MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385562745 · doi:10.1063/5.0140766

Searching for the causes of anomalous Advanced LIGO noise

2023· article· en· W4385562745 on OpenAlexaff
B. K. Berger, J. S. Areeda, J. D. Barker, A. Effler, E. Goetz, A. F. Helmling-Cornell, B. Lantz, A. P. Lundgren, D. M. Macleod, J. McIver, R. Mittleman, P. Nguyen, A. Pele, H. Pham, P. R. Rangnekar, K. Rink, R. M. S. Schofield, J. R. Smith, S. Soni, J. Warner, R. Abbott, R. X. Adhikari, A. Ananyeva, S. Appert, K. Arai, Y. Asali, S. M. Aston, A. M. Baer, M. Ball, S. Ballmer, S. Banagiri, D. Barker, L. Barsotti, J. Betzwieser, D. Bhattacharjee, G. Billingsley, Sébastien Biscans, C. D. Blair, R. M. Blair, N. Bode, P. Booker, R. Bork, A. F. Brooks, D. Brown, C. Cahillane, X. Chen, A. A. Ciobanu, F. Clara, C. M. Compton, S. J. Cooper, K. R. Corley, S. T. Countryman, P. B. Covas, D. C. Coyne, L. E. H. Datrier, D. Davis, C. Di Fronzo, K. L. Dooley, J. C. Driggers, S. E. Dwyer, T. Etzel, M. Evans, T. M. Evans, J. Feicht, A. Fernandez-Galiana, P. Fritschel, V. V. Frolov, P. Fulda, M. Fyffe, J. A. Giaime, K. D. Giardina, P. Godwin, S. Gras, C. Gray, R. Gray, A. C. Green, Anchal Gupta, E. K. Gustafson, R. Gustafson, J. Hanks, J. Hanson, R. K. Hasskew, M. C. Heintze, N. A. Holland, S. Kandhasamy, S. Karki, M. Kasprzack, K. Kawabe, N. Kijbunchoo, Peter King, J. S. Kissel, M. Landry, B. B. Lane, M. Laxen, Y. K. Lecoeuche, J. Leviton, J. Liu, M. Lormand, R. Macas, M. MacInnis, G. L. Mansell, Szabolcs Márka, Z. Márka, Д. В. Мартынов, K. Mason, F. Matichard, N. Mavalvala, R. McCarthy, D. E. McClelland, S. McCormick, L. McCuller, T. McRae, G. Mendell, K. Merfeld, E. L. Merilh, F. Meylahn, T. Mistry, G. Moreno, C. M. Mow–Lowry, S. Mozzon, A. Mullavey, T. J. N. Nelson, J. Oberling, Richard J. Oram, C. Osthelder, D. J. Ottaway, H. Overmier, W. Parker, Ethan Payne, R. Penhorwood, C. J. Perez, M. Pirello, K. E. Ramirez, J. W. Richardson, K. Riles, N. A. Robertson, J. G. Rollins, C. L. Romel, J. H. Romie, M. P. Ross, K. Ryan, T. Sadecki, E. J. Sanchez, L. E. Sanchez, T. R. Saravanan, R. L. Savage, D. Schaetzl, Roman Schnabel, E. Schwartz, D. Sellers, T. Shaffer, D. Sigg, B. J. J. Slagmolen, B. Sorazu, A. P. Spencer, L. Sun, M. J. Szczepańczyk, M. Thomas, P. Thomas, K. Thorne, K. Toland, G. Traylor, M. Tse, G. Vajente, G. Valdés, D. C. Vander‐Hyde, P. J. Veitch, G. Venugopalan, A. D. Viets, C. Vorvick, M. Wade, R. L. Ward, B. Weaver, R. Weiss, C. Whittle, B. Willke, C. C. Wipf, S. Xiao, H. Yamamoto, Hang Yu, Haocun Yu, Liyuan Zhang, M. E. Zucker, J. Zweizig

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCalifornia Institute of TechnologyScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLIGONoise (video)Gravitational waveComputer scienceDetectorPhysicsCoupling (piping)AcousticsFocus (optics)AstronomyTelecommunicationsOpticsEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo have detected gravitational waves from astronomical sources to open a new window on the Universe. To explore this new realm requires an exquisite level of detector sensitivity, meaning that the much stronger signal from instrumental and environmental noise must be rejected. Selected examples of unwanted noise in Advanced LIGO are presented. The initial focus is on how the existence of this noise (characterized by particular frequencies or time intervals) was discovered. Then, a variety of methods are used to track down the source of the noise, e.g., a fault within the instruments or coupling from an external source. The ultimate goal of this effort is to mitigate the noise by either fixing equipment or by augmenting methods to suppress the coupling to the environment.

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)0.005
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics Letters→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→