attempts to directly detect weakly interacting massive particles ( wimps ) using liquid and solid - state detectors have a long history .
a key goal of this field is the detection of one ( or more ) of the ` smoking gun ' signals of direct detection : annual modulation  @xcite , material dependence ( e.g. ref .
@xcite ) and direction dependence  @xcite . much theoretical
work has been carried out investigating how the wimp particle physics ( mass and cross - section ) and astrophysics ( local density and velocity distribution ) could be inferred from the energies ( e.g. refs .
@xcite ) or energies and directions  @xcite of wimp induced nuclear recoil events .
the directionality of the wimp event rate is due to the motion of the sun with respect to the galactic halo .
we are moving towards the constellation cygnus and hence the nuclear recoils are expected to be strongly peaked in the direction opposite to this . the strength of the signal is expected to be large ; an anisotropic set of recoils can be discriminated from isotropic backgrounds with as few as 10 events  @xcite , while the peak recoil direction can be measured , and the galactic origin of the scattering particle confirmed , with around @xmath1 events  @xcite .
practically directional detection is still in its early stages , with a number of prototype detectors in the process of development .
directional detection is typically achieved using gas time projection chambers ( tpcs ) which contain low pressure gases such as cf@xmath2 , cs@xmath3 , c@xmath2h@xmath4 or @xmath5he ( see ref .
@xcite for a review ) . after an interaction with a wimp
, the recoiling nucleus leaves an ionisation track in its wake .
the 3-dimensional reconstruction of the recoil track then allows the full energy and direction dependence of the wimp recoil spectrum to be measured and , in principle , the wimp velocity distribution can be inferred  @xcite .
the detectors currently in the prototype phase include dmtpc  @xcite , drift  @xcite , mimac  @xcite , and newage  @xcite .
directional detection offers several theoretical advantages over its non - directional counterpart .
firstly and foremost , there are no known backgrounds able to mimic the wimp signal in its characteristic peak direction .
furthermore it offers the only prospect for constraining the local _ velocity _ distribution of the dark matter .
the dependence of the experimental signals on the form of the local wimp velocity distribution has attracted a lot of attention in the literature , as there is significant uncertainty in the form of the velocity distribution , and the parameters on which it depends ( for a review see ref .
data from direct detection experiments are typically compared using the standard halo model ( shm ) , for which the velocity distribution is an isotropic maxwell - boltzmann distribution .
the shape of the true local velocity distribution is expected to depart significantly from this simple model  @xcite .
however the use of the shm is at least somewhat justified for several reasons .
firstly there is no fully agreed upon alternative parametrisation of the velocity distribution and secondly the expected deviations from the shm are unlikely to affect the analysis of data from the _ current _ generation of non - directional detectors , provided the free parameters are appropriately marginalised over  @xcite .    nevertheless , results from n - body and hydrodynamical simulations of galaxy formation show deviations from the putative smooth and isotropic shm , including tidal streams  @xcite , a dark disk  @xcite and debris flows  @xcite , which could be detectable by future experiments . in this paper
we focus on substructure in the form of tidal streams , which result from the disruption of sub - halos accreted by the milky way .
there are hints that such a feature may pass through the solar neighbourhood .
a contiguous group of stars moving with a common velocity , that are possibly part of a tidal tail from the sagittarius dwarf galaxy , have been observed nearby  @xcite .
moreover it has been argued that the dark matter content of the stream is likely to be significantly more extended than the stellar content and to have an offset of as much as a few kpc  @xcite .
we examine the capabilities of future directional dark matter detectors to detect a dark matter stream . in sec .
[ sec : theory ] , we overview the calculation of the directional event rate , including the relevant particle physics and astrophysics input
. we will begin our statistical analysis in sec .
[ sec : directionalstats ] with non - parametric directional tests , studying first the example of a sagittarius - like stream and then extending the analysis to streams in general . then in sec .
[ sec : llhoodratio ] we perform likelihood analyses , using bayesian inference to reconstruct the parameters of a sagittarius - like stream and a profile likelihood ratio test to assess the detectability of general streams in a parametric way .
finally we conclude with a discussion of our results in sec .
[ sec : summary ]
the directional event rate is typically written in the form of a double differential  @xcite : @xmath6 here , @xmath7 is the event rate per unit time per unit mass of detector which is expressed as a function of the direction and energy of the recoiling nucleus @xmath8 in the laboratory frame , where @xmath9 is the solid angle element around the recoil direction @xmath10 .
the local dark matter density is denoted by @xmath11 , the wimp - nucleus scattering cross section by @xmath12 , the wimp mass by @xmath13 and @xmath14 is the radon transform of the local wimp velocity distribution in the lab frame  @xcite , where @xmath15 is the minimum wimp speed that can scatter to create a recoil of energy @xmath16 .
the wimp - nucleus reduced mass is @xmath17 , where @xmath18 is the nucleus mass .
the nuclear form factor , @xmath19 , is the fourier transform of the nuclear density distribution .
it accounts for the decrease in the effective cross section for scattering events with non - zero momentum transfer .
we use the helm form factor , @xmath20 ^ 2 e^{-q^2 s^2 } \,,\ ] ] where @xmath21 fm , where @xmath22 is the mass number of the nucleus and @xmath23 fm  @xcite . for light targets such as @xmath24f , considered in this work
, the form factor can be approximated as a simple exponential @xmath25 where the value of @xmath26 depends on the nucleus under consideration . for @xmath24f , we find @xmath27 .    the wimp - nucleus cross section @xmath12 can be written in terms of the experiment - independent wimp - nucleon cross section @xmath28 which for spin - dependent scattering is , @xmath29 ^ 2 \sigma_{p , n } \ , , \ ] ] where @xmath30 is the wimp - proton reduced mass , @xmath31 the total spin of the nucleus , @xmath32 the model - dependent couplings to protons and neutrons , and @xmath33 are the expectation values of proton and neutron spins inside the nucleus  @xcite .
the velocity distribution of wimps in the rest frame of the laboratory is obtained through a galilean transformation of the galactic frame distribution , @xmath34 , by the laboratory velocity @xmath35 , @xmath36 we ignore the effects of gravitational focusing of the distribution by the earth and sun , which is known to be small and takes place below the threshold energies of most detectors  @xcite and also the annual modulation due to the earth s orbit , which is also only detectable with large numbers of events  @xcite .
the lab velocity is then the sum of the velocity of the local standard of rest ( lsr ) and the peculiar velocity of the sun : @xmath37 .
the velocities are represented in cartesian co - ordinates , defined using the local galactic co - ordinate system , oriented such that the local standard of rest ( lsr ) points in the @xmath38-direction .
the speed of the lsr is typically taken to be @xmath39 km s@xmath40 although there is some uncertainty in this value @xcite .
the most recent measurement of the peculiar velocity of the sun is @xmath41 km s@xmath40  @xcite .
the shm ( which has a density profile @xmath42 , and hence a flat rotation curve ) has an isotropic maxwell - boltzmann ( mb ) velocity distribution which is typically truncated by hand at the galactic escape speed , @xmath43 , @xmath44 where the normalisation constant , @xmath45 , is given by @xmath46 the dispersion @xmath47 is related to the speed of the lsr via @xmath48 and we take the galactic escape speed to be @xmath49  @xcite .    the function @xmath50 that appears in the differential recoil spectrum , eq .
( [ dr / dedo ] ) , is the radon transform of this distribution at @xmath51 which is defined as  @xcite , @xmath52 it is most efficient to calculate the radon transform of the velocity distribution in the lab frame by first calculating it in the galactic frame and then transforming to the lab frame via @xmath53 the calculation for the shm velocity distribution , eq .
( [ shm ] ) , yields  @xcite @xmath54 \ , .
\nonumber          \end{aligned}\ ] ] the simplest way to incorporate substructure into a halo model is by combining two distributions , a background smooth halo model and an additional component corresponding to the substructure . we adopt the mb velocity distribution function for the background halo model , as deviations from this are likely to be too small to have an appreciable effect on the detection of streams .
we assume that a single tidal stream makes up a fraction @xmath55 of the local dark matter density , so that the total velocity distribution of the halo+stream model is given by @xmath56 where , @xmath57 for simplicity we have taken the velocity distribution of the stream to be a mb distribution too , but with dispersion @xmath58 and a mean velocity @xmath59 in the galactic frame    the full radon transform for the halo+stream model is therefore @xmath60 where @xmath61 is the radon transform of the galactic frame maxwell - boltzmann distribution .
figure  [ streamskymap ] shows the angular and energy dependence of the radon transform of the halo+stream distribution .
we have taken the stream velocity and dispersion to correspond to a sagittarius - like stream , @xmath62 km s@xmath40 and @xmath63 km s@xmath40  @xcite , however we have set the stream density fraction to @xmath64 in order to make the feature more prominent in the image .
this is larger than the maximum stream density found in simulations  @xcite .
the top panel of fig .
[ energyspectrum ] displays more clearly the energy dependence of the signal and the dependence on the wimp mass .
the energy dependence is found by integrating eq .
( [ dr / dedo ] ) over angles , @xmath65 we have fixed the values of the local density and the cross section to @xmath66 gev @xmath67 and @xmath68 pb in this and subsequent plots . in the bottom panel we show the difference between the differential event rate for the halo+stream and halo - only models defined as @xmath69 the stream manifests itself in the energy dependence of the event rate as a step - like feature that appears at higher energies for more massive wimps ( this effect has been studied further in the context of annual modulation in ref .
the deviation from the smooth halo event rate is sharper and larger in size for lighter wimps .      to study the detectability of a stream we simulate mock experiments by monte carlo generating nuclear recoils . to do this we build the velocity flux distribution , sample velocities from this distribution , and
scatter the resulting velocities off the chosen nucleus .
we simulate a mimac - like experiment with target cf@xmath2 , in which the scattering is dominated by @xmath24f .
the energy of a recoil is given by , @xmath70 where @xmath71 is the scattering angle between the initial wimp direction and the direction of the recoiling nucleus .
the scattering angle is related to the centre of mass scattering angle , @xmath72 , by @xmath73 the scattering process is isotropic in the centre of mass ( com ) frame so the com angle is taken to be isotropically distributed , i.e. @xmath74 where @xmath75 is a uniformly distributed random variate .
the recoil vector is generated by deflecting the initial wimp direction by the elevation angle @xmath71 and then rotating the deflected vector by a uniformly random angle @xmath76 around the initial wimp direction .
the correction to the event rate due to the nuclear form factor is taken into account by calculating @xmath77 for each recoil and then discarding each recoil with a probability @xmath78 .
finally we must account for the exposure and background of the detector .
we split the total number of events seen into wimp and background events , @xmath79 .
the @xmath80 events are generated from an isotropic distribution with a flat energy spectrum .
@xcite showed that the background model assumed has little effect in the initial detection phase , provided the detector has good sense recognition .
we show in appendix a that this is also the case for the reconstruction of the stream parameters using the profile likelihood ratio test statistic outlined in sec .
[ sec : llhoodratio ] . to specify the number of events we vary the exposure , @xmath81 , measured in kg yr .
this is the most physical way of adjusting the number of background events as it is independent of the wimp mass or halo parameters .
the total number of events is related to the exposure time and the total rate by @xmath82 where @xmath83 is the background event rate and @xmath7 is the total wimp rate @xmath84      as seen in eq .
( [ dr / dedo ] ) , the local wimp density @xmath11 and spin - dependent ( sd ) wimp - nucleon cross section @xmath85 do not affect the shape of the recoil spectrum , only its amplitude , i.e. the total number of events seen in a given exposure time .
we fix these parameters to @xmath86 and @xmath68 pb . this value of @xmath85 lies just below current exclusion limits from xenon100  @xcite , so our results are optimistic , however they still hold if @xmath85 is smaller , but for larger exposure times .    as we have displayed in fig .
[ energyspectrum ] the wimp mass affects the energy dependence of the differential event rate .
however @xmath13 also appears in the pre - factor of eq .
( [ dr / dedo ] ) hence the amplitude of the signal will also depend on the wimp mass . in fig .
[ r_m_chi ] we show the dependence of the signal event rate , @xmath7 , on the wimp mass for three different experimental energy windows , @xmath87 $ ] .
we include the dependence on the energy window as this will play a crucial role in the detectability of streams .
a change in the input wimp mass will affect the results of the statistical tests due to both the change in the number of events and also the prominence of the stream in the data . for heavier wimps one would expect fewer total events and a stream signal
that is more dispersed in energy , making it harder to detect a stream . when studying the effects of other parameters and for the most computationally demanding calculations we fix the input wimp mass to @xmath88 however , where appropriate , we also consider input wimp masses of 10 and 100 gev .
.benchmark wimp , halo , experimental and stream parameters used in sec .
[ sec : directionalstats ] .
[ cols= " < , < , < " , ]     in the following sections we will compare the power of several different statistical tests using the benchmark wimp , halo , experimental and stream parameter values listed in tab . [ tab : partable ] . for the other background halo parameters the values used
are taken from the literature ( as outlined in sec .
[ sec : astrophysics ] ) but the precise values are not expected to impact the results significantly .
the parameters used to describe the stream are the stream density fraction , @xmath89 , velocity , @xmath59 , and velocity dispersion , @xmath58 .
when describing the properties of the stream we will often parameterise the direction in which it is moving in terms of the angle between @xmath59 and @xmath90 , @xmath91 from symmetry considerations the performance of the statistical tests is only sensitive to this quantity . for the stream density and dispersion , unless otherwise stated , we will use @xmath92 and @xmath62 km s@xmath40 .
the experimental energy window , @xmath93 $ ] kev , reflects a plausible forecast for a cf@xmath2 experiment such as mimac @xcite .
as we will subsequently see , the threshold energy , @xmath94 , and the maximum energy , @xmath95 , play an important role in determining the detectability of streams .
therefore we also study the effects of ( optimistically ) raising @xmath95 to 100 kev and ( less optimistically ) raising @xmath96 to 20 kev .
lastly we assume that the scattering is only off @xmath24f with pure proton coupling , so in eq .
( [ wimpnucleoncrosssection ] ) we take @xmath97 , @xmath98 , @xmath99 and @xmath100 .
there are two steps in characterising a stream .
firstly the stream must be detected , and then its parameters ( e.g. density and velocity ) can be measured .
first we consider non - parametric statistical tests .
these tests use the direction information only and have been used in the past to determine the number of events required to distinguish a wimp signal from isotropic backgrounds  @xcite .
the advantage of a non - parametric analysis , is that it is not necessary to assume a particular model for the smooth component of the halo , and the results are valid provided the basic hypotheses that define the statistical tests are satisfied .
however a notable disadvantage of non - parametric analysis is that it is less powerful than parametric analysis ( in the sense that , for a given data set , the detection significance will be lower ) .
therefore we will subsequently perform a parametric analysis using a likelihood in sec .
[ sec : llhoodratio ]    the question we wish to answer is : what exposure is needed to reject , at a given confidence level , a smooth and isotropic galactic wimp distribution in the event that the true distribution contains an additional steam component ?
figure  [ signal_comparison_skymap ] illustrates the problem ; how does one extract information from a small quantity of spherical data ? the left hand panels show the normalised directional signal observed in a perfect detector with infinite exposure , for the halo and stream parameters given in tab . [
tab : partable ] .
the top row shows the signal with no stream present , and the bottom with the inclusion of a stream .
the right hand panels show the signal expected in a real detector with an exposure of @xmath101 kg yr including events from experimental backgrounds with a total rate of @xmath102 distributed isotropically .
since the directional statistics only use information about the directions of the nuclear recoils , and not their energies , their performance is independent of the background energy spectrum .
the data consist of 304 signal events in the halo - only case and 316 in the halo+stream case .
the data have been binned on a sphere using a healpix @xcite equal angular area discretisation with @xmath103 .
while detecting the isotropy of a wimp signal requires few events , finding deviations from a smooth halo will require a great deal more  @xcite .
we construct test statistics , @xmath104 , that are distributed as @xmath105 under some null hypothesis that is satisfied in the presence of a distribution without a stream and @xmath106 when a stream is present in the data .
these distributions may be known analytically for some test statistics in the null case , but if not they can be monte carlo generated . for a particular measured value of the test statistic , @xmath107 , the significance is the probability of measuring @xmath108 if the null hypothesis is true @xmath109 the statistical power is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis if the null hypothesis is false . in other words
it is the probability of measuring @xmath110 when @xmath111 is distributed according to @xmath106 , @xmath112 for detection of a stream we require @xmath113 and define @xmath114 as the detection significance achievable in 95% of experiments .
the median direction , @xmath115 , of a set of @xmath116 directions , @xmath117 , is found by minimising the quantity @xcite , @xmath118 the median recoil direction of the smooth halo distribution is @xmath119 , i.e. the inverse of the direction of solar motion . to test whether recoils are consistent with a hypothesised median direction , @xmath120
, we use the @xmath121 test statistic which is calculated as follows  @xcite .
first the recoil vectors @xmath122 are rotated so that they are measured relative to a north pole at the sample median given by @xmath123 ) , this is done using the rotation , @xmath124 where @xmath125 and @xmath126 are the cartesian rotation matrices for rotations around the @xmath38 and @xmath127 axes . after the recoil vectors have been rotated , the azimuthal angles @xmath128
are then measured in this new co - ordinate system .
then the matrix , @xmath129 where , @xmath130 is constructed .
next , the recoil vectors are rotated again using eq .
( [ rotnp ] ) but now so that they are measured relative to a north pole at the hypothesised median direction @xmath131 . finally the test statistic is calculated as , @xmath132 where @xmath133 is defined as @xmath134 if the hypothesised median direction is correct and the number of events is @xmath135 , then the test statistic is distributed according to a @xmath136 distribution .
the statistical significance of a particular observed value @xmath137 is then equal to the cumulative distribution function for @xmath136 at @xmath137 according to eq .
( [ significance ] ) .
the modified kuiper test is a test for rotational symmetry around some hypothesised direction @xmath120 .
the test is performed by first rotating all recoil direction vectors @xmath122 so that their spherical angles @xmath138 are measured relative to a north pole with angles @xmath131 prior to rotation , using the same procedure as outlined in the previous section in eq .
( [ rotnp ] ) . after the recoil vectors have been rotated , the azimuthal angles @xmath139 are then measured in this new co - ordinate system in units of @xmath140 , reorganised in ascending order and denoted @xmath141 such that they define a cumulative distribution @xmath142 . in the case that the data possess rotational symmetry the cumulative distribution follows @xmath143 .
the modified kuiper statistic quantifies deviations from this and is defined as , @xmath144 where @xmath145 is the unmodified kuiper statistic and @xmath146 with @xmath147 .
the modification factor in eq .
( [ modkuiper ] ) allows the distribution of the kuiper statistic to be independent of the sample size for @xmath148 .
there is no analytic form for this distribution in the null case but there are published critical values @xcite or the distribution can be monte carlo generated using any set of vectors with rotational symmetry satisfied , for example the isotropic experimental background recoils .
figure [ dirstatsdists ] shows the distributions of the two test statistics when the null hypothesis is true ( generated with isotropic backgrounds ) and when performed on data containing recoils from a sagittarius - like stream with varying density fraction , @xmath89 .
the distributions in each case were generated from @xmath149 mock experiments with an exposure of 10 kg yr .
as @xmath89 is increased the degree of rotational asymmetry is increased , the median direction becomes more displaced from @xmath150 and the observed distributions of the test statistics become further separated from the null distributions .      to demonstrate the performance of the tests as a function of parameters other than the stream velocity we will take as a concrete example , a sagittarius - like tidal stream .
we will assume a velocity of @xmath63 @xcite for the stream .
there is sizable uncertainty in both the speed and direction of the velocity ( and even whether or not dark matter from this stream passes through the solar neighbourhood ) therefore in the subsequent sub - sections we will vary the stream velocity .    in fig .
[ testcompare_sagit ] we plot @xmath114 , the value of the significance @xmath151 given a required power @xmath152 ( i.e. the value of significance obtainable by 95% of hypothetical experiments ) for the kuiper and median direction @xmath121 tests .
we show how this quantity varies with exposure time , stream dispersion , stream density , experimental background rate , wimp mass and escape speed .
we also show the dependence of the results on the energy window of the detector , considering three examples , @xmath153 $ ] kev , @xmath93 $ ] kev and @xmath154 $ ] kev .
the benchmark experimental and halo parameter values that are fixed when the other parameters are varied are indicated in the figure by vertical lines .
the results are intuitive , with longer exposure times or for streams which make up a larger fraction of the local wimp density , the signal is stronger and hence the tests perform better .
the number of stream wimps scales linearly with exposure time and stream density fraction hence the significance of the result scales as roughly the square root of those quantities . to detect a sagittarius - like stream at 90 - 95% confidence in 95% of experiments
, one would need exposures between 10 - 20 kg yr for stream densities around @xmath155 .
experiments with larger background rates perform predictably poorly compared to those with fewer backgrounds to contaminate the wimp signal .
note that the quoted value of @xmath83 is the rate observed in the energy window @xmath153 $ ] kev and the value for the other ranges has been scaled appropriately to account for the smaller sensitivity window .
the dispersion of the stream has no effect on the performance of the test , because , for dispersions of at most tens of @xmath156 , the wimps scatter into the same angular area independent of the dispersion .
the significance achieved decreases weakly as the escape speed is increased .
this is because increasing the escape speed does nt affect the recoils from stream wimps , but slightly increases the number of recoils from the smooth halo .
the tests perform more or less equally well , however there is a notable difference between the performance of the tests when the threshold energy is 20 kev .
the lowest energy recoils are those which scatter through the largest angles .
removing the low energy recoils from the signal by increasing the threshold energy thus removes the stream wimps scattering furthest from the peak stream direction .
as can be seen in fig .
[ testcompare_sagit ] , the performance of the median direction test is weakened compared to the kuiper test under the removal of these low energy recoils .
the performance of the tests also depends on the mass of the wimp , due mainly to the variation in the total wimp scattering rate . as shown in fig .
[ r_m_chi ] , typically higher mass wimps yield fewer events ( assuming fixed exposure and local density @xmath11 ) and hence the significance achieved by the tests decreases with increasing wimp mass .
however for light wimps the majority of the recoils from stream wimps are below threshold and the significance achieved decreases .
this occurs for @xmath157 gev for a 20 ( 5 ) kev energy threshold . as we will see in fig .
[ n_wimp_str_location_cont ] in sec .
[ sec : llhoodratio ] , the number of recoils from stream wimps also depends on the stream velocity .
it is possible that a dm stream without a stellar component could pass through the solar neighbourhood . given this , and also the uncertainties in the velocity of the sagittatius stream , we now examine how the test statistics perform when the stream velocity is varied .
as mentioned previously , the stream velocity can be described by two parameters , the speed of the stream , @xmath158 , and the angle between the lab and stream velocities , @xmath159 , defined in eq .
( [ deltatheta ] ) .
figure [ testcomparison_deltatheta ] shows how the significance varies with the stream direction and speed , and also the energy window of the detector .
the tests do not perform equally for all stream directions .
in particular the tests return a low significance when the stream is anti - aligned with the solar velocity , as in this case the null hypotheses of rotational symmetry and inverse - solar median direction are in fact correct .
the number of events from stream wimps plays an important role in determining the significance which can be achieved , and for streams with small @xmath160 this number is very low and for low streams speeds or high threshold energies it can even be zero .
the symmetry in the plots is due to this dependence on both the sample size and the positioning of the stream recoils with respect to the smooth halo recoils . for the fastest streams , increasing the threshold energy results in a higher significance ,
this is essentially a background rejection effect ; it preferentially removes low energy smooth halo recoils and the stream is more prominent , even with fewer overall events .
the drop - off at large @xmath160 for the [ 5 , 50 ] kev window is due to the stream being boosted so that a portion of the recoils fall above the energy window .
this is the reverse effect to that at low values of @xmath160 in the [ 20 , 100 ] kev window , in this case the stream recoils lie below the threshold energy .
the kuiper and median direction tests studied in this section only use the direction of the recoils and not their energies . as has been shown in ref .
@xcite , use of the full energy and direction data allows better constraints to be placed on the wimp speed distribution . it may be possible to improve the tests we have studied by incorporating the energy dependence of the signal by performing the test successively on energy ordered recoils or by binning the recoils in energy . in the case where there is no stream present the hypotheses of rotational symmetry and inverse - solar median direction are satisfied for all energies
however with a stream in the signal there will be a range of energies where the hypothesis is false .
the degree to which the test is failed will initially increase with energy and then above a certain value , determined by the stream speed , the test would return a value closer to the null case . accounting for this effect in the test statistic would decrease the overlap between the null and alternative distributions and hence increase the significance of a particular result .
however it is likely to be a small effect , in fig .
[ energyspectrum ] one can see that the energy dependent effect of a stream is quite small and highly dependent on mass .
furthermore splitting the recoils in energy would result in a smaller number of events , and hence a loss of information , for each individual evaluation of the test statistic .
therefore it is likely that such a modified energy dependent non - parametric test would perform no better than the standard direction - only non - parametric tests we have studied , given the low numbers of recoils expected .
we now turn our attention towards statistical tests capable of placing constraints on the properties of substructure present in the local dark matter velocity distribution as well as distinguishing between the halo and halo+stream models . for placing constraints on the parameters of the model we use bayesian inference , whereas the test that is most appropriate for model comparison is a profile likelihood ratio test , as it uses the assumption that the null hypothesis is obtained by applying a constraint to the alternative hypothesis .
the likelihood ratio test has the added advantage of being able to conveniently account for astrophysical uncertainties by treating them as nuisance parameters  @xcite .
the model we describe has 11 free parameters , @xmath161 , where we split the velocity of the stream into its three galactic co - ordinate components . for simplicity we will again assume the smooth component of the halo has a mb distribution , but in principle the approach could be used with other velocity distributions e.g. the form of mao et al .
@xcite .
we define the likelihood function as the product of the probabilities for obtaining recoils with energies and directions @xmath162 ( @xmath163 ) multiplied by a poisson factor accounting for the probability of obtaining @xmath164 observed events given an expected number @xmath165 : @xmath166 \ , ,           \end{aligned}\ ] ] the expected number of events is a function of the parameters @xmath167 and is equal to the sum of the expected number of wimp and background events , @xmath168 and @xmath169 respectively , @xmath170 .
\end{aligned}\ ] ] the probabilities @xmath171 and @xmath172 are the probabilities for an event to occur at @xmath162 in the signal and background ( no wimp ) cases respectively , i.e. @xmath173 and , assuming a flat background energy spectrum , @xmath174 and @xmath175 is the signal fraction , @xmath176    it will be difficult to constrain the escape speed , @xmath43 , as it only affects the @xmath177f recoil spectrum at energies beyond the maximum energies we are considering .
this can be overcome , as in ref .
@xcite , by treating @xmath43 as a nuisance parameter and accounting for its uncertainty by hand by including an additional multiplicative term to the likelihood in the form of a gaussian with mean and standard deviation of @xmath178 km s@xmath40 @xcite .
the wimp density , @xmath11 , and cross section , @xmath85 , are also difficult to constrain as they only appear in the amplitude of the recoil spectrum and hence only affect the number of events seen for a given exposure . even for the quite large stream densities that we are considering here the difference between
the number of events in the stream case and in the null case is small .
moreover , the two parameters are degenerate with one another meaning there is no single set of values for @xmath11 and @xmath85 that maximise the likelihood function .
therefore we also employ a gaussian contribution to the likelihood function for @xmath11 with mean and standard deviation @xmath179 gev @xmath67  @xcite .
whilst the questions that we are trying to address are frequentist in nature , there is much to be gained from parameter estimation by bayesian inference .
we can test this approach by reconstructing the input parameters used to generate a set of mock data , again initially studying the example case of a sagittarius - like stream and a @xmath180 wimp , using the same benchmark parameters and experimental configuration as in sec .
[ sec : directionalstats ] .
we sample the likelihood using the nested sampling software multinest  @xcite using 5000 live points , an evidence tolerance factor of 0.05 and sampling efficiency of 0.3 .
the posterior distribution is the probability distribution of the parameters @xmath167 given a data set @xmath181 and is defined by bayes theorem ,    @xmath182    where @xmath183 is the likelihood function , i.e. the probability of the data given parameters @xmath167 , @xmath184 is the prior distribution for the parameters and @xmath185 is the evidence ( practically , the normalisation factor for the posterior distribution ) . for each parameter
we use a flat prior with ranges indicated by the axes of fig .
[ posts_11params ] .
we define minimum credible regions which give contours of the parameter space encompassing 95% or 68% of the posterior distribution and indicate how well the parameters are reconstructed from the data .
figure  [ posts_11params ] shows the marginalised 1 and 2-dimensional posterior probability distributions of the parameters .
the marginalised probability distributions are calculated by integrating the distribution over the remaining parameters , e.g. for parameters @xmath186 , @xmath187    while the stream parameters are recovered well , the largest uncertainties are present in the halo and wimp parameters , in particular @xmath13 .
the effect of the gaussian parametrisation of @xmath43 and @xmath11 is apparent and equivalent to using a gaussian prior .
there is a still some correlation in the @xmath188 plane but the degeneracy is broken .
the halo parameters are reconstructed less accurately when the bare likelihood function is used , however the gaussian parameterisation is representative of the astrophysical uncertainties .
our conclusions are not sensitive to the form assumed for the background energy spectrum . in appendix
a we show that the the maximum likelihood estimators for the stream parameters for a sagittarius - like stream with an exponential background are almost identical to those with a flat background .
we have shown that good constraints can be placed on the parameters describing a stream , if the correct model is used in constructing the likelihood function for the data .
importantly , we note that the exposure times needed to make these constraints @xmath189 kg yr are significantly shorter than are needed when the non - parametric directional tests are used .
our results agree with a similar work by lee and peter  @xcite .
they likewise found that the constraints improved with the use of the full energy and direction information , however they used a different parameterisation , subsuming the degenerate local density and cross section into a single parameter , fixing the total number of wimp and background events and normalising out the amplitude of the signal . here , in order to achieve independence under changing halo , wimp and experimental parameters , we quote exposure time and not total number of events and must parameterise the likelihood function with local density and cross section and also use the background rate @xmath83 as an input parameter .
we now turn our attention towards the profile likelihood ratio test , a frequentist test that we will use to assess the detectability of streams with different velocities in a parametric way .
model comparison is performed by considering two hypotheses , a null hypothesis , @xmath190 , that the wimp distribution is described by a mb distribution alone with no stream component and an alternative hypothesis , @xmath191 , where the density of the stream is non - zero .
the profile likelihood ratio test utilises the fact that the model best describing the null hypothesis is contained within the model best describing the alternative hypothesis .
we use this test as it is computationally easier than performing bayesian inference over a range of input velocities .
the likelihood ratio between the null and alternative hypotheses is @xmath192 where @xmath193 are the maximum likelihood estimators in the alternative model , and @xmath194 are the maximum likelihood estimators evaluated when the stream density fraction is fixed at zero , @xmath195 .
the likelihood ratio test statistic is then defined as @xmath196    next we require an expression for the statistical significance of a particular measured test statistic value .
this requires knowledge of how the profile likelihood ratio test statistic @xmath197 is distributed in the case that the null hypothesis is true , i.e. if the observed value is @xmath198 :    @xmath199    it is known however from wilk s theorem  @xcite that the distribution of the profile likelihood ratio test statistic in the case that the null hypothesis is true asymptotes towards a @xmath200 distribution .
hence the discovery significance is defined as @xmath201 .
however as we will be quoting quite high values of significance it is simpler to write them in units of standard deviation , @xmath202 , i.e. @xmath203 . so a value of @xmath204 corresponds to a 1@xmath202 result or a significance of 68% .
the significance obtainable by 95% of mock experiments , @xmath114 , is then found by solving the equation , @xmath205 in fig .
[ llratio_null_alternative_dists ] we show the distributions of @xmath197 from @xmath149 mock experiments under the null and alternative hypotheses , for the sagittarius - like stream given in tab . [
tab : partable ] .
for a non - zero stream density fraction the test statistic has a gaussian distribution which moves further from @xmath206 as the stream density is increased .
again , our conclusions here are not sensitive to the form assumed for the background energy spectrum . in appendix
a we show that the distribution of the likelihood ratio test statistic for a sagittarius - like stream with an exponential background is almost identical to that with a flat background .    as in sec .
[ sec : directionalstats ] we now study the performance of the test over a range of stream velocities where we will again use the stream speed , @xmath158 , and the angle between the solar and stream velocities , @xmath159 , to describe the stream velocity . in fig .  [ s95_deltatheta ] we plot the significance , in units of @xmath202 , obtainable by 95% of hypothetical experiments , @xmath114 , using the profile likelihood ratio test as a function of stream speed , @xmath158 , and direction given by @xmath159 , for a 50 gev wimp and the three energy windows considered previously .
figure [ s95_deltatheta ] , and also fig .
[ n_wimp_str_location_cont ] , was generated using exposure times of 5 kg yr and the parameters not plotted were all taken to have the benchmark values given in tab . [
tab : partable ] .
the test , by virtue of being parametric , performs much better than the non - parametric tests . for the example of the sagittarius stream , indicated in the figures by a star ,
the tests for the three energy windows detect the stream at @xmath207 in 95% of experiments . for the same exposure
, the non - parametric tests could only reach a value of @xmath208 between 0.1 and 0.2 .
the enhancement in performance is also due to the use of the full energy and direction data whereas before only the direction information was used .
furthermore the tests achieve high significance over a wide range of stream velocities , with the limiting factor being the number of wimps coming from the stream , @xmath209 , as can be seen by comparing the two figures . for low values of @xmath160 , where the number of stream wimps drops to zero
, the significance can be seen to do likewise .
there is similarly a dependence on the energy window of the detector which causes a reduction in the number of stream wimps when the stream becomes boosted past the maximum of the energy window .
this can be seen clearly in the @xmath93 $ ] kev case . for a stream speed of 500 km s@xmath40 ,
the significance begins to decrease for @xmath210 and drops by @xmath211 up to @xmath212 .
however the significance for faster stream speeds is enhanced over what might be expected simply from the dependence on @xmath213 .
this is due to faster streams becoming more prominent because of the exponential drop off with energy of the event rate for the smooth halo .
the number of events from wimps in the stream , @xmath213 , plays a key role in determining the detectability of a stream .
therefore in fig .
[ n_wimp_str_location_cont ] we show @xmath213 as a function of the stream speed and direction for the three energy windows and @xmath214 and @xmath215 gev . as discussed earlier , provided the wimp mass is large enough that the stream recoils are above the energy threshold , then increasing the wimp mass decreases the number of stream events .
the energies of the stream recoils depend on the stream velocity as well as the wimp mass .
increasing the threshold energy to 20 kev or reducing the maximum energy to 50 kev reduces the size of the region of steam speed - angle parameter space within which the number of stream events is large enough for the stream to be detected . for a 10 gev wimp and a 20 kev threshold
a stream will only be detectable if it has a high speed and a large angle relative to the lab velocity .
using both non - parametric directional tests and a profile likelihood test , we have shown that there are reasonable prospects for the detection of a moderately high density tidal stream by a future directional detector .
we have looked at the concrete example of a sagittarius - like stream and also explored the dependence on the parameters of the stream , namely its speed , direction , dispersion and density .
using non - parametric directional statistics the detection of a sagittarius - like stream would need a total of around 900 events , but using bayesian parameter estimation good constraints can be placed on the stream parameters with around 300 events , independent of astrophysical uncertainties . for wimp - nucleon spin - dependent cross sections just below the current exclusion limits  @xcite this
corresponds to around 10 kg yr exposure , which is within the scope of future directional detectors  @xcite .
we have shown that the detectability of a stream is highly dependent on its speed and position in relation to the lab velocity .
faster streams that are oriented at @xmath216 with respect to the lab velocity are most easily detected when using directional statistics as the signal in this case deviates furthest from the smooth halo signal . using a profile likelihood ratio test , there is weaker dependence on the position of the stream as the likelihood does not favour a particular directionality of the signal , but there is naturally a dependence on the the number of wimps originating from the stream , which indirectly leads to a dependence on stream direction .
faster streams can be detected with higher significance , as they cause more events and are also more prominent in the energy spectrum , due to the exponential drop off with energy of events from the smooth halo .
a similar conclusion is likely for parameter estimation as weaker constraints would be made on parameters of the stream with fewer wimps from the stream .
the estimation of halo and wimp parameters would also be dependent on the stream velocity , if the stream is boosted out of the energy window of the detector there would be fewer events overall which would weaken the relative constraints .
the advantage of using non - parametric tests is that one need not assume a model to describe the data , simply that the data satisfy either a null or alternative hypothesis .
however non - parametric tests will always return a less significant result than parametric tests .
the likelihood analyses also make use of both the energy and direction information of the recoils whereas the non - parametric tests are direction only .
the kuiper and median direction tests may be improved with the use of energy information however this would result in a greater dependence on the wimp mass and would be expected to perform poorly with low numbers of recoils .
we have also investigated a number of experimental considerations .
firstly , as might be expected , a larger experimental background rate results in poorer performance of the statistical tests , but the dependence on the background rate flattens at very large values .
a crucial factor is the energy window of the detector , where for the detection of streams the window must cover the range of recoil energies from stream wimps .
this is dependent on both the speed of the stream and its direction in relation to the lab velocity as we have demonstrated .
the statistical methods we have studied here may all be applied in a practical setting on real data , however there remain some experimental issues that may affect the detectability of streams .
the mock detector we have considered here has perfect angular resolution . in practice a finite angular resolution of around @xmath217
is thought to be achievable for future detectors @xcite .
this will have some impact on the power of an experiment to detect fine substructure , however the results here are likely to remain valid if finite angular resolution is taken into account either through a binned analysis or by adding in an uncertainty in the recoil data .
another experimental concern is that of sense recognition ( i.e. distinguishing between @xmath10 and @xmath218 ) which remains an issue for some current directional detectors .
a lack of sense recognition has been shown to increase the number of events needed to reject an isotropic non - wimp background in the initial detection phase  @xcite and is likely to be problematic for the detection of substructure and new tools may be needed to reconstruct the velocity distribution if it is still an issue in the future .    to conclude , we have shown that if a moderately high density wimp stream is present in the solar neighbourhood then there are good prospects for its detection using directional dark matter detectors .
the authors thank mattia fornasa and tasos avgoustidis for useful discussions .
cajo and amg are both supported by the stfc .
in this appendix we studying the effects of assuming an exponential , rather than flat , background energy spectrum on the stream parameter estimation in sec .
[ param - reconstruct ] .
the `` worst possible '' energy dependence would be an exponential with a characteristic scale that is similar to that of the wimp signal i.e. @xmath219 where @xmath83 is defined as the rate observed in an experiment with a window of @xmath153 $ ] kev and @xmath220 for a background which mimics the energy dependence of a @xmath221 wimp .
the previous 11-dimensional parameter space is expanded to 12-dimensions with the addition of @xmath222 .    in fig .
[ backgroundtest ] we plot the distribution of the likelihood ratio test statistic and the maximum likelihood estimators for the stream parameters of a sagittarius - like stream for both flat and exponential backgrounds .
it can be seen that the the distribution of the test statistic and the accuracy with which the parameters are recovered are nearly identical for the two background models
.    1 a.k .
drukier , k. freese and d. n. spergel , phys .
d * 33 * , 3495 ( 1986 ) .
k.  freese , m.  lisanti and c.  savage , rev .
phys .   * 85 * 1561 ( 2013 ) .
a. h. g. peter , v. glusevic , a. m. green , b. k. kavanagh and s. k. lee , arxiv:1310.7039 .
d. n. spergel , phys .
d * 37 * , 1353 ( 1988 ) .
m.  pato , l.  baudis , g.  bertone , r.  ruiz de austri , l.  e.  strigari and r.  trotta , phys .
d * 83 * ( 2011 ) 083505 .
a.  h.  g.  peter , phys .
d * 83 * ( 2011 ) 125029 . c. j. copi , j. heo , and l. m. krauss , phys .
b * 461 * , 43 ( 1999 ) . c. j. copi and l. m. krauss , phys .
d * 63 * , 043507 ( 2001 ) .
j. billard , f. mayet , and d. santos , phys .
d * 82 * , 055011 ( 2010 ) .
m. s. alenazi and p. gondolo , phys .
d * 77 * , 043523 ( 2008 ) .
s. lee , a. h. g. peter , jcap * 1204 * , 029 ( 2012 ) .
a. m. green , b. morgan , astropart . phys . * 27 * , 142 ( 2007 ) .
j. billard , f. mayet , j. macias - perez and d. santos , phys .
b * 691 * , 156 ( 2010 ) .
a. m. green and b. morgan , phys .
d * 81 * , 061301 ( 2010 ) .
s. ahlen _ et al .
phys . * 25 * , issue 1 ( 2010 ) .
p. gondolo , phys .
d * 66 * , 103513 ( 2002 ) .
dmtpc : s. ahlen _ et al .
b * 695 * , 124 - 129 ( 2011 ) .
et al . _ , eas publ
. ser . * 53 * , 11 - 18 ( 2012 ) .
mimac : c. grignon _ et al . _ , journal of instrumentation * 4 * , 11003 ( 2009 ) . k. miuchi _
et al . _ ,
b * 686 * , 11 - 17 ( 2010 ) .
a. m. green , mod .
a * 27 * , 1230004 ( 2012 ) .
m. kuhlen , n. weiner , j. diemand , p. madau , b. moore , d. potter , j. stadel , and m. zemp , jcap , * 1002 * , 030 ( 2010 ) .
mao , l. strigari , r. h. weschler , h .- y .
wu , and o. hahn , apj * 764 * , 35 ( 2013 ) .
mao , l. strigari , and r. h. weschler , phys .
d * 89 * , 063513 ( 2014 ) . m. lisanti , l. e. strigari , j. g. wacker , and r. h. weschler , phys .
d * 83 * , 023519 ( 2011 ) .
m.  pato , l.  e.  strigari , r.  trotta and g.  bertone , jcap * 1302 * ( 2013 ) 041 .
m. maciejewski , m. vogelsberger , s. d. m. white and v. springel , mon . not .
soc . * 415 * , 2475 ( 2011 ) .
j. i. read , g. lake , o. agertz and v. p. debattista , mon . not .
soc . * 389 * , 1041 - 1057 ( 2008 ) .
j. i. read , l. mayer , a. m. brooks , f. governato and g. lake , mon . not .
. soc . * 397 * , 44 - 51 ( 2009 ) .
m. kuhlen , m. lisanti , and d. n. spergel , phys .
d * 86 * , 063505 ( 2012 ) . m. lisanti and d. n. spergel , phys .
dark univ .
* 1 * , 155 - 161 ( 2012 ) . b. yanny _
et al . _ , astrophys . j. * 588 * , 824 ( 2003 ) .
s. r. majewski , m. f. skrutskie , m. d. weinberg and j. c. ostheimer , apj * 599 * , 1082 ( 2003 ) .
j. newberg _ et al .
_ , apj . * 596 * , l191 ( 2003 ) .
a. sollima , e. carretta , v. dorazi , r. g. gratton , a. bragaglia and s. lucatello , pre - print arxiv:1406.6198 ( 2014 ) .
c. w. purcell , a. r. zentner and m .-
y wang , jcap , * 1208 * , 027 ( 2012 ) .
j. d. lewin and p. f. smith , astropart .
* 6 * , 87 - 112 ( 1996 ) .
j. engel , physics letters b * 264 * , 114 ( 1991 ) .
g. jungman , m. kamionkowski , k. griest , phys . rept . *
267 * 195 - 373 , ( 1996 ) .
s. k. lee , m. lisanti , a. h. g. peter , b. r. safdi , phys .
* 112 * , 011301 ( 2013 ) .
n. bozorgnia and t. schwetz , arxiv:1405.2340 ( 2014 ) .
f. j. kerr and d. lynden - bell , mon . not .
soc . * 221 * , 1023 - 1038 ( 1986 ) .
et al . _ , astrophys . j. * 759 * , 131 ( 2012 ) . v. v. bobylev and a. t. bajkova , pre - print arxiv:1404.6987 ( 2014 ) .
m. c. smith _ et al .
_ , mon . not
. soc . * 379 * , 755 - 772 ( 2007 ) .
s. r. deans , _ the radon transform and some of its applications _ , john wiley & sons , ( 1983 ) .
c. savage , k. freese and p. gondolo , phys .
d * 74 * , 043531 ( 2006 ) .
k. freese , p. gondolo and h. j. newberg , phys .
d * 71 * , 043516 ( 2005 ) .
m. vogelsberger _
et al . _ ,
mon . not .
. soc . * 395 * , 797 - 811 ( 2009 ) .
xenon100 : e. aprile _
111 * , 021301 ( 2013 ) .
b. morgan , a. m. green and n. j. c. spooner , phys .
d * 71 * , 103507 ( 2005 ) .
k. m. gorski , e. hivon , a. j. banday , b. d. wandelt , f. k. hansen , m. reinecke and m. bartelman , astrophys .
j. * 622 * , 759 - 771 ( 2005 ) .
n. i. fisher , t. lewis and b. j. j. embleton , _ statistical analysis of spherical data _ , cup , ( 1987 ) .
j. billard , f. mayet and d. santos , phys .
d * 85 * 035006 ( 2012 ) .
_ , a&a , * 562 * a91 ( 2014 ) .
j. i. read , j. phys .
g : nucl . part .
phys . * 41 * 063101 ( 2014 ) .
f. feroz and m. p. hobson , mon . not .
soc . * 384 * , 449 - 463 ( 2008 ) .
f. feroz , m. p. hobson and m. bridges , mon . not .
. soc . * 398 * , 1601 - 1614 ( 2009 ) .
g. cowan , k. cranmer , e. gross , and o. vitells , eur .
j. c * 71 * , 1555 ( 2011 ) .
a. m. green and b. morgan , phys .
d * 77 * , 027303 ( 2008 ) .