Analysis of L1 WaveMon S2 veto triggers

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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

Advertisements

LIGO-G Z 1 S2/E10 pulsar injection analysis Réjean Dupuis University of Glasgow 13 November 2003 LSC Meeting, LHO.

G Z 1 Block-Normal, Event Display and Q-scan Based Glitch and Veto Studies Shantanu Desai for Penn. State Burst Group And Glitch Working Group.

LIGO-G Z LSC March 2004 KYF1 Veto efficiency study of triple coincidence playground WaveBurst events using WaveMon and glitchMon S2 veto triggers.

LIGO Reduced Data Sets E7 standard reduced data set RDS generation for future runs decimation examples LIGO-G Z Isabel Leonor (w/ Robert Schofield)

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

LIGO-G DM. Landry – Amaldi5 July 9, 2003 Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory Monitoring LIGO Data During the S2 Science Run Michael.

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.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization SummaryK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of Detector Characterization Sessions Keith Riles (University.

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.

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

1 Data quality and veto studies for the S4 burst search: Where do we stand? Alessandra Di Credico Syracuse University LSC Meeting, Ann Arbor (UM) June.

Glitch Group S5 Activities Laura Cadonati for the Glitch Working Group LSC meeting, Hanford March 21, 2006 G Z.

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 Z April 2006 APS meeting Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech) Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO’s S5 run Igor Yakushin (LLO, Caltech)

S.Klimenko, August 2005, LSC, G Z Constraint likelihood analysis with a network of GW detectors S.Klimenko University of Florida, in collaboration.

LIGO- G D Burst Search Report Stan Whitcomb LIGO Caltech LSC Meeting LIGO1 Plenary Session 18 August 2003 Hannover.

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.

S.Klimenko, LSC March, 2001 Update on Wavelet Compression Presented by S.Klimenko University of Florida l Outline Ø Wavelet compression concept E2 data.

LIGO- G D E7: An Instrument-builder’s Perspective Stan Whitcomb LIGO Caltech LSC Meeting Upper Limits Plenary Session 22 May 2002 LIGO Livingston.

1 Planning notes from August 2005 Burst Group Face-to-Face Meeting LHO, August 18, 2005 Peter Shawhan, scribe LIGO-G Z.

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, LSC, August 2004, G Z BurstMon S.Klimenko, A.Sazonov University of Florida l motivation & documentation l description & results l.

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.

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.

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

LSC meeting – Mar05 Livingston, LA A. Di Credico Syracuse University Glitch investigations with kleineWelle Reporting on work done by several people: L.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization Summary K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Summary of the Detector Characterization Sessions Keith.

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 Status of the LIGO-TAMA Joint Bursts Search Patrick Sutton LIGO Laboratory, Caltech, for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Working Group.

S.Klimenko, LSC meeting, March 2002 LineMonitor Sergey Klimenko University of Florida Other contributors: E.Daw (LSU), A.Sazonov(UF), J.Zweizig (Caltech)

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.

LIGO-G D Glitch Investigation Update Laura Cadonati for the Glitch Investigation Group LSC meeting, Hanford November 12, 2003.

Best 20 jobs jobs sites.

All The future of DC work. GEO DC workshop June Restructuring of DC and Detector Work for many reasons the DC work was not very efficient in the.

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.

Inspiral Glitch Veto Studies

S5 First Epoch BNS & BBH Inspiral Update

All-Sky Burst Searches for Gravitational Waves at High Frequencies

Virgo Status Detector Status Computing Data Analysis status and Plans

Igor Yakushin, LIGO Livingston Observatory

r-statistic performance in S2

LIGO S6 Detector Characterization Studies

LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting

Overview of E10 / S3 Hardware Injections

On Behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration and VIRGO

S3 Glitch Updates Laura Cadonati

S3/S4 BNS/PBH RESULTS and UPPER LIMITS

Coherent detection and reconstruction

WaveMon and Burst FOMs WaveMon WaveMon FOMs Summary & plans

Travis Hansen, Marek Szczepanczyk, Michele Zanolin

S2/S3 Glitch Investigation Update

WaveBurst upgrade for S3 analysis

Searching for GRB-GWB coincidence during LIGO science runs

Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates

Burst Figure of Merit Julien Sylvestre LSC Meeting, March 2004

M Ashley - LSC Meeting – LIGO Hanford, 12 Nov 2003

S2 Bilinear Couplings Study

Status of Instrumental Beam Studies and Technical Description of Detectors and DAQ February 24, 2017.

Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data

Presentation transcript:

Analysis of L1 WaveMon S2 veto triggers 2/15/2019 Analysis of L1 WaveMon S2 veto triggers Ken Yoshiki Franzen University of Florida LSC November 2003 KYF LIGO-G030611-00-Z

Outline: Introduction Data processing status Produced veto triggers Veto of Waveburst triggers Summary and plans LSC November 2003 KYF

WaveMon: Time frequency analysis in the wavelet domain www.phys.ufl.edu/LIGO/bursts for documentation Producing off-line veto triggers from 65 channels (control, ACC, MIC, MAG, V, RADIO, QPD, WFS, AS_DC, SEIS, OPLEV) LSC November 2003 KYF

Using LLO machine alvar (2 x 1 GHz PC) So far 50 % of L1 S2 locked segments (~two weeks) Should be finished before December Need more computing resources on site to run off-time DMT jobs!!! LSC November 2003 KYF

LSC November 2003 KYF

50 % of L1 S2 data: (*): AS_I included SNR Number of triggers 2/15/2019 50 % of L1 S2 data: SNR Number of triggers Dead time fraction (%) 4 145499 (432452) 0.9 (5.0) 5 97004 (231588) 0.6 (3.0) 6 68576 (118867) 0.5 (1.5) (*): AS_I included LSC November 2003 KYF LIGO-G030611-00-Z

L1 time shifted relative H1H2 Studying veto efficiency on triple coincidence off-time WaveBurst triggers L1 time shifted relative H1H2 Gap: time between each WaveBurst trigger and the nearest in time existing WaveMon trigger Negative gap: Veto! LSC November 2003 KYF

WaveBurst trigger to nearest WaveMon veto gap distribution: (all 65 channels except AS_I) LSC November 2003 KYF

Veto efficiency vs. dead time fraction (with and without AS_I) LSC November 2003 KYF

Frequency limit on WB triggers: LSC November 2003 KYF

Confidence limit on WB triggers: LSC November 2003 KYF

Triple coincident (3 IFOs) off-time WaveBurst triggers vetoed by L1 WaveMon triggers (50 % of S2, red all WB, blue vetoed WB): Veto SNR 4.0, e=14.1 % LSC November 2003 KYF

Summary Plans Dead time fraction 0.5-1.0 % without AS_I 2/15/2019 Summary Dead time fraction 0.5-1.0 % without AS_I L1 veto efficiency 10-17 % Plans Run WaveMon on H1, H2 data Apply glitchMon data to WaveBurst triggers LSC November 2003 KYF LIGO-G030611-00-Z