A Cost Effective Optimization of the hybrid-DOM Design for TRIDENT

Donglian Xu; Fuyudi Zhang; Hai Liu; Hengbin Shao; Hualin Mei; Iwan Morton-Blake; Jingtao Huang; Qichao Chang; Ruike Cao; Shuhua Hao

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

A Cost Effective Optimization of the hybrid-DOM Design for TRIDENT

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Swapping TRIDENT's 31-PMT 3-inch optical module for a 19-PMT 4-inch one keeps neutrino performance while cutting channels, power, and cost—if the larger tubes reach equal quantum efficiency.

desk verdict Useful, honest simulation study, but the 4-inch recommendation rests on unvalidated joint QE+TTS improvements, not QE alone. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10256 v1 pith:73G4L4MZ submitted 2025-07-14 hep-ex physics.ins-det

Hengbin Shao , Fuyudi Zhang , Qichao Chang , Shuhua Hao , Ruike Cao , Jingtao Huang , Weilun Huang , Hai Liu

show 6 more authors

Hualin Mei Iwan Morton-Blake Wei Tian Yingwei Wang Xin Xiang Donglian Xu

This is my paper

classification hep-exphysics.ins-det

keywords neutrinotelescopehybridDigitalOpticalModulemulti-PMTdesignTRIDENTquantumefficiencyastrophysicaltauastronomydeep-seadetector

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tests whether a planned deep-sea neutrino telescope can replace the 31 small 3-inch photomultiplier tubes in each optical module with 19 larger 4-inch tubes without sacrificing physics. Using full detector simulations with site-specific seawater optics and realistic backgrounds, it compares all-flavor detection efficiency, directional reconstruction, and tau-neutrino flavor identification from 1 TeV to 10 PeV. The central result is conditional: if 4-inch tubes can reach the quantum efficiency of today's 3-inch tubes, the smaller-count 4-inch module performs as well or better while cutting channels by about 40%, with lower power and cost. If the 4-inch tubes keep their current quantum efficiency, the design underperforms, so the hardware improvement is the load-bearing premise.

What carries the argument

The central object is the hybrid Digital Optical Module, a 17-inch pressure sphere holding an array of photomultiplier tubes plus silicon-photomultiplier timing arrays. The design comparison hinges on total photocathode area, per-tube quantum efficiency, and transit time spread: the 4-inch module has larger total area (about 1704 versus 1455 cm2) but fewer, larger tubes, with a downward-biased distribution that favors upward-going neutrinos. Performance is evaluated with a detector trigger requiring five hDOMs to each see two PMT hits within 20 ns, against backgrounds from potassium-40 decays, PMT dark noise, and atmospheric muons, and tau flavor is tagged by the double-pulse technique. The load-bearing scenario is the hypothetical high-QE 4-inch tube; the simulation chain is what shows that this tube restores or exceeds the 3-inch module's photon collection.

What would settle it

Measure the quantum efficiency and transit time spread of a production-representative 4-inch tube and plug the values into the same simulation; if the current low-QE values or a transit time spread near 2.7 ns are what actually ship, the predicted parity with the 3-inch design will not appear because the low-QE 4-inch configuration is the underperforming one.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The study argues that a 19-PMT 4-inch hDOM can replace the 31-PMT 3-inch hDOM in TRIDENT without losing performance, provided the 4-inch PMTs have quantum efficiency matching the high-QE 3-inch model and a transit time spread of 1.4 ns. In that scenario the 4-inch module gives higher effective area for muon-neutrino tracks and electron-neutrino cascades at low energies, comparable or better angular resolution (about 0.1 degrees above 100 TeV for tracks), and tau-neutrino double-pulse identification within about 10% of the 3-inch design. Because the 4-inch layout carries more total photocathode area with fewer channels, it costs less, draws less power, and simplifies mechanical assembly. The paper also shows the opposite edge: with today's lower 4-inch quantum efficiency, the module loses effective area and resolution at low to medium energies, which keeps the 3-inch design preferable unless the 4-inch tubes improve.

Load-bearing premise

The whole recommendation rests on the untested premise that 4-inch tubes can be made with quantum efficiency matching the mature 3-inch tube and a transit time spread of 1.4 ns; if that hardware never ships, the low-QE baseline underperforms the 3-inch design.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the high-QE 4-inch tube is realized, the full TRIDENT array can adopt 19-PMT modules and keep all-flavor neutrino sensitivity while cutting readout channels by about 40%.
The high-QE 4-inch design raises effective area and angular resolution at TeV energies, which would improve sensitivity to dimmer astrophysical sources near threshold.
Above 100 TeV both designs reach about 0.1-degree track angular resolution, so the cost savings do not cost high-energy pointing accuracy.
Tau-neutrino double-pulse identification changes by only about 10%, preserving TRIDENT's flavor-tagging capability.
If 4-inch quantum efficiency stays low, the 3-inch design remains the safer choice to protect low-energy performance.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond the paper: the 40% channel reduction also shrinks data volume, trigger logic, and high-voltage distribution, so the system-level savings may be larger than the per-module cost estimate alone.
Beyond the paper: the same total-area-times-quantum-efficiency trade-off could guide tube choice in other multi-PMT neutrino detectors, not only TRIDENT.
A testable extension is to build a 19-PMT 4-inch prototype and measure its background coincidence rates in situ; the simulation predicts a steeper fall-off in potassium-40-induced rates at high coincidence levels because fewer PMTs share the light.
Because the 4-inch module concentrates photocathode area downward, it may improve sensitivity to upward-going Earth-transiting neutrinos more than the all-sky averaged metrics show, which a dedicated zenith-dependent study could confirm.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Worth a read if you care about next-generation neutrino telescope module design. The paper does something concrete: it simulates a 31x3-inch PMT hDOM and a 19x4-inch PMT hDOM in the full TRIDENT array, using site-specific seawater properties, realistic backgrounds, and the actual trigger logic, then compares effective area, angular resolution, and tau double-pulse efficiency. That specific comparison is new for TRIDENT, and it is a natural extension of the collaboration's prior hDOM work. The main finding is stated conditionally in the abstract: if 4-inch PMTs reach 3-inch-level QE, performance matches or improves while cutting channel count by about 40%. That conditional claim is internally consistent, and the authors are honest that the low-QE 4-inch baseline underperforms.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. The high-QE 4-inch scenario assumes not just high QE but also a 1.4 ns transit time spread. The only 4-inch tube they tabulate (NNVT N2041) has a 2.7 ns TTS. QE mostly drives low-energy photon collection; TTS drives timing-dominated high-energy track resolution and tau double-pulse identification. So the simulated equality could fail in the timing regime if a real high-QE 4-inch tube does not also improve TTS. The conclusion and abstract emphasize the QE gap and largely elide the TTS assumption, which overstates the case. That said, Section 3.1 is explicit about the TTS value used, so a careful reader can see it. Second, PMT angular acceptance is not simulated, and with 31 vs 19 PMTs that could bias the comparison; the authors note this as future work. Third, several performance plots lack error bars, and no code or data are provided; for a simulation paper that is a transparency miss, though not a correctness problem.

This is not groundbreaking; it is a competent, incremental engineering study. The central conditional claim holds up as stated, but the headline version slightly overstates what is actually demonstrated. It deserves serious peer review, and the TTS assumption and angular acceptance should be pushed on in revision. I would bring it to our reading group as a well-scoped detector optimization study, and would cite it if we work on multi-PMT module designs.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper compares two candidate hybrid Digital Optical Module (hDOM) designs for the TRIDENT neutrino telescope: a 31-PMT design using 3-inch Hamamatsu R14374 tubes and a 19-PMT design using 4-inch NNVT N2042 tubes. Using the TRIDENTSim full-chain simulation with site-specific seawater properties, it evaluates background trigger rates, neutrino effective area for νμ and νe charged-current events, angular resolution, and ντ double-pulse identification efficiency. The 4-inch design is simulated in two variants: a baseline 'Low QE' scenario using the N2041 PMT parameters and a hypothetical 'High QE' scenario in which quantum efficiency matches the 3-inch PMT. The paper finds that the High QE 4-inch design matches or improves upon the 3-inch performance while reducing channel count by about 40%, and concludes that the 4-inch hDOM is an attractive option provided the QE improvement is realized.

Significance. If the conditional claim holds, the study provides a useful, simulation-based argument for adopting a 4-inch hDOM with roughly 40% fewer channels, with implications for TRIDENT's cost and power budget. The strengths include the use of a full-chain simulation, site-specific optical properties, all-flavor performance metrics, and an honest statement of the conditional nature of the central conclusion. However, the conclusion rests on unvalidated hardware assumptions—in particular, a 1.4 ns TTS for the 4-inch tube that is not currently available—and on two explicitly stated simplifications (neglect of PMT angular acceptance and exclusion of SiPM hits) that could bias the comparison. These issues must be addressed before the recommendation can be accepted.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 3.1, Table 1] The HighQE 4-inch hDOM is simulated with both a quantum efficiency matching the 3-inch Hamamatsu tube and a 1.4 ns transit time spread, whereas Table 1 lists the NNVT N2041 TTS as 2.7 ns FWHM. No measurement of the N2042 variant at 1.4 ns is presented. The abstract and Sec. 3.6 attribute the favorable comparison to QE alone ('if 4-inch PMTs can achieve QE comparable to 3-inch PMTs'), but in the simulation the timing performance also improves; TTS drives the high-energy track angular resolution in Fig. 6 and the double-pulse tau identification efficiency in Fig. 7. The central claim should be re-expressed as conditional on both high QE and a reduced TTS, or the simulations should be repeated with the 2.7 ns TTS to isolate the QE contribution.
[Sec. 3.1 and Sec. 3.4] The paper states in Sec. 3.1 that the angular acceptance of PMTs has not been taken into account, yet Sec. 3.4 reports that PMT orientation is used as a handle in track and cascade reconstruction. These statements are difficult to reconcile, and the omission is consequential: the 3-inch and 4-inch designs differ in PMT number and orientation, so a difference in angular collection efficiency could bias the effective-area and angular-resolution comparisons. Please clarify how orientation enters the reconstruction if angular acceptance is ignored, and estimate the size of the effect, or include angular acceptance in the simulation.
[Sec. 3.4 and Sec. 2.3.1] Photons detected on SiPMs are excluded from the PMT performance comparisons, but the hDOM is defined as a hybrid module and the two designs have very different SiPM layouts: Sec. 2.3.1 reports a 2.4 times reduction in SiPM area in the 4-inch design. Because SiPMs provide fine timing information that is expected to aid neutrino event direction, vertex, and particle discrimination, excluding them removes a design-specific contribution from the comparison. The paper should either include SiPM hits in the performance evaluation or justify why their exclusion does not affect the relative ranking of the two designs.

minor comments (3)

[Sec. 2.2] The model number is written as 'N2402' in the sentence 'the predecessor of N2402'; it should be N2042, and the relationship between N2041 and N2042 used in the simulation should be stated consistently with Table 1.
[Sec. 3.1] The opening sentence, 'Section 3.1 introduced two candidate hDOM configurations,' appears to refer to Section 2, since Section 3.1 is the subsection that actually introduces the three simulated configurations.
[Sec. 2.3.2] The cost and power savings are described only qualitatively; a table with estimated per-module channel counts, power budgets, and relative costs would make the title's cost-effectiveness claim more concrete and easier to verify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the hDOM performance comparison is a conditional simulation study, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: (1) fix the same 17-inch pressure vessel and mechanical constraints; (2) define two PMT configurations with specified QE/TTS inputs (Table 1, Fig. 3); (3) simulate photon detection, trigger rates, effective area, angular resolution, and double-pulse efficiency with TRIDENTSim; (4) compare outputs and conclude conditionally. No parameter is fitted to a subset of the performance data and then used to 'predict' that same data. The 4-inch high-QE scenario is explicitly hypothetical: Section 2.2 says 'we explore an improved 4-inch PMT design with QE performance matching the high-QE Hamamatsu 3-inch PMT,' and Section 3.1 lists 'assuming high quantum efficiency matching the 3-inch PMT' and 'A TTS of 1.4 ns is used.' The conclusion is therefore a conditional statement ('if 4-inch PMTs can achieve QE comparable to 3-inch PMTs, their performance matches or improves'), not a claim that the high-QE 4-inch PMT currently exists. That the favorable low-energy effective area follows in part from the assumed QE and larger photocathode area is the intended content of the hypothesis, not a circularity. The use of TRIDENTSim and prior TRIDENT papers for detector geometry, optical properties, and reconstruction methods is normal internal tooling; it is not an imported uniqueness theorem or an unverified self-citation that forbids alternatives. The admitted omission of PMT angular acceptance and the unvalidated 1.4 ns TTS are correctness/validity concerns, not circular reasoning. The paper is self-contained as a design optimization: the low-QE 4-inch scenario provides an independent baseline, and the comparison is against an external benchmark (the 3-inch design) rather than against the simulation's own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumed quantum efficiency and TTS of a future 4-inch PMT, plus the fidelity of the TRIDENTSim framework, the reference array geometry, and the omission of PMT angular acceptance and SiPM hits in reconstruction.

free parameters (3)

High-QE 4-inch PMT quantum efficiency = QE curve matched to Hamamatsu R14374 (peak ~31.3% at 450 nm)
Chosen by hand as a hypothetical future specification (Sec 2.2, 3.1); the central conclusion holds only under this assumption.
High-QE 4-inch PMT transit time spread = 1.4 ns FWHM
Assumed equal to the 3-inch PMT, while the current NNVT N2041 TTS is 2.7 ns (Tab 1). This improves timing-based reconstruction and is not stated in the abstract.
PMT dark noise rate = 1 kHz per PMT
Assumed from current device specifications (Sec 3.2); affects trigger rates but likely does not change the relative ranking.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption TRIDENTSim full-chain simulation framework accurately models particle propagation, Cherenkov light emission in seawater, and detector response.
The paper relies on this framework from earlier TRIDENT papers [5,27,28] without independent validation in this work.
domain assumption The reference detector geometry (1200 strings, 10 km3, 20 hDOMs per string, 100 m spacing) is representative of TRIDENT.
Adopted from [5]; all physics comparisons are computed on this array.
ad hoc to paper PMT angular acceptance can be neglected in this comparison.
Stated in Sec 3.1: 'the angular acceptance of PMTs has not been taken into account in this simulation work'. This could differentially affect low-energy efficiency and reconstruction.
ad hoc to paper SiPM photon hits can be excluded from the PMT performance comparison.
Sec 3.4: 'photons detected on SiPMs are not included in these PMT performance comparisons'. The hDOM design includes SiPMs, so the full-module performance is not assessed.
domain assumption The double-pulse identification algorithm described in [38] works as claimed.
Sec 3.5 defers to a PhD thesis for the waveform selection and double-pulse method; no details are in this paper.
domain assumption Per-channel costs dominate module cost, so 40% fewer channels gives proportional savings.
Sec 2.3.2 argues cost scales with channel count but provides no quantitative model or citation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Cost Effective Optimization of the hybrid-DOM Design for TRIDENT." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/73G4L4MZ

@misc{pith2026250710256,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Cost Effective Optimization of the hybrid-DOM Design for TRIDENT},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/73G4L4MZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10256}
}

read the original abstract

TRIDENT is a planned multi-cubic-kilometer deep-sea neutrino telescope to be built in the South China Sea, designed to rapidly discover high-energy astrophysical neutrino sources with sensitivity to all neutrino flavors. Achieving this at scale requires a detector design that balances performance with power, cost, and mechanical simplicity. This study presents a cost-effective optimization of TRIDENT's hybrid Digital Optical Module (hDOM) design, comparing configurations using high-quantum-efficiency (QE) 3-inch PMTs and larger 4-inch PMTs, the latter evaluated with both baseline and enhanced QE assumptions. Using full-chain detector simulations incorporating site-specific seawater optical properties and realistic backgrounds, we assess performance in all-flavor neutrino detection efficiency, directional reconstruction, and tau neutrino flavor identification from 1 TeV to 10 PeV. We find that if 4-inch PMTs can achieve QE comparable to 3-inch PMTs, their performance matches or improves upon that of the 3-inch design, while significantly reducing channel count, power consumption, and cost. These findings support the 4-inch PMT hDOM as a promising and scalable choice for TRIDENT's future instrumentation.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Design and Evaluation of a PMT High-Voltage system for Deepsea Neutrino Telescope
hep-ex 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

A Cockcroft-Walton HV system for 31 PMTs in a hybrid DOM delivers stable baseline, uniform gain, and sub-1.8 ns timing performance suitable for deep-sea neutrino detection.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

IceCube collaboration, Evidence for neutrino emission from the nearby active galaxy ngc 1068, Science 378(2022) 538 [2211.09972]

arXiv 2022
[2]

IceCube collaboration, Multimessenger observations of a flaring blazar coincident with high-energy neutrino icecube-170922a,Science 361(2018) eaat1378 [1807.08816]

arXiv 2018
[3]

Kinetic theory and thermalization of weakly interacting fermions

IceCubecollaboration,Extending the search for muon neutrinos coincident with gamma-ray bursts in icecube data, Astrophys. J.857 (2018) 117 [1712.06290]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[4]

Scholberg,Supernova neutrino detection,Ann

K. Scholberg,Supernova neutrino detection,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.62 (2012) 81 [1205.6003]

arXiv 2012
[5]

TRIDENT collaboration, A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean, Nature Astron.7 (2023) 1497 [2207.04519]

arXiv 2023
[6]

IceCube collaboration, Design and production of the IceCube digital optical module,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A567 (2006) 214

work page 2006
[7]

ANTAREScollaboration, Study of large hemispherical photomultiplier tubes for the antares neutrino telescope,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A555 (2005) 132 [physics/0510031]

work page Pith review arXiv 2005
[8]

Avrorin et al.,The optical module of Baikal-GVD,Phys

A.D. Avrorin et al.,The optical module of Baikal-GVD,Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett.13(2016) 737

work page 2016

Show all 38 references

[9]

KM3NeT collaboration, The KM3NeT multi-PMT optical module, JINST 17(2022) P07038 [2203.10048]

2022 arXiv
[10]

IceCube-Gen2 collaboration, A multi-PMT optical sensor for IceCube-Gen2,JINST 16(2021) C11009

2021
[11]

P-ONEcollaboration, STRAW: A Pathfinder for a Neutrino Telescope in the Pacific Ocean,JINST 14 (2019) P02013 [1901.06553]

2019 arXiv
[12]

KM3NeT collaboration, Results of the first detection units of KM3NeT,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A876 (2017) 181

2017
[13]

Photomultiplier Tube R14688-100 Data Sheet

H. Photonics, “Photomultiplier Tube R14688-100 Data Sheet.”https://www.hamamatsu.com/jp/ en/product/optical-sensors/pmt/pmt_tube-alone/head-on-type/R14688-100.html , 2022

2022
[14]

Kaptanoglu, A

T. Kaptanoglu, A. Rincon, M. Duce, S. Kaplan, J. Koplowitz, S. Lynch et al.,Characterization of the Hamamatsu 8-inch R14688-100 PMT,JINST 19 (2024) P02032 [2311.05080]

2024 arXiv
[15]

IceCube-Gen2 collaboration, Performance studies on new 4” photomultiplier types intended for IceCube-Gen2 optical modules,PoSICRC2023(2023) 985 [2307.14589]

2023 arXiv
[16]

F. Hu, Z. Li and D. Xu,Exploring a PMT+SiPM hybrid optical module for next generation neutrino telescopes,PoSICRC2021(2021) 1043 [2108.05515]

2021 arXiv
[17]

W. Zhi, J. Zheng, W. Tian, D. Xu and X. Xiang,Preliminary Design of the Hybrid Digital Optical Module for TRIDENT, PoSICRC2023(2023) 1213

2023
[18]

Rept.1121-1124 (2025) 1 [2504.09473]

ANTAREScollaboration, The ANTARES detector: Two decades of neutrino searches in the Mediterranean Sea, Phys. Rept.1121-1124 (2025) 1 [2504.09473]. – 14 –

2025 arXiv
[19]

KM3NeT collaboration, Evaluation of the upgraded 3-inch Hamamatsu photomultiplier for the KM3NeT Neutrino Telescope, 2504.02989

arXiv
[20]

W. Zhi, R. Cao, J. Tang, M. Wang, Y. Tan, W. Wu et al.,Front-end electronics development of large-area SiPM arrays for high-precision single-photon time measurement,JINST 19(2024) P06011 [2403.02948]

2024 arXiv
[21]

Zhang and Y

G. Zhang and Y. Yang,Design and Performance of the hDOM Motherboard for TRIDENT Phase-I, PoSICRC2025(2025) 591

2025
[22]

Zhi and W

W. Zhi and W. Wu,Large-area SiPM array readout electronics for high-precision single-photon time measurement, PoSICRC2025(2025) 1055

2025
[23]

Simon,Silicon photomultipliers in particle and nuclear physics, Nucl

F. Simon,Silicon photomultipliers in particle and nuclear physics, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A926(2019) 85 [1811.03877]

2019 arXiv
[24]

Phys.19(2003) 253 [astro-ph/0206454]

ANTAREScollaboration, Sedimentation and fouling of optical surfaces at the antares site,Astropart. Phys.19(2003) 253 [astro-ph/0206454]

2003 arXiv
[25]

KM3NeT collaboration, A light intensity measuring system for sedimentation measurements on KM3NeT optical modules,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A626-627 (2011) S111

2011
[26]

Nakayama,Recent Progress in the Development of Photomultiplier Tubes,PoSPhotoDet2015 (2016) 013

S. Nakayama,Recent Progress in the Development of Photomultiplier Tubes,PoSPhotoDet2015 (2016) 013

2016
[27]

Chang, F

Q. Chang, F. Hu, I. Morton-Blake and D. Xu,Optimizing the optical array geometry for TRIDENT, PoSICRC2023(2023) 1203

2023
[28]

Zhang, C

F. Zhang, C. Mo, I. Morton-Blake, F. Hu and D. Xu,The Performance of Shower Reconstruction in TRIDENT,PoSICRC2023(2023) 1207

2023
[29]

Agostinelli, J

S. Agostinelli, J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, H. Araujo et al.,Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A506 (2003) 250

2003
[30]

T. Hahn, A. Fedynitch, J.R. Hörandel et al.,CORSIKA 8: Towards a modern framework for the simulation of extensive air showers,EPJ Web of Conferences210 (2019) 02011

2019
[31]

Hannen,Characterisation of scintillation light induced by radioactive excitation in the mdom glass pressure vessel, Master’s thesis, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 2020

V. Hannen,Characterisation of scintillation light induced by radioactive excitation in the mdom glass pressure vessel, Master’s thesis, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 2020

2020
[32]

Wu et al.,MuonSLab: A plastic scintillator based detector for muon measurement in the deep ocean (Accepted by JINST), 2501.17639

J. Wu et al.,MuonSLab: A plastic scintillator based detector for muon measurement in the deep ocean (Accepted by JINST), 2501.17639

arXiv
[33]

Carminati, M

G. Carminati, M. Bazzotti, S. Biagi, S. Cecchini, T. Chiarusi, A. Margiotta et al.,MUPAGE: a fast atmospheric MUon GEnerator for neutrino telescopes based on PArametric formulas, 0907.5563

arXiv
[34]

IceCube collaboration, The icecube neutrino observatory: Instrumentation and online systems, JINST 12(2017) P03012 [1612.05093]

2017 arXiv
[35]

IceCubecollaboration,Search for Astrophysical Tau Neutrinos in Three Years of IceCube Data,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 022001 [1509.06212]

2016 arXiv
[36]

W. Tian, C. Mo and D. Xu,Searching for astrophysical tau neutrinos with hDOM waveforms in TRIDENT,PoSICRC2023(2023) 1092

2023
[37]

W. Tian, H. Shuhua and D. Xu,Enhancing Neutrino Flavour Sensitivity in TRIDENT with Tau Neutrino Identification,PoSICRC2025(2025) 1195

2025
[38]

Tian,Real-time Optical Calibration Strategy and Astrophysical Tau Neutrino Identification in Water-based Next-generation Neutrino Telescopes, PhD thesis(2025)

W. Tian,Real-time Optical Calibration Strategy and Astrophysical Tau Neutrino Identification in Water-based Next-generation Neutrino Telescopes, PhD thesis(2025) . – 15 –

2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

IceCube collaboration, Evidence for neutrino emission from the nearby active galaxy ngc 1068, Science 378(2022) 538 [2211.09972]

arXiv 2022

[2] [2]

IceCube collaboration, Multimessenger observations of a flaring blazar coincident with high-energy neutrino icecube-170922a,Science 361(2018) eaat1378 [1807.08816]

arXiv 2018

[3] [3]

Kinetic theory and thermalization of weakly interacting fermions

IceCubecollaboration,Extending the search for muon neutrinos coincident with gamma-ray bursts in icecube data, Astrophys. J.857 (2018) 117 [1712.06290]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[4] [4]

Scholberg,Supernova neutrino detection,Ann

K. Scholberg,Supernova neutrino detection,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.62 (2012) 81 [1205.6003]

arXiv 2012

[5] [5]

TRIDENT collaboration, A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean, Nature Astron.7 (2023) 1497 [2207.04519]

arXiv 2023

[6] [6]

IceCube collaboration, Design and production of the IceCube digital optical module,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A567 (2006) 214

work page 2006

[7] [7]

ANTAREScollaboration, Study of large hemispherical photomultiplier tubes for the antares neutrino telescope,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A555 (2005) 132 [physics/0510031]

work page Pith review arXiv 2005

[8] [8]

Avrorin et al.,The optical module of Baikal-GVD,Phys

A.D. Avrorin et al.,The optical module of Baikal-GVD,Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett.13(2016) 737

work page 2016