MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058876267 · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/24/19/s06

Matched filter analysis of burst waveform injections

2007· article· en· W2058876267 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. Sung

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Electrical Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMax-Planck-GesellschaftCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research, IndiaAlfred P. Sloan FoundationDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDavid and Lucile Packard FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsWaveformFilter (signal processing)Matched filterOpticsQuantum mechanicsComputer visionDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hardware injections provide us with a crucial tool for proving that we understand the response and performance of the LIGO detectors. Since we have complete knowledge of the injected waveform and detailed measurements of the detector response function, we are able to predict and confirm the instrument response. During the S5 science run of LIGO, various burst-type waveforms are being injected. We have analyzed the first seven months of these injections, using optimal matched filters derived from the injection waveforms. We have confirmed that most of the responses follow the predictions and have measured the accuracy of the estimated arrival time. In addition, we examined transients identified by the KleineWelle algorithm in auxiliary data channels at the time of hardware injections. Through this study, we could recognize couplings between auxiliary channels and the gravitational wave channels and assess the safety of the use of auxiliary channels as vetoes for gravitation wave candidates.

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)0.000
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 score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicAdvanced Electrical Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207