Swift-BAT GUANO Follow-up of Gravitational-wave Triggers in the Third LIGO–Virgo–KAGRA Observing Run
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present results from a search for X-ray/gamma-ray counterparts of gravitational-wave (GW) candidates from the third observing run (O3) of the LIGO–Virgo–KAGRA network using the Swift Burst Alert Telescope (Swift-BAT). The search includes 636 GW candidates received with low latency, 86 of which have been confirmed by the offline analysis and included in the third cumulative Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalogs (GWTC-3). Targeted searches were carried out on the entire GW sample using the maximum-likelihood Non-imaging Transient Reconstruction and Temporal Search pipeline on the BAT data made available via the GUANO infrastructure. We do not detect any significant electromagnetic emission that is temporally and spatially coincident with any of the GW candidates. We report flux upper limits in the 15–350 keV band as a function of sky position for all the catalog candidates. For GW candidates where the Swift-BAT false alarm rate is less than 10−3 Hz, we compute the GW–BAT joint false alarm rate. Finally, the derived Swift-BAT upper limits are used to infer constraints on the putative electromagnetic emission associated with binary black hole mergers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".