English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Detecting gravitational waves from inspiraling binaries with a network of detectors: Coherent versus coincident strategies

Mukhopadhyay, H., Sago, N., Tagoshi, H., Dhurandhar, S., Takahashi, H., & Kanda, N. (2006). Detecting gravitational waves from inspiraling binaries with a network of detectors: Coherent versus coincident strategies. Physical Review D, 74(8): 083005. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.083005.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-4D11-E Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-4D12-C
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
prd083005.pdf (Publisher version), 445KB
Name:
prd083005.pdf
Description:
-
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
eDoc_access: PUBLIC
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Mukhopadhyay, Himan1, Author
Sago, N., Author
Tagoshi, Hideyuki, Author
Dhurandhar, Sanjeev, Author
Takahashi, H.2, Author
Kanda, Nobuyuki, Author
Affiliations:
1External Organizations, ou_persistent13              
2Astrophysical Relativity, AEI-Golm, MPI for Gravitational Physics, Max Planck Society, ou_24013              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: We compare two strategies of multidetector detection of compact binary inspiral signals, namely, the coincidence and the coherent. For simplicity we consider here two identical detectors having the same power spectral density of noise, that of initial LIGO, located in the same place and having the same orientation. We consider the cases of independent noise as well as that of correlated noise. The coincident strategy involves separately making two candidate event lists, one for each detector, and from these choosing those pairs of events from the two lists which lie within a suitable parameter window, which then are called coincidence detections. The coherent strategy on the other hand involves combining the data phase coherently, so as to obtain a single network statistic which is then compared with a single threshold. Here we attempt to shed light on the question as to which strategy is better. We compare the performances of the two methods by plotting the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) for the two strategies. Several of the results are obtained analytically in order to gain insight. Further we perform numerical simulations in order to determine certain parameters in the analytic formulae and thus obtain the final complete results. We consider here several cases from the relatively simple to the astrophysically more relevant in order to establish our results. The bottom line is that the coherent strategy although more computationally expensive in general than the coincidence strategy, is superior to the coincidence strategy—considerably less false dismissal probability for the same false alarm probability in the viable false alarm regime.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2006-10
 Publication Status: Published in print
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: -
 Identifiers: eDoc: 298186
ISI: 000241724000013
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.083005
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Physical Review D
  Alternative Title : Phys. Rev. D
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 74 (8) Sequence Number: 083005 Start / End Page: - Identifier: ISSN: 1550-7998