present of standard approaches and equipment procured power allocation is therefore 1275W. from or provided by the NSBF, and will require The battery system is intended to fulfill sev- some interface definition and compliance testing eral functions. The batteries will provide power for these interfaces, primarily for managing the from the time ground power is disconnected un- telemetry. til the solar panels are operational. The batteries The calibration system will be required to will also provide power for the attitude control provide the instrument with a recognizable and system to enable return to Sun point for the solar unique signal designed to allow in-flight cali- panel and they will allow some data to be taken bration of the antenna response. At least one if the solar panels fail. The battery system is system will be deployed near McMurdo for currently planned as a bank of Li/Thionyl Chlo- 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 29

Table8:ANITA Mass budget. Table9:ANITA Instrument power budget.

System/Subsystem/item CBE (kg) Instrument Subsystem CBE (W) Science Payload (incl. reserve) 1554 RF amplifiers 432 Gondola (subtotal) 667 Triggering 75 Ring antenna mounts 48 Digitization 11 Nadir antenna mount 11 Avionics 104 Photovoltaics 17 Attitude sensors 10 Batteries 58 LOS comm. 10 crush pads 6 Conversion losses 128 Structure/strongback 527 Reserves (30%) 231 Instrument (subtotal) 528 Total 1001 Antennas 367 Digital electronics 56 RF electronics 101 Power conditioning 4 craft in the table) since these are measured val- ues. The present margins on the totals are also Payload Reserves (30%) 359 shown. Ballooncraft 469 SIP & therm. shield 172 2.7 Attitude control & knowledge. LDB Batteries 27 We do not anticipate any stringent control or Ballast system 101 knowledge requirements on the balloon atti- LDB photovoltaics 59 tude and pointing during the mission. We have LDB antenna system 18 specifically designed ANITA to be insensitive Rotator 91 to orientation to first order, since the antennas themselves have a wide angular response. Since TOTALS 2023 kg the highest precision we can attain at present in angular knowledge is of order 2−3◦,werequire a knowledge of order 1◦ tilt angle with respect ride primary batteries with 29 kw-hrs of capac- to the local gravity vector. This allocation thus ity. This is sufficient power to run the instrument adds no more than 10% uncertainty to our over- for 24 hours. all elevation angle determinations. Since bal- Asecond solar array and a second set of bat- loon gondolas do experience pendulations, we teries are flown on the gondola as part of the SIP. will require an update in this knowledge at a This hardware powers the balloon control sys- rate of order 10 times the highest pendulum fre- tem, and the telemetry system. The designs for quency to avoid any possibility of aliasing the this hardware exist and have been flown many tilt measurement. We anticipate an update rate times. This solar array and power system for the of order several Hz will be required. SIP will be provided as part of the support costs Control of the tilt direction is not necessary paid to the NSBF. as long as the tilt amplitude does not exceed 10◦, In Table 10 we show the summary of the and we do not anticipate tilt amplitudes of this mass and power budget values, including 30% magnitude. Control of the azimuth is also not re- power reserves, and mass reserves on the sci- quired at any level more stringent that 10◦,and ence instrument and gondola. No reserves are this should be easily accommodated by a stan- held on the NSBF supplied equipment (balloon- dard sun-pointing anti-rotation device. 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 30

Table 10: ANITA Total Mass/Power Resources & Margins

Parameter Subsystem reserves CBE + Allocation system margins CBE (30%) reserves Science Payload Mass 1195 kg 179 kg 1374 kg 1814 kg 32% Ballooncraft mass (known) 469 kg 0kg 469 kg 469 kg 0% Mass (total) 1664 kg 179 kg 1843 kg 2283 kg 24% Science Payload Power 770 W 231 W 1001 W 1275 W 27%

ployed in the GLUE project, which has estab- Table 11: ANITA Attitude & control require- lished the basic approach to be used for rejec- ments tion of background and specific triggering on Parameter value and sampling of the pulse waveforms. Given Control method gravity+rotator that these functional elements are now reason- Control reference solar ably well understood, the heritage and maturity Attitude control 10◦/axis of the subelements of the instrument can be de- requirements scribed with some confidence. Ballooncraft attitude ±0.33◦ Antennas. ANITA makes use of standard knowledge at moderate-gain antenna elements as the primary instrum. interface front-end sensors, as described in previous sec- Agility none tions. The antenna modules have a high level of Deployments none technology readiness and the design is mature at Articulation none this stage. Prototypes will also be flown as part On-orbit calibration Ground-station of the ANITA-lite EMI survey flight this year. (antenna response) RF pulser RF conditioning. The antenna signals re- ◦ Attitude knowledge ±0.5 per axis quire front-end amplifiers with a gain of order processing post-processing 50 dB, and a noise temperature of less than 80 K. Such amplifiers are commercially available at a high technology readiness level, and the costs are relatively low. Several suitable amplifiers 2.8 Mission Technology. ANITA rep- have been already procured as part of the prepa- resents a novel approach to neutrino astronomy ration for the ANITA-lite EMI survey flight. which is itself a relative newcomer to the as- Digitizer. The custom digitizer develop- trophysics discipline. However, the technology ment represents one of the important new tech- employed by ANITA is largely mature and we nology areas of ANITA. Digitizers of compara- do not anticipate any significant technology de- ble bandwidth exist in commercially available velopment issues. In this section we describe parts, but the power requirements are typically the required technology, its heritage and matu- at least several watts per channel or more, which rity level. becomes a serious issue for the power budget of 2.8.1 Heritage & maturity of mission ele- ANITA which is already stretched. In addition, ments. The primary heritage of the ANITA use of these commercial parts would require a design is based on the functional elements em- very high throughput digital signal processor to 2 MISSION IMPLEMENTATION 31 manage the digital data stream from many chan- The flexibility afforded by the new design nels at the same time for the purpose of generat- enables the possibility of performing the dig- ing the local triggering via software or firmware. itization on only those signals which occur in Forexample, four eight-bit digitizers running at multiple antennas, polarizations, and frequency 3 Gs/s in parallel on the RF signals from a pair bands simultaneously. Once a trigger is found, of adjacent antennas will generate a data stream the 256 sample signal storage array, which of order 100 Gbit/s, several orders of magnitude forms a continuous analog ring buffer, is latched above the bus bandwidth of anything presently and read out with an analog-to-digital converter. available at mature technology levels. This triggered-digitizer approach presents an To address this problem, Dr. G. Varner of the enormous improvement in throughput require- Univ. of Hawaii Instrument Development Lab- ments for the system. oratory (IDL) has developed a monolithic 16- Global Trigger Logic. We intend to imple- channel waveform recorder application-specific ment the global trigger logic in Xylinx field- integrated circuit (ASIC) with onboard trigger- programmable gate arrays. The technology ing provided by complimentary circuits. A readiness for this application is high and the high-level threshold allows triggering based on logic requirements for the FPGAs are relatively a large signal in a single channel. In addition, straightforward. multiplicity logic allows for a coincidence trig- The closest analog in radio-frequency sys- ger based upon a number of channels exceed- tems to ANITA’s trigger is probably found in ing a smaller threshold. A 12-bit on-chip ADC, low-SNR radar applications, where single-pulse capable of 2M Conversions/s, provides a digital recognition is necessary. In ANITA’s case, the data stream out. Waveform record length is at trigger system makes use of may different chan- least 256 samples per channel with a sampling nels that simultaneously detect the leading edge frequency up to 4GSa/s. of any RF impulse that arrives at the instrument. A prototype of the device described here has For example, in the sequence of pulses shown recently been developed and tested by Dr. G. in the simulation of Fig. 2 above, the trigger Varner of the University of Hawaii. Initial re- system would actually have 72 different poten- sults of the device, which uses a CMOS 0.25µm tial channels in which the impulse could be de- process, have demonstrated sampling rates well tected: two polarizations for each of the 9 an- above 3Gs/s, and spectral frequency response tenna signals shown, with four 250 MHz trigger beyond 1 GHz, with a power consumption of bands for each polarization. only 275 mW per device. A second genera- The trigger would form in a hierarchical tion device which will extend to the full ANITA manner, with the 8 channels from a single an- bandwidth is now in final design and simulation tenna forming the lowest level of the hierar- stages, and will be on hand by late summer of chy. If a pre-set fraction of these channels ex- this year, prior to the start of the Phase A study ceed a certain amplitude threshold, a logic gate for ANITA. is enabled at the next highest level of the hi- As readout can take up to 10ms, deadtime is erarchy, the adjacent antenna pairs. If any of avoided by the use of multiple chips in parallel, several user-set antenna-pair patterns then ex- thus providing multi-hit capability. Taking ad- ceed threshold and also enable their logic sig- vantage of the low-power and compact size of nals, a global trigger is formed, all of the anten- these chips, in addition to multi-buffering, in- nas are digitized, and the event is recorded as terleaved sampling at higher effective sampling a telemetry candidate. This triggering scheme frequencies or simultaneous logging of multiple is indicated schematically in Fig. 12. Here we frequency bands may be accomplished. have shown the 8 channels for a single antenna, 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 32 with simulated pulses from the same simulation trigger logic methods have been in use for many used in Fig.2. The multiplicity logic can be years in high energy physics experiments, and thought of as a simple (positive as shown here) the ANITA team has several members, includ- sum of logic levels of the channel discrimina- ing Gorham, Barwick, Beatty, Saltzberg, and tors here, indicated by a negative-going pulse Varner, with extensive experience in these meth- beneath each of the radio signals. At each higher ods. level of the hierarchy, the trigger pulse generated ANAGEMENT AND by the lower level becomes part of the logic sum 3 ANITA M for the next level until the global trigger condi- SCHEDULE tion is met. 3.1 Management approach The Prin- Further onboard analysis then would charac- cipal Investigator, Prof. P. Gorham, is respon- terize the event’s telemetry priority according to sible for the success and scientific integrity of its neutrino candidate likelihood. Similar array the ANITA Project and is the final project au- thority on all issues. To execute that responsibil- ity, the PI has established the ANITA Project as SINGLE ANTENNA TRIGGER HEIRARCHY an integrated partnership; each member brings unique strengths to the project team that will en- 1.0−1.2 GHz able it to complete the project on schedule and on cost, without compromising the project’s sci- .75−1.0 ence objectives. The PI provides his proven abil- GHz ity in science team leadership and science data processing, modeling and analysis. JPL pro- 0.5−.75 vides its expertise in project management, sys- GHz tem engineering, and mission operations. JPL also provides expertise in RF instrument devel- 0.25−.5 opment and calibration (including background GHz measurement). Investigators specializing in the- ory, modeling, and data analysis have been re- 1.0−1.2 GHz cruited as team members. Because of the com- plexity of balloon operations in Antarctica, par- .75−1.0 ticular care has been paid to the inclusion of GHz investigators (six team members representing three different institutions) with balloon experi- 0.5−.75 ence. The members of the ANITA Project team GHz are committed to full and open communications among all elements of the project in a manner Right Circular Polarization0.25−.5 Left Circular Polarization similar to that practiced among Discovery-class GHz missions under current development at JPL. 3.1.1 Management organization. The COINC, 5/8 LEVEL ANITA Project management organization is shown in Figure 13. The PI is the central TRIGGER 10 ns person responsible to NASA Headquarters for successful execution of the mission. He Figure 12: Schematic of local trigger sequence. is prepared to recommend termination of the See text for details. project in the unlikely event that achievement 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 33 of the performance floor should become im- nate, and monitor system design and implemen- possible with the committed project resources. tation during all phases of the project. The The PI is supported by the ANITA Advisory Project Manager is also responsible for over-all Board, which includes the PI as chairman. The risk management. Upon selection by NASA, members of the advisory board are from the aProject Plan will be developed that will in- institutions participating in the ANITA Project. clude specific spending plans and development The primary role of the advisory board is to milestones that will be used as the basis of an assure that these institutions provide the PI with earned value performance measurement track- the support that the project needs from their ing system. The Project Plan will also docu- respective organizations. ment the initial level of project reserves and a 3.1.2 Decision-making process. The PI ap- schedule for their depletion tied to key project points the JPL Project Manager, with the con- milestones. The PI will have approval authority currence of appropriate JPL line and program overthe Project Plan and all other project level management, and assigns project management documents, as well as any changes to those doc- responsibility to him. The Science Team is un- uments. The PI will report to NASA all changes der the leadership of the PI, but all financial re- to the plan and descope options exercised, for porting is through the Project Manager. All sys- NASA concurrence. The Project Manager will tem managers report to the PM. Decision mak- report monthly against the Project Plan and pe- ing will occur at the lowest level possible while riodically review the completion plan to assure ensuring that decisions made in one system do that it is proceeding within schedule and cost. not adversely affect other system areas or impact The Project Manager will report progress and the prospects for successful science data return. any problems to the PI in weekly meetings or The PI is the final project authority for all deci- teleconferences. Monthly reports to the appro- sions that cannot be resolved at lower levels and priate NASA Program Office will be prepared in particular for any involving the science data by the Project Manager and approved by the PI. deliverables. 3.1.4 Risk Management. The mission ar- 3.1.3 Teaming arrangements. Asummary chitecture has been designed to minimize risk; of the participating institutions and their primary in particular the choice of development of two roles as part of the ANITA team is summarized identical payloads is a choice specifically made below in Table 12. At present, no formal agree- to minimize risk to the overall mission success. ments for teaming arrangements with vendors The top six highest risk items are listed in Ta- have been made; these may or may not be ap- ble 13, along with mitigation strategies that are propriate for the scale of a long duration balloon costed and planned as part of the baseline mis- mission. sion architecture. Upon selection, a detailed Specific roles and responsibilities of the risk management plan will be developed that Principal Investigator and the Project Man- will provide a systematic approach to assess- ager. The Principal Investigator is in charge ment and mitigation of all significant risks. JPL of the investigation and maintains full author- has recently developed a list of principles for ity for its scientific integrity and for the in- design, validation, and operations of missions tegrity of all other aspects of the mission, in- that will guide risk management of the ANITA cluding Education and Public Outreach. He Project. The JPL Design Principles incorporate delegates the responsibility for implementation the many lessons learned on management of risk of the flight system to the JPL Project Man- of deep space missions. The key element in ager. The Project Manager will plan, coordi- managing project risk is the establishment and 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 34

SMEX Program

Science ANITA Advisory Principal Board Team Investigator (PI, Co−I, JPL)

Project Management System Engineering Mission Assurance

Instrument Payload Balloon Education/ Development Integration Services Outreach

Gondola Calibration Operations Development

Figure 13: ANITA project organization chart. management of appropriate project reserves, in- 3.2 Project Schedule. A project sched- cluding both cost and schedule reserves. The ule showing all mission phases and major mile- 30% reserves in this proposal are in accordance stones is shown in Figure 14. We note that with the JPL Design Principles. An important ANITA is unique in already having support for element in risk management is the establish- first LDB-flight development through the SR&T ment of an integrated baseline of requirements, program, and we have developed an integrated schedule and cost, against which progress will schedule which reflects this. We anticipate a rel- be tracked in order to determine as early as pos- atively seamless transition if selected, such that sible when project reserves will be needed. The personnel involved in engineering development basis of estimate for the cost reserves for ANITA and prototyping for the SR&T program would is described below, and the basis of estimate see minimal impact from the Phase A study, for schedule reserves is addressed in section 3.2 which would be managed at the co-investigator which follows. levels. This allows for a transition to the Ex- plorer program which maximizes the utility of Akey element in our risk assessment and the prior design and development that are af- management approach is the use of informal forded by the SR&T program. peer reviews at the sub-system level for all JPL and partner-provided project deliverables. A The project critical path is represented by the project risk team review will be held within 12 RF instrument subsystem instrument and later months of launch to assess launch readiness. by the full instrument, leading to test flight in- The current proposal includes an estimate of the tegration. There are 30 days of fully funded cost associated with risk management based on schedule reserve on the critical path just before the analogy with similar missions currently un- delivery to payload integration. There is an- der development at JPL. other 60 days of funded schedule reserve follow- 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 35

Mission Fiscal year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Element Quarter 12341234 123412341234 1234 123412 Project Phases: SR&T development Phase A/B Phase C/D Phase E Project Milestones: SR&T Requirements review RR NASA Selection RFI survey EMI Prelim. Design Review PDR Critical Design Review CDR Engineering test flight Eng.flt. Project Inititation Conf. (PIC) PIC Mission Readiness Review MRR Launch #1 Launch Launch #2 Launch Launch #3 Launch Project Tasks: Requirements definition Design development Prototype develop/test EMI survey develop. EMI background survey RF Instrument development Onboard DAQ system Flight software development Gondola development Test flight integration Calibration & testing Test flight launch/recover Final Payload Integration Calibration & testing Payload to NSBF Ground data systems Data analysis SW devel. Launch & Recover Refurbish payload Data Analysis Reporting/Publication

Figure 14: ANITA project schedule. 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 36

Table 12: ANITA Participating Team members & Expertise

Team Member Responsibility/Capability Relevant Experience Principal Investigator Science Team leadership PI for GLUE, ANITA SR&T projects Integrity of science Radio detection of investigation high energy particles RF expertise Neutrino astrophysics University of Hawaii Science management Neutrino astrophysics Antenna development Cosmic ray astrophysics Science data analysis RF instrument development Instrument modeling Various neutrino experiments Digitizer development Prototype digitizer completion Jet Propulsion Laboratory Project Management Management of numerous System engineering major NASA missions; Mission operations development & deployment of RF instrument complex space- and ground-based Mission assurance instruments; history of Payload I&T high success-rate missions University of California, Gondola development Balloon and payload development Irvine GSE support software HEAT & other balloon experience Science data analysis Neutrino astrophysics Payload integration Neutrino data modeling & analysis AMANDA neutrino observatory University of California, Antenna calibration RF instrument development Los Angeles Ground data system & calibration Science data analysis Neutrino astrophysics Large data set management Pennsylvania State University Balloon operations CREAM ULDB balloon payload Trigger design support IceCube Project leadership Balloon avionics Cosmic ray & neutrino astrophysics Flight Software Auger cosmic ray observatory Bartol Research Institute, Balloon operations Balloon and payload development University of Delaware EMI background survey Cosmic ray & neutrino astrophysics Science data analysis Modeling & analysis Archiving & modeling RF instrument calibration University of Minnesota Balloon navigation Balloon and Payload development Onboard data storage Cosmic ray astrophysics Balloon avionics RF instrument development Science data analysis CREAM ULDB payload University of Kansas On-ice calibration RICE/AMANDA experiment Antenna development Antarctic science experience Science data analysis RF instrument development Instrument modeling

ing system test, providing 1.5 months of fully in addition to the costed schedule reserves. Fig- funded schedule reserve per year of pre-launch ure 14 shows a realistic work flow and review development. The cost of the schedule reserve plan consistent with our commitment to an on- is included in the baseline cost of the project, cost, on-schedule project completion. not within the project cost reserves, which are We complete this section with a more de- 3 ANITA MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 37

Table 13: ANITA Risk Mitigation Strategies.

Risk Element Mitigation Strategy Anthropogenic RF background SR&T EMI background survey planned to establish produces saturation of LNAs probable levels of interference. LNA protection circuits planned if interference is rare but levels could lead to damage. Hardware filters in place for known bad frequencies. Digital trigger pattern reprogramming capability to be utilized for blanking of individual antennas in high-noise transient conditions. Anthropogenic RF background Background survey will indicate probability/risk. Digital raises system temperature or blanking for individual antennas possible. Noise-riding increases false alarm rate threshold to be used for reduction of false alarm rate beyond tolerable levels. from slowly-varying anthropogenic sources. For impulsive sources, trigger pattern requirements can be adjusted via Xylinx or control software uploads to reject specific threats, since anthropogenic impulses cannot reproduce neutrino signal pulses. Gondola is damaged during Budgets for the period following each flight contain post-flight landing or recovery. resources for refurbishment of the instrument & gondola within the time frame necessary for deployment in the second year following. 2nd payload available for following year. Gondola cannot be recovered due Parts selection & thermal design to minimize damage if to onset of Antarctic winter. system were to winter over. Precipitation is light in Antarctica so risk of snow covering is small. Include transponders which have adequate lifetime for winter-over. 2nd payload deployed for next year. Gondola lost over ocean. Force landing on ice if flight path shows significant risk of straying over open ocean.Second payload ensures mission continuity. Failure of telemetry system Redundant non-volatile on-board storage will record during flight results in loss data as backup to TDRSS and SIP telemetry. of mission data.

tailed description of aspects of the schedule Preliminary Design Review is complete. After subelements. CDR is passed we will continue with final flight 3.2.1 Instrument and Gondola Develop- production. ment, Integration, Calibration, and Testing. Because the launch window each year is We have scheduled a total of 7 quarters for limited by the length of the Antarctic austral both instrument and avionics development, and summer, and payloads must be delivered to 4 quarters for both gondola fabrication and pay- NSBF Palestine approximately 6 months prior load integration, calibration, and final testing to launch, a slip of the schedule beyond the prior to the engineering test flight.Flight soft- costed reserves could result in a 1 year delay ware development continues for a full 12 quar- in the initial launch. Our awareness of the po- ters including reserves, allowing final flight code tential costs of such a delay (such as instrument to be refined through multiple major test mile- storage, additional labor costs, and additional stones. We will proceed directly to engineering- transportation) are one of the reasons we have model units of the instrument as soon as the adopted a 30% overall project reserves policy, 4 ANITA COST AND COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY 38 as noted in the cost section presented below. We ble 15). We have adopted a conservative ap- note also that such a delay would still satisfy the proach toward overall project contingencies at SMEX AO requirement of first launch prior to this stage, and have included 30% across-the- August 2008. board reserves in the NASA OSS costs. 3.2.2 Data Analysis, Production, Reporting. 4.2 Methodology. We have provided a total of 8 quarters under 4.2.1 Project cost estimate. The first step data analysis software development. We note in the cost estimating process was the defini- here that this includes not only production soft- tion of a detailed, product-based Work Break- ware for data reduction, but development and down Structure (WBS), covering all project el- refinement of models for the RF pulse pro- ements, as described in Table 16. For each el- duction mechanism, for the geographical dis- ement of the WBS, a member of the proposal tribution and depths of ice over the potential team was assigned the responsibility for provid- flight path, for the mapping of probable ice at- ing a cost estimate. These individual estimates tenuation lengths, as well as development of were then combined and rectified to yield a com- detailed models for instrument response and plete WBS-based cost estimate. This estimate is Monte Carlo models for neutrino interactions therefore subsystem-based, and is shown in Ta- within the viewed volume. These efforts have ble 16. traditionally been the domain of university re- The WBS estimates were then broken out search groups and we have assembled a team and processed using the JPL Project Cost Anal- with considerable expertise in these areas al- ysis Tool, which applies appropriate inflation ready. rates, prorated burdens, and more accurate per- We have scheduled a six-month period after sonnel costs. This tool can also be configured the conclusion of each balloon flight for data to reflect more closely the requested cost break- product preparation, followed by an initial re- down as described in the SMEX Announcement lease of the flight data to a publicly accessible of Opportunity. This then yields a slightly modi- archive. During the six month period the ini- fied set of budget figures which are used to com- tial data products would remain proprietary and plete the Tables 14 and 15 below. an early internal release of initial data products would allow investigators the possibility of first The approach used and issues considered in rights to publication of the results. making the cost estimates is summarized in the following subsections for the line items in Ta- 4 ANITA COST AND COST ESTI- ble 16. MATING METHODOLOGY Project Management, System Engineer- 4.1 Project costs. The total NASA OSS ing, and Mission Assurance. Project Manage- cost for all cost-capped mission phases is esti- ment supports the activities of the Principal In- mated to be approximately $31.9M in FY2003 vestigator (PI) and the Project Manager. The dollars, well within the cost cap of $35M (FY PI is a university professor and requires sup- 2003) for Missions of Opportunity. This esti- port only for his summer salary. The Project mate includes all balloon launch services and Manager is assumed to be a full time JPL Man- ground data support. ager I during the development of the instrument Summaries of several more detailed repre- and the year of the first balloon campaign, with sentations of the cost estimate are shown in Ta- his/her involvement thereafter being at a de- bles 14-16. These are broken out by WBS el- creasing level. Travel costs for both the PI and ements (Table 16), by major NASA OSS el- PM were estimated based on past experience. ements (Table 14) and by mission phase (Ta- Mission Assurance and System Engineering 4 ANITA COST AND COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY 39 supports environmental testing of the integrated on termination and landing. Thus the digitizer and calibrated instrument, and support from the and flight computer categories contain a signif- JPL 5X organization for mission assurance and icant fraction of implicit costs associated with safety. The cost of the environmental testing is these requirements which will levy the need for based on established costs for the use of the en- testing of individual parts and subassemblies in vironmental test facilities at JPL with a scope addition to the integrated testing noted above. determined by the requirements for LDB mis- Gondola Development. Gondola develop- sions which are not as stringent as spacecraft ment will be led by Prof. Barwick of the Univer- requirements. Division 5X support for mis- sity of California, Irvine, with significant engi- sion assurance and safety is estimated to in- neering support from both Hawaii and JPL. Prof. clude one full time engineer prior to the first bal- Barwick has access to and an institutional com- loon launch, with the level of support decreasing mitment for use of a high bay facility at UCI thereafter. for the staging and assembly of the two twin Science Team Support. This line item sup- gondolas.We currently plan to use carbon-fiber ports modeling of the astrophysics and physical composite tubing, used extensively in ultra-light processes associated with the science basis for structural design, to form the gondola skele- ANITA, algorithm and software development ton. Costs for these elements include engineer- for science data analysis, and science data anal- ing costs associated with joints and fasteners, as ysis and interpretation. In addition, we include well as some research and development on inter- costs for ongoing efforts to monitor the EMI lev- calation materials for optimizing the RF absorb- els from ground stations in Antarctica, and to get ing qualities of the structure so as not to degrade better and more comprehensive measurements the antenna array performance. of ice properties. The bulk of this work will Instrument integration. At the integration be done at the institutions of co-investigators, stage, we intend to move the primary gondola to mostly universities. ANITA benefits from a sig- aUCI high bay facility, where final integration nificant heritage of past modeling and analysis and testing of the instrument with the gondola work performed by the co-investigators as part will proceed. The second gondola and backup of the SR&T program. instrument will be delivered to UCI where sec- RF Instrument Development. The RF In- ondary testing and integration can also proceed strument will developed at both the University in parallel with the primary. This secondary of Hawaii and JPL, primarily in Division 33. instrument will provide an engineering testbed Cost estimates for individual sub-systems (e.g., during the first launch, and then will be read- antennas, RF/IF conditioners, digitizers, flight ied for flight immediately after the first flight is computer, software and telemetry support) were complete. based largely on experience with prototypes Ground Data System Development. Dur- currently under development with the NASA ing the Antarctic balloon campaigns, data will SR&T program, off-the-shelf items, and engi- be transported from the gondola to NSBF Head- neering estimates. Costs for flight-qualification quarters in Palestine, Texas via a link through of the parts are included. Flight qualification for the TDRSS satellite. This link and the ground LDB flights is not as stringent as for spacecraft, data system, has been developed, tested, and re- since launch loads and vibration are not an issue, fined by the NSBF. The only costs required of and the radiation environment is not as severe. ANITA will be for the establishment of a data However, significant attention must be paid to base system for the interim storage and transport thermal analysis and testing, and vacuum quali- of data from NSBF to the ANITA archives. fication, as well as non-operational shock loads Calibration. The Calibration WBS element 4 ANITA COST AND COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY 40 captures several non-flight hardware develop- ing the guidance given in the SMEX AO, Edu- ment tasks, as well as antenna calibration tasks cation and Public Outreach will be supported at that are specific to determination of the instru- an ongoing level of 2% per year throughout the ment sensitivity. As such they are primarily in lifetime of the project. the domain of the co-investigator science team, 4.2.2 Cost Models. Cost models for bal- and are costed as such. We have noted above looncraft (gondola), instrument, and project that this element will bring a significant her- costs were used to assess and verify the ANITA itage of development under the SR&T program, project estimates. This included use of the JPL through the ANITA-lite LDB flight. Team X project cost model, which obtained rea- Mission Operations, & Data Analysis (in- sonable agreement with the project estimate. cludes archiving). During balloon campaigns, 4.3 Contributed Costs. There are no di- two persons will be deployed to outlying camps rect contributed costs proposed for the current such as Vostok or DOME C in Antarctica to ANITA project broadcast calibration signals to the balloon- 4.4 Budget Reserve Strategy. The borne instrument. This will permit a monitor ANITA Project has endorsed JPL’s standard of instrument and gondola health. In addition, of a 30% cost reserve on this proposal. This a team of 2 persons each will be deployed to reserve is very conservative for a project with as Palestine, Texas to oversee and monitor the ar- much heritage and design simplicity as ANITA, rival of date from the balloon via TDRSS. This but acknowledges the uncertainties that exist in activity does not include the cost of launching a mission with virtually no science precursor. and tracking the balloon. As such, the proposed reserves address the Data analysis costs incurred by the science potential need to increase instrument sensitivity team are also captured in this item during the to achieve mission success should the models post-launch phase E, which includes the addi- on which the instrument design is based evolve tional two LDB launches in successive years. so as to require it. The ANITA 30% reserve is Balloon services. The cost per campaign for applied to all project phases and all costs and the balloon, Helium gas, balloon-gondola inte- provides a very high confidence that the ANITA gration, launch services, and post-flight recov- mission will meet project commitments for ery is currently given by the NSBF as $1000K cost, schedule, and high-quality science return. for Antarctica. There have been recent increases in cost for other services provided by the NSBF. It will also be necessary to make a one-time pur- chase ($1000K) of a support instrument pack- age (SIP) from the NSBF. The SIP provides for tracking of the balloon, the recovery of the gon- dola, and the TDRSS link. Also included in this line item are additional costs for subcon- tract management at JPL, and additional items such as the sun-pointing rotator ($210K). We do not budget for the purchase of a second SIP for the secondary payload since SIP recovery and re-integration can be accomplished for a single- year turnaround. Loss of the SIP is covered by project reserves. Education and Public Outreach. Follow- 5RequiredNASA OSS Budget Tables & WBS

Table 14: SMEX AO Required Table B-4:NASA COST FUNDING PROFILE FOR MISSIONS OF OPPORTUNITY. Fiscal Year costs in Real Year $K; Totals in real year $K and FY03 $K.

Cost element FY FY FY FY FY FY FY Total Total 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 real year FY2003 Phase A 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 242 Phase B 5487 0 0 0 0 0 0 5487 5322 Reserves 1492 0 0 0 0 0 0 1492 1447 Phase C/D PM/SE 0 884 811 147 105 108 0 2055 1882 Instrument 0 3465 1019 616 594 300 0 5995 5495 Instrument IAT 0 601 718 102 105 54 0 1579 1445 GDS/MOS 0 622 378 136 117 120 0 1372 1250 Science Team 0 946 997 424 361 360 124 3212 2885 EPO 0 148 92 0 0 0 0 240 223 Balloon launch services 0 866 668 689 1328 1369 0 4921 4315 Instrument Reserves 0 1220 521 215 210 106 0 2272 2082 Other Reserves 0 780 683 212 175 177 37 2064 1872 Phase E PM 0 0 0 328 262 228 118 936 800 MO&DA 0 0 0 554 548 564 210 1876 1600 EPO 0 0 0 60 68 62 9 199 171 Reserves 0 0 0 282 263 256 101 903 771 Total capped 7229 9532 5888 3764 4136 3706 599 34854 31802 Phase F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total NASA (incl. Bridge phase) 7329 9532 5888 3764 4136 3706 599 34954 31899 2Month Bridge Phase 100

Table 15: SMEX AO Required Table B-5:ANITA Mission Phase Summary for NASA OSS costs. FY costs in real year $K, and totals in real year $K and FY2003 $K.

Mission Phase FY FY FY FY FY FY FY total total 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 real yr FY2003 Phase A/B 7329 0 0 0 0 0 0 7329 7108 Phase C/D 0 8666 5220 1851 1666 1226 161 18789 17134 Phase E 0 0 0 1224 1141 1111 438 3915 3342 Phase F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Balloon launch services 0 866 668 689 1328 1369 0 4921 4315 NASA OSS cost, FY totals 7329 9532 5888 3764 4136 3706 599 34954 31899

41 Table 16: ANITA Work breakdown structure and associated grass-roots cost estimate.

WBS Fiscal Years: 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Totals 1 Project Management 280 287 300 290 225 190 95 1667 1.1 Principal Investigator 40 42 50 50 50 45 30 307 1.2 Project Manager 240 245 250 240 175 145 65 1360 2 Science Team 680 620 710 595 580 570 270 4025 2.1 Astrophysics Modeling (incl. Phase A) 300 120 90 80 80 80 40 790 2.2 Algorithm/Database/Software Devel. 110 110 100 100 100 90 60 670 2.3 Science Data Analysis and Interp. 70 170 370 370 370 370 170 1890 2.4 Ice properties & Antarctic surveys 200 220 150 45 30 30 675 3 System Engr. and Mission Assurance 410 545 440 130 90 90 0 1705 3.1 Environmental testing 50 110 125 25 25 25 360 3.2 System Engineering 195 230 120 25 25 25 620 3.3 Mission Assurance 165 205 195 80 40 40 725 4 Instrument Development 2370 2360 525 440 445 190 0 6330 4.1 Antennas 380 320 90 35 40 25 890 4.2 RF/IF Conditioning 500 480 45 40 40 25 1130 4.3 Digitizers 880 950 85 40 40 25 2020 4.4 Flight Computer & Mass Storage 180 110 40 30 20 20 400 4.5 Flight Software 350 380 150 60 35 35 1010 4.6 Telemetry 80 80 50 35 20 20 285 4.7 Refurbishment and Upgrade 0 40 65 200 250 40 595 5 Gondola Development 720 900 405 105 65 60 0 2255 5.1 Engineering Workforce 160 230 120 20 20 20 570 5.2 Materials and Services 160 120 65 20 20 15 400 5.3 Power systems development 400 550 220 65 25 25 1285 6 Payload Integration 105 565 655 90 90 45 0 1550 6.1 Engineering Workforce 45 280 330 20 20 20 715 6.2 Materials and Services 30 120 110 20 20 15 315 6.3 Integration and Test Support 30 165 215 50 50 10 520 7 Calibration 185 270 200 150 100 100 0 1005 7.1 Antenna calibration 50 75 75 45 30 30 305 7.2 Antarctic calibration system 120 150 60 45 30 30 435 7.3 Calib. Sys. deployment & services 15 45 65 60 40 40 265 8 Balloon Services 500 815 610 610 1140 1140 0 4815 8.1 Support Instrument Package 500 550 50 50 20 20 1190 8.2 Campaign Costs (Ft. Sumner/Antarctica) 0 265 560 560 1120 1120 3625 9 Operations 205 585 345 240 200 200 0 1775 9.1 Ground Data System Development 125 125 30 10 10 10 310 9.2 Data Acquisition and Archiving 25 100 80 65 45 45 360 9.3 Gondola Packaging and Shipment 25 120 100 45 45 45 380 9.4 Operations Support (Antarctica/Texas) 30 240 135 120 100 100 725 SUBTOTALS 5455 6947 4190 2650 2935 2585 365 25127 10 Education and Outreach (2%) 109 139 84 53 59 52 7 503 11 Reserves (30%), except balloon services 1447 1881 1099 628 556 449 112 6172 NASA OSS totals (incl. bridge phase) 7107 8967 5373 3331 3550 3086 484 31898 2-Month Bridge Phase 96

42 6 ANITA EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH 43

6 ANITA EDUCATION AND PUB- Partnerships with ANITA scientists will be sup- LIC OUTREACH ported during the duration of the project, pro- viding mentoring by ANITA scientists, and op- portunities for internships at a NASA facil- 6.1 Relationship to Mission. ANITA ity to work on Pre-service materials related to uses our imagination and scientific tools to try ANITA research. At a later stage as the ANITA to see the universe in an entirely new form launch approaches, opportunities for attachment of ghostly energy: the neutrino. The ANITA of small passive student experimental payloads EPO Plan will focus on three programs that to the main ANITA Gondola will be developed showcase some of those tools and promote the and offered. imagination of inquiry. These programs involve both the Formal and Informal Education com- 6.2 Goals and Objectives. munity from middle school through university Enhanced involvement of middle school girls audiences. The following sections detail how in inquiry-based science. The ABOVE pro- we intend to implement this program and Ta- gram will partner with an highly successful ble 17 describes the budget, constituting about website, Whyville.net, to house an ANITA in- 2% of the overall mission total for ANITA. We teractive learning center. Whyville is a virtual intend to develop ANITA EPO in close collab- affinity community which offers inquiry based oration with a new QuarkNet program currently science activities to an underserved audience in its initial phase at UH Manoa. This program, and is moderated daily. Currently, Whyville.net sponsored through Fermi National Accelerator has 105,000 registered users, 65% of whom Lab, will provide a framework on which to build are middle school girls. An ANITA section ANITA EPO. in Whyville will feature information about the Antarctic Balloon Observatory Virtual Ex- ANITA mission and a hot air balloon race based plorer (ABOVE) :Awebsite for middle on principles of physics. It has received editors school girls using a virtual Three-Dimensional choice awards from Netscape, AOL.com, Hot- World where visitors receive information about bot, dmoz and Lycos and was a finalist for a GII the ANITA neutrino detection mission and use Award. inquiry activities and simulations to experience Participation of underserved high school and aspects of ANITA research. college students in research. The DetectNet DetectNet. Ahigh school and community Program will involve minority and underserved college program to develop a teaching array of participating high schools and institutions of radio pulse detection systems for high energy higher education in the process of scientific re- cosmic ray particles. One such array in early search. ANITA will assist in the placement of construction stages (CHICOS) is a collaboration low cost cosmic ray detection systems, which with JPL and managed by Caltech. A startup will be internet-linked throughout Oahu. These program (HOPA, Hawaii Observatory for Par- collaborations will be supported with personal ticle Astrophysics) is currently under study as contact with ANITA scientists acting as Detect- an extension to the QuarkNet EPO program now Net Advisors to participating institutions. The under initial development at UH Manoa. development of small experiments to be flown ANITA Academics. A program of engage- with ANITA to extreme high altitudes provides ment with Teacher Education K-12 Relations an opportunity for involvement in space sci- (TEKR) faculty who work with Pre-service ence at a level that few students or teachers ever teachers at a Historically Minority Serving achieve, and this aspect of ANITA EPO is ex- Campus of the University of Hawaii Manoa. pected to generate great interest. 7 NEW/ADVANCEDTECHNOLOGY,& SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES44

internships will be provided. A competition for Table 17: ANITA EPO. Costs are in FY 2003$K. winning student experimental payloads aboard FY ABOVE DetecNet ANITA total ANITA will introduce students and teachers to Academics the excitement of scientific competition. $K $K $K $K 6.4 Dissemination strategies. 2004 40 50 19 109 2005 10 57 72 139 ABOVE. Whyville.net currently is growing 2006 10 25 49 84 by 10,000 registered users a month. Interactive 2007 8 17 28 53 experiences with ANITA simulations and infor- 2008 8 17 34 59 mation by this affinity community will grow 2009 8 17 27 52 daily as visitors come to the ANITA site and dis- 2010 3 2 2 7 seminate the information learned. total 87 185 231 503 DetectNet. The participants of the DetectNet array will write news reports of their accom- plishments and experiences. These reports will Capability and Commitment. As a uni- be submitted to news media for publication. Pre- versity professor with the backing and encour- sentations at conferences such as NSTA and agement of his department’s educational faculty, NCTM will be promoted. Peter Gorham, the ANITA PI, strongly supports ANITA Academics. NASA media relations asignificant and resourceful Education and Pub- will be given continuing information concerning lic Outreach program as part of the ANITA Mis- the ANITA Academics during their studies. If sion, with a $502K budget and active participa- completion of doctoral studies is completed dur- tion by all members of the ANITA science team. ing the ANITA mission, special recognition of 6.3 Evaluation of the ANITA EPO these scholars will be made by the NASA com- Success. munity. The post-flight reports on student ex- ABOVE. Metrics of visits to the ANITA web- periments will be featured on ABOVE and par- site and balloon race simulation will be gathered ticipants will be invited to describe their results by the Whyville.net team and reported annually in public forums and venues. in time for entry in the EDCATS system. Based 7NEW/ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY, on an NSF funded project called Whygirls con- &SMALL DISADVANTAGED ducted by the Caltech Precollege Science Initia- tive Research Group interest in inquiry science BUSINESSES by middle school girls can be monitored. The PI, Prof. Peter Gorham, understands DetectNet. The program will seek a goal of 6 NASA OSS goals for new/advanced technology institutions, which will build, maintain and sub- transfer, and intends to address them in detail mit data to ANITA scientists for the duration of during the Phase A study. He also understands the DetectNet part of the E/PO. All information the NASA OSS requirements for participation needed for EDCATS will be reported. Detect- of Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minor- Net would also provide integration to the wider ity Institutions, and fully intends to comply with community of internet-based cosmic-ray detec- these requirements. The University of Hawaii tion facilities such as CHICOS via access to a is a historically minority-serving institution, and web-based archive of cosmic ray events. will be fully involved in ANITA development. ANITA Academics. Initial support will cre- Aplan to implement NASA requirements will ate Pre-service teacher curricular materials in re- be in place shortly after selection for Phase B search related to the ANITA mission. Academic development. 8 APPENDICES 45

8APPENDICES 8.1 Letters of Endorsement. We in- clude one letter of endorsement from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory as a major contributor, taking the Project Management role. There are no co-Investigators with planned no-exchange-of-funds contributions to ANITA. There are also no non-U.S. co-Investigators. Ac- cording to section 3.5.3 of the AO, no additional letters of endorsement from the co-Investigators are therefore required until the Phase A study.

8 APPENDICES 47

8.2 Statement of Work and Funding ondary efforts divided roughly equally between information. JPL is the NASA lead cen- the other institutions according to the local ex- ter on the ANITA SMEX Mission proposal, as pertise and interests. We expect this matrix to submitted in response to the 2003 SMEX An- become more focused during Phase A, and in nouncement of Opportunity. If this mission is particular one of the deliveries of the Phase A selected for development and launch as a SMEX study will be a detailed division of labor for the mission, JPL will act as the NASA lead center secondary contributions from the universities. for the project, providing overall project man- Scope of Work and Government responsibil- agement and specific contributions to the instru- ities. The scope of work for JPL, which is the ment development, payload testing, integration, contributing NASA center for ANITA, has been calibration, launch, and mission operations. The noted in prior sections, and we recap it here. JPL University of Hawaii will provide the lead in will take primary responsibility for the project Science-related tasks, and in specific instrument management: that is, the coordination and fi- development tasks associated with the PI’s re- nal accountability for all phases of the mission search expertise. and all deliveries and integration associated with Phase A concept study report. We propose outside contractors or participating universities. that the requirement for a phase A concept study JPL will also be primarily responsible for the de- for ANITA be somewhat relaxed. We believe livery of the RF instrument to payload integra- that the goals of the concept study will have tion, as well as oversight of mission assurance, been largely achieved through the funding al- calibration, and environmental testing. ready allocated to ANITA under the Space Re- Contractual arrangements for Phase A & search and Technology funding provided by the bridge phase. Two NASA contracts are re- ROSS 2002 award, and will facilitate rapid com- quired for the Phase A and Bridge phase, one pletion of the phase A report. for the PI institution and one for JPL. It is an- ticipated that these contracts will be issued for We propose that the concept study and bridge amounts of $100 + $50K to the University of phase be completed in a relatively compressed Hawaii, and $150 + $50K to JPL. We also re- schedule within the first 4-5 months of FY 2004. quest that, should ANITA be selected for a phase This would be immediately followed by a con- Astudy, that the ANITA ROSS SR&T fund- firmation review and rapid transition to Phase ing continue incrementally through the Phase A B, which would be facilitated by continuing ef- study, until the final NASA selection is made, so forts of the collaboration members under incre- that continuity of the project can be maintained mental funding from the ROSS program, which to avoid any hiatus and associated schedule risk would not be phased out until the downselection to the Explorer program. of ANITA was complete. The concept study can be completed by senior members of the collabo- ration without serious impact on the continuing efforts that will be ongoing under the ROSS pro- gram. General task statements for Phase B/C/D/E. Table 18 provides a summary of general task statements for the various institutions as a func- tion of mission phase. The major work cen- ters during the pre-launch mission phases are ex- pected to be JPL and UCI, with important sec- 8 APPENDICES 48

Table 18: Phase B, C/D, E general tasks.

Institution Phase A/B Phase C/D Phase E Preliminary Study/Design Design/constr. to Launch+30 Data acq. & Analysis University of Hawaii PI oversight PI Oversight Analysis Oversight Calibration design Calibration development Calibration Data Products Digitizer design Digitizer development Trigger design Trigger development Software design Secondary SW develop. Secondary data analysis JPL Project Management Project Management Project Management RF instrument design RF instr. constr./integration Flight turnaround telemetry design telemetry development Ground telemetry UC Irvine Gondola Design Gondola construction Primary analysis, Ancillary system management Payload Integration data product development Ice properties database Antarctic Launch support Penn State Univ. Gondola design support Gondola ancillary Data analysis Trigger design support Payload integration NSBF support equip. Antarctic support Bartol Research Inst. RF Background study RFI risk mitigation Data analysis NSBF support equip. Payload integration Antarctic support UCLA Data center design Data center development Data center operations Calibration design Calibration development Calibration data products Univ. Minnesota NSBF support equip. Gondola ancillary Data analysis trigger design support payload integration flight turnaround support Univ. Kansas Calibration system develop. Calibration system deploy Ice properties data Ice properties meas. design Ice properties monitoring calib. data

Table 19: Phase A concept study and Bridge Phase estimated cost breakdown, in Real Year $K.

Institution Phase A funds Bridge funds (RY $K) (RY $K) University of Hawaii at Manoa 100 50 Jet Propulsion Laboratory 150 50 TOTALS 250 100 8 APPENDICES 49

8.3 Curriculum Vitae

List of Investigators Providing CVs.

PROF.PETER GORHAM

PROF.STEPHEN BARWICK

PROF.JAMES BEATTY

PROF.DAV I D BESSON

PROF.DOUG COWEN

PROF.MICHAEL DUVERNOIS

DR.KURT LIEWER

DR.CHARLES NAUDET

PROF.DAV I D SALTZBERG

PROF.DAV I D SECKEL

DR.GARY VARNER CURRICULUM VITA Peter W. Gorham

Profession Preparation:

♦Ph.D., Physics, 1986, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Physics & Astronomy ♦M.S., Physics, 1983, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Physics & Astronomy ♦B.S., Physics, 1980, University of California at Irvine, Department of Physics. ♦B.A., English Literature, 1980, University of California at Irvine, Department of English.

Appointments: ♦ Associate Professor of Physics, University of Hawaii at Manoa Department of Physics and Astronomy, August 2001 to present. ♦ Senior Member of the Technical Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, (1996-2001; joint appointment continues to present). Duties included: ♦Architect, Stellar imaging subsystem, NASA Starlight Mission (Dual Spacecraft Formation flying optical interferometer) ♦Project element manager, StarLight Mission Focal Plane Detector System ♦ Research Professor in Physics, University of Hawaii at Manoa Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, (1991-1996) ♦ Project Manager, Deep Underwater Muon and Neutrino Detector project, University of Hawaii (1991-1996). ♦ Senior Research Fellow in Physics, California Institute of Technology (1989-1991). ♦ Postdoctoral Research Associate in Physics, California Institute of Technology (1987- 1989).

Awards & Recognition: ♦ 2002 U.S. Department of Energy Outstanding Junior Investigator Award for research in radio detection of high energy particles. One of only six awarded nationwide in 2002. ♦ Chair, SPIE 2002 Kona Conference on Particle Astrophysics Instrumentation. ♦ Co-chair (with D. Saltzberg) of 2000 UCLA conference on Radio Detection of High Energy Particles (RADHEP 2000). ♦1999 JPL Director's Award for Exceptional Technical Excellence in the development of a novel dual-spacecraft interferometer design for the Deep Space Three Project ($2000 cash prize).

Current and Recent Research Activities: ♦ Principal Investigator, Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA). NASA Office of Space Science, Space Research & Technology Grant for Long-duration Antarctic Balloon project to detect ultra-high energy neutrinos, 2003, ongoing. ♦ Principal Investigator, Goldstone Lunar Ultra-high energy neutrino Experiment (GLUE). NASA/JPL/DOE-supported ongoing search for radio Cherenkov emission from ultra-high energy neutrinos and cosmic rays interacting with the lunar limb, using the 70 meter Goldstone radio telescope. ♦ Principal Investigator, Radio Detection of High Energy Particles, a DOE-funded program under the DOE Outstanding Junior Investigator Award program, 2002., ongoing. ♦ Principal Investigator, Characterization of the Askaryan Effect for PeV to EeV Showers, SLAC T464 experiment, completed in June 2002. ♦ Co-Investigator, Cosmic-ray Atmospheric ZeV Interaction, Los Alamos National Laboratory FORTE satellite data analysis Long-Duration Research Funding (LDRF) grant, A. Jacobson (Los Alamos) PI, 2003 ongoing. ♦ Co-Investigator, KamLAND neutrino oscillation experiment, Kamioka Japan, 2003 ongoing.

Prior Research Activities: 1997-2001: ♦Spacecraft and instrument architecture and development for various space optical interferometry projects, NASA/JPL..

1991-1996: ♦Search for ultra-high energy neutrino-induced cascades from astronomical sources, observed with a deep ocean water Cherenkov detector. ♦Studies of deep ocean physics related to detector development: optics, housing implosion dynamics, acoustics, galvanic effects.

1987-1991: ♦Discovery of first radio pulsar in the core of a globular cluster using Arecibo 305 m telescope. ♦Multiwavelength studies of supernova remnants; VLA radio imaging of remnant candidates. ♦Deep pulsar survey of supernova remnants from Arecibo. ♦Development of speckle interferometer detector system for Palomar 200’’ telescope ♦Production of first diffraction-limited optical and near-infrared images at Palomar; used to image the photosphere and molecular atmosphere of the giant Cepheid variable star Mira ♦Development of imaging, photon-counting detector for Palomar 60" telescope.

1982-1986: ♦Development of prototype detector data acquisition system, used to make new measurements of the cosmic-ray muon ocean depth intensity relation. ♦Search for cosmic monopoles catalyzing baryon decay. ♦High energy gamma-ray observations on galactic and extragalactic objects at Whipple Observatory (dissertation research). ♦Studies of X- and gamma-ray pulsar phenomenology, including gravitational lensing, and high energy particle beam steering effects.

Recent Invited Talks:

♦ "Neutrino Astronomy at Ultra-high Energies," invited plenary talk at the International Astronomical Union (IAU) Symposium 214, High Energy Processes and Phenomena in Astrophysics}, Suzhou, People's Republic of China, July 2002. ♦ "Towards Teraton Neutrino Detectors," invited talk, National Science Foundation NeSS 2002, September 2002, Washington D.C. ♦ "Radio Pulses from High Energy Particles," invited plenary talk, American Astronomical Society special session on the Dynamic Radio Sky,202nd meeting of the AAS, Nashville, TN, scheduled for May 2003. ♦ "Balloon-borne Neutrino Astronomy," invited talk, IAU XXV: General Assembly of the International Astronomical Union, Sydney, Australia, scheduled for July 2002.

Selected Recent Publications:

♦"Synchrotron Radiation at Radio Frequencies from Cosmic Ray Air Showers," Denis A. Suprun, Peter W. Gorham, & Jonathan L. Rosner, Astroparticle Physics, in press, 2003. ♦"Detecting Radio Emission from Cosmic Ray Air Showers and Neutrinos with a Digital Radio Telescope," Heino Falcke & Peter Gorham, Astropart. Phys., in press, 2003. ♦"Neutrino-induced Collapse of Bare Strange Stars Via TeV-scale Black Hole Seeding," Peter Gorham, John Learned, & Nikolai Lehtinen, astro-ph/0205170, 2002. ♦"First Results from KamLAND: Evidence for Reactor Anti-Neutrino Disappearance, " The KamLAND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 021802. ♦"Measurements of the Suitability of Large Rock Salt Formations for Radio Detection of High Energy Neutrinos, " Peter Gorham, David Saltzberg, Allen Odian, Dawn Williams, David Besson, George Frichter, Sami Tantawi, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A490, (2002) 476-491. ♦"Observation of the Askaryan Effect: Coherent Microwave Cherenkov Emission from Charge Asymmetry in High Energy Particle Cascades,"” Saltzberg, D., Gorham, P., Walz, D., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 2001. ♦"Radio Limits on as isotropic flux of >100 EeV neutrinos,"” P. W. Gorham, K. M. Liewer, C. J. Naudet, D. P. Saltzberg, and D. Williams, Proc. First Int. Workshop on Radio Detection of High Energy Particles (RADHEP 2000), UCLA, AIP Physics, (2001). ♦"Radio Frequency Measurements of Coherent Transition and Cherenkov Radiation: Implications for High Energy Neutrino Detection,"” Gorham, P. W., Saltzberg, D. P., Schoessow, P., et al, 2000, Phys. Rev. E, 62, 8590..

Curriculum Vita

STEVEN W. BARWICK

Department of Physics and Astronomy Phone: 949-824-2626 University of California Email: [email protected] Irvine, CA 92697-4575 WWW:http://www.ps.uci.edu/~barwick

A. Education: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Physics B.S. 1981 University of California-Berkeley Physics M.A. 1983 University of California-Berkeley Physics Ph.D 1986

B. Appointments: 2000-present Professor of Physics, University of California-Irvine 1995-2000 Associate Professor of Physics, University of California-Irvine 1990-1995 Assistant Professor of Physics, University of California-Irvine 1986-1990 Research Physicist, University of California-Berkeley

C. Selected Publications:

Search for Point Source of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA”, J. Ahrens, X. Bai, G. Barouch, S.W. Barwick, et al., Astrophy. J. 583 (2003), 1040.

“Scientific Potential of the AMANDA-II High Energy Neutrino Detector”, Proc. 27th Inter. ICRC [Hamburg, 2001]; http://www.copernicus.org/icrc/papers/icc1247_p.pdf

“Observation of High Energy Atmospheric Neutrinos with AMANDA”, E. Andres, et al., Nature, 410(2000)441.

“Results from the AMANDA High Energy Neutrino Detector”, E. Andres, et al., Nucl. Phys. B, 91(2001)423;

“High Energy Cosmic Neutrinos”, Steven W. Barwick, Physica Scripta, T85 (2000)106;

“The AMANDA Telescope: Principle of Operation and First Results”, E. Andres, et al., Astropart. Phys.13(2000)1.; astro-ph/9906203.

“Cosmic Ray Positrons at High Energies: A New Measurement”, S. W. Barwick, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75(1995)390.; astro-ph/9505141.

D. Recent honors: Elected Fellow of The Americal Physical Society, Division of Astrophysics, 2003. JAMES J. BEATTY

Departments of Physics and of Astronomy and Astrophysics Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802

Education: 1986 Ph.D., Physics, University of Chicago 1984 S.M., Physics, University of Chicago 1982 A.B.., Physics, University of Chicago

Positions: 2001-present Professor, Physics and Astronomy & Astrophysics, Pennsylvania State University 1995-2001 Associate Professor, Physics and Astronomy & Astrophysics, Pennsylvania State University 1994-1995 Associate Professor, Physics, Washington University in St. Louis 1991-1994 Assistant Professor, Physics, Washington University in St. Louis 1989-1991 Assistant Professor, Astronomy and Physics, Boston University 1986-1989 Research Assistant Professor, Physics, Boston University 1986 Research Associate, Physics, University of Chicago 1982-1985 Research Assistant, Physics, University of Chicago

Selected Awards:

John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Fellow, 2001-2002.

Representative Recent Publications:

1. With E.S. Seo et al. (CREAM Collaboration), “Cosmic Ray Energetics and Mass (CREAM) Balloon Experiment,” Adv. Space Res. 30, 1263-1272 (2002).

2. With M. A. DuVernois et al. (HEAT Collaboration), “Cosmic-Ray Electrons and Positrons from 1- 100 GeV: Measurements with HEAT and their Interpretation,” Ap. J. 559, 296 - 303 (2001).

3. With A. S. Beach et al. (HEAT Collaboration), “Measurement of the Cosmic-Ray Antiproton-to- Proton Abundance Ratio between 4 and 50 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 271101, 1 - 4 (2001).

4. S. Coutu et al. (HEAT Collaboration), “Energy Spectra, Altitude Profiles and Charge Ratios of Atmospheric Muons,” Phys. Rev. D 62, 032001, 1-9 (2000).

5. J. J. Beatty, “Galactic Cosmic Rays with Energy Less than 1 TeV/amu,” Proc. Of the 26th ICRC (Salt Lake City), eds. B.L. Dingus, D.B. Kieda, and M.H. Salamon, AIP Conf. Proc. 516, 169-179 (2000).

6. S. Coutu et al. (HEAT Collaboration), “Cosmic-Ray Positrons: Are There Primary Sources?,” Astropart. Phys. 11, 429-435 (1999).

7. With S. Barwick et al. (HEAT Collaboration), “The Energy Spectra and Relative Abundances of Electrons and Positrons in the Galactic Cosmic Radiation,” Ap. J. 498, 779-789 (1998).

¢¡¤£ ¥ §¦¤¨ ©  

 ! "$#%'&(%*) + ,$-*.*% / 0%*2143*&#0

& / #:;-*< =>0@?BAA¤%*) + CDAE#E-F)-F (? ,$#0 + %'#E& G HI-KJL:M*N4O2PQN*R S T HU&V%'3LOLH W X

57698

%QVZ&Q)[\&*O 1^]*] )$#E& _ `aRKbcMBPQRBP HD%'#$-F)%*$#d? G + 14#%'#E&QA

Y 5 6

T S e*R X e*]f`'bg` S `P h> i%* G +kj &QAAE-F)Llmk3f%*)[A:n& + 

o7p q rcs@tutuv q wyx[zo7pfs@{xpfxk|Kv q w

PQN*e*]i=>0}: :[)^=~0a?BAAQOBUk#E.*&A )J*&A$#c?*OHI&V9,~€)AEVI3OBH W

8 6

0k&QAA¤C + JBAE-* G =>-*<ƒ:;„k&Q 1B%*))k&QA

‚

0k&QAA $#$& G I% + %'#$J*& &Q%Q?BAI-*<†#0k&ˆ‡ T Pu1 X ‰Š&QAE-F)

8

‚ ‚

PQN S Ni,U:‹1Œ:[)^=>0@?BAAOL-F j % )$J*&€A$#d?*OHIŽ(DO[HIŽ

6

¡¢{{ q vw|K‘s4w|Kt

P ’ N S b~CUAAE-4':~=;-*<ƒ:$O )[$J*&A$#c?“-*< %*)A%*AO & / #:;-*< =>0@?BAA

6 5 8

e ’ N*”•bUPQM ’ N*]CDAAE#:>=>-*<ƒ:$O )[$J*&A$#c?i-*< %*)A%*AO & / #:>-*<†=>0@?4AA

6 5 8

N ’ N _ be ’ N*”–-*€)k&Q :$O & / #:;-*< =>0@?4AAOk=-FAE# + -B\#E-*%*yI&QA:;CDAAE-B':

6 8

T  h—˜-F% j -*%'#$-F)š™ECD)%*$?BAAI-4-* + )[%'#E-*› + k)k.ˆ#0[%'#Z# •& X

Y

:-*<†„-* P ’ e S be ’ N _ + %BO & / #:;-*< =~0a?BAAO=-FAE# + -4\#E-*%*yZ&QA:~CUAA-4':

6 8

’ e*e•bUPQM ’ e*e• "A$#)k.i1B$&Q)@#AE#Okœ)AE#$#k#E&"-*< HD$&Q%'I=~0a?BAAOHU-uJ*-FA j $A3LOL1B j &€% T UAA% X N

] ’ e*”•bUP ’ e S Uk#E.*&A :$O[=~0a?BAA & / #:>I&QAE&Q%'€0ŠCDAAA#%*)a#

6 8

N ’ S N•b] ’ e*”žUk#E.*&A :$O[=~0a?BAA & / #: &Q%*0[)k.iCDAAA#%*)a#

6 8

‚

¡“Ÿ xpf¡ytxLw2¡£¢“s4¤ q ¥Lwv|fv q w

P': =~0a?BAA & / #: ) + &.*% + [%'#E& &Q%*€0)k.iCUV%' + T PQN*Nf` X <¦-*I))k-uJ'%'#$-F)AI)^)^AE#E[\#$-F)}:

576 8 6

‚

M4:"-*#E#E&Qy1k0k-F%' T Z&QAE&Q%'€0§-* / O [A\-F)}O[Cm¨ X O©PQN*N*RKbcM _*_ P

‚

”4:U‰ª&Q)@#E-*QO[<«-FkU¬D-F + V%'#E&m1B0-F%'A0 / &Q / $&Q)@#A¤VI$#0[)¢#0k&7%*AE#­[J*&(?*&Q%'A:

`k:UHU%* •& +i/  i%'?ˆ)[AE#E\#E-* <«-* %*)A%*A>Z&.*&Q)@#A>®D$.F0CD% + &Q ˆ?*OkA  •&>M _*_ M4: #$&QA;) + & +

5 8

#E&Q%*0). P\` _ b / &A-F) %*AA-*<[0$.F0 A0-@-Fu¯)$-*Ay%*) + AE&Q)$-*AAE&Q$&Q\#E& + <«-F °#0k-Fk.F0-Fk#y#0&AE#%'#E&

+ A / &Q%*A  •&%*AA;-F)“\-FA •-F$-*.*?“%'#>#0k& )J*&A$#c? -*< %*)A%*A T W )k&(P _ O -*< %*)A%*A>#E- %'#E#E&Q)

6 5 5

M _*_ M ± W $?¢R X

R4:UHU%* •& +ª/  i%'?i)A#E\#E-*¤<«-*“™ )$J*&A#d?²1B0k-F%'A› / -*.*€%* ^O[M _*_ ”4:

6

sBz¦s4¤*|us4¡£o(³2´†zv«¤Fxk|Kv q wyt

P':“™µI¶\·«¸¹'·€º»'¼ ½ ¶ˆ»'¼L¾ ¿ À«º Á4Â$»*ÏÀĹ'¼Š¹¸DëÅB¶ZÆZÇ'È©Éʾa¶Ãd¶ ½ Ãg¹'·›BOk%*AE#E-'b / 0 ’ _ P*PQM*” S M4OLCUAE#E- / %'#:;=>0@?BA:¤PQN

T M _*_ ” X PQRKbc”*]

½ Ï·¹*¼“Ôˆ¶ÁBÏ·ÕÀ«¼L¹mÖ;Â×ÁFظշ¹'ºÙëÅB¶¤ÆZÇ'È©ÉÚÉ>ØÕÛk¶·€À«ºi¶\¼[Ã$›BOB%*AE#E-'b M4:“™ˆÀ«º ÀÃ«ÌD¹'¼^ëÅB¶ÎÍyÂÏÏ·»*ÐÄÑ7ÀÏÒ*ňɼ¶·ÒFÓ"ɶ

/ 0 ’ _ M _ ]*” S P'OŒ%*\& / #E& + <«-* /  j %'#$-F)Î)^CDAE#E- / %'#:>=>0@?BA:

”4:“™FÈ ¹fÅB¶\·¶\¼LÃDƤ»F¾*À¹ÜµÁB‹Ì¶ÕÌ֌·E¹'ºÞÝ>É~ßUÔ¢àáÝI¶\¼¶·»*Ãd¶¾§É¤Â$¶ ½ Ï·E¹'º»QÒ*¼Œ¶ÏÀ ½²¿ Å4¹'â~¶\·€Ì“Ç€¼ãÇ ½ ¶›BO>%*AE#E-'b

/ 0 ’ _ P*PQM*R _ R4OŒ=>0@?4A:~Z&J: O T M _*_ M X P _ ” _*_ M4:

²äLå

æ~çDہ·¹Q¾*Á ½ ÏÀ¹*¼ÚÀ¦¼Ú¶*éI¶\Ðm»'¼¼[ÀÅaÀ«Â$»*ÏÀ¹*¼kÌ¢»*à ê ë ì•íaî*ï«ðñÝI¶[ò©O©Cˆ:©,-*)0k&Q ôóQõUö4÷ƒ: `k:¢È ¹'·€·¶\Â$»*Ãd¶¾Îæ~ç~è

T VI$#0^#0k&ˆ h—ø-F% j -*%'#$-F) X O0& / bg& _ P _ P _ RBP'O}=~0a?BA:;Z& : T M _*_ P X P*PQM _*_ ”

Y ²äLù

T æü ü £ O : W %¥¤Œ&ŠóQõ ö4÷ƒ: T VI$#0š#0&§ h— -F% j -*€%'#$-F) X O~0& / b R4:"úñ¶»'̀ÁB·E¶ºi¶\¼[à ¹¸iû

8 Y

ç ý þLÿ¡

¢

& ’ _*_*_ ` _*_ P'Oy H"14bPQ]*]f`kOŒ h— _*_ ’ ”4OL=~0a?BA: I&JL: O T M _*_*_ X _aS M _*_ R

Y Y ²ä§¦ DOUGLAS F. COWEN Departments of Physics and of Astronomy and Astrophysics Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802

Education: 1990 Ph.D., Physics, University of Wiconsin, Madison 1985 M.S., Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison 1983 B.S., Physics, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

Positions: 2002-present Associate Professor, Physics and Astronomy and Astrophysics, Pennsylvania State University 2001-2002 IceCube Project Science Coordinator, and Research Professor, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison 1994-2002 Assistant Professor, Physics, University of Pennsylvania 1993-1994 Senior Research Fellow, California Institute of Technology 1990-1993 Research Fellow, California Institute of Technology 1985-1990 Research Assistant, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Selected Awards:

National Science Foundation CAREER award, 1999-2003, University of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania State University.

Representative Recent Publications:

1. Search for Neutrino-Induced Cascades with the AMANDA Detector, J. Ahrens et al., Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 012003. 2. Search for Point Sources of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA, J. Ahrens et al., Astrophy. J. 583 (2003) 1040. 3. Observation of High Energy Atmospheric Neutrinos with the Antarctic Muon and Neutrino Detector Array, J. Ahrens et al., Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 012005. 4. Measurement of Day and Night Neutrino Energy Spectra at SNO, Q.R. Ahmad, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 011302. 5. Direct Evidence for Neutrino Flavor Transformation from Neutral Current Interactions in SNO, Q. R. Ahmad, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 011301. 6. Observation of High Energy Atmospheric Neutrinos with AMANDA, E. Andres, et al., Nature, 410 (2000) 441.

Michael Andrew DuVernois School of Physics and Astronomy Phone: (612) 624-6844 116 Church St. SE Fax: (612) 624-4578 University of Minnesota—Twin Cities E-Mail: [email protected] Minneapolis, MN 55455 URL: http://www.physics.umn.edu/~duvernoi/

RESEARCH EXPERIENCE 2000- Assistant Professor current School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN Research Focus: Experimental particle astrophysics • HEAT, HEAT-pbar, CREAM cosmic-ray balloon payloads • Pierre Auger Observatory for the highest energy cosmic rays • Detector and detector electronics research 1996- Research Associate (Prior to 9/99: Postdoctoral Research Fellow), Advisor: James J. Beatty 2000 Department of Physics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 1991- Graduate Research Assistant, Advisor: John A. Simpson 1996 Enrico Fermi Institute, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL Thesis: On the Galactic cosmic ray manganese EDUCATION Ph.D. Physics: University of Chicago, August 1996 M.S. Physics: University of Chicago, March 1995 B.S. Physics, with Highest Honors: Georgia Institute of Technology, June 1991 RECENT, RELEVANT ARTICLES “The elemental composition of the Galactic cosmic ray source: Ulysses high-energy telescope results,” M. A. DuVernois and M. R. Thayer. Ap.J., 465, 982 (1996)

“Comic ray measurement of the 54Mn b- partial half-life,” M. A. DuVernois. Phys. Rev. C., 54, R2134 (1996)

“The energy spectra and relative abundances of electrons and positrons in the Galactic cosmic radiation,” S. W. Barwick, J. J. Beatty, C. R. Bower, C. J. Chaput, S. Coutu, G. A. de Nolfo, M. A. DuVernois, D. Ellithorpe, D. Ficenec, J. Knapp, D. M. Lowder, S. McKee, D. Muller, J. A. Musser, S. L. Nutter, E. Schneider, S. P. Swordy, G. Tarle, A. D. Tomasch, and E. Torbet (HEAT Collaboration). Ap.J., 498, 779 (1998)

“Cosmic ray reentrant electron albedo: High-Energy Antimatter Telescope balloon measurements from Fort Sumner, New Mexico,” S. W. Barwick et al. (HEAT Collaboration). J.G.R., 103, No. A3, 4817 (1998)

Topics in cosmic-ray astrophysics, ed. M. A. DuVernois. Nova Science Press (Volume 230: Horizons in World Physics). New York (1999)

"Cosmic-ray positrons: Are there primary sources?" S. Coutu et al. (HEAT Collaboration). Astropart. Phys. 11, 429 (1999)

“Atmospheric muons,” S. Coutu et al. (HEAT Collaboration). Phys. Rev. D, 62, 032001 (2000)

“Cosmic ray electron and positron spectra from 1 to 100,” M. A. DuVernois et al. (HEAT Collaboration). In press, Ap.J. (2001) Curriculum Vita for Kurt M. Liewer

Jet Propulsion Laboratory Phone: (818) 354-4751 4800 Oak Grove Drive E-Mail: [email protected] m/s 238-600 PASADENA, CA 91109

EDUCATION: B.S. University of Washington (Physics). 1967 Ph.D. University of Maryland (Physics). 1974 Dissertation advisor: Douglas Currie

CURRENT POSITION: Principal Engineer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Formation Interferometer Testbed Architect, StarLight Project

EXPERIENCE:

• Active in all phases of design, construction and operation of the StarLight Project Formation Interferometer Testbed. Primary expertise is in the areas of optics (interferometry), mechanics and CCD cameras.

• A co-investigator in the search for ultra-high energy neutrinos (Goldstone Lunar Ultra-high Energy neutrino Experiment, GLUE) using Deep Space Network (DSN) radio telescopes.

• Ten years experience as System Engineer for the DSN Tracking and Very-long-baseline Interferometry (VLBI) Systems.

• Contributed extensively to bringing an 11-m radio antenna on line in support of the U.S. Space VLBI Project.

• Experience with microwave hardware, digital hardware, many programming languages and operating systems, data analysis.

• Considerable additional experience with system engineering and requirements definition.

• Eight years of experience with VLBI hardware, software and analysis.

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS:

1. "Radio Limits on as isotropic flux of >100 EeV neutrinos,"” P. W. Gorham, K. M. Liewer, C. J. Naudet, D. P. Saltzberg, and D. Williams, Proc. First Int. Workshop on Radio Detection of High Energy Particles (RADHEP 2000), UCLA, AIP Physics, (2001).

Curriculum Vitae Charles J. Naudet, Jr.

Correspondence Address: MS 238-700, Jet Propulsion Laboratory 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena CA. (818) 354-2053 (office) Email: [email protected] Professional: Manager of the Deep Space Tracking Systems Group, 2003- present Member of the Senior Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 1999-2003 Member of the Technical Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 1994-1999 Staff Scientist, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, 1986-1994

Education: B.S. Engineering Physics, 1979, University of Kansas M.A. Physics, 1983, Rice University, Thesis: A Monte Carlo Study of High Transverse Energy Triggers in pp Collisions at Plab=400 GeV/c. Ph.D Physics, 1986, Rice University, Thesis: A Study of Large Transverse Events in pp and πp Interactions at P lab=200 GeV/c and Evidence for Higher-Twist Effects.

Experience: Co-I on the KQ VLBI Survey Collaboration. This international collaboration has been formed with the objective of extending the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) to K-band and Q-band frequencies, extending the VLBA calibration source, and providing a candidate list for Ka-band observations with flux and structure variability that is suitable for navigational applications. Co-I on Kollaboration. This collaboration is formed between members of Japan’s Communication Research Laboratory and the Deep Space Tracking Systems group at JPL. The Kollaboration will have the objective of performing a detailed radio source survey at Ka-band and to produce the first celestial reference frame at Ka-band frequencies. CO-I on ANITA (ANtarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna) which was funded under NASA’s ROSS program. ANITA is a balloon borne radio Cherenkov instrument optimized for detection of radio frequency pulses created by ultra-high energy neutrinos interacting with the Antarctic’s ice fields. Co-I on the GLUE experiment (Goldstone Lunar Ultra-high Energy neutrino search), which received a “Caltech Presidents Research Grant” in fiscal 2000 and is currently close to acquiring over 120 hours of data at the DSN’s Goldstone complex. The Deep Space Network’s (DSN) Very Long Baseline Interferonomy (VLBI) lead system engineer, and the task manager and Science Service Engineer for the DSN’s VLBI element.

Selected Publications: “Evidence for Higher-Twist Effects in 200 GeV/c πp Collisions”, The E609 collaboration (C.J. Naudet et. al.), Physical Review Letters 56 (1986) 808.

“Threshold Behavior of Electron Pair Production in P+Be Collisions”, The DLS collaboration (C.J. Naudet et.al.), Phys. Rev. Lett 62, (1989) 2652.

“Limits on Cosmic ZeV Neutrino fluxes from the Goldstone Lunar Ultra-high Energy neutrino Experiment”, P.W. Gorham, K.M. Liewer, C.J. Naudet, D. Saltzberg, and D. Williams, to be submitted to Physical Review Letters.

ïëa GëBAf T†ôI†àr =;s;2 |vâoAôo2 =¢_Äí ZíAB†¢oA9â2 Ç3ùb< 4;T;2 |vâoAôo2 ZíAB†¢oA9â _m dëovAí89_í2 Ç3jÇ< |v;G;2 ZíAB†¢oA9â _m dëovAí89_í2 Ç3jå;

ï^a sõõ_Aí9U†í9or soo_ôAë9† |¢_m†oo_¢2 ZíAB†¢oA9â _m G†àëÄ뢆2 NEEEqõ¢†o†í9< soo_ôAë9† |¢_m†oo_¢2 =ë¢q 9_à á†o†ë¢ôv óío9A9w9† Ç33åqNEEE< sooAo9ëí9 |¢_m†oo_¢2 =ë¢9_à á†o†ë¢ôv óío9A9w9†2 Ç3jjqÇ33å< |_o9 G_ô_9¢ëà á†o†ë¢ôv soo_ôAë9†2 ZíAB†¢oA9â _m zëàAm_¢íAë ë9 Tëí9ë z¢wV2 Ç3jñ ëíf Ç3jùqÇ3jj< |ëAf soo_ôAë9†2 èv†_¢â GABAoA_í2 zÉát2 Ç3jb< |_o9 G_ô9_¢ëà á†o†ë¢ôv soo_ôAë9†2 èv†_¢†9Aôëà so9¢_õvâoAôo é¢_wõ2 P†¢UAàë^2 Ç3jåq Ç3jñ;

ïôÇa PAB† õw^àAôë9A_ío ¢†à†Bëí9 9_ ¢†o†ë¢ôv õ¢_õ_oëàr Ç; ukAUA9o _í 9v† Zà9¢ëqYA8v É톢8â ïZYÉa Éà†ô9¢_í t†w9¢Aí_ PàwJ m¢_U 9v† áózÉ ÉJõ†¢AU†í9?2 ó; û¢ëBôv†íI_ †9 ëà;2 Aí õ¢†oo2 so9¢_õë¢9; |vâo; N; uz_v†¢†í9 áëfA_ |wào†o P¢_U éÉstè é†í†¢ë9†f Éà†ô9¢_Uë8í†9Aô Tv_Ć¢o óí óô†?2 T; áëVVëgw†2 T; T†wíë¢Aí†2 G;5; =†oo_í2 G;d; 4ôûëâ2 c;|; áëào9_í2 ëíf G; T†ôI†à2 |vâo á†B Gbñ2 ÇEåEEN ïNEENa; å; u|¢_õë8ë9A_í _m 4w_ío ëíf èëwo ë9 YA8v É톢8A†o?2 T; ó↢ Gw99ë2 4; Y; á†í_2 ó; Të¢ô†BAô ëíf G; T†ôI†à2 |vâo á†B Gbå2 E3XENE ïNEEÇa; X; ut†w9¢Aí_o m¢_U õ¢_õë8ë9A_í _m wà9¢ëqvA8v †í†¢8â õ¢_9_ío?2 á; Éí8†à2 G; T†ôI†à ëíf è; T9ëí†B2 |vâo á†B GbX2 E3åEÇE ïNEEÇa; ñ; uG†9†ô9Aí8 ZYÉ í†w9¢Aí_o ïç â ÇEÇj†òa ÄA9v ë àë¢8† ¢ëfA_ 뢢ëâ?2 G; T†ôI†à ëíf é; P¢Aôv9†¢2 YÉ b;å;ÇN2 |¢_ô; üüòó óí9; z_oUAô áëâ z_ím; Tëà9 këI† zA9â2 Z9ëv ïÇ333a;

ïôNa PAB† ëffA9A_íëà õw^àAôë9A_íor Ç; us 4†ëow¢†U†í9 _m 9v† PàwJ _m z_oUAô áëâ ó¢_í ë9 ñ ÇEÇå †ò?2 c; zà†U2 d; G¢_†8†2 |;s; ÉB†ío_í2 Y; PAoôv†¢2 é; 领†í2 G; Yw^†¢2 Y; ûwí_Ä2 ëíf G; T†ôI†à2 so9¢_õë* ¢9; |vâo; Çb2 åjùqå3ñ ïNEENa; N; ut†w9¢Aí_qõv_9_í ¢†ëô9A_ío Aí ëo9¢_õvâoAôo ëíf ô_oU_à_8â?2 G; T†ôI†à2 |vâo; á†B; k†99; jE2 3EE ïÇ3jja; å; uG†9†ô9A_í _m z_oUAô Gë¢I 4ë99†¢?2 c; |¢AUëôI2 G; T†ôI†à2 ëíf =; Tëf_wà†92 síí; á†B; twô; |ë¢9; TôA; åj2 ùñÇ ïÇ3jja; X; u=_wífo _í ÉJ_9Aô |ë¢9Aôà† óí9†¢ëô9A_ío m¢_U Tt Ç3jùë?2 é; áëC†à9 ëíf G; T†ôI†à2 |vâo; á†B; k†99; bE2 Çù3å ïÇ3jja; ñ; uèv† Tvëf_Ä d_¢àf _m Twõ†¢o9¢Aí8 èv†_¢A†o?2 É;d; û_à^2 G; T†ôI†à ëíf 4;T; èw¢í†¢2 të9w¢† åÇX2 XÇñ ïÇ3jña;

ïfa Tâ톢8Ao9Aô sô9ABA9A†or k_ôëà >w9¢†ëôvr õ¢†o†í9ë9A_ío ë9 uYA8v Tôv__à |vâoAôo Gëâ?2 uTõëô† Gëâ?2 à_ôëà †à†U†í9ë¢â oôv__ào2 z†í9†¢ m_¢ kAm†à_í8 k†ë¢íAí8< cwf8† m_¢ TôA†íô† >àâUõAôo;

ï†a z_ààë^_¢ë9_¢o ëíf >9v†¢ s{àAë9A_íor ïAa z_ààë^_¢ë9_¢or c; sàB뢆V2 T; =뢢2 s; =†ëí2 G; =†oo_í ïáózÉa2 c; zà†U2 d; G¢_†8†2 á; Éí8†à2 |; ÉB†ío_í ï=szYa2 é; P¢Aôv9†¢2 è; éëAoo†¢2 |; é_¢vëU ïstóèsa2 P; YëàV†í ïóô†zw^†a2 d; 4ë99vë†wo2 G; 4ôûëâ2 é; áëC†à92 c; áëào9_í2 4;Y; á†í_2 ó; Të¢ô†BAô2 é; TõAôVëI2 è; T9ëí†B; ïAAa é¢ëfwë9† ëíf |_o9qG_ô9_¢ëà sfBAo_¢or s; 5†† ï9v†oAoa2 É; û_à^2 c; ÉààAo2 c; |¢AUëôI ïõ_o9f_ô9_¢ëàa ïAAAa èv†oAo sfBAo_¢ ëíf |_o98¢ëfwë9† Tôv_àë¢ Tõ_ío_¢r PAB† â†ë¢or é†_¢8† P¢Aôv9†¢ ïõ_o9f_ô9_¢ëà oôv_àë¢a< T9wf†í9 è_9ëà Ç< |_o9f_ô9_¢ëà è_9ëà Ç; Gary S. Varner

1. Professional Preparation: Boston University Electrical Engineering B.S.E.E. 1989 Boston University Physics M.A. 1995 University of Hawaii Physics Ph.D. 1999

Appointments:

2002-present: Director, Univ. of Hawaii Instrumentation Development Laboratory 2000-2002: Principal Engineer/Sr. Scientist, AOptix Technologies 1998-2000: Electrical Engineer/Researcher, University of Hawaii 1997-1998: Visiting Project Engineer, CERN & LIP, Portugal 1995-1997: Research Associate, University of Hawaii 1994-1995: Adjunct Professor, Wentworth Institute of Technology 1993-1995: Senior Electrical Engineer/Physicist, Boston University 1992-1993: Physics Design Engineer, Boston Univ & SSC Laboratory

Awards & Recognition: Research Fellowship, Laboratory of Instrumentation and Particles, Portugal 1997. R&D 100 Award for development of Time Stretcher circuit, 1997. Electronics Coordinator, LHC ATLAS MDT Muon subsystem, CERN, 1994. Coordinator, Cathode Strip Chamber anode subsystem, SSCL GEM detector, 1993. Soldier of the Cycle, Nuclear Biological & Chemical Warfare School, US Army, 1985.

Selected Publications : Varner, G. et al., "Silicon Pixel Detector R&D for a Beam Profile Monitor," Taipei 2000, Asian Pacific Physics Conference, APPC 2000 572-577. Varner, G. et al., "The Belle TOF System," Nucl. Instr. Meth. A453:315-320,2000. Varner, G. and Sahu, SK "Pixel Detectors in a B Factory Environment and Thoughts on Use in Belle," 2nd Workshop on Backgrounds at Machine Detector Interface 162-180, 1997. Varner, G. et al., "A Deadtimeless Multihit TDC for the new g-2 Experiment," 4th International Conference on Electronics for Future Colliders 223-232, 1994.

Selected Patents:

"A Monolithic Charge Integrating Wavefront Sensor Readout", patent rights held AOptix Tech

"An Integrated Charge Pump HV Bi-morph Mirror Driver", patent rights held AOptix Tech 8 APPENDICES 63

8.4 Draft International Participation investigators known to be working in this field. Plan/Compliance with Export Rules. Once preliminary confirmation was given, the There is no international participation in the PI and Prof. Saltzberg then both contacted the ANITA Mission at this time and none is en- spokesmen of the two major U.S. neutrino ob- visioned in the future. However, the proposal servatories in operation or planning stages, Prof. team is cognizant of the issues delineated in the Barwick of the AMANDA, and Prof. Halzen of AO regarding compliance with U.S. export laws IceCube. and regulations. Specifically, the U.S. Interna- When both of these investigators endorsed tional Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the project, The PI then requested their recom- Export in Arms Regulations (EAR) will be care- mendations for a potential science team, based fully followed in all instances where they apply on several factors: to the ANITA Mission. • The need for significant and diverse bal- 8.5 Assignment of Technical Respon- loon expertise on the project. sibilities between US and International • Credible experience and recognition in ei- ANITA has no international par- Partners. ther high energy cosmic ray astrophysics or ticipation at present. No assignment of respon- high energy neutrino astrophysics. sibilities is necessary. (See previous item). • Availability and willingness to participate 8.6 Orbital Debris Generation Ac- and make a significant contribution. knowledgment Statement. ANITA will not launch any material into orbit. No further Prof. Barwick then proceeded to informally statement is necessary. publicize the opportunity for science team par- ticipation among attendees of the International 8.7 NASA PI proposal team infor- Cosmic Ray Conference in Hamburg, Germany mation. Because the Principal Investigator in mid-August. This meeting, which occurs ev- maintains a joint status with both JPL and the ery other year, is the premier conference in the University of Hawaii, we provide here a de- field of high energy cosmic rays and neutrinos, scription of the process by which the non- and thus provided an ideal venue to inform and Governmental members of the proposing team assess the interest of potential participants. were included. The present size of the (non-JPL) participat- The ANITA concept developed very quickly ing team, with twelve members in addition to the based on discussions that arose originally out of PI, achieves an appropriate balance in which all the RADHEP 2000 conference held at UCLA in of the members will have opportunities to make November 2000. At that meeting the concept important contributions without any excessive of a balloon experiment over Antarctic ice was burden. first informally presented. The concept was not The Principal Investigator has no personal fi- further developed or discussed after that time, nancial interest in any aspect of the proposed in- butlater, after encouragement by JPL manage- vestigation for ANITA, including all hardware ment, the concept was revisited in early summer and software development, ground data systems, of 2001. After the results from adaptation of the or any other proposed work. The PI is therefore modeling codes discussed above indicated sig- aware of no conflict of interest, potential or real, nificant promise for the idea, the PI asked for in his involvement with the ANITA project. independent confirmation from a collaborator (Prof. Saltzberg) who was one of the few other 8 APPENDICES 64

8.8 Abbreviations & Acronyms LoE Letter of Endorsement LPZZ Log-periodic zig-zag antenna ABOVE Antarctic Balloon Observatory MDF Minimum detectable flux Virtual Explorer MBH Massive Black Hole ADC Analog-to-digital converter NESTOR Neutrino Extended Submarine Telescope AGNActive Galactic Nuclei with Oceanographic Research AMANDA Antarctic Muon and Neutrino NSBF National Scientific Balloon Facility Detector Array OWLOptical Wide-area Light-collectors ANITA Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna OSS Office of Space Science AO Announcement of Opportunity PeV Peta-electron volt (1015 eV) ATAAllen Telescope Array PI Principal investigator AWAArgonne Wakefield Accelerator PM Project Manager CBE Current Best Estimate PV Photo-Voltaic CHICOS California High School Cosmic-ray RAND Radio Antarctic Neutrino Detector Observatory RF Radio frequency CMBR Cosmic Microwave Background RFI Radio frequency Interference radiation RICE Radio Ice Cherenkov Experiment CSU California State University SCA Switched Capacitor array CV Curriculum vita SEU Structure and Evolution of the Universe DAC Digital-to-analog converter SIP Support Instrument package DAQData acquisition SK Super-Kamiokande EAR Export in Arms Regulations SLAC Stanford Linear Accelerator Center EDCATS Education Program Data Collection SMEX Small Explorer and Evaluation System SNO Sudbury Neutrino Observatory EeV Exa-electron volt (1018 eV) SNR Signal to noise ratio EMI Electromagnetic interference SR&T Space Research and Technology EMP Electromagnetic pulse SW Software EP/0 Education and Public Outreach TD Topological Defect EUSO Extreme Universe Space Observatory TDRSS Telemetry data recovery FORTE Fast On-orbit Recording of Transient satellite system Events TEKR Teacher Education K-12 Relations FY Fiscal Year TeV Tera-electron volt (1012 eV) GLUE Goldstone Lunar ultra-high energy TIGER Trans-Iron Galactic Element Recorder neutrino Experiment TLM Telemetry GPS Global Positioning System UHF Ultra-High Frequency GZK Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin ULDB Ultra-long duration balloon HDPE High density polyethylene UT Universal time HK Housekeeping VHF Very High Frequency HMSC Historically Minority Serving Campus WB Waxman-Bahcall HOPA Hawaii Observatory for Particle WBS Work Breakdown Structure Astrophysics XRB X-ray Binary IF Intermediate frequency ISS International Space Station ITAR International Traffic in Arms Regulations JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory LISA Laser Interferometer Space Array LNA Low-noise amplifier LDB Long-duration balloon REFERENCES 65

8.9 References [10] P. Argyres, S. Dimopoulos, & J. March- References Russell, Phys. Lett. B 441, 96, (1998). [1] “First Results from KamLAND: Evidence for Reactor Anti-Neutrino Disappear- [11] R. Emparan, G. T. Horowitz, & R. C. ance,” The KamLAND Collaboration, Myers, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85, 499, 2000. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 021802.

[12] S. Dimopolous, & G. Landsberg, Phys. [2] K. Mannheim, R.J. Protheroe, J.P. Rachen Rev. Lett. 87, 161602-1, 2001. Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 023003.

[3] E. Waxman and J. Bahcall Phys.Rev. D 59 [13] S. B. Giddings & S. Thomas, Phys. Rev. (1999) 023002, and followup in Phys.Rev. D, 65, 056010-1, 2002. D 64 (2001) 023002. [14] J. L. Feng & A. D. Shapere, Phys. Rev. [4] See for example, V. Berezinsky et al. Lett. 88, 021303-1, 2002. Astrophysics of Cosmic Rays, p352, 357, 358, (North Holland, Elsevier) (1990). [15] J. Alvarez-Muniz,˜ J. L. Feng, F. Halzen, T. Han, & D. Hooper, hep-ph/0202081, 2002. [5] K. Greisen, ”End to the Cosmic Ray Spec- trum?,” Phys. Rev Lett. 16,748 (1966). [16] Scarsi, L. et al., 1999, Proc. 26th Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., eds. Kieda, Dingus & [6] G.T. Zatsepin and V. A. Kuz’min, JETP Salamon, (Univ. Utah: Salt Lake City) vol Letters 4,78(1966). 2, 384.

[7] R. Engel, D. Seckel, & T. Stanev, ”Neu- [17] “Extreme Universe Space Observatory - trinos from propagation of ultra-high EUSO: an innovative project for the de- energy protons,” 2001, Bartol Research tection of extreme energy cosmic rays Institute Report Number BA-01-01 and neutrinos,” O. Catalano, Il Nuovo Ci- (astro-ph/0101216) and references therein mento, Vol.24-C, N.3, pp.445-470, 2001; provides a recent comprehensive summary “EUSO - Extreme Universe Space Obser- of the GZK neutrino connection. vatory,” O. Catalano, M.C. Maccarone, B. Sacco, L. Scarsi, Proc. 27th ICRC, Ham- [8] N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, & G. burg,Germany, August 2001, Copernicus Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998). Gesellschaft, Vol.HE, pp.835-838, 2001; see also other technical papers on EUSO in the same volume. [9] I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Di- mopoulos, & G. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 436, [18] G. A. Askaryan, JETP 14, 441 (1962); 257 (1998). also JETP 21, 658 (1965). REFERENCES 66

[19] P. W. Gorham, K. M. Liewer, C. J. Naudet, [25] S. Yoshida, G. Sigl, S. Lee, Phys. Rev. D. P. Saltzberg, and D. Williams, ”Radio Lett. 81, 5505 (1998). limits on an isotropic flux of ≥ 100 EeV cosmic neutrinos,” Proc. RADHEP 2000, ed. D. Saltzberg & P. Gorham, [26] G. Sigl, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 87, (Amer. Inst. Phys. press), in press, (2001); 439-441 (2000). astro-ph/0102435. [27] D. J. Bird et al.,”Evidence for Correlated Changes in the Spectrum and Composition [20] J. Linsley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 146 (1963); of Cosmic Rays at Extremely High Ener- see also Proc. of the Int’l Cosmic Ray con- gies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3401 (1993); H. ference, Jaipur 1963, ed. R. Daniel et al., Hayashida et al., Ap. J. 522, 225 (1999); (Commercial Press, Bombay), vol. IV, 77. C. C. H. Jui et al., 26th International Cos- mic Ray Conference Invited, Rapporteur, [21] J. V. Jelley et al.,Nature 205, 327 (1965); and Highlight papers (AIP Conf. Proc Nuovo Cimento A46, 649 (1966); N. A. 516), 370 (2000). Porter et al.,Phys. Lett. 19, 415 (1965); S. N. Vernov et al.,Pis’mavZhETF 5, 157 (1967) [Sov. Phys.–JETP Letters 5, [28] T Stanev, et al.,”The Arrival directions 126 (1967)]; Can. J. Phys. 46,S241 of the most energetic cosmic rays,” Phys. (1968); P. R. Barker, W. E. Hazen, and A. Rev. Lett. 75, 3056 (1995); N. Hayashida Z. Hendel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18,51(1967); et al., ”Possible Clustering of the Most W. E. Hazen, et al., ibid. 22,35(1969); Energetic Cosmic Rays Within a limited 24, 476 (1970); D. Fegan & N. A. Porter, Space Angle Observed by the Akeno Nature, 1968; H. R. Allan, in Progress Giant Air Shower Array,” Phys. Rev. Lett. in Elementary Particles and Cosmic Ray 77, 1000 (1996). Physics,v.10, edited by J. G. Wilson and S. G. Wouthuysen (North-Holland, [29] A. Kusenko & M. Postma, ”Neutrinos Amsterdam, 1971), p. 171, and references produced by ultrahigh-energy photons therein. at high red shift,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1430, (2001); G. Gelmini, & A. Kusenko, ”Unstable superheavy relic particles as [22] Radio Detection of High Energy Parti- asource of neutrinos responsible for the cles,Proceedings of the First International ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays,” Phys. Rev. Workshop, 2000, Los Angeles, CA, Edi- Lett. 84, 1378 (2000). tors: D. Saltzberg, P. Gorham, American Institute of Physics Press, New York, AIP Conf. Proc. 579. [30] C.T. Hill and D, N. Schramm, ”Ultrahigh- energy cosmic-ray spectrum,” Phys. Rev. [23] A. Muecke, R.J. Protheroe, Astropart. D 31,564 (1985); F.W. Stecker, ”Effect of Phys. 15, 121 (2001). Photomeson Production by the Universal Radiation Field on High-Energy Cosmic Rays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 1016-1018 [24] R. J. Protheroe, & T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. (1968). Lett.77,3708. REFERENCES 67

[31] see the link at 10, 303 (1999); N. Hayashida, et. al., http://universe.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Astrophys. J. 522 225 (1999).

[32] G. R. Farrar and T. Piran, Phys. Rev. Lett. [40] T.Abu-Zayyad, at. al.,”Measurement of 84, 3527 (2000). the Cosmic Ray Energy Spectrum and Composition from 1017 to 1018.3 eV Using aHybrid Fluorescence Technique”, Astro- [33] E. Waxman, Phys. rev Lett. 75, 386 phys. J. 557, 686 (2001).// (1995). [41] J. G. Learned, & K. Mannheim, ”High Energy Neutrino Astrophysics,” Ann Rev. [34] S. D. Wick, T.W. Kephart, T. J. Weiler Nucl.Part. Sci. 50, 679-749, (2000) is an astro-ph/0102002. excellent recent review on this topic.

[35] G. Sigl, S. Lee, P. Bhattacherjee, and S. [42] The Auger Collaboration, The Yoshida, Phys. Rev. D 59,43504 (1999); Pierre Auger Project Design Report, P. Bjhattacherjee, C.T. Hill, and D. N. FERMILAB-PUB 96-024 (1996). Schramm, Phys. Rev. Lett 69, 567 (1992); J. Ellis, 26th International Cosmic Ray Conference Invited, Rapporteur, and [43] T. Aoki et al., Proc. 26th International Highlight papers (AIP Conf. Proc 516), 21 Cosmic Ray Conference,Salt Lake City, (2000); M. Birkel and S. Sakar, Astropar- Utah 5, 352 (1999). ticle Physics 9, 297 (1998); V. Berezinsky and A. Mikhailov, Phys. Lett B 449, 237 [44] “Accelerator Measurements of the (1999). Askaryan Effect in Rock Salt: Towards Teraton Neutrino Detectors”, P. W. [36] D. J. H. Chung, G.R Farrar, and E. W. Gorham, D. Saltzberg, C. Field, G. Guil- Kolb, Phys. rev.D57, 4606 (1998); S. lian, D. Walz, E. Zas, J. Alvarez-Muniz, R. Yoshida, G. Sigl, and S. Lee, Phys. rev. Milincic, C. J. Naudet, and D. Williams, Lett. 81, 5505 (1998); D.B. Cline and F.W. in prep. for Physical Review D, 2003. Stecker, astro-ph/0003459 [45] D. Seckel, ”In ice radio detection of GZK neutrinos”, RADHEP-2000; astro- [37] T. J. Weiler, Astropart. Phys. 11, 303 ph/0103300. (1999). [46] Peter Gorham, David Saltzberg, Allen [38] T. Kifune, Ap. J. Lett.518,L21 (1999). Odian, Dawn Williams, David Besson, George Frichter, Sami Tantawi, ”Measure- ments of the Suitability of Large Rock [39] see AGASA contributions to 27th ICRC, Salt Formations for Radio Detection of Hamburg 2001 (in press 2001); M. Takeda, High Energy Neutrinos”, to be submitted et. al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1163 (1998); to Nucl. Inst. and Meth.;hep-ex/0108027. N. Hayashida, et. al., Astropart.Phys. REFERENCES 68

[47] see D. Seckel, op. cit. [56] Resvanis LK, et al (NESTOR Collabora- tion). Proc. Workshop High Energy Neu- [48] V. V. Bogorodsky, C. R. Bentley, & P.E. trino Astrophys., Honolulu, March 23–26, Gudmandsen, Radioglaciology,(D.Rei- ed. VJ Stenger, JG Learned, S Pakvasa, X del: Dordrecht, Holland), (1985). Tata, pp. 325–53. Singapore: World Sci. (1992); Sotiriou S. Proc. Rencontres de [49] M. Markov & I. Zheleznykh,”Large scale Blois, 8th, Chateau de Blois, France, June Cherenkov detectors in ocean, atmosphere 8–12, ed. T Stolarczyk, J Tran Thanh Van, and ice,” Nucl. Instr. Meth. A 248, 242 FVannucci, p. 305. Ed. Frontieres` (1996), (1986). http://www.uoa.gr/nestor/intro.html˜

[57] J. Alvarez-Muniz and F. Halzen, ”1020 [50] I. M. Zheleznykh, 1988 Proc. Neutrino eV Cosmic Ray and Particle Physics with ‘88,World Scientific, Boston, ed. J. IceCube”, 1st International Workshop on Schreps, 528. Radio Detection of High Energy Particles (RADHEP-2000), UCLA, November 2000;astro-ph/0102106. [51] R. D. Dagkesamansky, & I. M. Zheleznykh, JETP Lett. 50, 233 (1989). [58] P. W. Gorham, D. P. Saltzberg, P. Schoessow, et al., ”Radio-frequency [52] E. Zas, F. Halzen, and T. Stanev, measurements of coherent transition and Phys. Rev. D 45, 362 (1992). Cherenkov radiation: Implications for high-energy neutrino detection,” Phys. Rev. E 62, 8590, (2000); hep-ex/0004007. [53] J. Alvarez-Muniz˜ & E. Zas, ”Prospects for radio detection of extremely high energy cosmic rays and neutrinos in the Moon,” [59] D. Saltzberg, P. Gorham, D. Walz, et Proc. RADHEP 2000, ed. D. Saltzberg & al., ”Observation of the Askaryan Effect: P. Gorham, (Amer. Inst. Phys. press), in Coherent Microwave Cherenkov Emission press, (2001); astro-ph/0102173. from Charge Asymmetry in High Energy Particle Cascades,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2802 (2001); hep-ex/0011001. [54] Gary C. Hill, for the AMANDA Col- laboration, Proceedings of the XXXVIth Recontres de Moriond, Electroweak [60] T. Hankins, R. Ekers, & J. D. O’SUllivan, Interactions and Unified Theories, March MNRAS 283, 1027 (1996). 2001;astro-ph/0106064.

[61] P. W. Gorham, K. M. Liewer, C. J. Naudet, [55] Basa S, et al (ANTARES Collaboration). ”Initial Results from a Search for Lunar Proc. Texas Symp. Relativistic Astrophys. Radio Emission from Interactions of and Cosmol., 19th, Paris, France, Dec. ≥ 1019 eV Neutrinos and Cosmic Rays,” 14–18,ed. J Paul, T Montmerle, E Proc. 26th ICRC, v2, 479, (1999). Aubourg (1998), http://antares2.in2p3.fr/ [62] N. S. Soboleva, ”Measurement of the to JGR (2001). polarization of lunar radio emission on a wavelength of 3.2 cm”, Soviet astronomy - AJ, 6 (6), 873, (1963); C. E. Heiles and F. [68] N. Lehtinen, P. Gorham, A. Jacobson, and D. Drake, ”The polarization and intensity R. Roussel-Dupre, (2003) Proc. SPIE Con- of thermal radiation from a planetary ference Part. Astroph. Instrumentation, in surface”, Icarus 2, 281 (1963). press. [69] J. Madey, personal communication, 2003. [63] Baltrusaitas, R.M., Cassiday, G.L., Elbert, [70] G. Smoot, personal communication, 2001. J.W., et al., Phys. Rev. D 31, 2192 (1985). [71] W. Imbriale, pers. commun. (2001).

[64] G. R. Olhoeft & D. W. Strangway, Earth [72] “A Measurement of the Flux of Cos- Plan. Sci. Lett. 24, 394 (1975). mic Ray Iron at 5 × 1013 eV,” J. Clem, W. Droege, P.A. Evenson, H. Fischer, [65] A. R. Jacobson, S. O. Knox, R. Franz, G. Green, D. Huber, H. Kunow, and D. &D.C.Enemark, ”FORTE observations Seckel, Submitted to Astroparticle Phys., of lightning radio-frequency signatures: 2000. Capabilities and basic results,” Radio [73] T. Takahashi, Y. Shibata, K. Ishi, et al., Science 34, 337, (1999); D. C. Enemark, ”Observation of coherent Cherenkov &M.E.Shipley, ”The FORTE receiver radiation from a solid dielectric with short and sub-band triggering unit,” Eighth bunches of electrons,” Phys. Rev. E 62, Ann. Am. Inst. of Aeronautics and As- 8606 (2000). tronautics, Utah State Univ. Conf. on Small Satellites, Logan, UT, 1994; Much information on FORTE can be gathered [74] T. Takahashi, Y. Shibata, F. Arai, et al., from http://forte.lanl.gov ”Coherent transition radiation at sub- millimeter and millimeter wavelengths,” Phys. Rev. E 48, 4674 (1993). [66] A.R. Jacobson, pers. communication, (2001).

[67] A. R. Jacobson, K. L. Cummins, M. Carter, et al., ”FORTE radio-frequency observations of lightning strokes detected by the National Lightning Detection Network,” JGR 105, 15, 653 (2000); R. Roussel-Dupre,´ & A. V. Gurevich, ”On runaway breakdown and upward propagating discharges,” JGR 101, 2297 (1996); A. V. Gurevich, K. P. Zybin, and R. Roussel-Dupre,´ ”Lightning Initiation by simultaneous effect of runaway break- down and cosmic ray showers,” submitted

69