searches(for(gravitaonal(waves( with(ground7based ...klimenko, september 19, samsi workshop, nc...
TRANSCRIPT
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 1 LIGO-G1200737 Credit: AEI, CCT, LSU
Searches for Gravita/onal Waves with ground-‐based Interferometers
Sergey Klimenko University of Florida for LSC Collaboration
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 2 LIGO-G1200737
Astrophysical Sources
Credit: Chandra X-ray Observatory
Casey Reed, Penn State
NS-NS
Credit: AEI, CCT, LSU
binary neutron stars
binary black holes pulsars
supernovae
gamma ray bursts
soft gamma repeaters
• and other violent astrophysical phenomena in the Universe • objec8ves of GW experiments: test of GR & GW astronomy
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 3 LIGO-G1200737
An8cipated Signals
• “chirps” - compact binary coalescence Ø neutron stars / black holes
• “bursts” - Supernovae / GRBs/ BH mergers/SGRs/…. Ø any relatively short GW transient (few minutes or less)
• “periodic” - pulsars in our galaxy Ø GWs from neutron stars (Doppler modulated)
• “stochastic” - cosmological/astrophysical signals Ø Early universe (like CMBR) and unresolved sources
use different data analysis and statistical methodologies
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 4 LIGO-G1200737
Detectors
� Ini/al (1G) LIGO detectors were in opera/on for a decade Ø 6 data taking runs (~1.5 years of 2D live /me) Ø reached its design sensi/vity during the S5 run: 2005-‐2007
Virgo detector joined in May 2007 (VSR1 run) Ø run enhanced configura/on during the s6 run: 2009 – 2010 Ø decommissioned in October 2010
� Initial LIGO data: GW strain ~ 16TB, AUX ~ 3PB
Livingston, LA (LLO)
L1: 4km x 4km
Hanford, WA (LHO) H1: 4km x 4km H2: 2km x 2km
Cacsina,Italy V1: 3km x 3km
GEO600, Germany G1: 600m x 600m
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 5 LIGO-G1200737
Sensi8vity of ini8al (1G) Interferometers
Hz1 102
4000)()( 23−×≈
Δ=
mfLfSstrain noise:
fermi 10~100)( 3−×Δ HzfL
150 Gm h~
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 6 LIGO-G1200737
Detector Antenna Sensi8vity
• Detector response
• Several detectors increase coverage of the sky and detection confidence
ξ = F+h+ +F×h×
L1
V1
×+ FF
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 7 LIGO-G1200737
Compact Binary Coalescence
LTC1rate∝
The most efficient emiUers among expected GW sources up to 10 % of total mass à GWs
Well understood accurate analy/cal (PN) and numerical (NR) GR models NS-‐NS, NS-‐BH, BH-‐BH with total mass up to 500Mo are in
the sensi/ve band of ini/al detectors
inspiral: PN merger: NR ringdown
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 8 LIGO-G1200737
Detec8on horizon & Astrophysical rates
LIGO&Virgo rate limits
astrophysical predic/ons
horizon vs mass
PRD 85, 082002 (2012) PRD 83, 12005 (2011)
intermediate mass compact binaries: 100<M<450Mo
low/high mass compact binaries: M<100Mo
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 9 LIGO-G1200737
IMBH binaries • Internediate Mass Black Holes – missing link between stellar mass BHs
(<100Mo) and supermassive BHs (>104 Mo) • A single detec/on of a IMBH binary system would be first unambiguous
confirma/on of their existence. This alone is a major discovery.
100≲ M/Mo ≲450
PRD 85 (2012) 102004
Best Rate UL90% 0.13 Mpc-3 Myr-1
Average Rate UL90%
0.9 Mpc-3 Myr-1
Expected Astro Rates ~2 10-5 Mpc-3 Myr-1
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 10 LIGO-G1200737
advanced (2G) network
• aLIGO (H,L), aVirgo(V) and KAGRA(j) are being constructed. • plans for aLIGO-‐India (I) (approved by NSB)
Ø part of aLIGO: LIGO provides instrument, India provides facility & personnel. • x10 beUer sensi/vity than 1G
Ø target detec/on of an/cipated NS-‐NS and possibly other sources afer 2015. Ø extended network significantly enhances GW&mul/-‐messenger observa/ons
LIGO-‐L LCGT-‐J Virgo
LIGO-‐A
LIGO-‐H
Indigo
I,J,H,L,V – existing and planned
detector sites
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 11 LIGO-G1200737
Inverse Problem for GW signals
arrival /me τ ExtTrig all-‐/me arrival direc/on (θ,φ) ExtTrig all-‐sky GW waveforms template unmodeled
ϕθ ,
τ2
τ1 τ3
DA scenarios: known unknown
X = [
f+f× ]
h+h×
"
#$$
%
&''+n[ ]
data = network x wave + noise
Data analysis ques/ons: 1.Detec/on: Is GW signal present in X? 2.Reconstruc/on: What can we learn about h from X?
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 12 LIGO-G1200737
Likelihood Method • Likelihood ra8o (global fit to GW data)
• Noise model: usually mul/variate Gaussian noise
• signal model (defined by detector response)
• find GW polariza8ons (h+,hx) at maximum of Λ • find source sky loca8on by varia8on of Λ over θ and φ
• Ambiguity due to a large number of free parameters
ξ [i]= h+[i]
F+ + h×[i]
F×, h+(Ω),h×(Ω), Ω− signal model
]exp[)0|( 1 TXXXp −Σ−∝
)0|()|(
XphXp
=Λ
Σ-noise covariance matrix
p(X | h)∝ exp[− X −ξ( )Σ−1 X −ξ( )T ]
Guersel&Tinto, 1998 Flannagan&Hughes, 1998 Finn, 2001 Klimenko et al. 2004, 2008 SuUon et al. 2009
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 13 LIGO-G1200737
Inspiral • ξ is calculated from theore8cal
waveforms h+hx described by source parameters Ω
• Parameter space Ω is constrained by the model
• Sample Ω with templates (explicit template banks)
• Find τ, θ, φ, Ω (thus ξ) from best matching template
• Increase Ω by expanding models: spin, eccentricity, etc
• more affected by possible discrepancy between models and nature
• less affected by noise
Matched Filter
Burst • Amplitudes h+[i], hx[i] are free source
parameters • Parameter space is constrained by
signal dura8on and bandwidth • Search through parameter space
analy8cally. • Find τ, θ ,φ, ξ at maximum of L • Decrease parameter space by adding
astrophysical constraints • less affected by possible discrepancy
between models and nature • more affected by noise
L = 2 lnΛ = 2X[i]⋅
ξ [i,h]( )
i∑ −
ξ [i,h]⋅
ξ [i,h]( )
i∑
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 14 LIGO-G1200737
Detec8on
Data is non-‐sta8onary, non-‐gaussian and affected by ar8facts Empirical background sample for es8ma8on of FA probability
Ø constructed by 8me-‐shiding data à may be biased wrt true background Ø need a massive background set (T observa8on x 106)
CQG 29 (2012) 155002
detec/on sta/s/c
FA ra
te
Sta/onary Gaussian noise
real noise
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 15 LIGO-G1200737
Detector Characteriza/on • Along with the GW strain data LIGO records data from thousands
auxiliary monitors designed to capture environmental and instrumental disturbances Ø Ini/al LIGO data: GW strain ~ 16TB, AUX ~ 3PB
• First line of defense: extensive analysis of AUX and GW data to Ø characterize detector noise and ar/facts (glitches) Ø validate data (data quality) Ø associate glitches with transients observed in GW data (veto analysis)
• A mul/tude of the analysis and sta/s/cal methods Ø Spectral density es/mators Ø TF transforma/ons (STFT, wavelets, WDM, Hilbert-‐Huang, etc) Ø Regression (Wiener-‐Kolmogorov, LPE & other filters) Ø Mul/variate classifica/on, binary decision trees a lot of room for improvement
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 16 LIGO-G1200737
Veto analysis
H1 H2
H0:PEM-ISCT4_ACCZ
accelerometer
� reject detected events IF they are associated with glitches. � process TBs of AUX data � characterize glitch sta/s/cs
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 17 LIGO-G1200737
coherent network analysis
• Noise scaled network antenna patterns
• Construct projec8ons P on f+fx plane Ø e.g. unconstrained likelihood
ξ = [
f+,f× ]
h+h×
"
#$$
%
&''= F ⋅h
f+
f×
X
ξ u
N f+ =
F1+(θ,φ,ψ)S1
,..., FK+(θ,φ,ψ)SK
,
f× =
F1×(θ,φ,ψ)S1
,..., FK×(θ,φ,ψ)SK
network plane
L = XTPX
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 18 LIGO-G1200737
Network sta8s8cs
• Detec8on sta8s8cs Ø Likelihood (tot SNR):
Ø coherent energy:
• Rejec8on of glitches Ø number of various sta8s8cs
based on residual (NULL) energy: χ2, coherent null, incoherent null, network correla8on coefficient, etc
cc = CN+ |C |
C = XTPX, Pii =0
L = XTPX
NEL −=
Wen & Shutz, 2004 Chatterji et al, PRD 74 082005 (2006) Klimenko et al, CQG 25, 114029(2008)
PRD 81 (2010) 102001
glitches injections
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 19 LIGO-G1200737
Detec8on Challenge
• Event has a “chirp” signature and very significant in CBC search Ø Likely BH-‐NS system at 20-‐50 Mpc Ø False alarm rate < 1/7000 years • Afer complete analysis the event was revealed to be a “blind injec/on”
http://www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection.php
• A candidate was iden/fied by online burst search in LIGO/Virgo data on September 16, 2010
Ø reconstructed within minutes afer data collected
Big Dog (sky location near Canis Major)
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 20 LIGO-G1200737
Source Reconstruc/on • Reconstruc8on of sky coordinates
Ø iden8fica8on of host galaxies, popula8on studies Ø associa8on with other observa8ons (EM, ν)
à mul8-‐messenger astronomy • Reconstruc8on of polariza8ons and waveforms
Ø Iden8fica8on and classifica8on of sources Ø Helps background rejec8on
• Es8ma8on of source parameters Ø test of GR Ø selec8on and valida8on of source models
• LIGO-‐India and KAGRA significantly simplify detec8on and improve source reconstruc8on
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 21 LIGO-G1200737
for perfectly co-aligned detectors Α=0 – detect only one GW component
Α - contribution to total network SNR from the second component
Network Alignment
A = | f× || f+ |
HL
IHLV
important for reconstruction of both GW polarizations and sky localization
HLV
PRD 83:102001,2011
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 22 LIGO-G1200737
• Median error angle in degrees (50% CL, SNRnet<30) for for reconstruc8on of ad-‐hoc burst signals
Sky Localiza8on 4 sites - IHLV
5 sites – IJHLV
3 sites – HLV
more spatially separated sites
à better sky localization
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 23 LIGO-G1200737
Mul/-‐messenger Astronomy
nearby galaxies
Images taken within 44 min afer the event and on subsequent nights by Zadko, SkyMapper, Swif, TAROT, ROTSE
probability skymap reconstructed with burst algorithm (cWB)
minutes afer the Big Dog event
Challenges: unambiguous associa/on of GW and other
messenger transients, low latency analysis (fast network, algorithms)
Capture source astrophysics with mul/ple messengers (EM,ν,GW) example: Big Dog event
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 24 LIGO-G1200737
Bayesian Coherent Analysis • Parameter es8ma8on: X-‐data, H-‐model, θ-‐parameters
Ø to get posterior PDF marginalize over a subset of θ
• Model selec8on with odds ra8o • evidence: • hard for large θ (17 parameters for inspiral sources, could be more for burst sources) -‐ nested sampling
• uncertain prior PDFs
Oij =p(Hi )p(H j)
p(X | Hi )p(X | H j)
p(X | H) = p(θ | H) ⋅p(X | H,
θ )∫ dθ
p(θ | X,H) = p(
θ | H) ⋅p(X | H,
θ )
p(X | H)Veitch&Vecchio, 2010 Van der Sluys et al, 2009 Skilling, 2004
Klimenko, September 19, SAMSI workshop, NC 25 LIGO-G1200737
Summary � Ini/al GW interferometers
Ø started to constrain source models (analysis of data con/nues) Ø established conceptually new GW data analysis Ø began integra/on of GW experiment and astronomy Ø paved road for advanced (2G) detectors
• advanced GW interferometers Ø target first detec/on of astrophysical GW signals Ø LIGO-‐India and KAGRA will significantly enhance the network
• advanced data analysis Ø challenges of confident detec/on and accurate reconstruc/on in
presence of non-‐sta/onary and non-‐Gaussian noise. Ø about the same data volume, faster computers à can explore
promising DA & STAT methods which are prohibi/ve now Ø demand for efficient&accurate STAT tools à beUer
communica/on between GW data analysts and experts