Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byVictor Appley Modified over 3 years ago

1
A walk through some statistic details of LSC results

2
CBC (“inspiral”) papers S1: Analysis of LIGO data for gravitational waves from binary neutron stars. Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 122001 gr-qc/0308069 Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 122001 gr-qc/0308069 S2: Search for gravitational waves from galactic and extra-galactic binary neutron stars. Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 082001 gr-qc/0505041 Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 082001 gr-qc/0505041 S3/S4: Search for gravitational waves from binary inspirals in S3 and S4 LIGO dataPhys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 062002 arXiv:0704.3368Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 062002arXiv:0704.3368 S5/VSR1: Search for Gravitational Waves from Compact Binary Coalescence in LIGO and Virgo Data from S5 and VSR1 Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 102001 arXiv:1005.4655 Also Sensitivity to Gravitational Waves from Compact Binary Coalescences Achieved during LIGO's Fifth and Virgo's First Science Run, arXiv:1003.2481Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 102001arXiv:1005.4655arXiv:1003.2481 S6/VSR2, 3: Search for Gravitational Waves from Low Mass Compact Binary Coalescence in LIGO's Sixth Science Run and Virgo's Science Runs 2 and 3 arXiv:1111.7314 P1100034. Also Sensitivity Achieved by the LIGO and Virgo Gravitational Wave Detectors during LIGO’s Sixth and Virgo’s Second and Third Science Runs, arXiv:1203.2674arXiv:1111.7314P1100034arXiv:1203.2674

3
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 20033 How to detect inspiral waves Use template based matched filtering algorithm Template waveforms for non-spinning binaries – 2.0 post-Newtonian approx. D: effective distance; a: phase Discrete set of templates labeled by I=(m1, m2) – 1.0 Msun < m1, m2 < 3.0 Msun – 2110 templates – At most 3% loss in SNR s(t) = (1Mpc/D) x [ sin(a) h I s (t-t0) + cos(a) h I c (t-t0)]

4
7/9/20034 Optimal Filtering Using FFTs Transform data to frequency domain : Calculate template in frequency domain : Combine, weighting by power spectral density of noise, and then inverse Fourier transform gives the filter output at all times: Find maxima of over arrival time and phase

5
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 20035 “Chi-Squared Veto” Many large glitches in the data can lead to a filter output with large SNR The essence of a “chirp” is that the signal power is distributed over frequencies in a particular way Divide template into sub-bands (p=8) and calculate 2 : Correct for large signals which fall between points in template bank and apply a threshold cut:

6
Multiple detectors: S2 example

7
Results of a search Candidates and their significance (detections?). Upper limits on rate of coalescences (frequentist or Bayesian).

9
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 20039 S1 Inspiral Search: results Use triggers from H 4km and L 4km interferometers: – T = 236 hours – Max SNR observed: 15.9 An event seen in L1 only, with effective distance = 95 kpc There are no event candidates in the coincidence category – Monte Carlo simulation efficiency for SNR=15.9: = 53% – Effective number of Milky Way-equivalent galaxies surveyed: N G = (L pop /L G )=0.53x1.13=0.60 – Uncertainties (calibration, etc):

10
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 200310 Inspiral Search: results Limit on binary neutron star coalescence rate: – R90% (Milky Way) < = 2.3 x (1/N G ) (1/T) = 140 (0.60/N G ) /yr – With N G =0.60-0.10 we derive R< 170 /yr /MWEG Compare with: – Previous experimental results: LIGO 40m ‘94: 0.5/hr (25hrs, D<25kpc, Allen et al., PRD 1998) TAMA300 ’99: 0.6/hr (6 hr, D<6kpc, Tagoshi et al., PRD 2001) TAMA300 DT6: 82/yr (1,038 hr, D<33 kpc, GWDAW 2002) – Expected Galactic rate: ~10 -6 - 5 x 10 -4 /yr (Kalogera et al)

11
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 200311 S1 search: Loudest Surviving Event Candidate Not NS/NS inspiral event! 2 Sep 2002, 00:38:33 UTC S/N = 15.9, 2 /dof = 2.2 (m1,m2) = (1.3, 1.1) Msun What caused this? Appears to be saturation of a photodiode SNR 2 test GW channel Actual trigger Injected signal

12
S2 run

13
S2 run: a new statistic, and an estimate of the background

14
S2 run: candidates

15
S2 run: background revisited

16
S2: upper limit

17
S3/S4: sensitivity, statistics

18
S3/S4: Bayesian upper limit

19
S3/S4: upper limit

20
S5: new statistic

21
S5 Results, upper limit

22
S5 Results – and blind injection

24
7/9/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration - Amaldi 200324 Days in S1 LIGO sensitivity S1: 23 Aug – 9 Sep, 2002 Inspiral sensitivity measured in distance to 2 x 1.4 Msun optimally oriented inspiral at signal to noise = 8 – Livingston: = 176 kpc – Hanford: = 46 kpc Sensitive to inspirals in – Milky Way, LMC & SMC

25
Keeping interferometer locked S1 run: 17days (408 hrs) Seismic Noise in theband

Similar presentations

Presentation is loading. Please wait....

OK

Inspiraling Compact Objects: Detection Expectations

Inspiraling Compact Objects: Detection Expectations

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To ensure the functioning of the site, we use **cookies**. We share information about your activities on the site with our partners and Google partners: social networks and companies engaged in advertising and web analytics. For more information, see the Privacy Policy and Google Privacy & Terms.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.

Ads by Google

Ppt on linear programming in operations research Ppt on object-oriented programming in java Ppt on game theory raleigh Ppt on line drawing algorithm in computer graphics Ppt on iso-osi reference model Ppt on political parties and electoral process in texas Ppt on mammals and egg laying animals birds Ppt on new product marketing Ppt on solid state drives Ppt on sports day at school