Cavalier Fabien on behalf LAL group Orsay GWDAW 10 December, 14 th 2005 Reconstruction of Source Location using the Virgo-LIGO network Presentation of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Developing Event Reconstruction for CTA R D Parsons (Univ. of Leeds) J Hinton (Univ. of Leicester)
Advertisements

Polarization Angle Calibration by the Wiregrid rotation Osamu Tajima (KEK) Presented by Hogan Nguyen (FNAL)
Mutidimensional Data Analysis Growth of big databases requires important data processing.  Need for having methods allowing to extract this information.
M 1 and M 2 – Masses of the two objects [kg] G – Universal gravitational constant G = 6.67x N m 2 /kg 2 or G = 3.439x10 -8 ft 4 /(lb s 4 ) r – distance.
CmpE 104 SOFTWARE STATISTICAL TOOLS & METHODS MEASURING & ESTIMATING SOFTWARE SIZE AND RESOURCE & SCHEDULE ESTIMATING.
12-1 Multiple Linear Regression Models Introduction Many applications of regression analysis involve situations in which there are more than.
12 Multiple Linear Regression CHAPTER OUTLINE
March 6th, 2006CALICE meeting, UCL1 Position and angular resolution studies with ECAL TB prototype Introduction Linear fit method Results with 1, 2, 3,
March 2005E. Armengaud - Moriond Search methods for UHECR anisotropies within the Pierre Auger Observatory Eric Armengaud (APC/IAP - Paris) for the Auger.
A Search for Point Sources of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA-B10 Scott Young, for the AMANDA collaboration UC-Irvine PhD Thesis:
COMP322/S2000/L221 Relationship between part, camera, and robot (cont’d) the inverse perspective transformation which is dependent on the focal length.
Peter Fauland (for the LHCb collaboration) The sensitivity for the B S - mixing phase  S at LHCb.
Bootstrap spatobotp ttaoospbr Hesterberger & Moore, chapter 16 1.
TOPLHCWG. Introduction The ATLAS+CMS combination of single-top production cross-section measurements in the t channel was performed using the BLUE (Best.
Chapter 3. Vector 1. Adding Vectors Geometrically
MOMENT ABOUT AN AXIS In-Class Activities: Check Homework Reading Quiz Applications Scalar Analysis Vector Analysis Concept Quiz Group Problem Solving Attention.
The LiC Detector Toy M. Valentan, M. Regler, R. Frühwirth Austrian Academy of Sciences Institute of High Energy Physics, Vienna InputSimulation ReconstructionOutput.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
POLAR COORDINATES (Ch )
Small-Scale Anisotropy Studies with HiRes Stereo Observations Chad Finley and Stefan Westerhoff Columbia University HiRes Collaboration ICRC 2003 Tsukuba,
Infrasound detector for Apatity group Asming V.E., Kola Regional Seismological Center, Apatity, Russia.
Measurement of through-going particle momentum by means of Multiple Scattering with the T600 TPC Talk given by Antonio Jesús Melgarejo (Universidad de.
DelayRatio: A Gravitational Wave Event Physical Likelihood Estimator Based on Detection Delays and SNR Ratios Amber L. Stuver LIGO Livingston ObservatoryCalifornia.
Chapter 5 Errors In Chemical Analyses Mean, arithmetic mean, and average (x) are synonyms for the quantity obtained by dividing the sum of replicate measurements.
Unfolding jet multiplicity and leading jet p T spectra in jet production in association with W and Z Bosons Christos Lazaridis University of Wisconsin-Madison.
A coherent null stream consistency test for gravitational wave bursts Antony Searle (ANU) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini, Leo.
CP violation measurements with the ATLAS detector E. Kneringer – University of Innsbruck on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration BEACH2012, Wichita, USA “Determination.
MS Calibration for Protein Profiles We need calibration for –Accurate mass value Mass error: (Measured Mass – Theoretical Mass) X 10 6 ppm Theoretical.
Ronald Bruijn – 10 th APP Symposium Antares results and status Ronald Bruijn.
Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research The University of Colorado 1 STATISTICAL ORBIT DETERMINATION ASEN 5070 LECTURE 11 9/16,18/09.
Solution of the Inverse Problem for Gravitational Wave Bursts Massimo Tinto JPL/CIT LIGO Seminar, October 12, 2004 Y. Gursel & M. Tinto, Phys. Rev. D,
1 Iterative dynamically stabilized (IDS) method of data unfolding (*) (*arXiv: ) Bogdan MALAESCU CERN PHYSTAT 2011 Workshop on unfolding.
Local Probabilistic Sensitivity Measure By M.J.Kallen March 16 th, 2001.
We will test here the accuracy of this method for a realistic model of the magnetic field. The regular component is modeled with a bisymmetric spiral configuration,
1 Testing coherent code for coalescing binaries network analysis Simona Birindelli INFN Pisa, Università di Pisa Leone B. Bosi INFN Perugia, Università.
Study of neutrino oscillations with ANTARES J. Brunner.
Study of neutrino oscillations with ANTARES J. Brunner.
May 17-19, 2005D. Zaborov, ARENA workshop1 Dmitry Zaborov for the ITEP group Berlin, May 2005 Analysis methods of ITEP Baikal data.
CP Violation Studies in B 0  D (*)  in B A B A R and BELLE Dominique Boutigny LAPP-CNRS/IN2P3 HEP2003 Europhysics Conference in Aachen, Germany July.
Sebastian Kuch, Rezo Shanidze Preliminary Studies of the KM3NeT Physics Sensitivity KM3NeT Collaboration Meeting Pylos, Greece, April 2007.
Joint LIGO-Virgo data analysis Inspiral and Burst Summary of the first project results Overview of the future activities M.-A. Bizouard (LAL-Orsay) on.
GWDAW10, UTB, Dec , Search for inspiraling neutron star binaries using TAMA300 data Hideyuki Tagoshi on behalf of the TAMA collaboration.
The KASCADE-Grande Experiment: an Overview Andrea Chiavassa Universita’ di Torino for the KASCADE-Grande Collaboration.
Gordana Milutinovic-Dumbelovic Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade Ivanka Bozovic-Jelisavcic, Strahinja Lukic, Mila Pandurovic Branching ratio.
Adam Blake, June 9 th Results Quick Review Look at Some Data In Depth Look at One Anomalous Event Conclusion.
Relative Positional Precision. 3.E.i. - Relative Positional Precision We know that every point located on a survey has an uncertainty in its location.
Jeroen van Hunen (for the LHCb collaboration) The sensitivity to  s and  Γ s at LHCb.
Comparison of filters for burst detection M.-A. Bizouard on behalf of the LAL-Orsay group GWDAW 7 th IIAS-Kyoto 2002/12/19.
GWDAW91Thursday, December 16 First Comparison Between LIGO &Virgo Inspiral Search Pipelines F. Beauville on behalf of the LIGO-Virgo Joint Working Group.
1 CMS Sensitivity to Quark Contact Interactions with Dijets Selda Esen (Brown) Robert M. Harris (Fermilab) DPF Meeting Nov 1, 2006.
Elliptic flow of D mesons Francesco Prino for the D2H physics analysis group PWG3, April 12 th 2010.
Giuseppe Ruggiero CERN Straw Chamber WG meeting 07/02/2011 Spectrometer Reconstruction: Pattern recognition and Efficiency 07/02/ G.Ruggiero - Spectrometer.
LIGO-G Z Searching for gravitational wave bursts with the new global detector network Shourov K. Chatterji INFN Sezioni di Roma / Caltech LIGO.
Insensitivity of GNSS to geocenter motion through the network shift approach Paul Rebischung, Zuheir Altamimi, Tim Springer AGU Fall Meeting 2013, San.
On the Optimality of the Simple Bayesian Classifier under Zero-One Loss Pedro Domingos, Michael Pazzani Presented by Lu Ren Oct. 1, 2007.
Muon Energy reconstruction in IceCube and neutrino flux measurement Dmitry Chirkin, University of Wisconsin at Madison, U.S.A., MANTS meeting, fall 2009.
Presentation : “ Maximum Likelihood Estimation” Presented By : Jesu Kiran Spurgen Date :
G v1Heterogeneous Detector Networks1 Heterogeneous Detector Networks Sky Localization with 3G Detectors May 26, 2016 Daniel Sigg LIGO Hanford Observatory.
SC03 failed results delayed FDS: parameter space searches
Confidence Intervals and Sample Size
ESTIMATION.
Amplitude and time calibration of the gw detector AURIGA
Using IP Chi-Square Probability
Time Independent Analysis
M.-A. Bizouard, F. Cavalier
Unfolding Problem: A Machine Learning Approach
LISA Data Analysis & Sources
Claudio Bogazzi * - NIKHEF Amsterdam ICRC 2011 – Beijing 13/08/2011
Computing and Statistical Data Analysis / Stat 7
Unfolding with system identification
Presentation transcript:

Cavalier Fabien on behalf LAL group Orsay GWDAW 10 December, 14 th 2005 Reconstruction of Source Location using the Virgo-LIGO network Presentation of the method Toy Simulation Influence of timing resolution and Effects of systematic errors Geometrical Properties of Virgo-LIGO network Effects of the Beam-Pattern functions

With n measured arrival times t i with associated errors  i, compute the best estimation of  and  Use of  2 Minimization  2 defined as: where t 0 is the arrival time of the signal at the center of the Earth and  t i Earth ( ,  ) is the delay between the i th ITF and the center of the Earth Reconstruction Method

Symmetrical Definition No reference detector to compute timing differences  How to choose it ? detector with lower error detector leading to highest time delays detector which gives the best relative errors on time delays … Uncorrelated Errors Easily expendable to any set of detectors Reconstruction Method

Put a source at a given location Computes arrival times t True [i] Computes timing errors in each detector set  [i] = s in all detectors (no beam-pattern effect) set = 10 (beam-pattern effect) and use  [i] =   / SNR[i] ms (  0 = 1 ms will be used by default) t Measured [i] = t True [i] + GaussianRandom *  [i] Compute the angular distance (Angular Error in the following plots) between reconstructed location and true one Toy Simulation

Example of Reconstruction for Galactic Center Estimated errors (through covariance matrix) in agreement with RMS values

Effect of Systematic Errors on Arrival Time t Measured [i] = t True [i] + GaussianRandom *  [i] + Bias (for only one ITF) bias in the angular reconstruction when the timing bias and  [i] have the same order of magnitude bias in the angular reconstruction proportional to the timing bias no significant difference between the three ITF Influence of Timing Resolution

Reconstruction for GC (no beam-pattern) Mean Angular Error: 1.9 Median Angular Error: 0.95 o Minimal Angular Error:0.8 o Maximal Angular Error:4.3 o

Reconstruction for  =0 o (no beam-pattern) Mean Angular Error: 1.8 o Median Angular Error: 1.5 o Minimal Angular Error:1.3 o Maximal Angular Error:3.1 o

Error increase when source crosses 3-detector plane 2 detectors located at (±d/2,0,0) source in the (x,y) plane defined by its angle  with x axis t 21 = d/c cos(  ) (1) if error  t on t 21, then error  on the angle:  = c/d  t / |sin(  )| when  approaches 0, due to statistical errors, Eq.(1) cannot be inverted    = 1/  t 2 (t 21 measured – d/c cos(  )) 2    minimal and equal to 0 for  = acos(t 21 measured *c/d) if |t 21 measured *c/d|≤1    minimal and  1 for  = 0 if |t 21 measured *c/d|>1 Similar effect in the 3-detector case

Reconstruction for full sky (no beam-pattern) Mean Angular Error: 1.6 o Median Angular Error: 1.1 o Minimal Angular Error:0.7 o Maximal Angular Error:4.5 o

Reconstruction for GC (beam-pattern effect included)

All events: Mean Angular Error: 4.0 o Median Angular Error: 1.8 o Minimal Angular Error:0.7 o Events with all SNR > 4.5 (56%): Mean Angular Error: 1.8 o Median Angular Error: 1.25 o Minimal Angular Error:0.7 o

Reconstruction for  =0 o (beam-pattern effect included)

All events: Mean Angular Error: 3.0 o Median Angular Error: 2.2 o Minimal Angular Error:1.2 o Events with all SNR > 4.5 (79%): Mean Angular Error: 2.1 o Median Angular Error: 1.7 o Minimal Angular Error:1.2 o

Reconstruction for full sky (beam-pattern effect included) All events: Mean Angular Error: 2.7 o Median Angular Error: 1.7 o Minimal Angular Error:0.7 o Events with all SNR > 4.5 (60%): Mean Angular Error: 1.8 o Median Angular Error: 1.3 o Minimal Angular Error:0.7 o

Conclusion  2 minimization works properly for position reconstruction In the case of 3 detectors, the method is able to find the two possible solutions The method is easily extendable to any ITF network Errors on parameters provided by the minimization procedure Accuracy of one degree can be achieved with good timing reconstruction (error proportional to timing error) Bias in timing estimator can easily introduce bias in reconstructed angles