MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415259147 · doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.041014

Improved Analysis of GW150914 Using a Fully Spin-Precessing Waveform Model

2016· article· en· W2415259147 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review X · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Human Resource DevelopmentAustralian Research CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research, IndiaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Education, IndiaRoyal SocietyMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadMax-Planck-GesellschaftNarodowe Centrum NaukiNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekInstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareEuropean CommissionRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchInstitut des Origines de LyonLeverhulme TrustScottish Funding CouncilScottish Universities Physics AllianceHungarian Scientific Research FundOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationScience and Engineering Research BoardNational Science FoundationIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareKavli FoundationResearch Corporation for Science Advancement
KeywordsPhysicsLIGODimensionless quantitySpin (aerodynamics)WaveformSystematic errorGravitational waveQuantum mechanicsStatistical physicsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents updated estimates of source parameters for GW150914, a binary black-hole coalescence event detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) in 2015 [Abbott , 061102 (2016).]. Abbott [ , 241102 (2016).] presented parameter estimation of the source using a 13-dimensional, phenomenological precessing-spin model (precessing IMRPhenom) and an 11-dimensional nonprecessing effective-one-body (EOB) model calibrated to numerical-relativity simulations, which forces spin alignment (nonprecessing EOBNR). Here, we present new results that include a 15-dimensional precessing-spin waveform model (precessing EOBNR) developed within the EOB formalism. We find good agreement with the parameters estimated previously [Abbott , 241102 (2016).], and we quote updated component masses of <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:mrow><a:msubsup><a:mrow><a:mn>35</a:mn></a:mrow><a:mrow><a:mo>−</a:mo><a:mn>3</a:mn></a:mrow><a:mrow><a:mo>+</a:mo><a:mn>5</a:mn></a:mrow></a:msubsup></a:mrow></a:math> <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><c:mrow><c:msub><c:mrow><c:mi mathvariant="normal">M</c:mi></c:mrow><c:mrow><c:mo stretchy="false">⊙</c:mo></c:mrow></c:msub></c:mrow></c:math> and <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mn>3</g:mn><g:msubsup><g:mn>0</g:mn><g:mrow><g:mo>−</g:mo><g:mn>4</g:mn></g:mrow><g:mrow><g:mo>+</g:mo><g:mn>3</g:mn></g:mrow></g:msubsup></g:math> <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><i:msub><i:mi mathvariant="normal">M</i:mi><i:mo stretchy="false">⊙</i:mo></i:msub></i:math> (where errors correspond to 90% symmetric credible intervals). We also present slightly tighter constraints on the dimensionless spin magnitudes of the two black holes, with a primary spin estimate <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><m:mo>&lt;</m:mo><m:mn>0.65</m:mn></m:math> and a secondary spin estimate <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:mo>&lt;</o:mo><o:mn>0.75</o:mn></o:math> at 90% probability. Abbott [ , 241102 (2016).] estimated the systematic parameter-extraction errors due to waveform-model uncertainty by combining the posterior probability densities of precessing IMRPhenom and nonprecessing EOBNR. Here, we find that the two precessing-spin models are in closer agreement, suggesting that these systematic errors are smaller than previously quoted. Published by the American Physical Society 2016

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.401 · 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