Review of the LIGO S4 data search for GW bursts from cosmic superstrings - Review committee: Chris Messenger, Richard O'Shaughnessy, M.Alessandra Papa.

Slides:



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

A walk through some statistic details of LSC results.
For the Collaboration GWDAW 2005 Status of inspiral search in C6 and C7 Virgo data Frédérique MARION.
Statistic for Combination of Results from Multiple Gravitational-Wave Searches Chris Pankow and Sergey Klimenko GWPAW 2011 Milwaukee, Wisconsin LIGO G v5G v5.
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.
Growth of Structure Measurement from a Large Cluster Survey using Chandra and XMM-Newton John R. Peterson (Purdue), J. Garrett Jernigan (SSL, Berkeley),
Moving towards a hierarchical search. We now expand the coherent search to inspect a larger parameter space. (At the same time the incoherent stage is.
Basic Scientific Writing in English Lecture 3 Professor Ralph Kirby Faculty of Life Sciences Extension 7323 Room B322.
Chapter 22 Systems Design, Implementation, and Operation Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 22-1.
Systematic effects in gravitational-wave data analysis
AACB ASM 2003 THE POWER OF ERROR DETECTION OF WESTGARD MULTI-RULES: A RE-EVALUATION Graham Jones Department of Chemical Pathology St Vincent’s Hospital,
CMSC 345 Fall 2000 Unit Testing. The testing process.
LIGO- G Z 03/23/2005LSC Meeting March BlockNormal Near-Online S4 Burst Analysis Keith Thorne Penn State University Relativity Group (Shantanu.
Searching for gravitational radiation from Scorpius X-1: Limits from the second LIGO science run Alberto Vecchio on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Adapting matched filtering searches for compact binary inspirals in LSC detector data. Chad Hanna – For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
LSC Meeting, November 4, 2006 LIGO-G D 1 Alan Weinstein (LIGO Laboratory / Caltech) For the LSC Internal review committee: Duncan Brown, Laura.
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 Z GWDAW10, December 16, S3 Final Results Bruce Allen, for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
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.
S.Klimenko, December 2003, GWDAW Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data S.Klimenko (UF), I.Yakushin (LLO), G.Mitselmakher (UF),
Searching for Gravitational Waves with LIGO Andrés C. Rodríguez Louisiana State University on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration SACNAS
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)
18/01/01GEO data analysis meeting, Golm Issues in GW bursts Detection Soumya D. Mohanty AEI Outline of the talk Transient Tests (Transient=Burst) Establishing.
LIGO-G D Status of Stochastic Search with LIGO Vuk Mandic on behalf of LIGO Scientific Collaboration Caltech GWDAW-10, 12/15/05.
Dec 16, 2005GWDAW-10, Brownsville Population Study of Gamma Ray Bursts S. D. Mohanty The University of Texas at Brownsville.
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.
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.
LIGO-G E1 Reviewer Report for the S2 Time-Domain Pulsar Search Teviet Creighton, Andri Gretarsson, Fred Raab, B. Sathyaprakash, Peter Shawhan.
LSC Meeting Aug 2006 Review of the S2 S3 S4 GRB/GWB Search Brian O’Reilly for the Burst Review Group.
S.Klimenko, G Z, December 2006, GWDAW11 Coherent detection and reconstruction of burst events in S5 data S.Klimenko, University of Florida for.
Search for Short-Duration GW Bursts Coincident with S2/S3/S4 Gamma-Ray Bursts S5 GRB-GWB Search: First Results Isabel Leonor (for External Triggers group)
Non-Parametric Distributional Tests for Gravitational Wave Transient Event Detection Yeming Shi 1, Erik Katsavounidis 1, Michele Zanolin 2 1 Massachusetts.
S.Klimenko, G Z, March 20, 2006, LSC meeting First results from the likelihood pipeline S.Klimenko (UF), I.Yakushin (LLO), A.Mercer (UF),G.Mitselmakher.
Data Analysis Algorithm for GRB triggered Burst Search Soumya D. Mohanty Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy University of Texas at Brownsville On.
Advances In Software Inspection
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.
First Year S5 Low Mass Compact Binary Coalescences Drew Keppel 1 representing the LIGO/VIRGO Compact Binary Coalescence Group 1 California Institute of.
A Comparison of Burst Gravitational Wave Detection Algorithms for LIGO Amber L. Stuver Center for Gravitational Wave Physics Penn State University.
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 Status of the LIGO-TAMA Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.
S5 First Epoch BNS Inspiral Results Drew Keppel 1 representing the Inspiral Group 1 California Institute of Technology Nov LSC Meeting MIT, 4 November.
LSC at LHO LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 LIGO-1 Analysis Wrap-up: Alan Wiseman University of Wisconsin.
LIGO-G Z Status of the LIGO-TAMA Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.
LIGO-G Z Peter Shawhan, for the LSC Burst Analysis Group LSC Observational Results Meeting November 4, 2006 The S4 LIGO All-Sky Burst Search.
The first AURIGA-TAMA joint analysis proposal BAGGIO Lucio ICRR, University of Tokyo A Memorandum of Understanding between the AURIGA experiment and the.
November, 2009 STAC - Data Analysis Report 1 Data Analysis report November, 2009 Gianluca M Guidi Università di Urbino and INFN Firenze for the Virgo Collaboration.
Searching the LIGO data for coincidences with Gamma Ray Bursts Alexander Dietz Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
LSC Meeting, June 3, 2006 LIGO-G Z 1 Status of inspiral search reviews Alan Weinstein (LIGO Laboratory / Caltech) For the LSC Internal review.
LIGO-G Z The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting.
GRB triggered Inspiral Searches in the fifth Science Run of LIGO Alexander Dietz Cardiff University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
Search for gravitational waves from binary inspirals in S3 and S4 LIGO data. Thomas Cokelaer on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Search for compact binary systems in LIGO data Thomas Cokelaer On behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Cardiff University, U.K. LIGO-G Z.
Search for compact binary systems in LIGO data Craig Robinson On behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Cardiff University, U.K. LIGO-G
Thomas Cokelaer for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Cardiff University, U.K. APS April Meeting, Jacksonville, FL 16 April 2007, LIGO-G Z Search.
GEO600 Data Analysis Status
Data Analysis report November, 2009 Gianluca M Guidi
SC03 failed results delayed FDS: parameter space searches
S2 Fstat paper presentation isolated
S3 Spinning Binary Black Hole Search: Status Report
S5 First Epoch BNS & BBH Inspiral Update
LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting
GW150914: The first direct detection of gravitational waves
CS212 Data Structures 2018 Second Semester.
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Experimental Psychology PSY 433
OK Alexander Dietz Louisiana State University
Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data
Presentation transcript:

Review of the LIGO S4 data search for GW bursts from cosmic superstrings - Review committee: Chris Messenger, Richard O'Shaughnessy, M.Alessandra Papa Florent Robinet - Main authors: Kipp Cannon and Xavier Siemens - Review has lasted about 1 year with weekly telecons, albeit sometime schedule was disrupted - Excellent documentation material: methods paper: PRD 73 (2006) search technical document paper draft in burst group CVS under papers/s4cosmic_string/cs_ligoS4.tex online documentation page: review technical document: in burst group CVS under papers/s4cosmic_string/ReviewDocumentTests/overview.tex

Results: this is a null-result - Distribution of on-source triggers is compared to the distribution of off-source (time-shifted triggers): A KS test confirms that foreground and background distributions are consistent at the 77% confidence level.

Upper limit - for upper limit have to determine pipeline efficiency: This plot shows how many injections were recovered out of a sample of 7400, with two criteria: that amplitude of recovered injection was louder than loudest found in analysis or simply that injection survived the pipeline.

Upper limit - these detection efficiencies e d are used in determining the rate of signals that we expect to see with our instruments as a function of the cosmic string model, described by Gm tension e loop size p - The effective rate g of events that we could see is compared with the Poissonian 90% confidence rate to have seen at least 1 event. If the effective rate is larger than the Poissonian rate, then we say that those parameters are ruled out with 90% confidence. - We do the same feeding in the computation of g the black e d that tells us about the sensitivity of the search and then compare it with 1/T.

Upper limit - - The effective rate g of events that we could see is compared with the Poissonian 90% confidence rate to have seen at least 1 event. If the effective rate is larger than the Poissonian rate, then we say that those parameters are ruled out with 90% confidence. - We do the same feeding in the computation of g the black e d that tells us about the sensitivity of the search and then compare it with 1/T. - blue curve: LIGO 1 sensitivity and 1 year of data.

What have we reviewed - have installed all software and reproduced the results - step-by-step instructions for the download and installation of all software necessary to perform this search (requires access to an LSC cluster). - have done a walk-through of all the code that had not already been reviewed, both C and Python - pipeline structure is very similar to that of a CBC search - relies on lal/lalapps standard functions - trigger output in standard xml format - development of a significant amount of fairly sophisticated Python code for post- processing - have performed several investigations to address specific questions and convince ourselves that the claims made in the results are correct

Investigations: - is the upper limit what we expect? yes, 30% discrepancy with prediction appears acceptable - injections are correctly performed - original results are consistent with results derived with most recent segmentation info - background and foreground distributions are consistent - no triggers were “lost” in the post-processing, and all triggers are accounted for - how well is the amplitude of an injection recovered ? consistently apart for an overall 7% loss in amplitude due to a mismatch between injection and recovered template for low freq cut-of signals. Will be improved in future searches. - looked in detail at 2 missed injections and confirmed all is OK - looked at two loudest events and agreed that they are not obviously due to instrument malfunction or glitch - checked power spectral estimation - careful investigation of the pipeline efficiency determination (error bars, effects of smoothing, algorithm checks) - check of the translation from efficiency curves to model constraints, including check of cosmology values

Conclusions - the results are correct and reproducible - the search well documented at all levels - the paper draft representative of what the final paper will look like. In need of only minor editing work.