Arxiv:1711.02643V2 [Astro-Ph.HE] 12 Nov 2017 Interactions and the Properties of Cosmic Rays

Recent results from the KASCADE-Grande cosmic-ray experiment — Test of hadronic interaction models with air-shower data

Jorg¨ R. Horandel¨ j, W.D. Apela, J.C. Arteaga-Velazquezb, K. Bekka, M. Bertainac, J. Blumer¨ a,d, H. Bozdoga, I.M. Brancuse, E. Cantonic,f,n, A. Chiavassac, F. Cossavellad,o K. Daumillera, V. de Souzag, F. Di Pierroc, P. Dolla, R. Engela, D. Fuhrmannh,p, A. Gherghel-Lascue, H.J. Gilsa, R. Glasstetterh, C. Grupeni, A. Haungsa D. Hecka, D. Huberd, T. Huegea, K.-H. Kamperth, D. Kangd, H.O. Klagesa, K. Linkd, P. Luczakk, H.J. Mathesa, H.J. Mayera, J. Milkea, B. Mitricae, C. Morellof , J. Oehlschlager¨ a, S. Ostapchenkol, N. Palmierid, M. Petcue, T. Pieroga, H. Rebela, M. Rotha, H. Schielera, S. Schooa, F.G. Schroder¨ a, O. Simam, G. Tomae, G.C. Trincherof , H. Ulricha, A. Weindla, J. Wochelea, J. Zabierowskik

aInstitut fürKernphysik, KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany — bUniversidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo, Inst. Fisica y Matematicas, Morelia, Mexico — cDipartimento di Fisica, Universita degli Studi di Torino, Italy — dInstitut fürExperimentelle Kernphysik, KIT Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany — eHoria Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania — f Osservatorio Astrofisico di Torino, INAF Torino, Italy — gUniversidade Sao Paulo, Instituto de Fisica de Sao Carlos, Brazil — hFachbereich Physik, Universitat Wuppertal, Germany — iDepartment of Physics, Siegen University, Germany — jDepartment of Astrophysics/IMAPP, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands — kNational Centre for Nuclear Research, Department of Astrophysics, Lodz, Poland — lFrankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS), Frankfurt am Main, Germany — mDepartment of Physics, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania — nPresent address: Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologia, INRIM, Torino, Italy — oPresent address: DLR Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany — pPresent address: University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany

Cosmic rays provide an unique approach to study hadronic interactions at high energies in the kinematic forward direction. The KASCADE air shower experiment was the ﬁrst to conduct quantitative tests of hadronic interactions with air shower data. A brief overview is given on results from KASCADE and its extension KASCADE-Grande with respect to investigations of hadronic arXiv:1711.02643v2 [astro-ph.HE] 12 Nov 2017 interactions and the properties of cosmic rays.

PRESENTED AT

EDS Blois 2017, Prague, Czech Republic, June 26-30, 2017 Recent results from the KASCADE-Grande cosmic-ray experiment 1 IntroductionTest of hadronic interaction models with air shower data

primary cosmic-ray particle (type unknown) Cosmic rays are ionized atomic nuclei im- What should be measured at colliders? pinging on the atmosphere from outer multiplicity and energy flux at LHC 14TeV collisions √s=14TeV pseudo-rapidity; η= -ln(tan(θ/2)) space. Particles with energies exceeding 20 Mul$plicity** Energy*Flux* 10 eV have been measured, being the 17 Elab=10 eV highest-energy particles in nature[1, 2, 3]. All#par'cles 0

When they impingeX on the atmosphere they 30 interactions initiate cascades of secondary particles, the , neutral i (partly) extensive air showers (EASs). The atmo- 11 unknown sphere with a thickness of 30 radiation ≈ lengths or 11 hadronic interaction lengths ≈ acts as a calorimeter. Cosmic rays are an unique probe to study hadronic interactions Most#of#the#energy#flows#into#very#forward at energies well beyond the regime of human air shower detector at ground level made accelerators. The center of mass en- Figure 1: Multiplicity (left) and energy flux (right) in hadronic interactions as a function of ergy of the LHCJörg√ sR.= Hörandel 14 TeV correspondsRadboud University Nijmegen & Nikhef http://particle.astro.ru.nl 17 pseudorapidity. In addition, the coverage of de- to a laboratory energy of 10 eV, relevant tectors at the LHC is shown. RP refers to Roman for cosmic-ray studies. The multiplicity of Pots, ZDC means zero-degree calorimeter. secondary particles in (central) collissions peaks around pseudorapidity∗ values of η = 0. Thus, the main experiments e.g. at the LHC such as ATLAS and CMS cover these central regions up to η 7, see Fig. 1. How- ≈ ± ever, the energy flux exhibits maxima at pseudorapidity values around η 10. At the ≈ ± LHC this region is covered by specialized forward detectors such as LHCf or TOTEM. The region in the extreme forward direction η 10 is of great importance for the development ≈ ± of extensive air showers. Thus, cosmic rays and extensive air showers are used to study hadronic interactions at highest energies in the kinematic forward direction. The KASCADE air shower experiment was one of the first experiments to conduct quantitative studies of hadronic interactions with air shower data. In the following, a brief introduction to the KASCADE and KASCADE-Grande experiments is given. Followed by a review of results on hadronic interactions and the properties of cosmic rays.

2 The KASCADE-Grande experiment

The KASCADE-Grande [4] detector array was situated at the site of the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology KIT, Campus North, Germany (49◦N, 8◦E) at 110 m a.s.l. It had a roughly quadratical shape ( 700 700 m2) and it comprised a multi-detector system. Several types ≈ × of detectors enabled the measurement of diﬀerent air-shower observables. Historically, the KASCADE-Grande detector was an extension of a smaller array, KASCADE [5], which has been operated from 1996 on. KASCADE was a complex detector system aimed to clarify the origin of the knee in the energy spectrum of cosmic rays at a few 1015 eV. It was designed to

∗The pseudorapidity is deﬁned as η = − ln [tan(θ/2)], where θ is the angle between the primary particle (or the beam axis) and the secondary particle.

1 measure cosmic rays with energies between 1014 and 1016 eV, by simultaneously recording the electromagnetic, muonic, and hadronic shower components. A 200 200 m2 scintilla- Hadronic shower× core tor array recorded the electromagnetic and muonicE0 ~ 6 PeV (Eµ > 230 MeV) shower components.

Of particular interest for the study of Number of reconstructed hadrons Nh = 143 Eh > 50 GeV hadronic interactions was a 320 m2 hadronic sampling calorimeter (Eh > 20 GeV) with a total depth of 11 hadronic interaction lengths, interspaced with nine lay- ers of liquid ionization chambers [6], see Fig. 2. To extend the energy range up to 1018 eV was the motivation for the extension KASCADE-Grande, thereby focusing on the expected transition from Galactic 16 m to extragalactic cosmic rays in the energy 17 18 range 10 10 eV. The Grande array 20 m th − May 7 , 2002 9:45 comprised 37 detector stations with 10 m2 plastic scintillator each (formerly part of the Figure 2: Hadrons in the core of an air shower EAS TOP array [7]), which were arranged with an energy of 6 1015 eV measured with on a roughly hexagonal grid with a spacing the KASCADE hadron≈ · calorimeter. 143 individ- of about 140 m. KASCADE-Grande was in ual hadrons have been reconstructed with energies operation from 2003 until 2013, after which exceeding 50 GeV. it was dismantled. For most investigations, the number of electrons, muons, hadrons is of interest. These are obtained by sampling the corresponding particle densities and ﬁtting an empirical function to the particle densities as a functionHow of to distance disentangle to the shower unknown axis [8]. mass The integral under these functions gives the number of electrons, muons, and hadrons in an air shower, respectively. They are used in turncomposition to derive cosmic-ray and properties, unknown such interaction as the energy and mass/particle type of the incoming cosmic ray. properites? Method: •Measure correlation between air shower components 3 Test of hadronic interaction (electromagnetic, models muonic, hadronic) •Compare to predictions of hadronic interaction models The biggest challenge in using cosmic for extreme rays to assumptions investi- (p & Fe) gate hadronic interactions is theair fact shower that simulation: two properties are (partly) unknown: theCORSIKA precise mass composition of cosmic rays and the propertiesdetector simulation: of hadronic interactions at high energies inGEANT the forward 3 direction. To disentangle these problems, the following approach has been adopted [9, 10]: Cosmic rays com- prise all elements known from the periodic table (e.g. [11]). However, the abundancesJörg ofR. Hörandel elementsRadboud heavier University Nijmegen & Nikhef http://particle.astro.ru.nl Figure 3: Principal idea of the feasibil- than iron (Z > 26) are signiﬁcantly lower (by sev- ity check, see text. eral orders of magnitude) as compared to the elements with nuclear charge numbers Z up to 26 (hy-

2 Investigation of Hadronic Interaction Models with the KASCADE-Grande Hadron Calorimeter 127 )

] 3 2

2 tr 10 G 1600 KG data ( = 0° - 40°) I 3.75 < lg(Nm) < 4 (g/cm Eh > 100 GeV 0 µ 1400 GI [GeV/m 10 2 I E GI KASCADE 1200 r G QGSJET 01 GI GI 1000 10 GI -0.5 GI GI 800 GI (with composition) GI I G I 600 G I 1 G I I energy density G G . 400 0 5 10 15 4 4.5 5 tr 5QGSJET II-2 5.5QGSJET II-04 6SIBYLL 2.1 6.5 EPOS LHC 7 distance to shower core r [m] number of muons lg(Nm)

hadr Figure 2. For the simulation using QGSJET/GHEISHA a mass composition has been assumed (see text). Shown are hadron lateral distributions (left hand side) and the correlationFigurebetween 4:hadronLeft:number Number ofand hadronsmuon number at ground level(right as a function of the number of muons (integrated hand side). The shaded band indicates the error caused by the statisticalover a certainuncertainty distanceof the assumed range)mass in aircomposition. showers. The number of hadrons is given relative to the expectations of simulations with the model QGSJET 01, assuming a mass composition as measured with the electromagnetic and muonic detectors of KASCADE [12]. Right: Attenuation length of extent compatible with the measurements of the hadronic component and its correlation with electromagnetic muons in the atmosphere. Measurements are compared to predictions of post-LHC interaction and muonic particles. As example, on the left hand side of figure 1 the correlation between the most energetic models [13]. hadron and the number of muons is shown. The influence of the low-energy interaction model is demonstrated on the right hand side of figure 1. Shown are simulations using QGSJET as high-energy model anddrogen/protonsFLUKA and GHEISHA to iron).for Thus,low ener forgies. a feasibilityThe dif- test, it can be savely assumed that cosmic ference is caused by different number of muons predictedraysby the aremodel mostlycombinations. comprisedSince of elementsFLUKA frompredicts hydrogen/protons to iron. fewer muons than GHEISHA, a higher primary energy is neededUsingfor thethe extremasame muon protonsnumber andinterv ironal. nuclei,There- air shower simulations are conducted with the fore, the hadronic energy sum is increased. Due to thestandardenergy threshold tool CORSIKAfor the reconstructed [14], using ahadrons particularof model to describe the hadronic interactions. 100 GeV the hadronic component itself is not influencedTheby the particleslow-ener reachinggy model. groundIn addition, level areresults treatedfor a in a detailed detector simulation, based on SIBYLL/GHEISHA simulation are plotted. It can be seenthethat standardthe difference tool GEANTbetween the [15].high-ener Thisgy resultsmodels in predictions for the correlation between the is still larger than between different low-energy codes. different shower components: electromagnetic, muonic, and hadronic. These predictions are compared to measurements of such correlations. If the measurements are outside the range protons to iron, a particular hadronic interaction model is not able to describe the 3.2 Assuming a composition in the simulations air shower development consistently, see Fig. 3. This method has been pioneered by the KASCADE group about two decades ago [9, For a more detailed test of the interaction models one has to assume a mass composition in the simulation to 10]. Over time different hadronic interaction models used in air shower simulations have compare a single simulation curve with the measured distribution. This can be done consistently by taking a mass composition derived from other observables usingbeenthe same studiedcombination systematically.of low-energy Inand 1999high-ener the modelgy QGSJET 98 has been favoured over the models. In the following, compositions determined by anmodelsunfolding VENUSprocedure andof SIBYLLthe two-dimensional 1.6 [16]. In 2007- the models DPMJET II.55, QGSJET 01,and spectrum [2] are used to check, if the models canSIBYLLdescribe the 2.1hadronic have beenobserv foundables. in reasonable agreement with the air shower data, while NEXUS 2 exhibited incompatibilities [17]. In 2009 incompatibilities between EPOS 1.6 Results for the simulation using QGSJET/GHEISHA are shown in figure 2. On the left hand side an example and air shower data have been found [18] and the model QGSJET II.2 has turned out for a lateral distribution of the hadrons is plotted. The model prediction is steeper than the measured distribution. The correlation between hadron number and muontonumber describeis plotted the airon showerthe right datahand bestside. [19].For muon It has also been studied how the properties of numbers the simulation is rather below individualthe measurement. hadronicThis interactionsis compatible (suchwith a asconsis- the cross section or the multiplicity) affect the tency check for the unfolding of the - spectrum,overallwhich showershows developmentthat QGSJET [20].cannot describe the electron-muon data in this range consistently, while for largerThemuon massnumbers composition(respectiv ofely cosmicprimary raysenergies) as a function of energy as obtained from the the description becomes better. The situation for SIBYLL/GHEISHAmeasurementsis ofopposite. the electromagneticWhile for smaller andprimary muonic shower components (see next section) has energies the hadronic observables as well as the electron-muonbeen useddata toare conductreproduced specificrather well, air showerthere are simulationsdis- to predict the hadronic component crepancies at larger muon numbers. The left panel ofonfigure ground3 sho level.ws a good Quantitativeagreement studiesfor measured showand that the models QGSJET 01 and SYBILL 2.1 simulated hadron energy spectra. The correlation between the numbers of hadrons and muons (right hand side

3 predict the hadronic component with an accuracy of the order of 10% [12], see Fig. 4 left. This work helped to fine-tune the hadronic interaction models used in air shower simulations. When first LHC data became available, it was interesting to realize that the air-shower optimzed hadronic interaction models did quite well in describing the properties of the first LHC data [21, 22, 23]. More recenlty, also post-LHC hadronic interaction models have been confronted with air-shower data. The influence of current hadronic interaction models on the interpreta- tion of air shower data has been investigated [24]. The attenuation length of muons in the atmosphere has been measured and compared to post-LHC hadronic models such as QGSJET II 04, EPOS-LHC, and SIBYLL 2.1 [13]. While the models predict an attenuation length of the order of 700 to 850 g/cm2, the KASCADE-Grande measurements yield a significantly higher value between 1200 and 1300 g/cm2, see Fig. 4 right. It is interesting to note that at the Pierre Auger Observatory a similar effect has been observed at higher energies: more muons are measured as compared to the predictions of LHC-tuned models [25].

4 Properties of cosmic rays

Main objective of KASCADE and KASCADE-Grande is the measurement of the properties of cosmic rays, in particular to derive energy spectra for elemental groups in cosmic rays. The number of elec- W.D. Apel et al. / Astroparticle Physics 47 (2013) 54–66 63 trons and muons in 17 EAS-TOP (Astrop.Phys.10(1999)1) 10 Tibet-III, QGSJET 01 (ApJ678(2008)1165) GAMMA (ICRC 2011) ) IceTop (arXiv:1202.3039v1) an air shower are ob- TUNKA-133 (ICRC 2011) 1.5 Yakutsk (NewJ.Phys11(2008)065008) tained through inte- KASCADE-Grande, QGSJET II (Astrop.Phys.36(2012)183)

eV Akeno (J.Phys.G18(1992)423) AGASA (ICRC 2003) -1 HiResI (PRL100(2008)101101)

gration of the lat- s HiResII (PRL100(2008)101101)

-1 AUGER (arXiv:1107:4809) eral density distribu- AUGER AMIGA infill (ICRC 2011) sr 16 tion function, as de- -2 10 scribed above. Ap- / (m 2.5

E plying a simple Heit- · ler-type model, it can be seen that 1015

KASCADE, all-part., QGSJET II (see Appendix A) in the electron-muon KASCADE, light (p), QGSJET II (see Appendix A) KASCADE, medium (He+C+Si), QGSJET II (see Appendix A) KASCADE, heavy (Fe), QGSJET II (see Appendix A) number plane the KASCADE-Grande, all-part., QGSJET II (this work)

diff. flux dJ/dE KASCADE-Grande, light (p), QGSJET II (this work) KASCADE-Grande, medium (He+C+Si), QGSJET II (this work) showers are charac- KASCADE-Grande, heavy (Fe), QGSJET II (this work) terized by two axes, 1015 1016 1017 1018 an energy axis roughly primary energy E/eV alined alongFig. the 11. The main all-particle spectrum obtained in this work based on an unfolding of KASCADE-Grande measurements, and the spectrum obtained in [32] based on an unfolding of KASCADE measurements (see Appendix A), are compared to spectra determined by other analysis methods of our collaboration [10] or other experiments (see legend for diagonal andreferences). almost AdditionallyFigure shown are some5: elementalThe spectra all-particle representing different energy massspectrum groups (see legend). of The cosmic error bars denote rays. statistical In unc addi-ertainties, error bands the systematic ones (the latter ones are only shown for the results of this work, as well as for the results obtained by the alternative analysis methods of our collaboration [10]). perpendicular to it a tion, energy spectra for groups of elements are shown (protons/light blue, iron/heavy red), for details see [26]. mass axis8. [27, Summary 28]. and conclusion energy where the charge dependent knee of iron is expected, if the This illustrates, that knee at about 3 PeV to 5 PeV is assumed to be caused by a decrease The two-dimensional shower size spectrum of charged particles in the flux of light primaries (protons and/or helium). from the simultaneousand muons measured measurements with KASCADE-Grande of wasthe unfolded. electromagnetic Based However, and muonicthere is still components uncertainty about the whether the applied energy spectraon this for analysis, groups the energy of elements spectra for five can primaries be unfolded representing [29].interaction The KASCADE models, especially results the high indicate energy one QGSJET-II-02, the chemical composition of cosmic rays have been determined, as are valid in all the details. As demonstrated in [2], it is expected well as the all-particle spectrum which is the sum of the elemental that variations in the interaction models primarily affect the rela- spectra. For this analysis, the response matrix of the experiment tive abundances of the primaries, and hence assign possible struc- was computed based on the hadronic interaction models QGSJET- tures given in the data to different mass groups, while the II-02 [12,13] and FLUKA 2002.4 [14–16]. 4 structures themselves are rather model independent. Although it The all-particle spectrum, which suffers in this work from was shown that the interaction models used do not seem to exhibit uncertainties of the contributing elemental spectra and which is significant weaknesses in describing the data, more certainty can structureless within the given uncertainties, agrees with that be expected in the near future, when man-made particle accelera- determined in an alternative analysis of the KASCADE-Grande data tors like the LHC reach laboratory energies up to some hundred [10], where a small break-off at about 80 PeV was found.18 Further- PeV, and hence allow to optimize the interaction models in an en- more, both KASCADE-Grande all-particle spectra are compatible ergy range relevant for KASCADE-Grande. with the findings of most of the other experiments. The unfolded energy spectra of light and intermediate primaries Acknowledgements are rather featureless in the sensitive energy range. There are slight indications for a possible recovery of protons at higher energies, The author would like to thank the members of the engineering which is, however, statistically not significant. But, this finding and technical staff of the KASCADE-Grande collaboration, who con- would agree with the one in [31] where a significant hardening tributed to the success of the experiment. The KASCADE-Grande in the cosmic ray spectrum of light primaries was observed. experiment is supported by the BMBF of Germany, the MIUR and The spectrum of iron exhibits a clear knee-like structure at INAF of Italy, the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education, about 80 PeV. The position of this structure is consistent with that and the Romanian Authority for Scientific Research UEFISCDI (PNII- of a structure found in spectra of heavy primaries determined by IDEI grants 271/2011 and 17/2011). other analysis methods of the KASCADE-Grande data [3]. The energy where this knee-like structure occurs conforms to the one Appendix A. KASCADE data unfolding based on QGSJET-II where the break-off in the all-particle spectrum is observed. Hence, the findings in this work and in [3] demonstrate the first time In Fig. 11, the results obtained by an unfolding analysis applied experimentally that the heavy knee exists, and the kink in the to air showers measured with the KASCADE experiment [8] in the all-particle spectrum is presumably caused by this decrease in zenith angle range of 0 to 18 are depicted. In this appendix, we the flux of heavy primaries. The spectral steepening occurs at an will discuss briefly the main findings of the corresponding analysis, while details can be found in [32]. The analysis is based on the same method of data unfolding and the same hadronic interaction 18 In the energy range from 1 PeV to some hundred PeV, this break-off in the all- particle spectrum is the second one besides the one at about 3 PeV to 5 PeV reported models (QGSJET-II-02 [12,13] and FLUKA 2002.4 [14–16]) as the in [32] based on KASCADE data an using also QGSJET-II-02 as interaction model. work described in this paper. But, instead of the total number of that the spectra for elemental groups (protons, helium, CNO group) follow roughly a power law with a fall off aproximately proportional to the nuclear charge Z. This implies that the knee in the all-particle energy spectrum of cosmic rays at an energy of about 4 5 1015 eV − · is caused by a fall-off for the light elements. Such a behaviour can be explained by astro- physical models (see e.g. [30]): The maximum energy attained during Fermi acceleration in Supernova Remnants is proportional to Z. Also leakage from the Galaxy during the difussive propagation of cosmic rays through the Milky Way causes a rigidity dependent fall-off of the spectra. Following these ideas one would expect a fall-off of the heavy component (iron-like elements) at an energy ZF e = 26 times the energy of the hydrogen/proton fall-off. Such a fall-off of the heavy cosmic-ray component has been indeed observed by KASCADE-Grande [26, 31]. Thus, confirming the scenario that the individual cosmic-ray elements fall-off at energies proportional to their nuclear charge Z, see Fig. 5. It could also be shown that the light component in cosmic rays recovers at energies above the fall-off energy of the heavy component [32]. Such a behaviour would be expected from a contrbution of another source class (e.g. extragalactic component) at higher energies. Recently, the IceCube experiment at the South Pole has found a similar behaviour of a rigidity dependent fall-off of individual elemental groups in cosmic rays as a function of energy [33]. This confirms the findings by KASCADE and KASCADE-Grande and a general picture emerges (see e.g. [34]): The energy spectra for individual elements in cosmic rays follow roughly power laws in the GeV and TeV regime. At higher energies (PeV regime) they exhibit a fall-of proportional to their nuclear charge Z. Thus, the Galactic cosmic-ray component is expected to reach up to energies above 1017 eV.

5 Summary and outlook

During the last two decades KASCADE and KASCADE-Grande have signiﬁcantly increased the knowledge about Galactic cosmic rays at high energies [35]. Both experiments also improved our understanding of hadronic interactions at high energies in the kinematic forward direction. This has been achieved through precise measurements of the individual components of extensive air showers: the electromagnetic, muonic, and hadronic components. The upgraded Pierre Auger Observatory [36] with improved capabilities to measure the electromagnetic and muonic shower components will allow to continue the quantitative tests of hadronic interaction models with air shower data, which have been pioneered by KASCADE two decades ago.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank the members of the engineering and technical staﬀ of the KASCADE- Grande collaboration, who contributed to the success of the experiment. The KASCADE- Grande experiment was supported in Germany by the BMBF and by the ”Helmholtz Al- liance for Astroparticle Physics HAP”, funded by the Initiative and Networking Fund of the

5 Helmholtz Association, by the MIUR and INAF of Italy, the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education, and the Romanian National Authority for Scientiﬁc Research, ANCS- UEFISCDI, project numbers PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0691 and PN-II-RUPD-2011-3-0145. J.C.A.V. acknowledges the partial support of CONACYT (grant CB-2008/106717) and the German-Mexican bilateral collaboration grants (DAAD-CONACYT 20092012, 20152016).

References

[1] M. Nagano, A. Watson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 72 (2000) 689. [2] A. Haungs, H. Rebel, M. Roth, Rept. Prog. Phys. 66 (2003) 1145–1206. [3] J. Blümer,R. Engel, J. Hörandel,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 63 (2009) 293. [4] W. Apel, et al., Nucl.Instrum.Meth. A620 (2010) 202–216. [5] T. Antoni, et al., Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 513 (2003) 490. [6] J. Engler, et al., Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 427 (1999) 528. [7] M. Aglietta, et al., Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A 336 (1993) 310. [8] T. Antoni, et al., Astropart. Phys. 14 (2001) 245. [9] J. Hörandel,et al., Proc. 25th Int. Cosmic Ray Conference, Durban 6 (1997) 93. [10] J. R. Hörandel, et al., Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 75A (1999) 228–233. [11] J. Hörandel,Adv. Space Res. 41 (2008) 442. [12] J. Milke, et al., Proc. 29th Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Pune 6 (2005) 125. [13] W.D. Apel, et al., Astropart. Phys. 95 (2017) 25. [14] D. Heck, et al., Report FZKA 6019, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe (1998). [15] CERN Program Library Long Writeup W5013, CERN (1993). [16] T. Antoni, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 25 (1999) 2161. [17] W. Apel, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 34 (2007) 2581. [18] W. Apel, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 36 (2009) 035201. [19] J. Hörandel,et al., Proc. 31th Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Lodz (2009) # 227. [20] J. Hörandel,et al., Proc. 29th Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Pune 6 (2005) 121. [21] T. Pierog, et al., Proc. 32nd Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Beijing 5 (2011) 71. [22] T. Sako, et al., Proc. 32nd Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Beijing 5 (2011) 59. [23] G. Mitsuka, et al., Proc. 32nd Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Beijing 5 (2011) 63. [24] M. Bertaina, et al., Proc. 33rd Int. Cosmic Ray Conf., Rio de Janeiro (196). [25] A. Aab, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (19) (2016) 192001. [26] W. D. Apel, et al., Astropart. Phys. 47 (2013) 54–66. [27] J. Matthews, Astropart. Phys. 22 (2005) 387. [28] J. Hörandel,Mod. Phys. Lett. A 22 (2007) 1533. [29] T. Antoni, et al., Astropart. Phys. 24 (2005) 1. [30] J. Hörandel,Astropart. Phys. 21 (2004) 241. [31] W. Apel, et al., Phys.Rev.Lett. 107 (2011) 171104. [32] W. D. Apel, et al., Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 081101. [33] K. Rawlins, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 718 (5) (2016) 052033. [34] J. R. Hörandel, AIP Conf. Proc. 1516 (2012) 185. [35] A. Haungs, PoS ICRC2015 (2016) 278. [36] A. Aab, et al., arXiv (2016) 1604.03637.