Gravitational-wave Parameter Estimation in Non-Gaussian Noise Using Score-based Likelihood Characterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gravitational-wave (GW) parameter estimation typically assumes that instrumental noise is Gaussian and stationary. Obvious departures from this idealization are typically handled on a case-by-case basis, e.g., through bespoke procedures to “clean” non-Gaussian noise transients (glitches), as was famously the case for the GW170817 neutron-star binary. Although effective, this data manipulation can bias key astrophysical inferences, such as binary precession, and compound unpredictably when combining multiple observations. Alternative bias-free methods, like joint noise-signal inference, remain too computationally expensive for large-scale execution. Here we take a different approach: rather than explicitly modeling individual non-Gaussianities to then apply the traditional GW likelihood, we seek to learn the true distribution of instrumental noise without presuming Gaussianity and stationarity in the first place. Assuming only noise additivity, we employ score-based diffusion models to learn an empirical noise distribution directly from detector data and then combine it with a deterministic waveform model to provide an unbiased estimate of the likelihood function. We validate the method by performing inference on a subset of GW parameters from 400 mock observations, containing real LIGO noise from either the Livingston or Hanford detectors. We show that the proposed method can recover the true parameters even in the presence of loud glitches, and that the inference is unbiased over a population of signals without applying any cleaning to the data. This work provides a promising avenue for extracting unbiased source properties in future GW observations over the coming decade.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".