1 / 13

Status of the first year of S5 all-sky burst analysis with coherent WaveBurst

Igor Yakushin and Sergey Klimenko LIGO-G070320-00-Z. Status of the first year of S5 all-sky burst analysis with coherent WaveBurst. Previous work: S5a. cWB S5a analysis (reported at November LSC meeting, GWDAW-11, April APS 2007): Final DQ segments and vetoes;

evan-hopkins
Download Presentation

Status of the first year of S5 all-sky burst analysis with coherent WaveBurst

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Igor Yakushin and Sergey Klimenko LIGO-G070320-00-Z Status of the first year of S5 all-sky burst analysiswith coherent WaveBurst LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  2. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Previous work: S5a • cWB S5a analysis (reported at November LSC meeting, GWDAW-11, April APS 2007): • Final DQ segments and vetoes; • Final calibration (v3 is the same as v2 on S5a); • Sine-gaussians Q 3,9,100, gaussians, band-limited white noise MDC sets; • Comparison with coincidence WaveBurst+CorrPower pipeline: cWB had better sensitivity on the considered waveforms; • H1H2L1 network.

  3. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Previous work: online, first year of S5 • cWB online analysis: • Science segments, no vetoes or DQs; • v2 h(t) data; • H1H2L1 network. • Last year we did preliminary analysis of the first year of S5 (reported at November LSC meeting, GDDAW-11, April APS 2007): • Final segments on S5a but only science segments on the rest of S5; • v2 h(t); • H1H2L1 and H1H2L1G1 networks.

  4. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Previous work • LIGO-VIRGO-GEO project 2b: • A weekend in Sep 2006, secret time shift between detectors, an exercise in joint data analysis; • For cWB the main peculiarity of this analysis: for the first time we applied cWB not only to 3- or 4-detector networks but also 2- and 5-detector networks: H1H2, L1H1, H1H2L1, H1H2L1G1, H1H2L1V1, H1H2L1G1V1; • Required some modification to the constraint used by the likelihood method and postproduction cuts; • Using the same parameters and tuning as in project 2b, we decided to reanalyze first year of S5 including all 3-, 2- LIGO detector networks and some networks that include GEO to maximize livetime and sensitivity of the search.

  5. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Current analysis of full year of S5 using cWB • Networks: H1H2, H1L1, H2L1, H1H2L1, H1H2L1G1 (?); • DQ segments: almost final category 1 and 2; • Vetoes, DQ category 3,4: about to be finalized; • Calibration: currently running on v2 h(t), we shall redo it once v3 h(t) becomes available; • MDC sets: currently just using sine-gaussians Q9, more MDC sets are produced by Keith and will be analyzed once v3 h(t) becomes available; • 64-2048 Hz, 100 time lags to estimate FAR.

  6. Status of trigger generation • Once final category 1 and 2 segments became available at the beginning of May, we started trigger production using CIT, LLO, LHO, nemo clusters. • This work is almost finished but there are still some gaps to fill in: • All this would have to be redone once version 3 h(t) frames become available. • In addition we plan to do simulations with more waveforms. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  7. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Postproduction cuts and tuning • Network correlation > 0.6. • Effective SNR cut is used for tuning. • There is an excess of low frequency glitches: we should use frequency-dependent threshold on effective SNR. • Depending on the detector, there are several distinct epochs in the first year of S5 and we might consider using time-dependent threshold, setting it differently for different epochs.

  8. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin H1L1 H1H2L1 H1H2 H2L1 Effective SNR vs frequency

  9. H1L1 H1H2L1 H1H2 H2L1 Effective SNR vs time • Distinct epochs: • S5a – worst for LHO, • First half of summer 2006 – best for LLO, • Second half of summer 2006 – best for LHO, best for LLO, • Fall 2006 – worst for LLO (high microseismic). LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  10. After very preliminary tuning, without having all the triggers, before category 3,4 DQs and vetoes, hrss50*1.e+22 for sine-gaussian simulated waveforms: • As in LIGO-VIRGO project 2b, H1L1 network sensitivity is significantly worse than H1H2 despite the fact that L1 is more sensitive than H2.The reason is that the current constraint used in the likelihood method is not optimal for two misaligned detectors and we are going to fix it.H1H2 network sensitivity is only slightly worse than that of H1H2L1 and more strict constraint should improve the sensitivity of this network as well.H1H2 network has almost 50% more livetime than H1H2L1 network. However, we have to worry about correlated H1H2 glitches. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  11. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  12. H1H2 • For H1H2 we have to worry about correlated glitches. • The above plot shows the distribution of non-zero lag triggers over lag between H1 and H2: the smaller the lag, the more triggers. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin

  13. LIGO-G070320-00-Z Igor Yakushin Conclusion • We are reanalyzing the first year of S5 with coherent waveburst using all 2- and 3-detector network configurations. We also plan to include GEO. • An open question discussed within the burst group: how to combine the networks to get a single upper limit result. • We see that the currently chosen likelihood constraint is not optimal for two misaligned detector networks and we plan to fix it. • The shown sensitivity numbers are very preliminary and will certainly change once we finish tuning the pipeline and rerun on v3 h(t) frames when they become available. • We plan to present the status of this work at Amaldi 7.

More Related