LIGO-G030492-00-E S2 Data Quality Investigation John Zweizig Caltech/LIGO.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Stefan Hild S4 Data Workshop, Hannover, May 2005 Title 1 kHz Glitches in S4 Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut)

Advertisements

For the Collaboration GWDAW 2005 Status of inspiral search in C6 and C7 Virgo data Frédérique MARION.

Calibration of the gravitational wave signal in the LIGO detectors Gabriela Gonzalez (LSU), Mike Landry (LIGO-LHO), Patrick Sutton (PSU) with the calibration.

AURIGA-LIGO Activity F. Salemi Italy, INFN and University of Ferrara for the LIGO-AURIGA JWG 2nd ILIAS-GW Meeting, October 24th and 25th, Palma de Mallorca,

LIGO-G Z Update on the Analysis of S2 Burst Hardware Injections L. Cadonati (MIT), A. Weinstein (CIT) for the Burst group Hannover LSC meeting,

GWDAW, Dec 2003 Shawhan, Christensen, Gonzalez1 LIGO Inspiral Veto Studies Peter Shawhan (LIGO Lab / Caltech) Nelson Christensen (Carleton College) Gabriela.

G Z 1 Block-Normal, Event Display and Q-scan Based Glitch and Veto Studies Shantanu Desai for Penn. State Burst Group And Glitch Working Group.

S5 Data Quality Investigation Status John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech LSC/Virgo DetChar Session Baton Rouge, March 21, 2007.

GWDAW-8 (December 17-20, 2003, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA) Search for burst gravitational waves with TAMA data Masaki Ando Department of Physics, University.

LIGO-G Z LSC March 2004 KYF1 Veto efficiency study of triple coincidence playground WaveBurst events using WaveMon and glitchMon S2 veto triggers.

E12 Report from the Burst Group Burst Analysis Group and the Glitch Investigation Team.

LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Use of detector calibration info in the burst group

LIGO-G0200XX-00-M DMT Monitors: Beyond the FOM John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech LLO August 18, 2006.

LIGO-G E ITR 2003 DMT Sub-Project John G. Zweizig LIGO/Caltech Argonne, May 10, 2004.

LIGO-G Z NSF Review LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Michigan 1 LSC Participation in Initial LIGO Detector Characterization.

LIGO-G DM. Landry – Amaldi5 July 9, 2003 Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory Monitoring LIGO Data During the S2 Science Run Michael.

Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut) Institut für Atom- und Molekülphysik Detector Characterization of GEO 600 during.

LIGO-G Z Detector characterization for LIGO burst searches Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 10 th Gravitational Wave.

S4/S5 Calibration The Calibration team G Z.

LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Use of detector calibration info in the burst group

LIGO-G Z Peter Shawhan, for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting April 25, 2006 Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in Data from the.

6. Results The accompanying histograms show the empirical PDF of z for each interferometer (H1, H2 at Hanford, WA; L1 at Livingston, LA). The green areas.

Analysis of nonstationarity in LIGO S5 data using the NoiseFloorMon output A proposal for a seismic Data Quality flag. R. Stone for the LSC The Center.

Martin Hewitson Overview of DC work. GEO DC workshop June DC work Noise characterisation Noise projections, noise sources, noise couplings Calibration.

Data Quality Vetoes in LIGO S5 Searches for Gravitational Wave Transients Laura Cadonati (MIT) For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.

1 Data quality and veto studies for the S4 burst search: Where do we stand? Alessandra Di Credico Syracuse University LSC Meeting, Ann Arbor (UM) June.

S.Klimenko, December 2003, GWDAW Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data S.Klimenko (UF), I.Yakushin (LLO), G.Mitselmakher (UF),

Stefan Hild 1GWDAW 10, Brownsville, December 2005 Status of GEO 600 Stefan Hild, AEI Hannover for the GEO-team.

LIGO-G Z April 2006 APS meeting Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech) Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO’s S5 run Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech)

G Z 1 New Glitches seen/studied in Block-Normal Shantanu Desai Pennsylvania State University for Glitch Working Group and many others Detchar.

Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

S5 BNS Inspiral Update Duncan Brown Caltech LIGO-G Z.

LIGO-G E1 Reviewer Report for the S2 Time-Domain Pulsar Search Teviet Creighton, Andri Gretarsson, Fred Raab, B. Sathyaprakash, Peter Shawhan.

LIGO-G Z Detchar Introduction (8/16/06)K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 SixtyHertzMon Update Junyi Zhang & Keith Riles (University of Michigan)

May 29, 2006 GWADW, Elba, May 27 - June 21 LIGO-G0200XX-00-M Data Quality Monitoring at LIGO John Zweizig LIGO / Caltech.

F Don Lincoln, Fermilab f Fermilab/Boeing Test Results for HiSTE-VI Don Lincoln Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.

LIGO-G Z Data Quality Segments Repository K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Data Quality Segments Repository Keith Riles (University.

Data Analysis Algorithm for GRB triggered Burst Search Soumya D. Mohanty Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy University of Texas at Brownsville On.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.

S.Klimenko, March 2003, LSC Burst Analysis in Wavelet Domain for multiple interferometers LIGO-G Z Sergey Klimenko University of Florida l Analysis.

LIGO-G Z GWDAW9 December 17, Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO Science Run 2 Data John G. Zweizig LIGO / Caltech for the LIGO.

1 Unbiased All-Sky Search (Michigan) [as of August 17, 2003] [ D. Chin, V. Dergachev, K. Riles ] Analysis Strategy: (Quick review) Measure power in selected.

Results From the Low Threshold, Early S5, All-Sky Burst Search Laura Cadonati for the Burst Group LSC MIT November 5, 2006 G Z.

LSC Meeting, 10 Nov 2003 Peter Shawhan (LIGO/Caltech)1 Inspiral Waveform Consistency Tests Evan Ochsner and Peter Shawhan (U. of Chicago) (LIGO / Caltech)

LSC meeting – Mar05 Livingston, LA A. Di Credico Syracuse University Glitch investigations with kleineWelle Reporting on work done by several people: L.

Detector Characterisation and Optimisation David Robertson University of Glasgow.

DAQ Errors John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech LSC Analysis Meeting Tufts June 6, 2004.

LIGO-G050197LSC Collab. Mtg, LHO, August 16,20051 S4 Data Quality & S5 Preview John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech.

LIGO-G9900XX-00-M DMT Monitor Verification with Simulated Data John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech.

LIGO-G E Data Simulation for the DMT John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech.

LIGO-G D S2 Glitch Investigation Report Laura Cadonati (MIT) on behalf of the Glitch Investigation Team LSC meeting, August 2003, Hannover.

Igor Yakushin, December 2004, GWDAW-9 LIGO-G Z Status of the untriggered burst search in S3 LIGO data Igor Yakushin (LIGO Livingston Observatory)

LIGO-G Z Report on the S2 RunK. Riles / S. Whitcomb 1 Report on the S2 Run Keith Riles (University of Michigan) Stan Whitcomb (LIGO–Caltech)

LIGO- G Z 11/13/2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 BlockNormal Performance Studies John McNabb & Keith Thorne, for the Penn State University.

3/21/2007 LIGO-G Z S5 Data Quality Investigation Status John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech LSC/Virgo DetChar Session MIT, July 25, 2007.

LIGO-G D Glitch Investigation Update Laura Cadonati for the Glitch Investigation Group LSC meeting, Hanford November 12, 2003.

Data Quality Investigation LIGO-G E John Zweizig Caltech/LIGO Liivingston, March 18, 2003.

LIGO-G E S2/S3 Data Quality Flagging John G. Zweizig LIGO/Caltech.

S5 Data Quality John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech Hanover, October 25, 2007.

Calibration and the status of the photon calibrators Evan Goetz University of Michigan with Peter Kalmus (Columbia U.) & Rick Savage (LHO) 17 October 2006.

Inspiral Glitch Veto Studies

WaveMon and Burst FOMs WaveMon WaveMon FOMs Summary & plans

Stochastic background search using LIGO Livingston and ALLEGRO

CMS Pixel Data Quality Monitoring

Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates

Progress Report: Noise Storms and Beam Splitter Oscillations

John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech

Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data

LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Michigan

Presentation transcript:

LIGO-G E S2 Data Quality Investigation John Zweizig Caltech/LIGO

LIGO-G E Data Quality Investigation Goals: Tabulate known problem Publish useful data segments with full info Analysis groups to decide what is appropriate for their analysis pipelines

LIGO-G E Data Quality Segment List Official segment lists are maintained by Keith Riles &Peter Shawhan and are available via: List of all locked segments generated/verified by Peter Shawhan. Segments are given a permanent ID - split if bad or non-existent data found in part of a segment. Error bit-mask associated with each (sub)segment – indicates which errors occurred in the segment. Graphical segment status.

LIGO-G E Segment Summary (Sample)

LIGO-G E Tests Underway We are studying the following potential problems: 1. DAQ Errors / Missing data 2. Control parameter changes 3. ADC Saturation 4. Peak-peak Outliers (from minute trends) 5. Calibration validity 6. Excessive noise in AsQ bands

LIGO-G E DAQ Errors / Missing Data Used BitTest triggers to find data with >32 successive 0 samples in AS_Q »Two 1 second drop-outs in H2:LSC-AS_Q »One 33-second and one 6-second drop-out in L1.

LIGO-G E Control Parameter Changes Rana (LLO & LHO), Betsy (LHO) and Gaby (LLO) reviewed the control parameter values and E-log throughout S2. Non-standard values of several parameters were found from time to time including: »Filters not set. »MICH_GAIN, PRC_GAIN Most problems don’t invalidate data although noise level or calibration may change in some cases.

LIGO-G E ADC Saturation Digital IFO signals may saturate if 1.RF signal exceeds amplifier range 2.Demodulated signals exceed ADC range AS, REFL and POB ADC values reconstructed from raw data and searched for either 1.Signal values exceeds  ( ), or 2.Signal value repeated > 4 times in successive samples Majority of times flagged due to »Loss of lock »Accidental triggers (5 repetitions occur at a level of ~1/hr) Saturation flagged in L1, H1 segment lists. H2 has segment– dependent saturation rates. Under investigation.

LIGO-G E Peak-to-Peak Outliers Gaby scanned IFO channel (AS, REFL & POB) minute trends for outliers in max-min values Produced graphs of 102 outliers (>140cts) in H1 and 89 outliers (>70cts) in L1. All graphs are available online at: Outliers further classified by whether the are »Clustered: one of several in consecutive minutes »Correlated: Oulier seen in other IFO channels in addition to AsQ »AsQ Only: no other evidence seen.

LIGO-G E Outlier 2 IFO Channel Trends

LIGO-G E Outlier 2 Power Channel Trends

LIGO-G E Calibration Validity Gaby checked all SenseMon trends for valid calibration constants. Segments where calibration is not valid are generally due to: »Missing calibration lines (  =0) »Calibration not stable near 35Hz (  < 0.6 in L1) Flagged segments totaled ~0.4% of H1 data, ~2.4% of L1 data.

LIGO-G E Excess Noise in AsQ RMS noise level monitored in wide bands by Data Quality Monitor (DataQual). PDFs of average and maximum values for entire run may be found in: » » Preliminary selections made on all H1 bands by comparing maximum 4s RMS to a threshold Low frequency bands seen to be correlated with windy conditions during data taking, but predominantly uncorrelated with glitches or noise in other bands.

LIGO-G E Excess noise in AsQ(cont’d) Excess noise in higher frequency bands ( , , 400-1kHz, 1k-7kHz) correlated with (glitches seen by DataQual glitch tool) and between bands. Sources include »Broad-band noise episodes »Violin spontaneous ring-ups »ADCU reboots (should be vetoed independently)

LIGO-G E Sample Average Histogram

LIGO-G E Average RMS in Hz Band

LIGO-G E Maximum 4s RMS in Hz

LIGO-G E Violin Ring-ups?

LIGO-G E H1 Broadband Noise Syndrome

LIGO-G E Hz Noise Spikes

LIGO-G E Hz Noise Trends

LIGO-G E 6  Glitch Rate Trend

LIGO-G E Questions For Burst Analysis Cutting calibration, controls, saturation segments should be safe. Are they necessary? Cutting p-p outliers and enormous noise excess in Hz band is probably safe (thresholds >> expected GW strain). Can we afford not to cut them (would a discovery be believable if there was a coincident l.f. noise excess?) Are cuts based on AS_Q RMS alone safe? Under what circumstances can segments be cut based on these data?