First goes the title (from the 2nd file). The ver. 1.0 of MMC was released, is
available at MMC homepage and AMANDA software coordination page.

1st file:

1st page shows what you get in the package - a mmc directory with all the
internal things, cross sections, integrals, etc. And 3 front end programs.
There is also a README file. The full HISTORY file is so large that it was
omitted, but is available from the MMC homepage.

2nd page: run the executable "ammc" from the MMC directory. It looks for most
recent JAVA installation in a standard set of directories, also HOME and MMC
directory. It reports the found version of java, spits warning messages if
it's not ok (too old) and gives a number of options. You can compile and run
programs with "ammc", create manual pages, hifi and float versions, perform
several precision tests and more.

3rd page: creating hifi and float versions

4th page: help for Frejus and Test programs.

5th page: help for "Amanda" program. Set length and radius of the detector
(active) volume, vcut before the detector (0.05-0.01 default), ecut inside the
detector (500 MeV default), set medium (default: Ice), add a user line
(possible to tell the coordinates and energy at the closest to center point,
negative values for energy mean distance traveled if disappeared; OR tell the
energy when particle crosses a plane at z). Set photonuclear cross section,
add LPM, enable Moliere scattering, continuous randomization, exact time of
flight (with the exact account of the muon velocity) treatment; specify
precision of interpolations and whether to save tables in raw or ascii format
(both should be portable, tested on alpha and Linux PC, a raw table can be
read correctly even if generated on the other platform - it's *Java* :),).

5-7 page: An example output of running the mmc: it writes out the parameters
and settings used, initializes swiftly (for raw table format, 0.5 sec or less
for the reading of 3 files, longer for ascii. Generation of the
parametrization tables takes from 2 min (basic set of options) to 5 min
(everything enabled)). You can see the secondaries, user line.

2nd file:

2nd page: There are several sources of computational errors: this shows
parametrization errors (already shown before).

3rd page: Same as above, but for different values of the span of the
interpolation routine over parametrization points (2 is linear, 3 is cubic
interpolation, etc.). g=3 corresponds also to the precision of the
interpolation scheme implemented by MUM. Default is 5, though the program was
also tested for g=3.

4th page: also shown before, 100 TeV muons propagated through 300 meters of
frejus rock, computed by exact (non-parametrizaed) version on 300 computers
over night, and with parametrizations in ~ 1 minute.

5th page: comparison of 2 different interpolation settings (with vcut=1.e-3,
previous plot was 1.e-2).

6th page: There are also errors from the integral evaluation (when creating
the tables or running the exact version). Many integrals are evaluated from
e_low to the current energy of the muon. For this example that's over 6 orders
of magnitude (from 105 MeV to 100 TeV). If e_low is set to 10 TeV (i.e. the
muon will be lost below this energy) there is only 1 order of magnitude
between integration limits, we get the same results.

7th page: Errors that come from implementation of the Monte Carlo method, here
for cross sections. Curves in the back show the probability functions.

8th page: Again, MC method implementation errors, but for the tracking
integrals. The final energy of the muon propagated with vcut=1 (purely
continuous propagation) should be the same as the average energy of the muon
propagated stochastically (with vcut given by abscissa). Errors given by these
plots are an order of magnitude smaller than those reported for MUM.

9th page: when propagating muons through large distances (bottom plot), most
of them stop before reaching this distance. The final energy distribution (top
plot) and "survival probability" of the muon are then extremely sensitive to
the cross sections used and any errors that may occur during the calculation.
This plot is mainly an introduction to the next slide, though one can also see
that something as major as enabling continuous randomization does not affect
the calculation (and for vcut as small as here - 1.e-3 - it shouldn't).

10th page: top table is in the internal report and the apparent deviation of
the last rightmost number is discussed there. Here we want to mostly show the
bottom table: MUM should be compared with the second line. Then, settings of
MMC and MUM are the same. Though there is an apparent disagreement, it's
small, and from point of view of the MUM author (Sokalski), it is a very good
agreement.

11th page. Here we see that MUM and MMC curves almost coincide.

12th page. same as above, but MUM gives energy spectrum shifted to lower
energies by a tiny bit. This is consistent with the survival probabilities of
MUM being smaller.

13th page: Extra options of MMC: choice between 4 different photon-nucleon
parametrizations.

14th page: 5 different photonuclear parametrizations (one more is allm, which
is different from the BB parametrization scheme). ALLM seems to work better
for taus, for which BB may sometimes yield strange results.

15th page: Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal and Ter-Mikaelian effects.

16-17: Moliere scattering

18-20: study of the "gap" and continuous randomization. When enabling "cont",
spectra are closer to the correct ones (at some really small vcut=1.e-3 or
less) for bigger vcut (already for 0.01 we get very good spectra, while w/o
"cont", there is still a rather big gap). This treatment was introduced in MMC
and have never been used anywhere else.

21st page: energy losses for the muon, compared with decay.

22nd page: same for taus: Notice how much higher is the decay curve.

23rd page: comparison of the decay curve with sum of all energy losses from
the previous plot.

24th page: tau range computed for purely continuous treatment (vcut=1) and
stochastically (vcut=1.e-3). Results are extremely close. Taus should be
calculated with continuous treatment (since it is faster) unless it is
important to get the spectrum of secondaries.

25th page: same as above for the interesting energy range.

26th page: it's ok to omit this one, it shows interpolation errors for taus.

27th page: One cannot stress enough: MMC is REALLY FAST. Even if people say
that mudedx was never optimized, the counter argument is that mudedx gives out
a lot less secondaries (since its secondary spectra have strange cutoffs) with
spectra which clearly are incorrect at smaller energy of the secondary. Each
extra secondary means more calculation, and MMC does more of such calculation.

28th page: Conclusions are important.

Ok, this is it. I hope it's not too much. Many slides in between can be shown
really fast, they are only there to demonstrate that this or that is
implemented and half of this stuff is discussed in our internal report.