LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting

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.
Comparing different searches for gravitational-wave bursts on simulated LIGO and VIRGO data Michele Zanolin -MIT on behalf of the LIGO-VIRGO joint working.
LIGO-G Z Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates Laura Cadonati Massachusetts Institute of Technology LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
G Z April 2007 APS Meeting - DAP GGR Gravitational Wave AstronomyKeith Thorne Coincidence-based LIGO GW Burst Searches and Astrophysical Interpretation.
LIGO-G Z Detector characterization for LIGO burst searches Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 10 th Gravitational Wave.
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.
Adapting matched filtering searches for compact binary inspirals in LSC detector data. Chad Hanna – For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
A coherent null stream consistency test for gravitational wave bursts Antony Searle (ANU) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini, Leo.
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.
Data Quality Vetoes in LIGO S5 Searches for Gravitational Wave Transients Laura Cadonati (MIT) For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
LIGO-G Z A Coherent Network Burst Analysis Patrick Sutton on behalf of Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini, Antony Searle, Leo Stein, Massimo.
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.
Amaldi-7 meeting, Sydney, Australia, July 8-14, 2007 LIGO-G Z All-Sky Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts during the fifth LSC Science Run Igor.
A fully coherent analysis can be performed when data is available from three or more non-aligned detectors Generalization of collocated Hanford detector.
Searching for gravitational-wave bursts with the Q Pipeline Shourov K. Chatterji LIGO Science Seminar 2005 August 2.
LIGO-G Z Results of the LIGO-TAMA S2/DT8 Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.
A Waveform Consistency Test for Binary Inspirals using LIGO data LSC Inspiral Analysis Working Group LIGO-G Z LSC Meeting Andres C. Rodriguez.
A fully coherent analysis can be performed when data is available from three or more non-aligned detectors Generalization of collocated Hanford detector.
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 Data Analysis Techniques for LIGO Laura Cadonati, M.I.T. Trento, March 1-2, 2007.
1 Laura Cadonati, MIT For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS meeting Tampa, FL April 16, 2005 LIGO Hanford ObservatoryLIGO Livingston Observatory New.
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, G Z, December 2006, GWDAW11 Coherent detection and reconstruction of burst events in S5 data S.Klimenko, University of Florida for.
S.Klimenko, G Z, December 21, 2006, GWDAW11 Coherent detection and reconstruction of burst events in S5 data S.Klimenko, University of Florida.
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.
Coherent network analysis technique for discriminating GW bursts from instrumental noise Patrick Sutton (CIT) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji,
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.
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.
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 Results of the LIGO-TAMA S2/DT8 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.
LIGO-G ZSearle LSC Mtg Aug A Coherent Network Burst Analysis Antony Searle (ANU) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini,
Status of the LIGO-AURIGA Joint Burst Analysis F. Salemi Italy, INFN and University of Ferrara on behalf of the AURIGA Collaboration and the LIGO Scientific.
LIGO-G Z Searching for gravitational wave bursts with the new global detector network Shourov K. Chatterji INFN Sezioni di Roma / Caltech LIGO.
LIGO-G Z Status of the LIGO-TAMA Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.
The first AURIGA-TAMA joint analysis proposal BAGGIO Lucio ICRR, University of Tokyo A Memorandum of Understanding between the AURIGA experiment and the.
G08XXXX-00-Z S. Chatterji, Cascina, Italy, 2008 November 261 Gravitational-wave data analysis and supernovae Shourov K. Chatterji INFN Sezione di Roma.
LIGO-G Z Introduction to QScan Shourov K. Chatterji SciMon Camp LIGO Livingston Observatory 2006 August 18.
Abstract: We completed the tuning of the analysis procedures of the AURIGA-LIGO joint burst search and we are in the process of verifying our results.
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.
LIGO-G05????-00-Z Detector characterization for LIGO burst searches Shourov K. Chatterji For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 10 th Gravitational Wave.
Search for gravitational waves from binary inspirals in S3 and S4 LIGO data. Thomas Cokelaer on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Thomas Cokelaer for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Cardiff University, U.K. APS April Meeting, Jacksonville, FL 16 April 2007, LIGO-G Z Search.
S5 First Epoch BNS & BBH Inspiral Update
All-Sky Burst Searches for Gravitational Waves at High Frequencies
The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO
Coherent wide parameter space searches for gravitational waves from neutron stars using LIGO S2 data Xavier Siemens, for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Igor Yakushin, LIGO Livingston Observatory
Searching for gravitational wave bursts with the new global detector network 2007 May 3 Searching for gravitational wave bursts with the new global detector.
r-statistic performance in S2
Coherent detection and reconstruction
Targeted Searches using Q Pipeline
Stochastic background search using LIGO Livingston and ALLEGRO
Background estimation in searches for binary inspiral
Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates
A Waveform Consistency Test for Binary Inspirals using LIGO data
Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data
Presentation transcript:

LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting S5 Q Pipeline Status Shourov K. Chatterji Caltech LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting MIT 2006 November 5

S5 Q Pipeline search The Q Pipeline is being applied to search for untriggered bursts in S5 data through 2006 April 3. There are two primary components of this analysis H1H2 double coincident search for combined excess signal energy followed by H1H2 null stream consistency test H1H2L1 triple coincident search for time frequency coincidence between H1H2 triggers and L1 triggers Upper limits will be determined using the loudest event statistic The loudest N events will be followed up QScans and a fully coherent follow-up if data is available from a sufficient number of detectors LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Q Pipeline Multiresolution time-frequency search for statistically significant excess signal energy Projects whitened data onto an overlapping basis of sinusoidal Gaussians characterized by central time, central frequency, and Q (ratio of central frequency to bandwidth) The template bank is constructed using a maximum mismatch approach similar to the matched filtering approach The search is equivalent to a matched filter search for waveforms that are sinusoidal Gaussians after whitening The reported normalized energy is measure of event significance and is simply twice the squared SNR that would be reported by a matched filter search LSC meeting 2006 November 5

H1H2 Null stream veto The collocated H1H2 search has two components H+: The optimal linear combination of H1 and H2 that maximizes the SNR of potential signals Weighting factors are inversely proportional to power spectral density in each frequency bin Normalized energy, Z+, is twice the quadrature sum of SNR in both detectors H-: The H1 – H2 null stream, which should be consistent with noise for real gravitational-waves To avoid calibration uncertainties, test normalized energy, Z-, against that expected null stream normalized energy, Z0, assuming incoherent glitches in the two detectors Z- > a + b Z0 LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Analysis code The QScan and QPipeline codes have been merged into a single code base, which is now available in the LSC MatApps CVS repository [links: code, documentation] This code base is now installated on most LSC computing clusters and LIGO laboratory general computing networks. Running QPipeline is now as simple as running QScan ssh ldas-pcdev1.ligo.caltech.edu mkdir –p ~/qpipelinetest cd ~/qpipelinetest ~shourov/qscan/bin/qpipeline.sh \ 843214931 843215031 \ @H1H2-collocated @S5 . It’s easy! Try it now! LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Summary of livetime and duty cycle H1 H1H2 90.1 (60.1%) 3.3 (2.2%) 34.4 (22.9%) 5.1 (3.4%) 55.8 (37.2%) 12.7 (8.5%) 10.2 (6.8%) 7.1 (4.7%) H2 L1 Livetime in days through April 3, 2006 Duty cycle relative to start of S5 at LHO LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Data quality and vetoes The following data quality flags were used to define the segment lists for trigger generation No other data quality flags have been applied. No auxiliary channel vetoes have been applied. OUT_OF_LOCK OUT_OF_SCIENCE_MODE PRE_LOCKLOSS_120 MISSING_RDS_C02_LX Injection LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Search parameters Using h(t) data Using burst MDCs Search space channelNames: {'H1:LSC-STRAIN', 'H2:LSC-STRAIN'} frameTypes: {'H1_RDS_C02_LX', 'H2_RDS_C02_LX'} timeShifts: [+0 -1] injectionNames: {'H1:GW-H', 'H2:GW-H'} injectionTypes: {'SG2_S5_A', 'SG2_S5_A'} injectionFactors: [0.5 0.5] reSampleFrequency: 4096 blockDuration: 64 minimumBlockOverlap: 8 qRange: [4 64] frequencyRange: [64 1024] maximumMismatch: 0.2 analysisMode: 'collocated' outlierFactor: 2.0 falseRate: 1e0 maximumSignificants: 1e5 maximumTriggers: 1e3 durationInflation: 1.0 bandwidthInflation: 1.0 Using h(t) data Using burst MDCs Search space LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Post-processing parameters High threshold veto H+ events are excluded if they fall within two seconds of very inconsistent tiles (Z- > 128 + 0.1 Z0) Low threshold veto H+ events are excluded if they overlap inconsistent tiles (Z- > 18 + 0.05 Z0). Low frequency, low Q cut A significant fraction of all glitches are observed to fall in the lowest frequency, lowest Q template. H+ events are excluded if they have a central frequency less than 100 Hz and a Q less than 14. LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Trigger production Trigger production and post-processing is visible online Detectors Injections Time Shift Amplitude x 2.5x10-21 H1 - H2 L1 H1H2 0, 0 0, -1 SG2_S5_A 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 GA2_S5_A WNB2_S5_A +1 LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Distribution of H1H2 significance Loudest event Z+ = 176 LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Loudest H1H2 event Loudest event is low Q burst in H1 No clear glitch in H2 Why did this pass the H1H2 null stream veto? Potential room for improved veto tuning? H1 H2 LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Efficiency for sinusoidal Gaussians LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Efficiency for sinusoidal Gaussians LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Efficiency for Gaussians LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Efficiency for white noise bursts LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Predicted (“time lag”) upper limits Decreased efficiency Increased livetime Crossover at 7e-22 and 0.08 events per day LSC meeting 2006 November 5

Outlook Further tuning will likely improve performance Anything that eliminates loud events will improve the resulting upper limit Triple coincidence (at the expense of livetime) Application of data quality flags and vetoes based on auxiliary or environmental channels Concern about potential zero lag H1H2 surprise Use S4 as a playground data set Trigger production complete at 17 different time lags including zero lag Use one day of S5 as a playground data set Once tuning is complete, the box will be opened for the analysis through April 3. LSC meeting 2006 November 5