G020077-00-R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Progress on Burst Simulation  t-f character of burst waveforms  Burst waveforms  Calibration  E7 data.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
S3/S4 BBH report Thomas Cokelaer LSC Meeting, Boston, 3-4 June 2006.
Advertisements

Calibration of the gravitational wave signal in the LIGO detectors Gabriela Gonzalez (LSU), Mike Landry (LIGO-LHO), Patrick Sutton (PSU) with the calibration.
Initial results of burst signal injections into a GEO burst search pipeline Indentify clusters of TF pixels Frame data from IFO Calculate time- frequency.
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-8 (December 17-20, 2003, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA) Search for burst gravitational waves with TAMA data Masaki Ando Department of Physics, University.
Burst detection efficiency  In order to interpret our observed detection rate (upper limit) we need to know our efficiency for detection by the IFO and.
LIGO- G R AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Simulation of Burst Waveforms and Burst Event Triggers Alan Weinstein Caltech Burst UL WG LSC meeting, 8/13/01.
LIGO-G Z External Triggers Circulation only within LIGO I authorship list Status of the Triggered Burst Search (highlights from LIGO DCC# T Z,
LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Use of detector calibration info in the burst group
G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Discussion of Statistical Methods, Tools, and Simulations  Review of tools and methods  (I am only familiar.
LIGO- G02XXXX-00-Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Zwerger Muller SN waveforms The 78 ZM waveforms differ in initial angular momentum they have (A parameter),
LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Hardware Burst Injections in E9  S2 Alan Weinstein, Caltech Laura Cadonati, MIT Shourov Chatterjee, MIT.
ALLEGRO G Z LSC, Livingston 23 March, Calibration for the ALLEGRO resonant detector -- S2 and S4 Martin McHugh, Loyola University New Orleans.
G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Discussion of Statistical Methods, Tools, and Simulations  Review of tools and methods  (I am only familiar.
LIGO-G Z Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates Laura Cadonati Massachusetts Institute of Technology LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Waveburst DSO: current state, testing on S2 hardware burst injections Sergei Klimenko Igor Yakushin LSC meeting, March 2003 LIGO-G Z.
LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Use of detector calibration info in the burst group
21 June 2002E7 Burst Search Status Report1 Peter Saulson co-chair, LSC Burst Upper Limit Group LIGO-G Z.
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.
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 Z The AURIGA-LIGO Joint Burst Search L. Cadonati, G. Prodi, L. Baggio, S. Heng, W. Johnson, A. Mion, S. Poggi, A. Ortolan, F. Salemi, P.
LIGO-G M GWDAW, December LIGO Burst Search Analysis Laura Cadonati, Erik Katsavounidis LIGO-MIT.
M. Principe, GWDAW-10, 16th December 2005, Brownsville, Texas Modeling the Performance of Networks of Gravitational-Wave Detectors in Bursts Search Maria.
S.Klimenko, December 2003, GWDAW Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data S.Klimenko (UF), I.Yakushin (LLO), G.Mitselmakher (UF),
LIGO- G D Burst Search Report Stan Whitcomb LIGO Caltech LSC Meeting LIGO1 Plenary Session 18 August 2003 Hannover.
G030XXX-00-Z Excess power trigger generator Patrick Brady and Saikat Ray-Majumder University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
LSC Meeting, 19 March 2003 Shawhan, Leonor, MarkaLIGO-G D Introduction to Hardware Signal Injections Peter Shawhan, Isabel Leonor, Szabi Márka.
A Waveform Consistency Test for Binary Inspirals using LIGO data LSC Inspiral Analysis Working Group LIGO-G Z LSC Meeting Andres C. Rodriguez.
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.
Characterization of PEM Channels Chirpiness of the Test Mass motion due to “Noise” Anthony Rizzi Staff Scientist, LIGO LIGO-G D.
LIGO-G Z The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting.
S.Klimenko, LSC, August 2004, G Z BurstMon S.Klimenko, A.Sazonov University of Florida l motivation & documentation l description & results l.
LIGO-G Z Confidence Test for Waveform Consistency of LIGO Burst Candidate Events Laura Cadonati LIGO Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
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.
Search for bursts with the Frequency Domain Adaptive Filter (FDAF ) Sabrina D’Antonio Roma II Tor Vergata Sergio Frasca, Pia Astone Roma 1 Outlines: FDAF.
Peter Shawhan The University of Maryland & The LIGO Scientific Collaboration Penn State CGWP Seminar March 27, 2007 LIGO-G Z Reaching for Gravitational.
LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 First look at Injection of Burst Waveforms prior to S1 Alan Weinstein Caltech Burst UL WG LSC meeting, 8/21/02.
LIGO-G Z r statistics for time-domain cross correlation on burst candidate events Laura Cadonati LIGO-MIT LSC collaboration meeting, LLO march.
LSC Meeting, 10 Nov 2003 Peter Shawhan (LIGO/Caltech)1 Inspiral Waveform Consistency Tests Evan Ochsner and Peter Shawhan (U. of Chicago) (LIGO / Caltech)
LIGO- G Z AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 A Coherence Function Statistic to Identify Coincident Bursts Surjeet Rajendran, Caltech SURF Alan Weinstein,
LSC meeting – Mar05 Livingston, LA A. Di Credico Syracuse University Glitch investigations with kleineWelle Reporting on work done by several people: L.
Comparison of filters for burst detection M.-A. Bizouard on behalf of the LAL-Orsay group GWDAW 7 th IIAS-Kyoto 2002/12/19.
LIGO-G Z TFClusters Tuning for the LIGO-TAMA Search Patrick Sutton LIGO-Caltech.
S.Klimenko, LSC, Marcht 2005, G Z BurstMon diagnostic of detector noise during S4 run S.Klimenko University of Florida l burstMon FOMs l S4 run.
S5 First Epoch BNS Inspiral Results Drew Keppel 1 representing the Inspiral Group 1 California Institute of Technology Nov LSC Meeting MIT, 4 November.
LIGO-G9900XX-00-M DMT Monitor Verification with Simulated Data 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 AJW, Caltech, LIGO Project1 Hardware Burst Injections in Pre-S2  S2 Alan Weinstein, Caltech Laura Cadonati, MIT Shourov Chatterjee,
LIGO-G Z Status of the LIGO-TAMA Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.
SEARCH FOR INSPIRALING BINARIES S. V. Dhurandhar IUCAA Pune, India.
LIGO-G Z The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting.
Discussion of Statistical Methods, Tools, and Simulations
The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO
r-statistic performance in S2
LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting
Bounding the strength of a Stochastic GW Background in LIGO’s S3 Data
Maria Principe University of Sannio, Benevento, Italy
Stochastic background search using LIGO Livingston and ALLEGRO
SLOPE: A MATLAB Revival
Excess power trigger generator
First look at Injection of Burst Waveforms prior to S1
Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates
Burst Figure of Merit Julien Sylvestre LSC Meeting, March 2004
Inspiral Waveform Consistency Tests
A Waveform Consistency Test for Binary Inspirals using LIGO data
Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data
Presentation transcript:

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Progress on Burst Simulation  t-f character of burst waveforms  Burst waveforms  Calibration  E7 data  LDAS jobs  Results from TFClusters  More work to be done Alan Weinstein, Caltech, 3/20/02

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 t-f character of burst waveforms (relevant for astrophysics-based analysis) Generic statements about the sensitivity of our searches to poorly-modeled sources can straightforwardly be made from the t-f “morphology”… longish-duration, small bandwidth (chirps, ringdowns) short duration, large bandwidth (merger) In-between (ZM waveforms) Of course, depends on t-f resolution, which must be optimized

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Waveforms buried in E2 noise, including calibration/TF ZM supernova ringdown Hermite-gaussian chirp

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Z-M waveforms (un-normalized)

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Burst waveforms  Start with simple, easy to interpret waveforms: damped sinusoids have well-defined central frequency and bandwidth:  h(t) = h peak exp(-t/  ) sin(2  f cent t), BW = 1/   Choose narrow bandwidth for now,  = 0.1 sec, BW = 10 Hz  Scan over range of f cent, h peak  Consider other bandwidths, other waveforms, later.  Since we’re analyzing lots of data (~512 secs) per job, inject multiple waveforms in one job, so that we don’t have to run so many jobs…  BUT, if these waveforms are BIG, and if the DSO calculates average power using the data itself, many injected waveforms could throw it off…  For now, this is just a convenience…

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Burst scan 32 waveforms, each 2 sec long, Scanning from 50 to 1600 Hz in 50 Hz steps. The first 2 waveforms, with f cent = 50 and 100 Hz;  =0.1 sec ASD of this 64-sec stretch of simulated data. Spectrogram to illustrate the frequency scan

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 E7 data  Want to run at MIT  GUILD reports that at MIT, we have » H R gwf /export/E7/LHO/frames » L R gwf /export/E7/LLO/frames  These are 2 hrs of data from 1/1/02, when all 3 IFOs are in lock.  This is not playground data. We need playground data at MIT.  In the meantime, I choose a 361-sec stretch, since TFCLUSTERS apparently likes to run on that much data (I need to learn how to change that, if possible): , H2:LSC-AS_Q. (This stretch has lots of noise bursts) Hz 361 sec

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Injecting bursts  The burst signals are absolutely normalized by h peak. Need to put it into same units as H2:LSC-AS_Q (volts) by using response function, obtained from calibration.  The burst signals are passed through a linear filter implementing the E7 H2 calibration transfer function, then saved to a frame file and ftp’ed to »  Add signals to the data in LDAS DatacondAPI; can scale magnitude of signals as desired, at run-time. -framequery { { R H {} $times Adc($channel) } { F H /ldas_outgoing/jobs/ldasmdc_data/burst-stochastic/burstscan_e7h2.F {} Adc(0) } } -aliases { x = _ch0; s = _ch1; } -algorithms { zx = slice(x,0, ,1); zy = slice(s,0, ,1); zm = mul(zy,1.e0); zs = add(zx,zm); zz = tseries(zs, , $stime, 0); pz = psd(zz,16384); intermediate(,pzs.ilwd,pz,psd of ch0); z = resample(zz,1,8); m = mean(z); y = sub(z,m); q = linfilt(b,y); r = slice(q,2047,737280,1); }

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 E7 calibration No calibration info from LLO has been posted here yet.

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Add bursts to data Time series Noise spectrum Ratio of noise spectra, With/without injected signal Calibrated strain noise spectrum

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 BIG Bursts added to E7 data (as a check) Noise ASD for 361 secs of H2:LSC-AS_Q (red), And with BIG bursts added during secs (blue). Bursts are added, and PSDs obtained, using LDAS/DataCond (thanks to Philip Charlton for his help). Strain sensitivity from 361 secs of H2:LSC-AS_Q (red), And with BIG bursts added (blue). Note that red curve is in good qualitative agreement with spectrum in Calib page, and bursts scan frequencies from Hz in 50 Hz steps, bandwidth = 10 Hz, and all with same peak strain.

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 DSO search  Run with TFCLUSTERS, 361 seconds at a time.  Run on 361 sec data segment from H2, no injected signals: »357 triggers into mit_test sngl_bursts table.  Inject 32 bursts with h peak = 1  , scanning f cent from 50 to 1600 Hz in 50 Hz steps, signals spaced 2 secs apart, starting at sec 200. »471 triggers into mit_test sngl_bursts table. Most big SNR triggers are unchanged after injection of simulated bursts. Many of the first 16 bursts stand out over the fakes.

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Efficiencies: Presenting the results Find loudest trigger within 1 sec of injected burst. Plot SNR vs frequency of injected burst. Note that accidental coincidence of injected burst with noise burst obscures injected bursts at, eg, 350, 500, 550, 850, 1000 Hz. Compare SNR of triggers coincident with injected bursts, with measured noise spectrum. Arbitrary relative scale, for now – needs work! Anyway, it looks like with the burst amplitudes that were injected, we run out of efficiency above ~1100 Hz.

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Power DSO  Running on 260 sec stretches of playground E7 data  With no signals injected, get 510 triggers (hard limit??)  If I run with large signals, baseline power (calculated from the same data stretch that we are searching in!) gets trashed; »ALL snrs go down for ALL triggers. »Even in the windows where signals are injected.  With smallish signals injected, still get 510 triggers, but they do seem to show up a bit.  Still, with these huge numbers of large SNR bursts, how can we hope to see signals that should be seen given the mean power levels?

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 SLOPE DSO  Ran on 260 secs of E7 data from 1/1/02  With no signals injected, get 5938 triggers  With signals injected, get same (?) 5938 triggers  At the moment, can’t seem to run slope DSO anymore at MIT; get wrapperAPI errors that data are unavailable…

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 First look at L1  361 secs of L1:LSC-AS_Q ( ) around 1/1/02.  Hmm. Doesn’t look a lot like expected…

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 More work  Get the full playground data at MIT.  Run on colored gaussian noise with same PSD as data.  Get absolute scale right.  Consider all three IFOs.  Learn how to tune/optimize DSOs.  Consider other bandwidths, waveforms.  Learn how to use Event class in ROOT. (Currently use MATLAB).  Enhance DatacondAPI capabilities to more easily modify the injected bursts on the fly.  Automate LDAS submissions, Trigger processing (rundso script).  Decide on best way to summarize results.