Comparison of h(t) and AS_Q on WaveBurst and CorrPower triggers

L. Cadonati (MIT) and I. Yakushin (LLO)

LIGO-G050407-00-Z

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

h(t)

AS_Q

http://www.ligo-la.caltech.edu/~igor/S4/HT_vs_AS_Q

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

h(t)

AS_Q

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

h(t)

AS_Q

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

AS_Q

h(t)

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

AS_Q

h(t)

Both on h(t) and AS_Q WaveBurst used gs=1.9 and standard H1-H2 amplitude cut.

Statistical properties of waveburst

offtime triggers on h(t) and AS_Q

2864 h(t) triggers, 2613 AS_Q triggers, only 262 common triggers!

Zero-lag waveburst triggers around hardware injections

221 h(t) triggers, 229 AS_Q triggers, 218 common triggers.

Comparison between S4 events produced by

Waveburst + r-statistics on AS_Q and h(t)

Only events with 5 that passed H1-H2 consistency cuts are listed.

Color legend:

Waveburst + r-statistics on h(t)

http://emvogil-3.mit.edu/~cadonati/S4/waveb-offline/events/waveb-outliers.html

h(t)

AS_Q

pink trigger

WaveBurst + r-statistics on AS_Q

h(t)

AS_Q

violin mode glitch, yellow trigger

h(t)

AS_Q

calibration line dropout, green trigger

violin mode glitch time series

calibration dropout time series

CorrPower on h(t) and AS_Q

http://emvogil-3.mit.edu/~cadonati/S4/CorrPower/CorrPower-1.html

10 non-zero time lags vs 100 non-zero time lags in WaveBurst + r-statistics search,

only events with ≥5 that pass H1-H2 consistency test are shown.

h(t) triggers

AS_Q triggers

naïve h(t) simulations

DARM_ERR simulation

How to do simulations on h(t)?

Is it correct to do simulations with h(t) in a naïve way: add strain signal

without subjecting it to the same kind of filtering that is used to make h(t)?

Summary

Statistical properties of waveburst background offtime triggers (~20Hz) look very similar for h(t) and AS_Q, however, only about 10% of triggers actually overlap.

97% of waveburst h(t) and AS_Q triggers obtained in zero-time lag on hardware injections overlap and have similar detected properties (central frequency, gs, central time).

After applying r-statistics and H1-H2 consistency cuts the rate is reduced to ~0.1Hz and the difference between h(t) and AS_Q triggers is reduced to two main cases:

violin mode breathing glitches (to be excluded by extra notch)

calibration dropout glitches (by construction this glitch does not make it into h(t))

CorrPower triggers after H1-H2 consistency cuts show the same kind of difference on h(t) and AS_Q.

It is an open question how to do the software injections accurately on h(t): should we just naively add strain signal to h(t) or should we calibrate it to adc, add to AS_Q and transform the result into h(t)?

2005-08-12T10:56:18