MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214908245 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.063030

Detecting gravitational waves with disparate detector responses: Two new binary black hole mergers

2021· article· en· W4214908245 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Barak Zackay, Liang Dai, Tejaswi Venumadhav, Javier Roulet, Matías Zaldarriaga

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchInstitute for Advanced StudySimons FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGravitational waveBinary black holePhysicsBinary numberDetectorBlack hole (networking)AstrophysicsGravitational-wave observatoryAstronomyComputer scienceOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new technique to search for gravitational wave events from compact binary mergers that produce a clear signal only in a single gravitational wave detector, and marginal signals in other detectors. Such a situation can arise when the detectors in a network have different sensitivities, or when sources have unfavorable sky locations or orientations. We start with a short list of loud single-detector triggers from regions of parameter space that are empirically unaffected by glitches (after applying signal-quality vetoes). For each of these triggers, we compute evidence for astrophysical origin from the rest of the detector network by coherently combining the likelihoods from all detectors and marginalizing over extrinsic geometric parameters. We report the discovery of two new binary black hole (BBH) mergers in the second observing run of Advanced LIGO and Virgo (O2), in addition to the ones that were reported in [B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations), Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019) and [T. Venumadhav et al., Phys. Rev. D 101, 083030 (2020)]. We estimate that the two events have false alarm rates of one in 19 years (60 O2) and one in 11 years (36 O2). One of the events, GW170817A, has primary and secondary masses ${m}_{1}^{\mathrm{src}}=5{6}_{\ensuremath{-}10}^{+16}\text{ }\text{ }{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ and ${m}_{2}^{\mathrm{src}}=4{0}_{\ensuremath{-}11}^{+10}\text{ }\text{ }{M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ in the source frame. The existence of GW170817A should be very informative about the theoretically predicted upper mass gap for stellar mass black holes. Its effective spin parameter is measured to be ${\ensuremath{\chi}}_{\mathrm{eff}}=0.5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.2$, which is consistent with the tendency of the heavier detected BBH systems to have large and positive effective spin parameters. The other event, GWC170402, will be discussed thoroughly in future work.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.435 · 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 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

Citations98
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207