G010290 -00-R LSC UL 13 Aug 011 Detector Characterization; Triggers, code infrastructure; Followup Analysis for the UL groups Nelson Christensen, Szabi.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

E2 Correlations Nelson Christensen Carleton College LSC Detector Characterization LIGO-G Z.

Advertisements

Oregon Proposal, Jim Brau, PAC, December 5, Jim Brau Univ. of Oregon December 5, 2002 Oregon Proposal for LIGO Research LSC collaborator since formation.

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

R. Stone for the LSC Center for Gravitational Wave Astronomy Department of Physics and Astronomy University of Texas at Brownsville. GWDAW, Boston, MA,

S4 Environmental Disturbances Robert Schofield, U of O I.Pre-S4 “fixes” II.Some S4 veto issues III. Early coupling results from S4 PEM injections.

LIGO-G Z Camp orientation / overview K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Orientation and Overview Keith Riles (University of Michigan)

G D 1 LIGObservatory Environment David Shoemaker 3 July 2001.

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

LIGO-G Z NSF Review LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Michigan 1 The LSC Role in Detector Characterization Keith Riles.

LIGO-G E ITR 2003 DMT Sub-Project John G. Zweizig LIGO/Caltech Argonne, May 10, 2004.

G R AJW, Caltech, LSC Meeting, 3/20/02 Discussion of Statistical Methods, Tools, and Simulations  Review of tools and methods  (I am only familiar.

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

LIGO-G Z NSF Review LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Michigan 1 LSC Participation in Initial LIGO Detector Characterization.

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

Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut) Institut für Atom- und Molekülphysik Detector Characterization of GEO 600 during.

LIGO-G Z Detector characterization for LIGO burst searches Shourov K. Chatterji for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 10 th Gravitational Wave.

June 27, 2002 EK 1 Data Analysis Overview Erik Katsavounidis LIGO-MIT PAC12 – June 27, 2002 LIGO-G Z.

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

LIGO NSF Rev LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 Upper Limits Groups: Status and Plans Alan Wiseman LSC Software.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization NeedsK. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Detector Characterization Needs Keith Riles (University of Michigan)

3 May 2011 VESF DA schoolD. Verkindt 1 Didier Verkindt Virgo-LAPP CNRS - Université de Savoie VESF Data Analysis School Data Quality and vetos.

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization Software Tools K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Detector Characterization Software Tools Keith.

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

The Role of Data Quality in S5 Burst Analyses Lindy Blackburn 1 for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,

GWDAW12, Dec , Cambridge MA1 Detection Confidence Tests for Burst and Inspiral Candidate Events Romain Gouaty *, for the LSC and the Virgo Collaboration.

Analysis of nonstationarity in LIGO S5 data using the NoiseFloorMon output A proposal for a seismic Data Quality flag. R. Stone for the LSC The Center.

LSC at LHO LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 Data Analysis Summary Alan Wiseman G040xxxx-zz.

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.

S2 and S3 Correlation Studies Nelson Christensen Sarah Vigeland Physics and Astronomy Carleton College Detector Characterization Session LSC Meeting August.

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 D Global Diagnostics and Detector Characterization 9 th Marcel Grossmann Meeting Daniel Sigg, LIGO Hanford Observatory.

LSC glitch group report Shourov K. Chatterji for the LSC glitch group LSC/Virgo meeting 2007 October 24 Hannover, Germany LIGO-G Z.

Veto Selection for Gravitational Wave Event Searches Erik Katsavounidis 1 and Peter Shawhan 2 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139,

LSC Meeting, 19 March 2003 Shawhan, Leonor, MarkaLIGO-G D Introduction to Hardware Signal Injections Peter Shawhan, Isabel Leonor, Szabi Márka.

LIGO-G D LSC Meeting Nov An Early Glimpse at the S3 Run Stan Whitcomb (LIGO–Caltech) LIGO Scientific Collaboration Meeting LIGO Hanford.

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

Searching for Gravitational Waves from Binary Inspirals with LIGO Duncan Brown University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration.

A Data/Detector Characterization Pipeline (What is it and why we need one) Soumya D. Mohanty AEI January 18, 2001 Outline of the talk Functions of a Pipeline.

LSC Meeting: 3/14/01Inspiral Upper Limit - Detector Characterization 1 Inspiral Upper Limit: Detector Characterization Needs Nelson Christensen Carleton.

LIGO-G Z Instrum. Lines and Blind CW Search K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Status Report on Instrumental Line Catalog and Blind.

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

LSC Meeting LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 LSC Software and Other Things Alan Wiseman University of Wisconsin.

LIGO-G Z DMT Status for UL Analysis K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 DMT Monitors -- Status Update for Upper Limits Analysis.

May 29, 2006 GWADW, Elba, May 27 - June 21 LIGO-G0200XX-00-M Data Quality Monitoring at LIGO John Zweizig LIGO / Caltech.

Proposing a DMT monitor for studying micro- seismic noise and up-conversions S. Mukherjee & R. Grosso UTB & U. Erlangen, Germany LSC Det Char Telecon,

LIGO-G D Commissioning at Hanford Stan Whitcomb Program Advisory Committee 12 December 2000 LIGO Livingston Observatory.

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.

LSC Meeting, August 2002 P. Shawhan / Inspiral U.L. Working GroupLIGO-G Z Vetoes Used in the E7 Inspiral Upper Limit Analysis Part 2 Peter Shawhan,

LIGO-G Z Detector Characterization Software Tools K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Introduction to Detector Characterization Sessions.

LIGO-G Z Introd. to Detect. Charact. Sessions K. Riles - University of Michigan 1 Introduction to the Detector Characterization.

LSC Z000.0 LSC at LHO LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 Software Committee Report Alan Wiseman University.

LIGO-G050197LSC Collab. Mtg, LHO, August 16,20051 S4 Data Quality & S5 Preview John Zweizig LIGO/Caltech.

LIGO-G Z Inspiral Upper Limits Detector Characterization Nelson Christensen Carleton College August 15, 2001.

LIGO-G E S2 Data Quality Investigation John Zweizig Caltech/LIGO.

LIGO-G W Interferometer and modecleaner transients during the E2 run Rauha Rahkola and Ray Frey University of Oregon Rick Savage LIGO Hanford.

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

LIGO-G Z March 21, 2007 March 2007 LIGO/Virgo Meeting - DetChar 1 S5 Spectral Line Cataloguing Keith Thorne for the Spectral Line Working Group.

LSC Z000.0 LSC at LLO LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 LSC Software Coordinator Report Alan Wiseman University.

LIGO-G Z E4 Correlations: Detector Characterization Nelson Christensen Carleton College August 15, 2001.

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.

Low-latency Selection of Gravitational-wave Event Candidates

Discussion of Statistical Methods, Tools, and Simulations

ASIS Status Report Bruce Allen LSC Meeting, LHO, August 16, 2001

Detector Characterization

LIGO S6 Detector Characterization Studies

LIGO Scientific Collaboration meeting

S3 Glitch Updates Laura Cadonati

LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Michigan

Presentation transcript:

G R LSC UL 13 Aug 011 Detector Characterization; Triggers, code infrastructure; Followup Analysis for the UL groups Nelson Christensen, Szabi Marka, Keith Riles, Robert Schofield, David Shoemaker, John Zweizig LHO LSC 13 Aug 2001

G R LSC UL 13 Aug 012 Detector Characterization for each [Bursts, Inspirals, Periodic, Stochastic]: Identifying channels and signatures that must be watched »PEM – microphones, accelerometers, seismometers, magnetometers, power lines »Interferometer auxiliary channels – Mode Cleaner, other DOF Dealing with the fact that we do not yet have 'interferometer strain signals' whose behavior resembles closely that we expect to see in the final instrument »Use of MC signal; defer final thresholds, etc. for last minute… The people to perform this initial canvassing »do you have the knowledge of the machine that is needed, »the people on site, »the people back home? The tools to perform this initial canvassing »DTT, trial versions of DMT triggers

G R LSC UL 13 Aug 013 Burst Signatures Plan to run this set at the MDC in September »Or an example of each, worst case time/frequency evolution: airplanes, helicopters specific signatures: »compressor transitions, »LF seismic noise, »lightening strikes »voltage spikes »interferometer auxiliary channel anomalies (line start/stop) excess power statistic »channels TBD; PSL »accelerometer/microphone »mode cleaner signal

G R LSC UL 13 Aug 014 Triggers, code infrastructure for each [Bursts, Inspirals, Periodic, Stochastic]: Status of coding suspects and approaches (Keith) »Specific signatures, or ‘deviations from the norm’ »E.g., Bursts: passing airplanes, compressors; ‘incoherent XF’, excess power »Documentation: propose a DCC document for each DMT process to be used Choosing thresholds »Much must wait for better interferometer performance Writing to the database »Capability of the code; capability of the database formats Coordination with LDAS processes: »Do LDAS tasks require environmental analysis to have been performed and recorded in database? »Use database segment entries to select sections to send to LDAS for analysis?

G R LSC UL 13 Aug 015 Analysis for each [Bursts, Inspirals, Periodic, Stochastic]: Approach: »Environmental signals analyzed in LDAS? »Read from database into LDAS code? »Post-analysis of LDAS and DMT output? »Any two- or three-interferometer issues? Tools to visualize correlations between GW and environmental/auxiliary channels »Daniel’s initiative Re-analysis with more sophisticated triggers »Plan on tuning of environmental analysis with some of the final data, then toss it out and analyze blind? Plans for end-to-end MDCs (LDAS + DMT  Database  analysis) »Real data