A first comparison of SLOPE and other LIGO burst event trigger generators

From MaRDI portal
Publication:3418674

DOI10.1088/0264-9381/23/19/S12zbMATH Open1117.85308arXivgr-qc/0609110OpenAlexW2002102801WikidataQ62123840 ScholiaQ62123840MaRDI QIDQ3418674FDOQ3418674


Authors: Amber L. Stuver, Lee Samuel Finn Edit this on Wikidata


Publication date: 5 February 2007

Published in: Classical and Quantum Gravity (Search for Journal in Brave)

Abstract: A number of different methods have been proposed to identify unanticipated burst sources of gravitational waves in data arising from LIGO and other gravitational wave detectors. When confronted with such a wide variety of methods one is moved to ask if they are all necessary, i.e. given detector data that is assumed to have no gravitational wave signals present, do they generally identify the same events with the same efficiency, or do they each 'see' different things in the detector? Here we consider three different methods, which have been used within the LIGO Scientific Collaboration as part of its search for unanticipated gravitational wave bursts. We find that each of these three different methods developed for identifying candidate gravitational wave burst sources are, in fact, attuned to significantly different features in detector data, suggesting that they may provide largely independent lists of candidate gravitational wave burst events.


Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0609110




Recommendations




Cited In (4)





This page was built for publication: A first comparison of SLOPE and other LIGO burst event trigger generators

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q3418674)