Capabilities of a Gravitational Wave Network Bernard F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute (Potsdam, Germany) and School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Detectors: Advancing toward a Global Network Stan Whitcomb LIGO/Caltech ICGC, Goa, 18 December 2011 LIGO-G v1.
Advertisements

VIRGO: WHERE WE COME FROM WHERE WE ARE GOING GIOVANNI LOSURDO - INFN Firenze Advanced Virgo Project Leader for the Virgo Collaboration (and the LIGO Scientific.
1 Science Opportunities for Australia Advanced LIGO Barry Barish Director, LIGO Canberra, Australia 16-Sept-03 LIGO-G M.
Virgo Open Data Plans October 27, 2011 Benoit Mours (LAPP-Annecy) On behalf of the Virgo Collaboration.
LIGO-G Z Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates Laura Cadonati Massachusetts Institute of Technology LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Systematic effects in gravitational-wave data analysis
GEO-LIGO data analysis M.Alessandra Papa Max Planck Inst. f. Gravitationsphysik, Potsdam, Germany G Z VESF foundation meeting, Pisa, Dec
G Z April 2007 APS Meeting - DAP GGR Gravitational Wave AstronomyKeith Thorne Coincidence-based LIGO GW Burst Searches and Astrophysical Interpretation.
1/25 Current results and future scenarios for gravitational wave’s stochastic background G. Cella – INFN sez. Pisa.
DelayRatio: A Gravitational Wave Event Physical Likelihood Estimator Based on Detection Delays and SNR Ratios Amber L. Stuver LIGO Livingston ObservatoryCalifornia.
Paris, July 17, 2009 RECENT RESULTS OF THE IGEC2 COLLABORATION SEARCH FOR GRAVITATIONAL WAVE BURST Massimo Visco on behalf of the IGEC2 Collaboration.
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.
Silvia Poggi - GW burst detection strategy in non-homogeneus networks Detection strategies for bursts in networks of non-homogeneus gravitational waves.
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 Major International Collaboration in Advanced LIGO R&D Gary Sanders NSF Operations Review Hanford February, 2001.
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.
1 GEO outlook Benno Willke (presented by Bernard Schutz) LSC meeting, MIT Nov 2006.
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,
ILIAS WP1 – Cascina IGEC – First experience using the data of 5 bar detectors: ALLEGRO, AURIGA, EXPLORER NAUTILUS and NIOBE. – 1460.
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)
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.
Energy Peter Shawhan GWPAW PPT February 2011 ~10 46 Joules ~2.4x10 31 Megatons ~10 16 times the annual output of the sun.
LIGO-G Z LIGO at the start of continuous observation Prospects and Challenges Albert Lazzarini LIGO Scientific Collaboration Presentation at NSF.
Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
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 D LIGO Laboratory1 Stoyan Nikolov LIGO-G D The LIGO project’s quest for gravitational waves Presenting LIGO to the students of.
LIGO- G D Gravitational Wave Observations with Interferometers: Results and Prospects Stan Whitcomb for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 2 nd.
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.
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.
LIGO-G v2 The Search For Continuous Gravitational Waves Gregory Mendell, LIGO Hanford Observatory on behalf of the LIGO Science Collaboration The.
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.
Stochastic Background Data Analysis Giancarlo Cella I.N.F.N. Pisa first ENTApP - GWA joint meeting Paris, January 23rd and 24th, 2006 Institute d'Astrophysique.
TAUP 2007, Sendai, September 12, 2007 IGEC2 COLLABORATION: A NETWORK OF RESONANT BAR DETECTORS SEARCHING FOR GRAVITATIONAL WAVES Massimo Visco on behalf.
Introduction Coalescing binary compact objects for a 1.4 M  neutron star inspiralling into a 10 M  black hole would be in-band for ~200 s. We could detect.
G Z The LIGO gravitational wave detector consists of two observatories »LIGO Hanford Observatory – 2 interferometers (4 km long arms and 2 km.
LIGO-G ZSearle LSC Mtg Aug A Coherent Network Burst Analysis Antony Searle (ANU) in collaboration with Shourov Chatterji, Albert Lazzarini,
GWDAW11 – Potsdam Results by the IGEC2 collaboration on 2005 data Gabriele Vedovato for the IGEC2 collaboration.
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.
Searching the LIGO data for coincidences with Gamma Ray Bursts Alexander Dietz Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
Gravitational Wave Data Analysis  GW detectors  Signal processing: preparation  Noise spectral density  Matched filtering  Probability and statistics.
Overview of iLCGT & bLCGT Kazuaki Kuroda LCGT Collaboration F2f meeting 27 September, 2010.
Gravitational Wave Astronomy
Low-latency Selection of Gravitational-wave Event Candidates
GW Policy: The Future: G3 Detectors
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
An improved method for estimating the efficiency of GW detectors
Coherent detection and reconstruction
DAWN III Workshop: What’s Next for Gravitational Wave Astronomy?
M.-A. Bizouard, F. Cavalier
Maria Principe University of Sannio, Benevento, Italy
Stochastic gravitational wave and its spectral property
Status of LIGO Patrick J. Sutton LIGO-Caltech
Coherent Coincident Analysis of LIGO Burst Candidates
Update on Status of LIGO
Status and Plans for the LIGO-TAMA Joint Data Analysis
Gravitational radiation from known radio pulsars using LIGO data
Joint bar-IFO observations
Presentation transcript:

Capabilities of a Gravitational Wave Network Bernard F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute (Potsdam, Germany) and School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, UK

2 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Why Networks? All operating GW interferometers pool their data LIGO/H, LIGO/L, GEO600 part of LSC, joint operation, partnership LSC and VIRGO pool all data, do joint analysis and publication Exceptional in physics: competition is the rule GW science demands cooperation: Verification: signals are transient, so no single detector can securely claim a burst detection (CW signals are the exception) Information: positions, polarization require triangulation among  3 detectors (exceptions: CW, coincident optical events). Added accuracy in parameter determination (eg sky location) is where the science payoff is: optical identifications, population studies of BHs or NSs, Hubble constant, etc. Sensitivity: because we observe coherent amplitudes, coherent analysis increases range, event rate. Sky coverage: extra detectors fill in holes in the antenna pattern of others. Duty cycle: interferometers typically have high-quality science data for ~80% of the time. That means that a 3-detector network only operates in triple coincidence 50% of time.

3 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Joint Analysis In practice, joint analysis addresses all issues of verification, information, sensitivity, coverage, and duty cycle. Searches typically apply thresholds to individual data streams, identifying possible candidate events. eliminates most spurious noise-generated events must be done in close cooperation with experimentalists, using all data Coincidences studied coherently, by adding weighted data with appropriate time- and phase-shifts. If shot noise limits sensitivity, this essentially synthesizes a detector with all the light in one. At present interferometers operate with about 80% duty cycle in each detector Three detectors operate three-way 50% of the time Four detectors would operate three-way about 80% of the time: for 33% extra expenditure, a fourth detector increases the science by 60%. Three detectors is minimum, not optimum.

4 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Information Extracting information from multiple detectors requires All detectors must receive event with reasonable SNR There must be more data than unknowns: to determine sky position ( ,  ) plus polarization (  ) plus amplitude (h), we need three detectors: 2 time-delays plus three amplitudes provides some redundancy. Existing network has a near degeneracy: the two large LIGO detectors are nearly aligned, so their amplitudes are not independent. This provides a check for a two-detector coincidence, but reduces the information available with three detectors. Degeneracy also reduces sky coverage: bigger holes in antenna pattern. This is a major reason for big improvements brought by a 4th detector.

5 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Comparing Networks Consider the following configurations of identical detectors located where the real detectors are (or are proposed): LIGO/Hanford and LIGO/Livingston LIGO/H, LIGO/L and VIRGO LIGO/H, LIGO/L, VIRGO, and LCGT Get an idea of sky coverage by adding antenna patterns.

6 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | LIGO-LIGO Each detector has a typical “peanut” pattern (sensitivity to randomly linearly polarized waves from a given sky direction) L/H and L/L not too different Sum L/H+L/L similar. Figure of merit f 50 : One interferometer has more than 50% of its peak sensitivity over 33% of sky: f 50 = 0.33 L/H+L/L have combined f 50 = 0.34

7 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | LIGO-LIGO-VIRGO When VIRGO is added to the network, its overall sensitivity is increased. This describes the expected situation for S6. Maximum goes up by 9% Coverage increases more: f 50 = 72% This means doubling the number of 2-way coincidences. L/H+L/L+VL/H+L/L+V 50%

8 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | LIGO-LIGO-VIRGO-LCGT There are further strong gains if LCGT is added. The maximum sensitivity increases by a further 13% above that of L/H+L/L+V. Coverage at 50% of the new maximum now 100%. This suggests the number of 3- way coincidences goes up by 28%. This is in addition to the 3- detector duty cycle improvement of 60%! L/H+L/L+V+LCGT 50%

9 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Summary Combined Antenna Patterns 50% Sensitivity Coverage L/HL/H+L/L L/H+L/L+V L/H+L/L+V+LCGT L/H+L/L L/H+L/L+VL/H+L/L+V+LCGT

10 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Truly Global Network The current development of three large detectors is a minimum for good science, but the increase in science from adding a 4th large detector is very significant: duty cycle up by 60%, sky coverage for 3-way coincidences up by 30%. Payoffs in source detection, more accurate locations, more identifications. Achieving this payoff requires joint coherent data analysis, along with close cooperation with other observatories: large optical surveys, rapid-response telescopes, transient event monitors (gamma-ray, X-ray, radio,...).

11 B F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute Fujihara Seminar | Networks of GW Detectors | Thank you!