LIGO-G050655-00-D 1 Toward Enabling Co-Located Interferometric Detectors to Provide Upper Limits on the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background Nick Fotopoulos,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

GWDAW9 – Annecy December 15-18, 2004 A. Di Credico Syracuse University LIGO-G Z 1 Gravitational wave burst vetoes in the LIGO S2 and S3 data analyses.

Advertisements

LIGO- G Z Optimally Combining the Hanford Interferometer Strain Channels Albert Lazzarini LIGO Laboratory Caltech S. Bose, P. Fritschel, M. McHugh,

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

GWDAW /12/16 - G Z1 Report on the First Search for BBH Inspiral Signals on the S2 LIGO Data Eirini Messaritaki University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

R. Stone for the LSC Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy Department of Physics and Astronomy University of Texas at Brownsville. GWDAW, Boston, MA,

July 13, 2007 Robert Ward, Caltech LIGO-G Z 1 Robert Ward for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Amaldi 7 Sydney, Australia July 2007 A Radiometer.

TeV Particle Astrophysics August 2006 Caltech Australian National University Universitat Hannover/AEI LIGO Scientific Collaboration MIT Corbitt, Goda,

LIGO-G Z Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates Laura Cadonati Massachusetts Institute of Technology LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

Results from TOBAs Results from TOBAs Cross correlation analysis to search for a Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background University of Tokyo Ayaka Shoda.

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

1/25 Current results and future scenarios for gravitational wave’s stochastic background G. Cella – INFN sez. Pisa.

Observing the Bursting Universe with LIGO: Status and Prospects Erik Katsavounidis LSC Burst Working Group 8 th GWDAW - UWM Dec 17-20, 2003.

S.Klimenko, G Z, December 21, 2006, GWDAW11 Coherent detection and reconstruction of burst events in S5 data S.Klimenko, University of Florida.

Data Characterization in Gravitational Waves Soma Mukherjee Max Planck Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik Golm, Germany. Talk at University of Texas, Brownsville.

LIGO-G Z LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 Upper Limits on the Rate of Gravitational Wave Bursts from the First LIGO Science Run Edward Daw Louisiana.

Searching for gravitational radiation from Scorpius X-1: Limits from the second LIGO science run Alberto Vecchio on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

The Role of Data Quality in S5 Burst Analyses Lindy Blackburn 1 for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,

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

LIGO-G M GWDAW, December LIGO Burst Search Analysis Laura Cadonati, Erik Katsavounidis LIGO-MIT.

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.

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

The Analysis of Binary Inspiral Signals in LIGO Data Jun-Qi Guo Sept.25, 2007 Department of Physics and Astronomy The University of Mississippi LIGO Scientific.

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)

LIGO-G D Status of Stochastic Search with LIGO Vuk Mandic on behalf of LIGO Scientific Collaboration Caltech GWDAW-10, 12/15/05.

Veto Selection for Gravitational Wave Event Searches Erik Katsavounidis 1 and Peter Shawhan 2 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139,

Status of coalescing binaries search activities in Virgo GWDAW 11 Status of coalescing binaries search activities in Virgo GWDAW Dec 2006 Leone.

GWDAW-8 December 18, 2003LIGO Scientific Collaboration, UW - Milwaukee 1LIGO-G Z Broad-band CW searches (for isolated pulsars) in LIGO and GEO.

Multidimensional classification of burst triggers from LIGO S5 run Soma Mukherjee for the LSC Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy University of Texas.

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

10/23/2006 Stefan Ballmer, Caltech G Stochastic Background of Gravitational Waves For the stochastic analysis group Stefan Ballmer California.

1 Status of Search for Compact Binary Coalescences During LIGO’s Fifth Science Run Drew Keppel 1 for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 California Institute.

1 LIGO-G Z Glitch and veto studies in LIGO’s S5 search for gravitational wave bursts Erik Katsavounidis MIT for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

1 Laura Cadonati, MIT For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS meeting Tampa, FL April 16, 2005 LIGO Hanford ObservatoryLIGO Livingston Observatory New.

S.Klimenko, G Z, December 2006, GWDAW11 Coherent detection and reconstruction of burst events in S5 data S.Klimenko, University of Florida for.

LIGO- G Z Optimally Combining the Hanford Interferometer Strain Channels - II Albert Lazzarini LIGO Laboratory Caltech S. Bose, P. Fritschel,

LIGO-G v2 The Search For Continuous Gravitational Waves Gregory Mendell, LIGO Hanford Observatory on behalf of the LIGO Science Collaboration The.

Coherent network analysis technique for discriminating GW bursts from instrumental noise Patrick Sutton (CIT) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji,

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

LIGO-G All-Sky Burst Search in the First Year of the LSC S5 Run Laura Cadonati, UMass Amherst For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration GWDAW Meeting,

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

Peter Shawhan The University of Maryland & The LIGO Scientific Collaboration Penn State CGWP Seminar March 27, 2007 LIGO-G Z Reaching for Gravitational.

Stochastic Background Data Analysis Giancarlo Cella I.N.F.N. Pisa first ENTApP - GWA joint meeting Paris, January 23rd and 24th, 2006 Institute d'Astrophysique.

GWDAW11 – Potsdam Results by the IGEC2 collaboration on 2005 data Gabriele Vedovato for the IGEC2 collaboration.

LIGO-G Z 23 October 2002LIGO Laboratory NSF Review1 Searching for Gravitational Wave Bursts: An Overview Sam Finn, Erik Katsavounidis and Peter.

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

The first AURIGA-TAMA joint analysis proposal BAGGIO Lucio ICRR, University of Tokyo A Memorandum of Understanding between the AURIGA experiment and the.

LIGO-G Z E4 Correlations: Detector Characterization Nelson Christensen Carleton College August 15, 2001.

LIGO-G05????-00-Z Detector characterization for LIGO burst searches Shourov K. Chatterji For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 10 th Gravitational Wave.

LIGO-G Z Results from LIGO Observations Stephen Fairhurst University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

GWDAW11, Potsdam 19/12/06 LIGO-G Z 1 New gravitational wave upper limits for selected millisecond pulsars using LIGO S5 data Matthew Pitkin for.

Brennan Hughey MIT Kavli Institute Postdoc Symposium

A 2 veto for Continuous Wave Searches

The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO

LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting

Bounding the strength of gravitational radiation from Sco-X1

Bounding the strength of a Stochastic GW Background in LIGO’s S3 Data

Results from TOBAs Cross correlation analysis to search for a Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background University of Tokyo Ayaka Shoda M. Ando, K. Okada,

Broad-band CW searches in LIGO and GEO S2 and S3 data

Stochastic background search using LIGO Livingston and ALLEGRO

Broad-band CW searches in LIGO and GEO S2 and S3 data

LIGO Scientific Collaboration, UW - Milwaukee

Broad-band CW searches in LIGO and GEO S2 and S3 data

LISA Data Analysis & Sources

Towards the first coherent multi-ifo search for NS binaries in LIGO

Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates

Environmental Monitoring: Coupling Function Calculator

Status and Plans for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Data Analysis

Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data

Advanced Optical Sensing

Presentation transcript:

LIGO-G D 1 Toward Enabling Co-Located Interferometric Detectors to Provide Upper Limits on the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background Nick Fotopoulos, MIT On Behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration UT Brownsville

LIGO-G D 2 Co-Located Interferometers: Overlap Reduction Function H1-H2 promises significantly enhanced sensitivity over H1-L1, especially at higher frequencies BUT Co-located detectors are subject to environmental correlation

LIGO-G D 3 H1-H2 Coherence (S4) N = /N ≈ 9.1·10 -6 Very coherent in the instrument’s “sweet spot”. Coherence squared f (Hz) S1-S4 measurements of  eff not consistent with zero

LIGO-G D 4 S1 Results Interferometer Pair  eff h 2  eff h 2 /  H1-H H1-L H2-L S1

LIGO-G D 5 Squaring Coherence Sensitivity Theorem: For all Z  {PEM channels}, coh(H1,H2)≥coh(H1,Z)coh(H2,Z) Corollary: coh(H1,H2)≥ coh(H1,Z)coh(H2,Z) max Z 1/N 1/N 2

LIGO-G D 6 Tracking Environmental Coupling in H1-H2 S4 had 107 PEM channels in RDS_R_L1 S5 will have roughly the same

LIGO-G D 7 Maximum of PEM Coherence Products: Frequency Veto 1/N 2 Threshold Maximum of PEM coherence products follows H1-H2 measured coherence very closely (within error) With this (semi-arbitrary) threshold, 56% bins lost in [50,350]Hz and 48% bins lost in [50,500]Hz, 30% in [50,1024]Hz Vetoed regions (H1-H2 1/N ~ 10 -5, PEM-IFO 1/N ~ due to resolution choices)

LIGO-G D 8 Success! We are one step closer to setting upper limits with the H1-H2 pair! coh(H1,H2) post-veto histogram  exp(-N  2 ) This (unreviewed) pipeline results in noticeably reduced significance for the point estimate We have physical basis for veto

LIGO-G D 9 Detector Characterization Have determined environmental coupling out to 1kHz. Can identify strongest sources at each frequency!

LIGO-G D 10 A Few Words on  instr  eff =  instr +  GW We must estimate or bound  instr Attempts to take this into account in S3 resulted in an  GW upper limit a few times worse than the H1-L1 upper limit As we have flagged and eliminated the major sources of instrumental correlation,  instr is greatly reduced l Other sources: Incomplete PEM coverage, non-linear environmental couplings…

LIGO-G D 11 H1-H2 and the Future The new technique: Take maximum across coherence products coh(H1,Z)*coh(H2,Z). The new capability: H1-H2 can provide upper limits at high frequencies, which are inaccessible to H1-L1. S4 was playground and proof of concept; will not publish upper limit from H1-H2. S5 will have “blind” frequency vetoes and the resulting point estimate is planned for publication. With some confidence in H1-H2, we can begin looking for astrophysical sources of stochastic radiation, which is expected to peak at frequencies >200Hz.