MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2016220752 · doi:10.1145/1277500.1277521

Matched filtering a gravitational wave pulsar signal involving reciprocal gamma functions

2007· article· en· W2016220752 on OpenAlexaff
Marc E. Normandin, Adam Vajda, S. R. Valluri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsFourier transformSpectral densitySIGNAL (programming language)Gravitational waveChirpNoise (video)PulsarAlgorithmComputational physicsComputer scienceOpticsAstrophysicsTelecommunicationsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direct detection of Gravitational Waves (GW) is a challenging problem that involves elaborate experimental and data analysis techniques. The verification of a detected signal demands an effective way to distinguish the source signal from the background noise. One possibility is to perform matched filtering analysis using different templates. Matched filtering, a form of pattern recognition, is ubiquitous and finds innumerable and diverse applications. In the present work, we develop the matched filter analysis for a Fourier transformed, monochromatic, Doppler shifted, continuous GW pulsar signal, which incorporates the effects of the rotational and orbital motion of the Earth. The GW pulsar signal involves a product of the reciprocals of two Eulerian gamma functions containing the Fourier transformed bandwidth frequency in their arguments. We derive an exact analytic solution for the case of constant spectral noise density for the inner product of the template with a received signal, thereby obtaining a closed form expression for the fitting factor, a measure of how well the template matches the received signal. This result can in turn be used to determine the location of the GW source. Simpler cases of the spectral noise density for the French-Italian VIRGO GW detector and its special case for Gaussian white noise are also amenable to an analytic formulation. Our analysis shows that the fitting factor may exhibit simple symmetries with respect to the polar direction angle to the source. Approximate symmetries will also be useful in reducing the numerical computation times. Our current study confirms that the whole analysis lends itself well to parallel computation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→