text:
# Bose-Einstein Correlations of Charged Kaons in Central Pb+Pb Collisions at 𝐸_{𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑚}=158𝐴𝐺𝑒𝑉

## 1 Introduction

Momentum correlations between pions have been widely used to study the space-time extent of the emitting source in nucleus-nucleus collisions. For identical bosons the symmetry requirement of Bose–Einstein (BE) statistics results in an enhanced production of bosons with small momentum difference. This effect was first observed by Goldhaber, Goldhaber, Lee and Pais (GGLP)  for pairs of like-charge pions at small opening angles. Kopylov and Podgoretsky  noticed the deep analogy with Hanbury-Brown and Twiss (HBT) space– time correlations  of the classical electromagnetic fields used in astronomy for interferometric measurement of star angular radii and developed the basic methods of momentum interferometry in particle and nuclear collisions. This technique represents an important tool for investigating the underlying reaction mechanism as far as it influences the decoupling configuration. For example, an unusually long decoupling time was suggested as one of the signatures of quark-gluon plasma (QGP) formation .

In this paper, we present data from an experimental study of BE correlations between charged kaons emitted in central collisions of Pb nuclei at a beam energy of 158 A$``$GeV with a fixed Pb target. We compare the results with those from earlier analyses of pion data for the same reaction. It was argued  that correlations of kaons and pions might differ due to different contributions from resonance decays during their propagation toward freeze-out. A comparison could help to distinguish between a QGP deflagration and a conventional production mechanism based on independent nucleon-nucleon interactions. However, rescattering between the final hadrons may smear out the differences and obscure what happened in the earlier stages of the collision.

A probably more important aspect of kaons is associated with their higher mass. The particle source resulting from a collision between heavy nuclei is rapidly expanding in longitudinal and transverse directions. This manifests itself in a dependence of the extracted correlation parameters on the transverse mass $`m_{}`$ of the particles, which form the pair . Therefore, kaons and pions probe the situation in different kinematic regimes. Assuming that the decoupling surface coincides for both particle species, the kaons extend the $`m_{}`$ range of the pion data and improve the sensitivity of comparisons with reaction models.

Because of their much smaller abundance a study of kaon correlations requires higher event numbers and a significantly improved particle identification compared to the pion case. The only published results on kaon correlation in Pb+Pb collisions were obtained by experiment NA44 at the CERN SPS . The NA49 spectrometer  includes a high-resolution time-of-flight (TOF) detector with acceptance at mid-rapidity which allows to select a relatively clean kaon sample. Data obtained from an analysis of approximately 1.7 million central as well as from 2 million semi-central events will be shown. The K+K+ and K-K- correlation functions are obtained in terms of the Bertsch-Pratt (BP)  and Yano-Koonin-Podgoretsky (YKP)  coordinate frames. They are corrected for Coulomb effects. The extracted parameters - correlation radii, freeze-out duration - will be compared with those obtained for pions  in the same central rapidity range.

## 2 Experiment and Data

The 158 A$``$GeV Pb ions from the CERN SPS were measured in position and direction by beam position detectors before hitting a Pb foil target of 224(336) mg/cm2 thickness (1(2.5) % interaction probability) during the 1995/1996(2000) data taking periods.

The trigger condition was derived from the signal detected in the veto calorimeter (VCAL, see Fig. 1) which intercepts mainly projectile spectators 25 m downstream of the target. For the central data sample the 5% most central interactions were selected. In a geometrical picture this corresponds to impact parameters smaller than 3.5 fm. Data taken during different run periods contribute 380 000 (1995), 400 000 events (1996) and 911 000 events (2000). From the year 2000 run an additional sample corresponding to semi-central events (centrality 5% - 20%) was available and analysed.

The NA49 spectrometer (described in detail in ) consists of two superconducting magnets (total bending power of 7.5 Tm) with TPCs (time projection chambers) inside the magnetic field, two additional TPCs downstream of the magnets, and several TOF (time-of-flight) walls on both sides of the beam (Fig. 1). The momentum vectors of charged particles are determined from their trajectories as measured in the TPCs and the position of the interaction point. The accuracy of the four-momentum difference111Note that the units are chosen such that $`c=\mathrm{}=1`$ $`q`$ of a particle pair is of the order of 3.5 MeV in the momentum range of interest.

For particle identification a combination of the specific energy loss $`dE/dx`$ measured in the TPCs MTPC-R/L with the mass information obtained from the TOF walls TOF-R1/L1 was used. The method is illustrated by Fig. 2a for a typical momentum range. From Fig. 2a it is clear that no satisfactory kaon identification can be derived from either the specific ionization or the TOF signal alone. Therefore we restrict the phase space used in the present study to the acceptance of the TOF walls. Particles inside the region around the kaon peak (see Fig. 2a) are selected as kaons. The corresponding population in the rapidity ($`y`$) and transverse momentum ($`p_T`$) plane is displayed in Fig. 2b for the K+ mesons; for K- it is nearly identical. From fits of sums of Gaussian distributions for the different particle species the purity of the kaon sample is estimated to be about 93%, resulting in a purity of 86% for pairs. The distribution of the average transverse mass222$`m_{}=\sqrt{m_K^2+K_T^2}`$, where $`K_T`$ is the average transverse momentum of the kaons in the pair. $`m_{}`$ of accepted K+K+ pairs is shown in Fig. 2c. Due to statistical limitations a subdivision into $`K_T`$ intervals was not possible. Because of slightly different detector efficiencies the weighted means of the correlation functions obtained from the 1995, the 1996 data and the 2000 data were used for the BE correlation analysis. Details of the analysis can be found in .

## 3 Bose-Einstein Correlation Analysis

The correlation function $`C_2(p_1,p_2)`$ is defined as the ratio of the probability of observing particles with four-momenta $`p_1`$ and $`p_2`$ simultaneously in one event divided by the probability for pairs of independent particles with the same single- particle phase space distribution. Experimentally, the raw correlation function is obtained as

$`C_2^{raw}(q)=𝒩{\displaystyle \frac{S(q)}{B(q)}}`$ (1)
where $`S(q)`$ denotes the yield of particle pairs from the same event with the four-momentum difference $`q=p_1p_2`$. $`B(q)`$ is the uncorrelated reference generated by the event-mixing method and the factor $`𝒩`$ is used to normalize the correlation function to be unity at large relative momenta (200 - 2000 MeV).

Assuming an expanding Gaussian source in a representation given by Yano-Koonin-Podgoretsky  and Heinz  that is appropriate to explicitly take into account collective expansion, the correlation due to quantum statistics can be parameterized in terms of the components of $`q`$ :

$`C_2`$ $`(`$ $`q_{},q_{},q_0)=1+\lambda exp[q_{}^2R_{}^2`$ (2)
$``$ $`\gamma _{YK}^2(q_{}\beta _{YK}q_0)^2R_{}^2\gamma _{YK}^2(q_0\beta _{YK}q_{})^2R_0^2],`$
where $`q_{}=\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }p_x)^2+(\mathrm{\Delta }p_y)^2}`$ is the transverse momentum difference, $`q_{}=\mathrm{\Delta }p_z`$ is the longitudinal momentum difference, $`q_0=E_1E_2`$ is the energy difference, $`\lambda `$ is the correlation intensity parameter and $`\beta _{YK}`$ is the “Yano-Koonin velocity” which describes the source’s longitudinal collective motion in the given rapidity range. The radii $`R_i`$, where $`i=,,0`$ denote the transverse, longitudinal and temporal extent of the coherence lengths, respectively.

Although the YKP parameters have the most straightforward physical interpretation , this parameterization can be ill-defined in some kinematic regions . Therefore, we use the Bertsch-Pratt parameterization in addition. For cylindrically symmetric systems and the midrapidity range it reads with vanishing cross terms  :

$`C_2`$ $`(`$ $`q_{side},q_{long},q_{out})=`$ (3)
$`1`$ $`+\lambda exp[q_{side}^2R_{side}^2q_{long}^2R_{long}^2q_{out}^2R_{out}^2],`$
where $`q_{long}`$ is identical with $`q_{}`$ defined above, and ($`q_{out}`$, $`q_{side}`$) are the components of the transverse 3-momentum difference in outward direction and perpendicular to it. As reference frame, a pairwise defined co-moving system would be appropriate. In view of the limited rapidity range considered here it is approximated by the so-called fixed local center-of-mass system, thus having the same frame for all particle pairs. Projections of the raw correlation function of $`K^+K^+`$ and $`K^{}K^{}`$ pairs are shown in Fig. 3 in BP-variables.

In order to extract the quantum-statistical effects, the counter-acting influence of the Coulomb repulsion as well as the dilution by misidentified pairs must be taken into account, while the effect of the strong interaction can be neglected . This leads to the ansatz:

$`C_2^{raw}=(1p)+pC_2(q)A(q),`$ (4)
where $`p=0.86`$ denotes the purity of the pairs, $`A(q)`$ represents the Coulomb repulsion factor and $`C_2(q)`$ is the correlation from quantum statistics parameterized by Eqs. 2 or 3. Because of the considerable size of the source in the present reaction  the classical Gamov correction factor is not appropriate . For pions the Coulomb correction can be approximately determined from the experimental correlation function for unlike-sign pairs , which is dominated by the Coulomb interaction and receives no contribution from BE correlation. In contrast, the strong interaction cannot be neglected  for unlike-sign kaons. Therefore, a parameterization of the Coulomb repulsion factor derived from a finite-size source Coulomb wave calculation  is used for the present analysis:

$`A(q)=\stackrel{~}{A_c}(r^{},q),`$ (5)
where $`r^{}`$ is the average distance between the emission points of the kaons in the pair center-of-mass system. Following  the value of $`r^{}`$ can be calculated from the correlation radii $`R_i`$ in Eqs. 2 and 3. As a consistency check the analogous procedure is applied below to the $`K^+K^{}`$ correlations which are also measured in this experiment.

The determination of the radius parameters $`R_i`$ proceeds in an iterative way. Starting with estimated values for $`R_i`$, the Coulomb repulsion factor $`A(q)`$ (Eq. 5) is calculated and smeared with the measuring resolution of $`q`$. A set of $`R_i`$ and $`\lambda `$ are then obtained from a 3-dimensional maximum likelihood fit of the r.h.s. of Eq. 4 to the raw correlation function Eq. 1. The procedure is iterated until the fit parameters reach stable values.

For the central collisions the final results for the YKP and BP parameterizations are summarized in Table 1 with the fit quality given by $`\chi ^2/NDF`$. The quoted errors are only statistical. The systematic errors on the the fitted parameters due to uncertainty in Coulomb correction and strong interaction are estimated to be about 10% of each parameter.

Using Eq. 4 and the fitted parameters one can calculate a Coulomb corrected correlation function $`C_2^{corr}`$ from the directly measured raw correlation function $`C_2^{raw}`$ :

$`C_2^{corr}(q)={\displaystyle \frac{C_2^{raw}(q)1+p}{pA(q)}}.`$ (6)
The result is shown in Fig. 4 as data points and compared to the fitted correlation functions which are depicted by the curves. One observes good agreement.

In addition the kaons from about 2 million semi-central (5% - 20%) events were also analysed and the extracted parameters are listed in Table 2. Both the values of the radius parameters and of the correlation intensity are found to be smaller than for the central collision events, in qualitative agreement with the expected decrease of the radii with the decreasing centrality.

Fig. 5 displays a plot of the $`K^+K^{}`$ correlation function versus $`Q_{inv}=\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{}{p})^2(\mathrm{\Delta }E)^2}`$ for central collision events. The observed correlation is due to the Coulomb attraction as well as the strong interaction of the $`K^+`$ and $`K^{}`$ . The data points are compared to theoretical calculations for which the effects of momentum resolution and misidentification were taken into account. As demonstrated by the dotted curve, the Gamov factor (appropriate for a point like source) does not describe the data. The finite size Coulomb wave calculation using the fitted radius parameters is shown by the dashed curve. It already provides a much better representation, but still stays somewhat above the data. When also including the contribution from strong interactions (full curve) a good reproduction of the region $`Q_{inv}<200`$ MeV is obtained. This agreement can be taken as a confirmation of the Coulomb correction procedure used for like-charge kaon correlations.

## 4 Discussion and Conclusion

From Tables 1 and 2 one observes that the radius parameters for K+ and K- are similar with a trend to somewhat larger values for K-. This is consistent with the expected influence of Coulomb interaction with the positive charge of the reaction zone . The correlation intensity parameter $`\lambda `$ stays below unity. Possible causes are e.g. a partially coherent source, a contribution to the observed kaons from decays of long-lived resonances, or a deviation from the Gaussian parameterization due to a mixture of sources with different radii . The longitudinal source velocities $`\beta _{YK}`$ are close to zero in agreement with the fact that our acceptance is restricted to midrapidity (see Fig. 2b).

When comparing the radius parameters obtained from kaon correlations with those of pions one has to bear in mind that these parameters depend on the transverse momentum or transverse mass as a consequence of the collective expansion of the source . In Fig. 6 we show the earlier pion data  for the same reaction together with the kaon results from Table 1 as well as those from the CERN experiment NA44 . The radii show $`m_{}^\alpha `$ dependence with $`\alpha 0.5`$ for the longitudinal radii (as suggested by Makhlin and Sinyukov ) and $`\alpha 0.3`$ for the transverse radii.

According to the relation :

$`R_{}=\tau _f\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{T}{m_{}}}},`$ (7)
based on a hydrodynamic expansion model , where $`\tau _f`$ and $`T`$ are the freeze-out time and temperature of the particles, respectively, the longitudinal radii can be plotted as a function of $`\sqrt{T/m_{}}`$ (Fig. 7a) using the known freeze-out temperature $`T120`$ MeV from . From its gradient the freeze-out time is extracted as $`9.5\pm 1.5`$ fm, which is consistent with the previous estimate based on the pion correlation study in . Furthermore, the relatively weak dependence of $`R_{}`$ on $`m_{}`$ can also be reproduced by hydrodynamic expansion models  with a transverse expansion velocity $`\beta _{}`$ around 0.55 (see Fig. 7b).

In conclusion the kaon radius parameters are fully consistent with the published pion results and the hydrodynamic expansion model. The influence of different contributions of resonance formation and different rescattering cross sections seem to be either minor or similar in both cases. Pions and kaons thus seem to decouple simultaneously.

## Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements: This work was supported by the Director, Office of Energy Research, Division of Nuclear Physics of the Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics of the US Department of Energy (DE-ACO3-76SFOOO98 and DE-FG02-91ER40609), the US National Science Foundation, the Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung, Germany, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research (2 P03B 130 23 and 2 P03B 02418), the Hungarian Scientific Research Foundation (T14920, T32293 and T032648), Hungarian National Science Foundation, OTKA, (F034707), the EC Marie Curie Foundation, and the Polish-German Foundation.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

Instrument Control at the FRM-II using TACO and NICOS

T. Unruh

ZWE FRM–II

Technische Universit t M nchen

Lichtenbergstr. 1

D–85747 Garching, F.R.G.

tunruh@frm2.tum.de

At the new neutron source FRM–II in Garching, Germany, the TACO control system, originally developed at the ESRF in Grenoble, France is used for instrument control purposes. TACO provides an object oriented, distributed control system including a clearly defined API. In order to equip TACO with a general user front end, a network based instrument control system named NICOS has been developed at the FRM-II. NICOS is divided into three parts: the NICOS Client, the NICOS Server and the NICOSMethods.

1. Introduction

In this article a survey of the design of NICOS (network based instrument control system) and a comprehensive introduction on how to use NICOS is given.

In spite of the fact that the NICOS client/server, the NICOSMethods and TACO, respectively, are separated program packages which do not depend on each other, the whole software will be regarded in the following as one modular system for control of complex instruments.

Besides the author of this article the following people at the FRM–II were involved: J. Beckmann, J. Kr ger, P. Link, J. Neuhaus and W. Wein.

2. The NICOS client

The NICOS client allows the user of an instrument to enter high level commands or even command scripts to control complex operations, as e.g. a series of energy scans of a triple axis spectrometer. Python is used as script language because it is easy to learn and provides powerful commands as well as a simple syntax which leads to short and well readable scripts.

The NICOS client itself is also written in Python (v. 2.1.1) using PyQt (v. 3.0.5) as graphical library.

Almost every Python script can be executed via the NICOS client on the server. However at the moment there are some limitations:

* There is no interface for using the standard input stream. Interactive communication between the Python script and the user is done via the special “nicmd\_prg (prg)” command which starts the program “prg”, waits until it is finished and returns its stdout as Python string. The DISPLAY of the client which started the script is used as standard display for that program.
* It is not safe to use special features as e.g. signal handlers, multithreading and server functionalities. Multithreading is safe, however, when using the internal commands as e.g. the “nicd\_startBgPrg” function to start a process in a new thread.

The main window of the nicos client that appears after startup is displayed in

Fig. . After startup you have to enter the hostname and the port number (1199 by default) of the NICOS server you want to be connected to (connect menu). Then you can login to that server with a user name and a password. After successful login the arrows of the connect button in the main window switch from transparent (grey) to red.

From the main window three major applications can be opened which will be described in the following subsections: The user editor, the program control monitor and the configuration editor.

2.1 The user editor

The user editor window includes a simple text editor with common editing capabilities

for the user to write experiment control scripts. Single line commands can be entered using the botton command line with history functionality (cf. Fig. ). Via the menu or the buttons of the toolbar it is possible to execute a script on the server (run) or to download the currently loaded script from the server to the editor.

It is possible to change the source code of a running script in the editor at lines which have not yet been executed and which are not inside the logical block of the current line (cf. subsection 2.2) and update the script with the new code during runtime.

Clicking on the reload tool button will recursively reload all modules loaded by the server by default. These modules can be specified in the configuration file of the server. Thus it is possible to activate any change of instrument configuration or of instrument control code by one mouse click.

The “simulation” button is not yet implemented, but will follow soon. Clicking on this button will then also start the script on the server but in a simulation mode. In this mode no hardware will be activated, but as many functionality checks of the script as possible are performed to avoid e.g. syntax errors or out of limit errors occur when running the script in real mode.

2.2 The program control monitor

The window of the program control monitor is displayed in Fig. .

Several informations about the status of the NICOS server and the program script that is currently executed by the server are displayed. The window is divided in three subwindows: the script execution monitor, the script output and the variables inspection monitor.

A toolbar with buttons is positioned above the subwindows. The script execution status is indicated by the color of the leftest button: A red color means that a script is currently executed, green means no script is running; yellow means that script execution is interrupted and transparent (grey) means that the client is not connected to a server.

By means of the other three tool buttons a script can be interrupted, continued or stopped by a simple mouse click.

In the script execution monitor (upper left subwindow) the source code of the loaded script is displayed. The currently executed line is highlighted and marked with an arrow on the left side. The logical block in which this line is located is marked by blue lines. The update rate of this window can be adjusted.

The output (stdout and stderr) of the script is displayed in the script output window (lower left subwindow). Python error messages are displayed here according to the standard Python shell.

In the variables inspection monitor (right subwindow) variables and their values can be displayed. It is possible to add and delete values from the script using the “nicd\_reg” and “nicd\_unreg” commands. Addition, deletion and change of entries are also possible during runtime pressing the “Add”, “Del” and “Edit” buttons. Instead of variables it is also allowed to enter any expression. Double clicking on an entry in the variables list causes the pop up of a window in which the value of the selected variable can be changed.

Another possibility to influence the script execution during runtime is to use the command line input window available from the special menu. Here any command can be entered and executed in the context of the current script.

The manipulation of instrument control scripts during runtime is intended to be used e.g. to extend the range of an energy scan at a triple axis spectrometer or to increase the measuring time at a TOF instrument, when the data collected up to this moment indicate that these changes are useful. In this way beam time will be saved because measurements or parts of measurements do not need to be performed twice.

2.3 The configuration editor

The configuration editor has been developed at the ESRF in close contact with the

FRM–II. The editor allows to create configuration files for python classes, which define e.g. components of an instrument. This tool has been developed to realize the aim “configuring instead of programming” claimed by the NICOSMethods.

The format of the configuration files will be converted automatically by the nicos client to the standard format of the NICOSMethods which are described later in this article. Thus all components of an instrument defined in the NICOS environment can be configured by this editor. It is also possible to configure TACO servers if the servers provide runtime configuration.

3. The NICOS server

The NICOS server is a multithreaded tcp stream server written in Python (v. 2.1.1).

It provides multiple user login and a secure password authentification procedure. Every login is associated with a security level number, which can be determined by a script that runs on the server. Thus it is possible to implement execution permissions for users within the NICOSMethods (cf. below).

The server can be configured by a simple configuration file. In this file the Python modules which implement the whole instrument can be specified. Executing the first script will initiate the import of these modules. To reload the modules recursively a deep\_reload function of the server is available and can easily be activated using the reload button of the NICOS client. User names can be added in the configuration file and passwords can be set and changed using the “nicd\_passwd.py” script.

Python scripts started on the server will be divided into blocks, which are executed sequentially. Before execution a syntax check of the whole script is performed.

By using Python special client classes or a generic Python TACO client class (as provided by the ESRF), it is possible to communicate with TACO device servers directly.

The capabilities of the NICOS server are described in section 2 of this article. Comprehensive information for all server commands available so far are listed in Tab. .

4. The NICOSMethods

NICOSMethods are Python classes which represent standard devices of instruments such as motors, digital i/o cards and counters. There are three important advantages to introduce such standard devices:

1. Some general functionalities as e.g. grouping (cf. below) can be implemented in the basic classes and therefore it needs not to be written for each special device.
2. It is possible to define a clear interface for important classes of devices. Such an interface allows to write powerful global commands (e.g. a scan command) which can be used for all the special devices in this class.
3. The interfaces include standard functions for the configuration of the devices. This is needed to set up a general configuration tool as the configuration editor of the NICOS client, which can also be used for any device implemented in the future.

The NICOSMethods framework is written in a way that the code for a new device

is easy to write, short and clear.

The root class for all devices is a class called Xable. An Xable object represents a physical or a virtual device, which can be abstracted to control or measure a single physical state of an object (main physical state, MPS), which is represented by the main physical state descriptor (MPSD) such as a position (length, angle), an energy, a temperature, the position of a switch, a count rate or a 2-dimensional intensity distribution. The MPSD can be read and/or set by the main operation of an object (OMO).

In this class the standard interface of devices is defined. The interface definition is described in Tab. . It is intended to add a pause () and a getAllPars () command.

There are several parameters defined for an Xable object. The “name” parameter can be used to specify an alias of the instance name of an Xable object. The “adev” dictionary specifies attached devices which are selected by configuration. These devices are linked to hard coded internal names of the Xable object.

With the standard “controller” parameter a device can specify the instance name of its controller object. Such objects are called “exported objects” of the controller. Several different devices can have the same controller. If a controller is specified, the functions of the standard interface are expected to be defined in the controller object. From this point of view a controller offers the possibility to have the same code for different devices. The pointer to the Xable object that calls a method of the controller class will be added to the argument list. Thus, the controller can determine from which device a function call originates.

The controller together with its exported devices is called “component”.

The controller concept reflects the possibility of TACO servers to export several devices. Attached devices correspond to the possibility of TACO servers to communicate with other TACO servers. So it is evident that the only general difference between TACO servers and NICOS Xable objects is that the Xable objects have no server functionality. Recently a project at FRM–II was initiated with the aim to write a generic TACO server which can add the server capabilities to any Xable object. Then the NICOSMethods provide another way to develop TACO servers:

Build a server by writing a client!

This concept is of special interest since it is very easy to implement a device funtionality with the script language Python and the NICOSMethods. The only thing to do is to write a class which inherits the Xable class. In this class for each standard interface function a method named “do” + $`<`$name of the interface function$`>`$ must be written. The following code example implements a class MotorWithSwitch which has two attached devices with the internal names “mot1” and “switch1”. mot1 is a moveable object. A moveable object is an Xable object that defines the alias “move” of the “start” function of the standard interface. switch1 is a switchable object. A switchable object is an Xable object that defines the alias “switchTo” of the “start” function of the standard interface. The MotorWithSwitch class inherits from the class moveable. It represents the functionality of mot1 with the exception that it only starts the mot1 if switch1 is set to “ON”.

```
from nicm_def import *
class MotorWithSwitch (Moveable):
    typelist = {
        "mot1":   Moveable,
        "switch1":  Switchable
    }
    def doStatus (self):
        return self.mot1.read ()
    def doStart (self, position):
        if self.switch1.read() == "ON":
            self.mot1.start()
        else:
            NicmError ("switch1 not on")
    def doRead (self):
        return self.mot1.read ()
    def doWait (self):
        self.mot1.wait ()

```

Another feature of the NICOSMethods framework is the grouping of Xable objects. To create a group “g” of the Xable objects “a”, “b” and “c”, `g = XOGroup(a,b,c)` has to be written. The command `g.read ()` returns a tuple of the return values of the read commands of the objects “a”, “b” and “c”. This works for all common functions.

An important feature of the grouping concept is that a particular controller receives only a single function call even if more than one of the grouped objects are exported devices of the controller. Accordingly the standard interface functions of a controller expect as arguments a list of all devices and a corresponding list of function arguments specified in the group call. The controller methods have to return a tuple with a corresponding number of return values.

Therefore it is possible to implement devices with dependent functionalities which can be handled simultaneously in the controller and initiated with a single function call.

Because of the limited space it was only possible to describe the most important features of the NICOSMethods.

The NICOSMethods are under development since december 2001. Nevertheless up to now the control software of a three axis spectrometer at the FRM–II using TACO and the NICOSMethods is nearly completed. Another instrument started software development with the NICOSMethods and further instruments intend to use this software package. The response of the NICOS users is very positive and as was demanded the development will be continued.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Charged particles and ions are known to be easily manipulated by means of electromagnetic fields. The situation is more complicated for neutral particles and atoms. In what follows, we shall often employ, for short, the term ”atom” for both elementary neutral particles as well as for composite systems, such as atoms or molecules. Neutral atoms can be successfully confined in different traps (see reviews \[1–3\]). Recently , neutrons were confined in a magnetic trap during the time of about 800 seconds, that is, around 13 minutes; this lifetime being mainly limited by the neutron beta decay into an electron, proton, and anti-neutrino, rather than by the trap losses. The formation of directed beams of neutral atoms is usually done in one of the two following ways. The first way can be called mechanical, since it requires the usage of mechanical collimators, selecting atoms from an isotropic distribution, after which the selected particles are released through tubes with a high pressure difference between the ends, as is done in molecular beam masers . Another mechanism may be named resonant, because it is based on the action of laser beams on resonant atomic transitions \[1–3\].

A novel mechanism for creating directed beams of neutral atoms has been recently advanced . This mechanism can be termed magnetic, since it involves magnetic fields, together with a special initial polarization of atomic spins. A short qualitative description of the suggested magnetic semiconfinement of atoms is directly connected with its name: This is an effect, when neutral atoms, stored in a trap, begin moving in one direction, forming a well-collimated beam, at the same time being confined from the opposite side.

The ability to form directed well-collimated beams of neutral atoms is very important for various applications. For example, this is necessary for the functioning of atom lasers . This can also be used for studying the coherence of trapped Bose-Einstein condensates , for considering the relative motion of binary mixtures , for measuring the one-particle density matrix by the scattering of fast atoms , and so on.

In order that a method of creating atomic beams be practical, it is necessary to check its feasibility under a realistic situation. And this is the aim of the present paper to generalize the consideration of the magnetic mechanism for creating atomic beams  by including the following really existing essential factors.

(i) Trap shape. Atoms to be shot out are, first, stored in a trap having a finite size and a particular shape \[1–3\]. The formation of an atomic beam is accomplished inside the trap whose shape, therefore, is of importance.

(ii) Field anisotropy. Fields governing the dynamics of atoms can be prepared in different configurations \[1–3,12\]. It is useful to include in the consideration additional parameters regulating the anisotropy of field configurations, which would help in choosing optimal conditions for the formation of beams.

(iii) Influence of gravity. Atoms, contrary to photons, possess mass. Hence atoms are subject to gravity that may strongly influence their dynamics . Therefore one has to accurately take into account the presence of gravity.

## 2 Semiconfining regime of motion

Let us consider a system of atoms, each having mass $`m_0`$, magnetic moment $`\mu _0`$, and spin $`S`$. Introduce the quantum-mechanical averages for the spatial position of an atom $`𝐫=\{r^\alpha \}`$, with $`\alpha =x,y,z`$, and for a spin $`𝐒=\{S^\alpha \}`$. Denote the gravitational acceleration as $`𝐠=\{g^\alpha \}`$ and the force due to interatomic interactions by $`𝐟=\{f^\alpha \}`$. The evolution equations for the averages $`𝐫`$ and $`𝐒`$, in the semiclassical approach , can be presented in the form

$$\frac{d^2r^\alpha }{dt^2}=\frac{\mu _0}{m_0}𝐒\frac{𝐁}{r^\alpha }+g^\alpha +\frac{f^\alpha }{m_0},$$
(1)
where $`𝐁`$ is a magnetic field acting on an atom, and

$$\frac{d𝐒}{dt}=\frac{\mu _0}{\mathrm{}}𝐒\times 𝐁.$$
(2)
The total magnetic field of a trap can be written as a sum

$$𝐁=𝐁_1+𝐁_2$$
(3)
of a time-invariant trapping field $`𝐁_1`$ and an alternating field $`𝐁_2`$. As a trapping field, one often uses the quadrupole field

$$𝐁_1=B_1^{}\left(x𝐞_x+y𝐞_y+\lambda z𝐞_z\right),$$
(4)
typical of magnetic traps \[1–3\], where $`𝐞_\alpha `$ are unitary vectors, $`B_1^{}>0`$ is a field gradient and $`\lambda `$ is an anisotropy parameter that can be varied. The alternating field

$$𝐁_2=B_2\left(h_x𝐞_x+h_y𝐞_y\right),$$
(5)
with $`h_\alpha =h_\alpha (t)`$ and $`h_x^2+h_y^2=1`$, is a transerse field serving for the stabilization of atomic confinement.

As is clear from the formulas (4) and (5), these magnetic fields describe a generalized TOP (time orbiting potential) trap. The fields specific for the latter follow if in Eq. (4) one sets $`\lambda =2`$ and in Eq. (5) a rotating transverse field is assumed. We accept here a more general form of the trap fields in order to stress that the considered mechanism of beam creation does not compulsory require the usage of the TOP traps but can be realized in other traps as well. Moreover, contrary to the TOP trap, with a fixed anisotropy, there exists a rich variety of other traps, where the field anisotropy can be varied in a wide diapason, with the ratio of radial to axial frequencies reaching a factor of 100. More details on possible field configurations can be found in reviews \[1–3\]. Modelling here the trap anisotropy by the parameter $`\lambda `$, we demonstrate the main idea that the semiconfining regime of motion can always be optimized by adjusting the corresponding configuration of trap fields.

In what follows, it is convenient to pass to the dimensionless space variable $`𝐫=\{x,y,z\}`$ with the dimensionless components

$$x\frac{r^x}{R_0},y\frac{r^y}{R_0},z\frac{r^z}{R_0}$$

measured in units of the characteristic length

$$R_0\frac{B_2}{B_1^{}}.$$
(6)
The latter is called the death circle, which describes the position of the oscillating zero magnetic field. The length (6) limits the size of the trapable cloud whose actual radius is slightly smaller \[1–3\]. Introduce the characteristic frequency of atomic motion, $`\omega _1`$, and that of spin motion, $`\omega _2`$, by the equalities

$$\omega _1^2\frac{\mu _0B_1^{}}{m_0R_0},\omega _2\frac{\mu _0B_2}{\mathrm{}}.$$
(7)
And let us employ the notation

$$𝐆\frac{𝐠}{R_0\omega _1^2},\gamma \stackrel{}{\xi }\frac{𝐟}{m_0R_0},$$
(8)
where $`𝐆`$ means the dimensionless gravitational force and $`\gamma `$ implies a collision rate. Atomic collisions can be modelled by a random variable $`\stackrel{}{\xi }=\{\xi _\alpha (t)\}`$ defined by means of the stochastic averages

$$\xi _\alpha (t)=0,\xi _\alpha (t)\xi _\beta (t^{})=2D_\alpha \delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta (tt^{}),$$
(9)
in which $`D_\alpha `$ is a diffusion rate.

With this notation, the evolution equation (1) takes the form of the stochastic differential equation

$$\frac{d^2𝐫}{dt^2}=\omega _1^2\left(S^x𝐞_x+S^y𝐞_y+\lambda S^z𝐞_z+𝐆\right)+\gamma \xi ,$$
(10)
and the spin equation (2) can be transformed as

$$\frac{d𝐒}{dt}=\omega _2\widehat{A}𝐒,$$
(11)
where $`\widehat{A}=[A_{\alpha \beta }]`$ is an antisymmetric matrix with the elements

$$A_{\alpha \alpha }=0,A_{\alpha \beta }=A_{\beta \alpha },$$

$$A_{12}=\lambda z,A_{23}=x+h_x,A_{31}=y+h_y.$$

The evolution equations can be simplified by taking account of the existence of small parameters

$$\left|\frac{\omega _1}{\omega _2}\right|1,\left|\frac{\omega }{\omega _2}\right|1,\left|\frac{\gamma }{\omega _2}\right|1,$$
(12)
where the notation

$$\omega \underset{t}{\mathrm{max}}\left|\frac{d}{dt}𝐡(t)\right|$$
(13)
is used. These inequalities are usually valid for realistic traps \[1–3\]. Then the evolution equations can be reduced to the consideration of atomic motion on the center manifold by employing the scale separation approach , which involves a generalization of averaging techniques  to stochastic equations.

Under conditions (12), the matrix $`\widehat{A}`$ can be treated as a quasi-invariant  with respect to the fastly oscillating spin $`𝐒`$. Then the solution to Eq. (11) can be presented as a sum

$$𝐒(t)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}C_i𝐛_j(t)\mathrm{exp}\{\omega _2a_j(t)t\}$$
(14)
over the eigenvectors $`𝐛_j=𝐛_j(t)`$ of the matrix $`\widehat{A}`$, where $`a_j=a_j(t)`$ are the related eigenvalues, and the coefficients $`C_j`$ are given by the initial conditions, so that

$$C_j=𝐒(0)𝐛_j(0),$$

$$𝐛_j=\frac{(A_{12}A_{23}a_jA_{31})𝐞_x+(A_{12}A_{31}+a_jA_{23})𝐞_y+(A_{12}^2+a_j^2)𝐞_z}{(A_{12}^2|a_j|^2)^2+(A_{12}^2+|a_j|^2)(A_{23}^2+A_{31}^2)]^{1/2}},$$

$$a_{1,2}=\pm i\sqrt{A_{12}^2+A_{23}^2+A_{31}^2},a_3=0.$$

The guiding center for the spatial variable $`𝐫`$ is described by Eq. (10) in which one has to substitute the form (14) and to average the right-hand side according to the rule

$$\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{\tau }_0^\tau f(𝐫,𝐡(t),\stackrel{}{\xi },t)dt.$$

In this way, one obtains the equation

$$\frac{d^2𝐫}{dt^2}=\omega _1^2\left(𝐅+𝐆\right),$$
(15)
in which

$$𝐅=C_3\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{1}{\tau }_0^\tau \left(b_3^x𝐞_x+b_3^y𝐞_y+\lambda b_3^z𝐞_z\right)𝑑t,$$

$$C_3=\frac{(x+h_x^0)S_0^x+(y+h_y^0)S_0^y+\lambda zS_0^z}{[(x+h_x^0)^2+(y+h_y^0)^2+\lambda ^2z^2]^{1/2}},$$

$$𝐛_3=\frac{(x+h_x)𝐞_x+(y+h_y)𝐞_y+\lambda z𝐞_z}{[(x+h_x)^2+(y+h_y)^2+\lambda ^2z^2]^{1/2}},$$

where $`h_\alpha ^0h_\alpha (0)`$ and $`S_0^\alpha S^\alpha (0)`$. In the integration, defining the effective force $`𝐅`$, one should keep in mind the occurrence of another small parameter

$$\left|\frac{\omega _1}{\omega }\right|1,$$
(16)
because of which $`𝐫`$ is to be treated as a quasi-invariant with respect to $`𝐡`$. Taking, for concreteness, the rotating field

$$h_x(t)=\mathrm{cos}\omega t,h_y(t)=\mathrm{sin}\omega t$$
(17)
results in the effective force

$$𝐅=\frac{[(1+x)S_0^x+yS_0^y+\lambda zS_0^z](x𝐞_x+y𝐞_y+2\lambda ^2z𝐞_z)}{2[(1+2x+x^2+y^2+\lambda ^2z^2)(1+x^2+y^2+\lambda ^2z^2)]^{1/2}}.$$
(18)
We have also considered other forms of the transverse field $`𝐡`$, provided it satisfies conditions (12), (13), and (16), which yields slightly different formulas for the effective force $`𝐅`$. However, slight variations of $`𝐅`$ do not qualitatively change the dynamics of atoms. Therefore in what follows, we particularize the effective force by Eq. (18).

At this point, it is worth stressing that the force (18), caused by magnetic fields, acts on atoms only inside the trap, while outside of the latter the force vanishes. Hence, to consider the motion of atoms in the whole space, including the state when they fly out of the trap, it is necessary to concretize the trap shape. For instance, a cylindrical trap of radius $`R`$ and length $`L`$, measured in units of $`R_0`$, can be characterized by one of the shape factors

$$\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐫)=1\mathrm{\Theta }\left(x^2+y^2R^2\right)\mathrm{\Theta }\left(|z|\frac{L}{2}\right),\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐫)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{x^2+y^2}{R^2}\frac{z^2}{L^2}\right),$$
(19)
in which $`\mathrm{\Theta }()`$ is a unit step function. Thus, the general expression of the force, acting on atoms inside as well as outside the trap, is Eq. (18) multiplied by a shape factor from Eq. (19). It could be possible to introduce more refined shape factors. However, to study the basic role of the trap finiteness, it is sufficient to consider the simple expressions (19). Generally, the shape factors influence atomic motion only in the intermediate region, at the instant the atoms leave the trap. In this region, the effective force (18) of trapping fields smoothly diminishes to zero. Because of this, an exact form of a shape factor does not change much in the principal behaviour of semiconfined atoms whose main properties remain practically not altered. In our numerical calculations, we have studied the difference resulting from the usage of the step-like and smooth shape factors from Eq. (19). For the same trap parameters $`R`$ and $`L`$, the difference in the atomic trajectories is practically unnoticeable. A slight distinction can only be noticed in the phase portraits for velocities: The step-like shape factor causes the appearance of characteristic kinks that are rounded off by the smooth shape factor.

To complete the formulation of the problem, we have to fix the initial spin polarization $`𝐒_0𝐒(0)`$. As is shown in Refs. , for creating directed motion of atoms, one has to fix the initial spin polarization so that

$$S_0^x=0,S_0^y=0,S_0^z=S.$$
(20)
Such initial conditions for spin polarization can be prepared in one of the ways well known in quantum mechanics  or by a short resonant pulse, as is discussed in Ref. . Accepting the initial condition (20) and taking account of the shape factor (19), we come to the expression for the effective force

$$𝐅=\frac{1}{2}\lambda Suz\left(x𝐞_x+y𝐞_y+2\lambda ^2z𝐞_z\right)$$
(21)
where $`u=u(𝐫)`$, with

$$u(𝐫)\frac{\mathrm{\Xi }(𝐫)}{[(1+2x+x^2+y^2+\lambda ^2z^2)(1+x^2+y^2+\lambda ^2z^2)]^{1/2}}.$$
(22)
As is easy to notice, the force (21) is invariant under the transformation

$$\lambda \lambda ,SS.$$
(23)
Therefore, it is always possible to choose such $`\lambda `$ and $`S`$ that $`\lambda S>0`$, which is assumed in what follows.

It is convenient to pass to the dimensionless time measured in units of $`(\sqrt{\lambda S}\omega _1)^1`$. The return to the dimensional time is made by means of the replacement $`t\sqrt{\lambda S}\omega _1t`$. Also, let us introduce the dimensionless gravitational force

$$\stackrel{}{\delta }\frac{𝐆}{\lambda S}=\frac{𝐠}{\lambda SR_0\omega _1^2}=\{\delta _\alpha \}.$$
(24)
Then the evolution equation (15) can be written as the system of equations

$$\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=\frac{1}{2}uzx+\delta _x,\frac{d^2y}{dt^2}=\frac{1}{2}uzy+\delta _y,$$

$$\frac{d^2z}{dt^2}=\lambda ^2uz^2+\delta _z,$$
(25)
where the function $`u=u(𝐫)`$ is defined in Eq. (22), with the shape factor (19).

We accomplished numerical solution of Eqs. (25) for different field-anisotropy parameters $`\lambda `$ and for different trap radii $`R`$ and lengths $`L`$. The results are presented in Figs. 1 to 4, where the $`z`$ axis is along the trap axis and the latter is inclined by the 45 degrees to the horizon, so that $`\delta _z=\delta _x`$. Initial conditions for the spatial position of atoms are close to the trap center $`𝐫_0=0`$, and initial velocities of atoms, $`\dot{𝐫}_0`$, are varied in the interval $`0.1\dot{r}_0^\alpha 0.1`$. The motion $`x(t)`$ is similar to $`y(t)`$, because of which we show only the $`xz`$ cross-section of phase portraits. The pictures do not qualitatively change when varying the trap parameters $`R`$ and $`L`$ in the interval $`[1,10]`$. But the acceleration is better for longer traps, with larger $`L`$, as well as for larger $`\lambda `$. The maximal velocity that can be achieved is of the order of $`v_{max}\lambda \sqrt{L}`$. The aspect ratio $`R_{asp}=<x>/<z>`$ is small, $`R_{asp}0.01`$, showing that the beam is stretched in the $`z`$-direction about $`100`$ times larger than in the $`x`$-direction, that is, the beam is well collimated. The figures present calculations for the step-like shape factor which, to our mind, more clearly illustrates the role of the trap finiteness. As we have numerically checked, the usage of the smooth factor, with the same trap parameters, does not alter atomic trajectories. The sole difference appears in the phase portraits showing the axial to radial velocities: In the case of the step-like shape factor there are kinks in the intermediate region where atoms leave the trap. These kinks are rounded off in the case of the smooth shape factor.

Comparing these numerical calculations with those of Ref. , where gravity was not taken into account, we come to the following conclusions. The regime of motion, called semiconfinement, remains, when atoms are confined from one side of the trap by the minimal value

$$z_{min}\left(\frac{6}{\lambda ^2}\dot{z}_0^2\right)^{1/3},$$

but are not confined from another side, escaping with acceleration in this direction. For the present choice of coordinates, the escape direction is along the axis $`z`$. If the gravity component $`\delta _z>0`$, the positive gravitational force only helps to atoms to move preferably in the $`z`$-direction, so that all atoms are semiconfined and escape from the trap forming a narrow beam along the $`z`$-axis. However, if $`\delta _z<0`$, then gravity hampers to escape for some of the atoms. The fraction of atoms that remain confined because of gravity is of order $`\frac{1}{2}\lambda \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}|\delta _z|}`$. The main visible influence of gravity on the ejected beam is in curving atomic trajectories in the same way as gravity curves the trajectory of a ball shot out of a cannon.

To have a feeling of the values of the characteristic quantities, met above, let us give estimates for the case of parameters typical of alkali atoms in magnetic traps \[1–3,9,21\]. The characteristic frequency of atomic motion is $`\omega _110^210^3`$ s-1, that of spin motion is $`\omega _210^710^8`$ s-1. The frequency of the transverse rotating field is $`\omega 10^410^5`$ s-1. The collision rate is $`\gamma 10`$ s-1. Consequently,

$$\frac{\omega _1}{\omega _2}10^5,\frac{\omega }{\omega _2}10^3,\frac{\gamma }{\omega _2}10^6,\frac{\omega _1}{\omega }10^2,$$

from where it follows that the inequalities (12) and (16) hold true. The characteristic radius (6) is $`R_00.10.5`$ cm. The dimensionless gravity components, defined in Eq. (24), can always be made small. Thus, for $`\lambda 2`$, $`S1`$, $`R_00.5`$ cm, and $`\omega _110^210^3`$ s-1, substituting in Eq. (24) the gravitational acceleration $`g^\alpha 10^3`$ cm/s2, we get $`\delta _\alpha 10^310^1`$. When the trap axis is directed against the gravitational force, then the amount of atoms that cannot escape from the trap is between $`1\%`$ to $`10\%`$. Hence, the semiconfining regime of motion is not much spoiled by gravity. The majority of atoms fly out of the trap, forming a well-collimated beam with a squeezing factor of about 100; the maximal velocity of atoms, for a trap of length $`110`$ cm can reach the order of 100 cm/s.

The role of random pair collisions can be considered in the same way as in Ref. . These collisions do not essentially disturb the semiconfining regime provided that

$$\frac{\gamma ^2D}{(\lambda S)^{3/2}\omega _1^3}1,D\underset{\alpha }{sup}\{D_\alpha \}.$$

This condition, accepting for the diffusion rate an estimate $`Dk_BT/\mathrm{}`$, where $`k_B`$ is the Boltzmann constant and $`T`$ is temperature, can be presented as

$$TT_c\frac{\mathrm{}(\lambda S)^{3/2}\omega _1^3}{k_B\gamma ^2}.$$

These inequalities show that the disorganizing influence of atomic collisions is suppressed when increasing the anisotropy parameter $`\lambda `$ or lowering temperature. For the characteristic values $`\lambda S1`$, $`\omega _110^210^3`$ s-1, and $`\gamma 10`$ s-1, the critical temperature, below which the semiconfining regime appears, is $`T_c10^710^4`$ K. This implies that for successful functioning of an atom cannon, trapped atoms are to be sufficiently cooled down. Such a cooling can be effectively realized in modern traps \[1–3\].

## 3 Discussion

In this paper, we have analysed the influence on the magnetic semiconfinement of neutral atoms of three factors, trap size, field anisotropy, and gravity, which had not been considered in the previous works . The principal result is that, despite the action of gravity, the semiconfining regime can always be preserved by appropriately choosing trap parameters. Consequently, the suggested magnetic semiconfinement can really serve as an efficient mechanism for creating well-collimated beams of neutral particles and atoms.

In order to correctly describe the semiconfining regime of motion, it has been necessary to lift the adiabatic approximation that is usually employed for considering the motion of trapped atoms. As is known from the general theory , the adiabatic approximation may be reasonable for treating the motion of a multifrequency dynamical system that is close to a stationary state. The motion of atoms, permanently confined inside a trap, is exactly such a kind of a stationary regime. This is why the adiabatic approximation works reasonably well for constantly confined atoms. Corrections to this approximation, in the case of a TOP trap, can be estimated as being of the order of $`\omega _1/\omega 10^2`$, which being expressed in percent, makes at most a few percent. Atomic micromotion of atoms in a TOP trap has recently been studied experimentally . The detected nonadiabatic effects were found to be of the order of a few percent, in agreement with the above estimate. Anharmonic corrections to the harmonic approximation of the effective TOP potential are also not large for trapped atoms moving close to the trap center .

The situation is different for atoms accelerated out of trap in the semiconfining regime of motion. Such a regime is far from stationary, because of which the adiabatic approximation is not applicable in principle . Also, in this regime, atoms may move far from the trap center, which prohibits the usage of a harmonic approximation. This is why, we have considered the effective trap force (21) in its complete form, containing the factor (22), never invoking harmonic approximations. At the same time, taking into account the anharmonic factor (22) not only makes the consideration more general but also reduces the influence of a particular shape factor on the motion of atoms. This happens because the role of the shape factor becomes noticeable when atoms leave the trap. But the effective force (21), due to the anharmonic factor (22), fastly diminishes to zero after atoms leave the death circle whose radius is usually essentially smaller than the trap size.

As is explained in the last paragraph of the previous section, the semiconfining regime is easier realized after precooling to sufficiently low temperatures. In the region of the estimated temperatures, Bose-Einstein condensates can be created. Atomic beams outcoupled from condensates remind photon beams from lasers, because of which a device emitting condensed atoms can be called an atom laser. The known standard way for realizing an output coupler for trapped atoms is by transferring atoms from a trapped state into an untrapped state by means of a monochromatic resonant rf field, as has been done in experiments \[25–27\]. This method produces a beam of atoms merely falling down in the field of gravity. Such a device can hardly be called an atom laser, since the very first condition on a laser is that its output could be pointed in an arbitrary direction. A directional extraction of sodium atoms from a trapped condensate was demonstrated by using two laser beams stimulating Raman transitions . More information on atom lasers can be found in reviews . The mechanism for creating atomic beams, we suggest, differs from the mentioned above in three main points: (i) it can be realized by using only magnetic fields, without involving additional blocking devices or external laser beams; (ii) the beam direction is prescribed by the trap axis that can be oriented arbitrarily; (iii) the characteristics of the semiconfinement can be varied by choosing appropriate magnetic fields. In this way, the proposed mechanism can be employed for creating highly-directional beams from atom lasers.

It would, certainly, be nice if the effect of semiconfinement could be observed experimentally. Since we are not experimentalists, it would not be reasonable from our side to plunge into a discussion of technical details of experiments. Our aim has been to demonstrate the principal feasibility of realizing the semiconfining regime of motion. However, to motivate experimentalists, it would, probably, be useful to touch several points whose clarification could facilitate experimental work.

First of all, we would like to emphasize that the described effect is rather general and can be realized in different traps, with different magnetic fields. A dynamic TOP-like trap was considered above for concreteness. As we have checked, the semiconfining regime of motion exists for static traps as well, provided the required initial conditions for atomic spins are prepared. We could imagine at least three ways to achieve the necessary initial spin polarization.

One possibility could be to orient spins in the $`z`$-direction by means of a guiding longitudinal field, while the transverse field is yet switched off. After this, the latter field should be quickly switched on. The main problem here is that the trap field has to be switched on faster than the Larmor period $`2\pi /\omega _2`$. This looks to be difficult to accomplish experimentally. Although, what seems difficult today may be successfully performed in future.

Another possibility is to prepare, first, atoms with the required $`z`$-polarization of spins in a trap. For instance, this can be done by using the trap of Ref. , which is a quadrupole trap with a bias field along the $`z`$-axis. Then the spin-polarized atoms are to be quickly loaded into another trap with the desired field configuration. The feasibility of transferring atoms from one trap to another by means of a sudden transfer, as opposed to slow transfer, has been discussed in Ref. .

One more way could be as follows. Assume that a trap consists of two chambers, upper and lower. Let atoms be confined in the upper chamber. Then, acting on these atoms by rf field, one transfers them into an untrapped state \[25–28\]. Obtaining the spin polarization corresponding to this untrapped state, atoms fall down because of gravity, and pass to the lower chamber. The field configuration of the latter is to be such that the spin polarization of the falling atoms be that required for the semiconfining regime of motion. Thus, the lower chamber could emit a quasi-continuous beam of atoms.

The features of the emitted atomic beam depend, of course, on many technical details related to particular experiments. The major properties are prescribed by the magnetic field configuration arranged. The trap shape factor, as is explained above, plays less important role, when the trap size is larger than the radius of the death circle or the radius of an atomic cloud in a trap. A continuous atomic beam being ejected out of the trap will be influenced by the trap shape slightly stronger than a short pulse. In the latter case, when the group of atoms, after an initial acceleration reaches the trap boundary, one could switch off the trap field abruptly. Such a situation would exactly correspond to the usage of the step-like shape factor.

Finally, one could imagine experiments for which the directed motion of atoms, organized in the proposed way, would not necessarily end up with atoms leaving the trap. Some of such possibilities are mentioned in the Introduction. Probably, the most interesting suggestion would be to study the relative motion of one atomic component through another, as is discussed in Ref. .

Acknowledgement

We are grateful for useful remarks to V.S. Bagnato and A.B. Kuklov. We acknowledge financial support by the Bogolubov-Infeld Grant of the State Agency for Atomic Energy, Poland.

Figure Captions

Fig. 1. The trajectories of atoms in the $`xz`$ cross-section at the initial stage of acceleration, when $`0t50`$, for the trap parameters $`R=1,L=1,\lambda =20`$, and the gravity components $`\delta _x=0.01,\delta _y=0,\delta _z=0.01`$.

Fig. 2. The velocities of atoms on the $`\dot{x}\dot{z}`$ plane for the same conditions as in Fig. 1. The characteristic kinks is a result of a step-like shape.

Fig. 3. Typical trajectories during the long time interval $`0t300`$ for the trap parameters $`R=1,L=1,\lambda =10`$, and the gravity components $`\delta _x=0.05,\delta _y=0,\delta _z=0.05`$.

Fig. 4. The phase portrait for atomic velocities corresponding to the parameters of Fig. 3. The kinks are again due to a step-like shape factor. The general picture for a smooth shape factor remains the same, except that the kinks become rounded off.


text:
# The Discovery of a Spatially-Resolved Supernova Remnant in M31 with Chandra

## 1. Introduction

X-ray emission from supernova remnants (SNRs) in our Galaxy has been extensively studied in the past twenty years. Pre-Chandra observations allowed many SNRs to be resolved, revealing several different morphologies. The detailed study of SNR morphology has revealed the interaction of ejected materials with the interstellar medium (ISM) in detail, and also has provided insights into the evolution of the SNR progenitor stars. Chandra observations of Galactic SNRs provide exquisite detail, allowing the chemical stratification of the progenitor to be revealed (e.g., Canizares et al. 2001) and identifying the central neutron star and its associated synchrotron nebula (e.g., Slane et al. 2000). Even with these new insights, studies of Galactic SNRs can be limited by the lack of reliable distance estimates and generally high interstellar absorption. These limitations are overcome by studies of SNRs in nearby extragalactic systems, the closest of which (the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds) are near enough to still allow Chandra to reveal the structure in detail (see e.g., Hughes 2001).

Because M31 is the closest ($`800`$ kpc) galaxy which shares similar morphology and size with the Milky Way, it is the best candidate for a comparative study of SNR. Optical surveys for SNR in M31 typically identify candidates based on \[S II\] and Hα imaging observations, e.g. d’Odorico, Dopita, & Benvenuti (1980), Blair, Kirshner, & Chevalier (1981, 1982), Braun & Walterbos (1993) and Magnier et al. (1995). About 200 SNR candidates have been identified by these surveys, 27 of which have been confirmed via spectroscopic observations (see Blair et al. 1981, 1982). In a recent extensive ROSAT PSPC survey (Supper et al. 2001) of M31, 16 SNRs were identified within a total area of $`10.7`$ deg2 by cross-correlating with the these optical catalogs. Their X-ray luminosities (0.1–2.4 keV) range from $`10^{36}`$ to $`10^{37}`$$`\text{erg}\text{s}^1`$.

More recently, Kong et al. (2002) detected two SNRs (CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 and CXOM31 J004253.5+412553) in the central $`17^{}\times 17^{}`$ region of M31 with Chandra, both of which were previously identified by ROSAT. It is worth noting that CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 was also identified as a SNR in the Einstein data (Blair et al. 1981). In a recent Chandra observation of M31 core region, we found that one of the SNRs is extended. In this Letter, we report on observations of the first SNR in M31 to be resolved at X-ray wavelengths, CXOM31 J004327.7+411829.

## 2. Observations and Data Reduction

CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 was observed several times with Chandra Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS-I) under a M31 monitoring program during 1999–2001 (see Kong et al. 2002). CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is about $`8^{}`$ from the aim point of these observations, and therefore the instrumental point spread function (PSF) is substantially poorer than if it was on-axis. In a recent 5ks ACIS-I observation of a transient in M31 taken on 2001 August 31 (Kong et al. 2001), CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is $`<4^{}`$ from the aim-point, where the PSF is sufficiently small to allow us to resolve this object. Additional observations were obtained with the ACIS-S on 2001 October 5 with total integration time of 37.7ks; although CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is in the ACIS-S4 front-illuminated (FI) chip and is almost $`8^{}`$ from the aim-point, this long observation provides nearly 300 counts and allows the best study of the source spectrum. In this Letter, we concentrate on the analysis of these two latterly mentioned observations; we also make use of other short ($`5`$ks) ACIS observations (see e.g., Di Stefano et al. 2002; Kong et al. 2002) to construct the long-term lightcurve.

All ACIS data were telemetered in Faint mode, and were collected with frame transfer time of 3.2 s. In order to reduce the instrumental background, we screened the data to allow only photon energies in the range of 0.3–7 keV, and ASCA grades of 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6. In addition, $`300`$ s of data was excluded from the 2001 October 5 observations due to increased background (likely due to increased particle flux from the solar wind). Data were reduced and analyzed with the Chandra X-ray Center CIAO v2.2 package 111http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/ and spectral analysis was performed by making use of XSPEC v11.2 222http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/xanadu/xspec/index.html. Unless otherwise specified, all quoted errors are at the 1$`\sigma `$ level.

## 3. Analyses and Results

### 3.1. X-ray Image

CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 was clearly detected in both observations, but we determined the source position and morphology from the shorter 5ks image because the source was significantly closer to the aimpoint in this dataset. We examined the aspect of this observation with the thread provided by the CXC 333http://asc.harvard.edu/mta/ASPECT/fix\_offset/fix\_offset.cgi; and find an offset of $`1.34^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`1.43^{\prime \prime }`$ in R.A. and Dec., respectively. After correcting for this aspect offset, the coordinates of the center of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 are found to be R.A.=00h 43m 27.8s, DEC.=+4118 29′′ (J2000) with a positional error of about $`0.5^{\prime \prime }`$. The optical counterpart of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is source 2-033 in Magnier et al. (1995), source 15 in d’Odorico et al. (1980) and source BA23 in Blair et al. (1981). This object was identified as an irregular, faint and high \[S II\]/Hα ($`1`$) SNR. The optical extension is about $`10^{\prime \prime }18^{\prime \prime }`$, with a slight elongation along the DEC. direction. This source was previously detected (but not resolved) with the ROSAT PSPC and identified as an SNR (Supper et al. 1997,2001, source RX J0043.4+4118). It was out of the field-of-view of the ROSAT HRI search for SNR in M31 which might have resolved it (Magnier et al. 1997). Figure 1 shows the “true color” X-ray image of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829. The color scheme is defined as 0.5–0.8 keV = red, 0.8-1.2 keV = green, and 1.2–4 keV = blue. The choice of such energy ranges is to highlight the O and Ne/Fe emissions (see § 3.2) from the SNR. CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is clearly extended in X-rays as a distinct ring-shaped object with a diameter of $`11^{\prime \prime }`$ (42 pc at 780 kpc). The uncertainty of physical dimension of the SNR is dominated by the distance to M31; for instance, Supper et al. (1997,2001) used 690 kpc, corresponding to $`37`$ pc. Our quoted distance (780 kpc; Stanek & Garnavich 1998) is the upper end of all distance estimates.

Figure 1: “True color” Chandra ACIS-I image of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829. This image was constructed from the soft (red: 0.5–0.8 keV), medium (green: 0.8–1.2 keV) and hard (blue: 1.2–4 keV) energy bands. The pixel size is $`0.496^{\prime \prime }`$ and the image has been slightly smoothed with a $`0.8^{\prime \prime }\sigma `$ Gaussian function. The diameter of the SNR is about $`11^{\prime \prime }`$.

### 3.2. Spectral Analysis

The long 37.7 ks ACIS observation was used for spectral analysis. We extracted data from a circle of 12 pixels ($`6^{\prime \prime }`$) radius centered on CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 and background from an annulus with inner and outer radii of 30 and 60 pixels, respectively. We found 266 net source counts. In order to allow $`\chi ^2`$ statistics to be used, the spectrum was grouped into at least 15 counts per spectral bin. Response files were selected according to the CCD temperature with standard CIAO routines. We fit the data with several single-component spectral models including power-law, thermal bremsstrahlung, blackbody, Raymond-Smith (RS) and non-equilibrium ionization (NEI) models with interstellar absorption. The RS model is a simple collisional equilibrium ionization model, while NEI model is appropriate for modeling SNRs whose age is smaller than the time required to reach ionization equilibrium. NEI model consists of electron temperature ($`kT_e`$) and ionization timescale ($`\tau =n_et`$), where $`n_e`$ and $`t`$ are the mean electron density and the elapsed time after the plasma was shock heated to a constant temperature $`kT_e`$. Both models are often applied to study X-ray emission from extragalactic SNRs (see e.g., Wang 1999; Schlegel, Blair, & Fesen 2000; Hughes, Hayashi, & Katsuji 1998). We were also concerned that the quantum efficiency degradation of ACIS will affect our spectral fit444see http://asc.harvard.edu/cal/Links/Acis/acis/Cal\_prods/qeDeg/. The degradation is shown to be a function of time and is most severe at low energies. We therefore applied corrections using the ACISABS absorption model in XSPEC 555http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/chartas/xcontdir/xcont.html. This model allows us to correct the response by inputing the number of days between Chandra’s launch and the observation (805 days for our observation). In general, the degradation mainly affects the best fit $`N_H`$, which is over-estimated without the correction. All results reported here are corrected for the degradation.

Except for the RS and NEI models, other spectral models give unacceptable fits to the data ($`\chi ^2/\nu >2`$). For the RS and NEI models, we first fixed the abundances at solar value (Andens & Grevesse 1989). We also did fits with the abundances of O, N, and Fe as free parameters and the remaining elements fixed to the solar value. Finally, we fixed the abundances based on optical spectroscopy of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 with to be $`2.3\times 10^4`$ (O), $`8.4\times 10^5`$ (N) and $`0.72\times 10^5`$ (S) relative to hydrogen, respectively (Blair et al. 1982); these correspond to 0.27, 0.75, and 0.44 solar abundance. Table 1 lists the best-fitting parameters for the RS and NEI models.

All models except the RS model fixed at the optically determined abundances provide acceptable fits. The NEI models clearly have relatively large errors, especially the electron temperature, $`kT_e`$. The best-fit $`N_H`$ is slightly lower (within 1$`\sigma `$) than the Galactic value along the direction ($`7\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2; Dickey & Lockman 1990), and the lower limit is not well constrained. Moreover, the abundance of O, Ne, and Fe is not constrained if they are left as free parameters in the NEI model. The best fit temperatures of the RS models with solar abundances and free O, Ne and Fe abundances are similar. The $`N_H`$ for the models with solar abundances is an order of magnitude greater than the optically determined value (see below). The X-ray spectrum with an absorbed RS model is shown in Figure 2. It is evident that the spectrum is dominated by a broad emission line of O VIII at 0.654 keV and a blend of Fe L shell lines and Ne K shell lines around 0.9 keV.

Figure 2: Upper panel: The Chandra ACIS-S4 spectrum of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 with an absorbed RS model ($`N_H=4.6\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2, $`kT_{RS}=0.18`$ keV). Lower panel: Residuals after subtracting the fit from the data in units of counts s-1 keV-1.

The hydrogen absorption column density for the remnant from optical observations was estimated to be $`N_H=7\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 ($`A_V=0.4`$; Blair et al. 1981, 1982). The best fit value for $`N_H`$ from the RS (NEI) model is higher (slightly lower) than the optically determined value. We also fixed $`N_H`$ at $`7\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 and the fit is still acceptable, but gives a slightly higher thermal temperature for both models.

### 3.3. Lightcurve

The long-term lightcurve is shown in Figure 3, which is constructed from a series of ACIS pointings (see e.g., Di Stefano et al. 2002; Kong et al. 2001). The background subtracted count rate was corrected for exposure, background variation and instrumental PSF. The mean count rate is 0.007 count s-1 and it is evident that the source does not vary significantly as expected for a SNR.

We also tested for variability over shorter time scales during the 37.7 ks observation. We binned the data into 500 s, 1000 s, 5000 s and 10000 s resolution and used Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to search for variability, finding nothing significant.

Figure 3: Lightcurve of the Chandra count rate in the 0.3–7 keV range of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 since 2000 March. The horizontal line is the average count rate of the SNR.

## 4. Discussion

CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is clearly resolved with Chandra into a ring-shaped object. This is the first extragalactic SNR resolved at X-ray wavelengths (other than those in the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds). The diameter of CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 as measured by Chandra is about $`11^{\prime \prime }`$, corresponding to 42 pc; this is comparable to the optically determined value (d’Odorico et al. 1980; Blair et al. 1981). The X-ray image shows evidence of a spatial dependence of chemical composition, with O concentrating in the north-western part, and Ne/Fe distributing along the eastern and south-eastern arc. It is unclear if the X-ray image shows the “blow out” seen in the south-eastern section of the optical image (d’Odorico et al. 1980; Maginer et al. 1995). There is no significant variability on both long (months to years) and short (hours) time scales. The X-ray emission from CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 can be acceptably fit with a RS model. For abundances fixed at solar values, the estimated luminosity is near the Eddington luminosity for a $`1.4M_{}`$ neutron star, which makes this SNR one of the most luminous ($`>10^{38}`$$`\text{erg}\text{s}^1`$) objects in M31 (see Kong et al. 2002). Beacaue it is not realistic to assume solar abundances for all elements, we here consider the RS model with varing chemical abundances. Fits to RS model with variable abundances find a slightly lower X-ray luminosity of $`5\times 10^{37}`$$`\text{erg}\text{s}^1`$ (0.3–7 keV; $`N_H=4.6\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2 and temperature $`kT_{RS}=0.18`$ keV), which is at the high end of luminosity distribution of SNR in M31 (Supper et al. 1997; Magnier et al. 1997). Assuming CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 is in the adiabatic expansion phase, we can estimate its physical parameters through the Sedov solution:

$$R=5\text{pc}\times (E_{51}t_3^2/n_0)^{1/5},$$
(1)
where $`R,E_{51},t_3,`$ and $`n_0`$ are the radius (in pc), initial explosion energy (in units of $`10^{51}`$ erg), age (in units of 1000 yr), and number density of ambient gas (in units of cm-3) of the SNR, respectively. The shock temperature can be written as

$$T_s=(0.18\text{ keV})(R/t_3)^2,$$
(2)
Adopting a radius of 21 pc, $`T_s=0.18`$ keV, and $`E_{51}=0.465`$ (Blair et al. 1981); from equations (1) and (2), We obtain $`t=21000`$ years and $`n_0=0.16`$ cm-3. Considering the SNR’s size and uncertainty of spectral fit, $`t`$ ranges between 15700 years and 22300 years while $`n_0`$ varies between 0.11 cm-3 and 0.26 cm-3. We therefore can classify CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 as a middle-aged SNR (cf e.g., Hughes et al. 1998) based on the age derived from the X-ray spectrum. Because SNR sometimes contain a pulsar and/or a pulsar nebula we also did some fits including a power-law component with photon index fixed at 2 along with our RS model. These fits limit the power-law component to less than about 25% of the flux. From the derived density, the swept-up mass is estimated to be $`(4/3)M_Hn_0\pi R^3153M_{}`$, where $`M_H`$ is mass of a hydrogen atom. Taking into account of the uncertainty of the SNR’s size and temperature, the swept-up mass ranges from $`105M_{}`$ to $`172M_{}`$. Thus for an ejected mass of a few solar masses, the ratio of swept-up to ejected mass is $`2030`$, indicating that the SNR is in the Sedov phase.

The X-ray emission from CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 can also be fit with an absorbed NEI model although the uncertainties of $`N_H`$ and $`kT_e`$ are large. Using this model, the X-ray luminosity (0.3–7 keV) of the SNR is estimated to be $`3\times 10^{36}`$$`\text{erg}\text{s}^1`$, which is typical of SNR in M31. Using Eqns (1) and (2), we obtain $`t=32107530`$ years and $`n_0=0.0030.02`$ cm-3. The ratio of swept-up to ejected mass is $`5`$, indicating that the SNR might be in the early Sedov phase. Comparing to RS model, these values are smaller. In particular, the number density of ambient gas is very low. The relatively high $`kT_e`$ ($`=2.1`$ keV) is not unusual; for example, N132D in the Large Magellanic Cloud requires a two-component NEI model for which the temperatures are $`0.8`$ and $`2.7`$ keV (Favata et al. 1997). The usual explanation for the hot component is that it comes from the shock-heated swept-up circumstellar medium, or it is due to the inhomogeneity of the ISM.

The number density of ambient gas is relatively low ($`n_0=0.0030.26`$ cm-3). For example, from a well-studied sample of SNRs in the Large Magellanic Cloud (e.g. Hughes et al. 1998), $`n_0`$ ranges between 0.3 to 4 cm-3. Previous ROSAT observations of M31 indicate that the number of X-ray emitting SNRs is surprisingly small (Supper et al. 1997; Magnier et al. 1997); only 16 out of 200 optically identified SNRs were detected in X-rays. Magnier et al. (1997) suggested that this lack of X-ray emission could be due to lower than expected local ISM densities, i.e., non-detected SNRs may be in regions with densities less than 0.1 cm-3, while those SNR detected in X-rays may be in higher density regions. The low $`n_0`$ we find for CXOM31 J004327.7+411829 provides support for this suggestion. In addition, in the optical image of Magnier et al. (1995), the SNR appears to be away from high density regions of the galaxy, suggesting that it may be in a relatively low density region.

Magnier et al. (1997) note that a multi-component ISM model (McKee & Ostriker 1977) is required for M31. In this case the densities we derive herein may be upper limits to the dominant low-density component of the ISM in the vicinity of the SNR. A future longer observation with the SNR on-axis is required to investigate multi-component model and detailed morphology.

We thank Bryan Gaensler and Patrick Slane for discussions, and an anonymous referee for useful comments. AKHK was supported by NASA LTSA Grants NAG5-10889 and NAG5-10705. MRG acknowledges the support of NASA LTSA Grant NAG5-10889 and NASA Contract NAS8-39073 to the CXC. The HRC GTO program is supported by NASA Contract NAS-38248. We acknowledge the hospitality of the Aspen Center for Physics, which allowed parts of this paper to be written.