L ocating and O bserving O ptical C ounterparts to U nmodeled P ulses in Gravitational Waves LOOC UP LIGO-G070827-00-Z Dec 16, 2007 Jonah Kanner, Peter.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LIGO-G Z Peter Shawhan, for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration GWDAW December 16, 2005 All-Sky Search for Gravitational Wave Bursts in LIGO S4.
Advertisements

Searching for Electromagnetic Counterparts of Gravitational-Wave Transients Marica Branchesi (Università di Urbino/INFN) on behalf of LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Sources and Timing A variety of possible source mechanisms motivate this search. Theoretical and numerical models predict nova-like transients from double.
GTN The GLAST Telescope Network Involvement for students and teachers in the science of the Swift, GLAST, and XMM-Newton missions Gordon Spear and Tim.
LIGO - Fermi Sub-Threshold Search for the 1 st Advanced LIGO Science Run Jordan Camp NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Moriond Gravitation Meeting March.
Following Up Gravitational Wave Event Candidates Roy Williams (Caltech), Peter Shawhan (U Maryland), for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration.
Pi of the Sky – preparation for GW Advance Detector Era Adam Zadrożny Wilga 2014.
Tile or Stare? Optimal Search Strategies for GRBs and Afterglows Robert J. Nemiroff Michigan Technological University.
Panorama of the Universe: Daily all-sky surveys with the SKA John D. Bunton, CSIRO TIP, Ronald D. Ekers, CSIRO ATNF and Elaine M. Sadler, University of.
Gamma Ray Bursts and LIGO Emelie Harstad University of Oregon HEP Group Meeting Aug 6, 2007.
R. Frey Student Visit 1 Gravitational Waves, LIGO, and UO GW Physics LIGO
GLAST LAT Project 1S. Ritz Purposes of the Data Challenges “End-to-end” testing of analysis software. –define the ends –define the tests (what is success?)
The Transient Universe: AY 250 Spring 2007 Existing Transient Surveys: High Energy I: Gamma-Ray Bursts Geoff Bower.
Capabilities of a Gravitational Wave Network Bernard F Schutz Albert Einstein Institute (Potsdam, Germany) and School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff.
Dawn of GW Astrophysics: Multi-messenger Astronomy May 7, 2015Silver Spring, MD1 Jonah Kanner LIGO Lab - Caltech LIGO-G v6.
Natalia Tyurina Behalf of the MASTER-team MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY Sternberg Astronomical Institute MASTER prompt and follow-up.
Follow-up of LIGO-Virgo observations of gravitational waves Roy Williams (Caltech) Peter Shawhan (U. of Maryland / JSI) for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Status of LIGO Data Analysis Gabriela González Department of Physics and Astronomy Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration Dec.
LIGO- G D Status of LIGO Stan Whitcomb ACIGA Workshop 21 April 2004.
RAS National Astronomy Meeting, Queens University, Belfast Gravitational wave astrophysics: Are we there yet? Matthew Pitkin for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Recent Results and the Future of Radio Afterglow Observations Alexander van der Horst Astronomical Institute Anton Pannekoek University of Amsterdam.
Pi of the Sky telescope contribution to the LSC-Virgo Electromagnetic Follow-up project Adam Zadrożny Spała 2014.
PI OF THE SKY AND GRAVITATIONAL WAVES SEARCHES Adam Zadrożny.
GRBs & VIRGO C7 run Alessandra Corsi & E. Cuoco, F. Ricci.
1 Gravitational Wave Astronomy using 0.1Hz space laser interferometer Takashi Nakamura GWDAW-8 Milwaukee 2003/12/17.
Prompt searches for optical signal from gravitational wave transients with Pi of the Sky Adam Zadrożny Pi of the Sky session at XXXII-th IEEE-SPIE Joint.
Searching for Gravitational Waves with LIGO Andrés C. Rodríguez Louisiana State University on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration SACNAS
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.
Gravitational-wave (GW) detectors in the nexus of multi-messenger astrophysics Isabel Leonor (University of Oregon) For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Energy Peter Shawhan GWPAW PPT February 2011 ~10 46 Joules ~2.4x10 31 Megatons ~10 16 times the annual output of the sun.
Dec 16, 2005GWDAW-10, Brownsville Population Study of Gamma Ray Bursts S. D. Mohanty The University of Texas at Brownsville.
1/26 Science case for AdV 1 st project review November 1 st, 2008 A.Viceré for the AdV Team‏
Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Search for neutrinos from gamma-ray bursts with the ANTARES telescope D. Dornic for the ANTARES Collaboration.
Searches for Compact Binary Coalescences in LIGO and Virgo data Gabriela González For the LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration APS.
Swift as a Rapid Wide Field Follow-up Instrument John Nousek & Jamie Kennea Penn State University Phil Evans University of Leicester International Workshop.
LIGO-G v5 5/2/09Joshua Smith, Syracuse University1 Low-latency search for gravitational-wave transients with electromagnetic follow-up Joshua Smith,
G Z 1 Real-time search for gravitational wave transients during S6/VSR2: Principles, thoughts and plans Erik Katsavounidis MIT for the LSC-Virgo.
LIGO-G Z The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting.
25s detection of the Sy1 galaxy NGC3516 The Palermo BAT survey project Application to a sample of SDSS LINERs V. La Parola, A.Segreto, G. Cusumano, V.
MMT Observation Database for Light Curve Analysis Vladimir Agapov Presentation for the WG1 session 33rd IADC meeting, Houston.
Gamma-Ray Bursts with the ANTARES neutrino telescope S. Escoffier CNRS/CPPM, Marseille.
GWDAW10, UTB, Dec , Search for inspiraling neutron star binaries using TAMA300 data Hideyuki Tagoshi on behalf of the TAMA collaboration.
LIGO-G W Death Star Redux: 35-year mystery solved Fred Raab October 28, 2005.
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,
Peter Shawhan The University of Maryland & The LIGO Scientific Collaboration Penn State CGWP Seminar March 27, 2007 LIGO-G Z Reaching for Gravitational.
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.
A Search For Untriggered GRB Afterglows with ROTSE-III Eli Rykoff ROTSE Collaboration University of Michigan Santorini GRB Meeting September 2 nd, 2005.
Igor Yakushin, December 2004, GWDAW-9 LIGO-G Z Status of the untriggered burst search in S3 LIGO data Igor Yakushin (LIGO Livingston Observatory)
A Proposed Collaboration Between LIGO-Virgo and Swift to Improve the Chances to Detect Gravitational Waves from Core Collapse Supernovae Kiranjyot (Jasmine)
Swift-BAT as a Triggering Facility Amy Lien Scott Barthelmy, Hans Krimm NASA Goddard Space Flight Center The 4 th AMON workshop, Penn State University,
Searching the LIGO data for coincidences with Gamma Ray Bursts Alexander Dietz Louisiana State University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
Gamma-Ray Bursts Please press “1” to test your transmitter.
LIGO-G Z Peter Shawhan for the LSC-Virgo Burst Analysis Working Group LSC-Virgo Meeting July 23, 2007 Eyes Wide Open: Searching for Gravitational.
LIGO-G Z The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration APS Meeting.
LIGO-G Z Results from LIGO Observations Stephen Fairhurst University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
GRB triggered Inspiral Searches in the fifth Science Run of LIGO Alexander Dietz Cardiff University for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration LIGO-G Z.
Online all-sky burst searches during the joint S6/VSR2 LIGO-Virgo science run Igor Yakushin LIGO Livingston Observatory, Caltech For the LIGO Scientific.
Search for gravitational waves from binary inspirals in S3 and S4 LIGO data. Thomas Cokelaer on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.
Brennan Hughey MIT Kavli Institute Postdoc Symposium
Low-latency Selection of Gravitational-wave Event Candidates
Follow-Ups to Gravitational-Wave Signal Candidates
Search for neutrinos from gamma-ray bursts with the ANTARES telescope
Finding Optical Transients with LIGO and Virgo Data
Real-time Astronomy with LIGO and Virgo: Status and Prospects Erik Katsavounidis LIGO-MIT for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration.
Astrophysics: 2016 highlights and the way forward
The Q Pipeline search for gravitational-wave bursts with LIGO
Inspiral Analysis Group Results
An improved method for estimating the efficiency of GW detectors
Searching for GRB-GWB coincidence during LIGO science runs
Presentation transcript:

L ocating and O bserving O ptical C ounterparts to U nmodeled P ulses in Gravitational Waves LOOC UP LIGO-G Z Dec 16, 2007 Jonah Kanner, Peter Shawhan, Tracy Huard Szabolcs Marka, Jennifer Piscionere David Murphy Univ. of Maryland Columbia Univ. Carnegie Observatories

GW + EM LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

LOOC UP LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

What is LOOC UP? 1) Analyze GW data in near real-time to seek 3 site coincident “event candidates” (H-L-V) 2) Estimate the source location of “candidates” Timing information yields a “triangulation” solution So-called “coherent methods” may do a more careful job 3) Image the source location with an optical radio, and/or x-ray telescope –A GW producing astrophysical event could produce an EM transient, thus confirming the event and gaining extra astronomical information LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Motivation: Why should we actively seek optical counterparts in this novel and exciting manner? Increased GW sensitivity –Low-threshold search Even at high SNR, would like to confirm first GW detection in independent channel More information => better physics Prepare for Advanced LIGO era Important step toward integrating GW astronomy into greater astronomical community Education/Research opportunity at forefront of GW and EM astronomy LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Sample Source Models Nuclear fireball of Li and Paczynski –Simplified theoretical model –NS matter ejected during merger decays –Tau ~ 1 day, R ~ 13 at 20 Mpc Optical afterglow of short GRB’s –Empirical –Beaming means we may not see gammas –Tau ~ 1 hour, bright at 20 Mpc Supernovas –Tau ~1 week, R~14 at 20 Mpc LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Potential Problems: Time and Space Space: GW Source reconstruction is hard, and has an “error box” larger than the field of view of most optical telescopes! GW “error box” is a few square degrees at best Time: It takes time to analyze gravitational wave data - can it really be done in about an hour? LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Solutions: Space LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007 We can take advantage of LIGO’s limited range. For example, for NS-NS mergers: S5/VSR1 ~15 Mpc S6/VSR2 ~30 Mpc Assemble a catalog* of potential host locations within the target range of our search *Thank you CBC group!

Solutions: Space LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007 We can take advantage of LIGO’s limited range. For each candidate event, we seek nearby galaxies within the error box of the estimated source location. These galaxies are then imaged for transients.

Solutions: Time By the end of S5, Q-Online was creating near real-time triggers for the H-L-V network. Typical time lags of 2 to 4 hours In pilot studies, our software was able to download lists of Q-triggers, find coincident events, and identify target galaxies in short time scales (10 – 20 minutes). While our pilot approach used “timing only” source reconstruction, “coherent methods” are possible as well For example, X-Pipeline currently takes 1 to 3 hours for one event All of these algorithms likely have room for optimization: we have a goal of ~1 hour from IFO event to first EM observation LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Open Issues: Image Processing Need to define a data pipeline to reduce images and identify transients. Issues Include: –Do we use pre-existing star catalogs or take our own reference images? –How dim a transient can we resolve against a galactic background? –How much variability do we expect from “normal” stars (or, how high a threshold do we set for variability?) –How do we identify known variable objects (Cepheid variables, eclipsing binaries, etc.) LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Open Issues: Observational Resources We need to identify the observational resources to use for this search. –Small robotic telescopes –~2 m telescopes –Radio telescopes such as LOFAR –Public Alerts, such as VoEvent –ToO (SWIFT, etc.) Appropriate resources are likely “era dependant” LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Proposal: LOOC UP in S6 Expected NS-NS inspiral range ~30 Mpc. This suggests: –About 1 target galaxy per square degree –Could meet demands of source models with modest equipment (R ~ 15) –With effort, software can be ready by 2009 start date –Basic technique has been demonstrated in pilot studies –With a dedicated or semi-dedicated network of robotic telescopes, we could perform a GW search with FAR of a few per day instead of a few per year The S6 run is a crucial opportunity to develop real-time techniques for the Adv. LIGO era, when detection-based GW astronomy will be a reality LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

LOOC UP Thank you LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

Extra Slides

GW triggers in S6/VSR2 ??? LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007 Flux (mJy) Waiting 2 days to image short GRB afterglows allows dimming of perhaps 30x (~ 3 magnitudes) and may miss interesting physics Should we wait that long? -Could 2009 transient surveys devote a fraction of time to IFO triggers? (a few targets per night?) -GW triggered searches with “off-the-shelf” telescopes compliments all sky surveys (targeted search vs. all-sky scan) -Radio band an interesting option as well Short GRB Afterglow Edo Berger

Solutions: Space Visible matter of the universe is concentrated in galaxies: We don’t have to scan the whole GW error box, but only image the galaxies within it. LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007 Krzysztof Belczynski, Rosalba Perna,Tomasz Bulik, Vassiliki Kalogera,Natalia Ivanova, Donald Q. Lamb, The Astrophysical Journal, 648: , 2006 September 10 Here, we see that most compact object mergers, at 10 Mpc, should occur within ~10 arc min of their hosts.

How low can you go? LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007 Rough estimate triple coincidence FAR of 1 per year: SNR = 7 Rough estimate triple coincidence FAR of 1 per day: SNR = 5.5 Low threshold search improves sensitivity by ~20% Increase space of search by ~70%!!

Search Skeleton IFO 1 Trigger Generator IFO 2 Trigger Generator IFO 3 Trigger Generator Coincidence and Position Take Optical Images Image Processing LOOC UP GWDAW 12 Dec 16, 2007

LOOC UP UMCP Sept 27, 2007 Pilot Study: Summer ‘07

LOOC UP UMCP Sept 27, 2007 Pilot Study: Summer ‘07 3 Runs on 3 different telescopes: – MDM 2.4 m June 4-6 –Swope Telescope July 22 – Aug 1 – MDM 1.3 m Sept. 4-9 Incoherent Source Reconstruction H-L-V and H-L networks I and R-Harris filters Imaged targets ~1 to 10 hours after GW trigger