MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158979907 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/739/2/99

LOCALIZING COMPACT BINARY INSPIRALS ON THE SKY USING GROUND-BASED GRAVITATIONAL WAVE INTERFEROMETERS

2011· article· en· W2158979907 on OpenAlexaff
S. Nissanke, Jonathan Sievers, Neal Dalal, D. E. Holz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLIGOPhysicsGravitational waveSkyObservatoryGravitational-wave observatoryAstronomyNeutron starAstrophysicsAstronomical interferometerTelescopeInterferometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inspirals and mergers of compact binaries are among the most promising events for ground-based gravitational-wave (GW) observatories. The detection of electromagnetic (EM) signals from these sources would provide complementary information to the GW signal. It is therefore important to determine the ability of GW detectors to localize compact binaries on the sky, so that they can be matched to their EM counterparts. We use Markov Chain Monte Carlo techniques to study sky localization using networks of ground-based interferometers. Using a coherent-network analysis, we find that the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO)–Virgo network can localize 50% of their detected neutron star binaries to better than 50 deg 2 with a 95% confidence interval. The addition of the Large Scale Cryogenic Gravitational Wave Telescope (LCGT) and LIGO-Australia improves this to 12 deg 2 . Using a more conservative coincident detection threshold, we find that 50% of detected neutron star binaries are localized to 13 deg 2 using the LIGO–Virgo network, and to 3 deg 2 using the LIGO–Virgo–LCGT–LIGO-Australia network. Our findings suggest that the coordination of GW observatories and EM facilities offers great promise.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations84
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207