with coherent WaveBurst pipeline

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AURIGA-LIGO Activity F. Salemi Italy, INFN and University of Ferrara for the LIGO-AURIGA JWG 2nd ILIAS-GW Meeting, October 24th and 25th, Palma de Mallorca,
Advertisements

GWDAW-8 (December 17-20, 2003, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA) Search for burst gravitational waves with TAMA data Masaki Ando Department of Physics, University.
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.
1/25 Current results and future scenarios for gravitational wave’s stochastic background G. Cella – INFN sez. Pisa.
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 D Status of LIGO Stan Whitcomb ACIGA Workshop 21 April 2004.
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 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 Z Coherent Analysis of Signals from Misaligned Interferometers M. Rakhmanov, S. Klimenko Department of Physics, University of Florida,
LIGO-G Z A Coherent Network Burst Analysis Patrick Sutton on behalf of Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini, Antony Searle, Leo Stein, Massimo.
S.Klimenko, December 2003, GWDAW Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data S.Klimenko (UF), I.Yakushin (LLO), G.Mitselmakher (UF),
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.
ILIAS WP1 – Cascina IGEC – First experience using the data of 5 bar detectors: ALLEGRO, AURIGA, EXPLORER NAUTILUS and NIOBE. – 1460.
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.
S.Klimenko, July 14, 2007, Amaldi7,Sydney, G Z Detection and reconstruction of burst signals with networks of gravitational wave detectors S.Klimenko,
Veto Selection for Gravitational Wave Event Searches Erik Katsavounidis 1 and Peter Shawhan 2 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139,
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.
Status of coalescing binaries search activities in Virgo GWDAW 11 Status of coalescing binaries search activities in Virgo GWDAW Dec 2006 Leone.
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.
S.Klimenko, December 16, 2007, GWDAW12, Boston, LIGO-G Z Coherent burst searches for gravitational waves from compact binary objects S.Klimenko,
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.
LIGO- G D Experimental Upper Limit from LIGO on the Gravitational Waves from GRB Stan Whitcomb For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Informal.
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.
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.
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.
Data Analysis Algorithm for GRB triggered Burst Search Soumya D. Mohanty Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy University of Texas at Brownsville On.
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.
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.
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.
GWDAW11 – Potsdam Results by the IGEC2 collaboration on 2005 data Gabriele Vedovato for the IGEC2 collaboration.
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 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.
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.
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.
Data Analysis report November, 2009 Gianluca M Guidi
SC03 failed results delayed FDS: parameter space searches
Brennan Hughey MIT Kavli Institute Postdoc Symposium
Advanced Virgo Detector Monitoring and Data Quality
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
LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting
Coherent detection and reconstruction
WaveMon and Burst FOMs WaveMon WaveMon FOMs Summary & plans
M.-A. Bizouard, F. Cavalier
Targeted Searches using Q Pipeline
Background estimation in searches for binary inspiral
Excess power trigger generator
Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates
Status and Plans for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Data Analysis
Performance of the WaveBurst algorithm on LIGO S2 playground data
Presentation transcript:

with coherent WaveBurst pipeline Analysis of S5 data with coherent WaveBurst pipeline S.Klimenko, I.Yakushin, A.Mercer, C.Pankow, P.Kalmus for the LSC-Virgo burst group coherent WaveBurst pipeline Preliminary results from un-triggered all-sky search Study of network configurations with project 2b data Application to GRB searches Coherent Event Display Summary S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 1

coherent statistic L(t,f) Coherent WaveBurst End-to-end multi-detector coherent pipeline based on constrained L method target detection of burst sources (inspiral mergers, supernova, GRBs,...) for confident detection combines data from several detectors handle arbitrary number of co-aligned and misaligned detectors reconstruction of source coordinates and GW waveforms & detector responses xk use coherent statistics for elimination of instrumental/environmental artifacts accounts for variability of the detector responses as function of source coordinates differences in the strain sensitivity of the GW detectors L1 H1 H2 coherent statistic L(t,f) +  + frequency time S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

status of the cWB pipeline Development is “complete” (there is always room for improvement…) Review is complete (M.Zanolin, K.Riles, B.O’Reilly) report draft: LIGO note LIGO-T040155-00-Z Documentation http://tier2.phys.ufl.edu/~klimenko/waveburst/S5/coherent/s5allsky.html method paper PRD 72, 122002 technical note project web page Performed preliminary studies for the following data sets LIGO network S5a, Nov 17/05 – Apr 3/06, live time 54.4 days S5 (full year), Nov 17/05 - Nov 17/06, live time 166.6 days (x10 of S4 run) LIGO-Geo network S4 data, NO events observed in zero lag S5 (full year), Jun 1/06 - Nov 17/06, live time 83.3 days LIGO-Virgo run 2b data LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

rate of coherent WB time-shifted triggers cWB Selection cuts Trigger production cut threshold on the likelihood of the TF pixels L(t,f) Post-production cuts (control FA rate and sensitivity) double OR coincidence network correlation coefficient average SNR per detector rk – estimated detector SNR LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. “single glitches” “double glitches” T=36 rate of coherent WB time-shifted triggers S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Effective SNR injections time-shifted log10(r) triggers S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

frequency dependent threshold S5 Rates time-shifted data frequency dependent threshold f>200-2048Hz f=64-2048 Hz Preliminary expected background rate of <1/46 year for a threshold of S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

Detection efficiency for bursts Use standard set of ad hoc waveforms (SG,GA,etc) to estimate pipeline sensitivity Coherent search has comparable or better sensitivity than the incoherent search Very low false alarm rate (~1/50years) is achievable Preliminary hrss@50% in units 10-22 for sgQ9 injections rate search 70 100 153 235 361 553 849 1053 S5a: 1/2.5y WB+CP 40.3 11.6 6.2 6.6 10.6 12.0 18.7 24.4 S5a: 1/3y cWB 28.5 10.3 6.0 5.6 9.6 10.7 16.9 21.9 expected sensitivity for full year of S5 data for high threshold coherent search S5: 1/46y cWB 25.3 9.5 6.1 5.1 8.7 9.9 15.2 20.0 S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

High threshold coherent search set thresholds to yield no events for 100xS5 data (rate ~1/50 years) - expected S5 all-sky sensitivity to sine-gaussian scalar waves Preliminary LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Status of the S5 all-sky search preliminary results (no zero lag) reported on GWDAW11 plan APS presentation (by Igor Yakushin) wait for final calibration, DQ flags and veto. After that need few weeks to finalize search meanwhile study H1xH2, L1xH1 network configurations LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Analysis of project 2b data project 2b data (includes LIGO-GEO and WSR1 Virgo data) Sep. 8, 2006 – Sep. 10, 2006 establish data exchange between LSC and Virgo exercise data analysis algorithms studies with coherent WaveBurst Igor run different network configurations: H1H2, L1H1, L1H1H2, L1H1H2V1, L1H1H2G1, L1H1H2V1G1 frequency band 256-2048 Hz (limited by Virgo & GEO) false alarm rates are estimated from time-shifted data (100 time lags) detection efficiency is estimated by using sine-Gaussian injections LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

relative glitch rates of the detectors LIGO network performance at FA rate of 1mHz network hrss@50% sg361q9 sg849q9 sg1615q9 live time sec H1xH2 11x10-22 16x10-22 31x10-22 182772 L1xH1 10x10-22 21x10-22 46x10-22 157599 L1xH1xH2 8x10-22 14x10-22 37x10-22 relative glitch rates of the detectors L1xH1xH2 LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

LIGO-Virgo-GEO network performance at FA rate of 1mHz hrss errors ~15% network hrss@50% sg361q9 sg849q9 sg1615q9 live time sec H1xH2 11x10-22 16x10-22 31x10-22 182772 L1xH1xH2 8x10-22 14x10-22 37x10-22 157599 L1xH1xH2xV1 9x10-22 17x10-22 40x10-22 104062 L1xH1xH2xG1 41x10-22 140351 L1xH1xH2xV1xG1 42x10-22 102907 LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. both sensitivity and stationarity of the noise are critical for a detector to be useful in the network S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Coordinate reconstruction H1xL1 coordinate reconstruct is possible for loud events due to a time delay between detectors and different antenna patterns L1xH1xH2xV1xG1 S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Triggered searches with cWB cWB can be used to search for GW-GRB association by analyzing data around GRB triggers in a small patch on the sky at GRB location. run analysis at lower threshold than for the un-triggered search. How cWB can complement current triggered searches? ability to handle arbitrary number of co-aligned and misaligned detectors conceptually different method – no need to specify a priori a duration (integration time) and bandwidth of anticipated GW event Peter Kalmus run a demo analysis on GRB 051213 with 3 LIGO detectors using 480 sec of data around the GRB time. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

rates FA rate is estimated from time-shifted data (100 lags) The effective SNR √ρeff of the loudest event observed in zero lag is used as threshold to construct efficiency curves S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

for sine-Gaussian wave at 235Hz and Q=9 upper limit on hrss for sine-Gaussian wave at 235Hz and Q=9 hrss 50%: hrss 90%: 1.1E-21 S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Coherent Event Display Tool developed by Adam Mercer for visualisation of the GW burst candidates coherent follow up analysis of burst triggers Uses Coherent WaveBurst algorithm Generates a web page containing Full set of the coherent event parameters Time-Frequency Maps Reconstructed Detector Responses Likelihood, Correlation, Alignment and Sensitivity Skymaps Likelihood Time-Frequency Maps http://tier2.phys.ufl.edu/~ram/private/event_display/ S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC

Summary & Plans coherent WaveBurst pipeline performed analysis of S5a set (no zero lag analysis) study of rates and sensitivity for one year of S5 data robust discrimination of glitches excellent computational performance trigger production for one year of S5 data (101 time lags) takes 1-2 day. prospects for the S5 all-sky coherent search trigger production & simulation with final S5 calibration in a time scale of few weeks after the v3 h(t) data is available analyze outliers and apply DQ and veto cuts final estimation of the detection efficiency and rates analyze zero lag triggers  produce final result expect 20-30% better sensitivitycompare to S5a in-coherent search S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

Network response matrix Dominant Polarization Frame where (all observables are RZ(Y) invariant) DPF solution for GW waveforms satisfies the equation g – network sensitivity factor network response matrix e – network alignment factor (PRD 72, 122002, 2005) detector frame y x z q,j Wave frame h+,hx Rz(y) S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

Virtual Detectors & Constraint Any network can be described as two virtual detectors constrain the solutions for the hx waveform. remove un-physical solutions produced by noise may sacrifice small fraction of GW signals but enhance detection efficiency for the rest of sources several different constraints are implemented in cWB X+ plus Xx cross output detector g eg noise var. SNR L+=X+2/g Lx= Xx2/eg likelihood L1xH1xH2 network essentially is not sensitive to hx g e S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC 2

variability of Virgo noise whitened Virgo data LIGO has held three science runs, with increasing sensitivity. These curves show the best strain sensitivity achieved during each of these runs, reaching within a factor of 2-3 of design sensitivity during S3. The duty cycle achieved by the Hanford interferometers is nearing the design target of 90%, but the Livingston interferometer has been disturbed by high ground noise. An active seismic isolation system has now been installed on the Livingston interferometer and will be operational by the next science run. Significant variability of Virgo noise due to angular motion of mirrors induced by seismic noise. S.Klimenko, G070090 -00-Z , March 19, 2007, LSC