MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gravitational-wave data analysis overview of compact binary searches using waveforms inspired by numerical relativity

2010· article· en· W2024709687 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chad Hanna

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAlfred P. Sloan FoundationCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research, IndiaScience and Technology Facilities CouncilIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsGravitational waveNumerical relativityBinary numberTheory of relativityWaveformGeneral relativityTheoretical physicsTests of general relativityGravitationClassical mechanicsAstronomyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Binary black holes with total masses between ~20 and 200 M_⊙ require numerical relativity to describe the detectable signal in ground-based, gravitational-wave detectors. The time–frequency properties of the signals suggest that both modeled, matched filter searches and unmodeled, burst searches can expect to detect high mass binary signals. This paper presents a comparison of a matched filter pipeline and two unmodeled burst pipelines on the inspiral, merger and ring-down phases of compact binary coalescence by evaluating the sensitivity to binaries with total masses between 25 and 100 M_⊙ at a fixed false alarm rate. All three algorithms provided an average range of ~250 Mpc for a 50,50 M_⊙ binary at 10^(−7) Hz false alarm rate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207