Transcript Status of TAMA data analysis

Status of TAMA data analysis
Hideyuki Tagoshi (Osaka Univ.)
on behalf of the TAMA collaboration
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
1
Outline
•
TAMA300 data taking history
•
TAMA data analysis
1. Inspiral analysis
2. Burst analysis
3. Ringdown analysis
•
Summary
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
2
Data taking run (1)
- Observation runs •
TAMA observation runs
Data Taking
Objective
Observation
time
Typical strain
noise level
Total data
(Longest lock)
DT1
August, 1999
Calibration test
1 night
3x10-19 /Hz 1/2
10 hours
(7.7 hours)
DT2
September,
1999
First Observation run
3 nights
3x10-20 /Hz 1/2
31 hours
DT3
April, 2000
Observation with
improved sensitivity
3 nights
1x10-20 /Hz 1/2
13 hours
DT4
Aug.-Sept.,
2000
100 hours'
observation data
2 weeks
(night-time operation)
1x10-20 /Hz 1/2
(typical)
167 hours
(12.8 hours)
DT5
March, 2001
100 hours' observation
with high duty cycle
1 week
(whole-day operation)
1.7x10-20 /Hz 1/2
(LF improvement)
DT6
Aug.-Sept.,
2001
1000 hours'
observation data
50 days
DT7
Aug.-Sept.,
2002
Full operation with
Power recycling
2 days
DT8
Feb.-April.,
2003
1000 hours
Coincidence
2 months
3x10-21 /Hz 1/2
DT9
Nov. 2003 Jan., 2004
Automatic
operation
6 weeks
1.5x10-21 /Hz 1/2
5x10-21 /Hz 1/2
111 hours
1038 hours
(22.0 hours)
25 hours
1157 hours
(20.5 hours)
558 hours
(27 hours)
Today’s talk
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
3
Data taking run (2)
- Obervable range -
Observable range
Detectable distance for binary inspirals
1.4 Mo binary inspirals
(SNR=10, optimal direction and polarization)
DT6: 33kpc
DT9: 72kpc
(～30kpc on average)
Now, TAMA300
covers most part
of our Galaxy
2
Observable Distance with SNR=10 [kpc]
DT8: 42kpc
Distance of detecting inspirals with SNR=10
3
2.7Msolar-96.3kpc
100
2003/11/04
2003/02/20
2002/08/31
2001/06
(DT9)
(DT8)
(DT7)
(DT6)
1.4Msolar-72.5kpc
6
5
4
0.5Msolar-32.6kpc
10Msolar-21.9kpc
3
2
10
6
5
4
3
2
DT6
DT9 DT8
1
6
5
0.1
1
10
mass of accompanying star [Msolar]
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
100
4
TAMA data analysis
- overview Inspiral of compact binaries
waveforms are well-known (chirp)
Bursts from stellar-core collapses, etc
wavefoms are not known precisely
Black holes quasi-normal mode
damped sinusoidal waves (ringdown)
Pulsars
continuous periodic waves
Others
veto analysis, etc.
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
5
Inspiral analysis (1)
m1
m2
amplitude
Inspiral phase of coalescing compact binaries are promising target
because expected event rate of NS-NS merger for LCGT and
advLIGO is a few within 200Mpc / year, and because waveforms
are well-known, etc.
chirp signal
neutron stars
black holes
Gravitational Waves
time
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
6
Inspiral analysis (2)
- Matched filtering • Detector outputs:
s(t )  Ah(t )  n(t )
h(t) ： known gravitational waveform (template)
n(t) ： noise
• Matched filter :
~
~
s ( f )h * ( f )
 (tc , m1 , m2 , )  2
df
Sn ( f )
Sn(f) : noise power spectrum
We need to introduce fake event reduction method because of non-Gaussian noise
• Fake event reduction by χ2 selection
a measure of the deviation of events
from real signal.
Parameters (mass, coalescence time, …) are not known a priori.
We must search the parameter space.
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
7
Inspiral analysis (3)
-ρ- χ2 relation -
2
TAMA triggers vs Galactic signals
ˆ 2
ρ
• We found that the ρ- χ2 relation is different between the
non-Gaussian triggers and the simulated Galactic signals.
Thus, we can distinguish them and reduce the fake event rate
produced by non-Gaussian noise.
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
8
Inspiral analysis (4)
- DT8 result mass region:1-3Msolar
Log10[Number of events]
Mass region :1‐3Msol
Threshold
 /  2  12.5
Set False alarm rate
to 0.8 event/yr
/
2
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
9
Inspiral analysis (5)
-Upper limit to the Galactic event rate • Threshold=12.5 (～S/N = 9)
(fake event rate = 0.8 / year)
• Detection efficiency from Galactic event simulation:   0.61
• We obtain upper limit to the average number of events which exceed the
threshold by standard Poisson statistics analysis
NUL = 2.3 (C.L. = 90%)
• Observation time T ＝ 1163 hours
Upper limit to the event rate
NUL
 0.0033 events/hour
T
= 29 event/yr (C.L.= 90 %) (1-3Msolar)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
10
Inspiral analysis (6)
- summary -
83 events/yr (1-2Msolar)
•DT8(2003) (1163 hours)
Range: ～42kpc
29 events/yr (1-3Msolar)
•DT9(2003-4) (558 hours)
Range: ～72kpc
analysis is not finished
70
Event upper limit
60
Detactable
range
50
3
10
40
30
2
10
20
Galactic–event
upper limit
10
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
9
Upper limit for event rates
[events/yr] (C.L.=90%)
Range: ～33kpc
Detactable range
[kpc] (SNR=10)
•DT6(2001) (1038 hours)
10
Data–taking runs
Initial results of DT8 analysis: Takahashi et al. Class.Quant.Grav. 21 (2004) S697
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
11
Inspirla analysis (7)
- Coincident analysis (20m IFO, Kamioka)
Coincident analysis of DT6 data of TAMA and LISM was done.
orientation latitude
longitude
TAMA
225°
35.68°N 139.54°E
LISM
165°
36.25°N 137.18°E
• Distance between TAMA and LISM ～ 220km
Kamioka (LCGT, CLIO site)
220km west from Tokyo
• Maximum delay of signal arrival time～0.73msec
• Relation between TAMA and LISM arms direction
Kamioka
220km
Tokyo (NAOJ)
IIAS
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
12
Inspiral analysis (8)
- Coincident analysis Data length: 275 hours
TAMA triggers
2
tctama , Mtama ,tama , tama , tama
DT6 results
H.Takahashi et al. PRD70, 042003 (2004)
compare
require consistency
LISM triggers
2
tclism Mlism ,lism , lism, lism
99.96% triggers are
removed by
coincident analysis
The number of remained
triggers are consistent with
the accidental coincidence
(no detection)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
13
Inspiral analysis (9)
- Coincident analysis •We demonstrated the power of coincident analysis by real data.
•Many technical issue were tackled.
Now, LIGO-TAMA coincident analysis which targets
the inspiral signals is now underway by LIGO-TAMA joint
working group (S. Fairhurst, H.Takahashi, et al.)
Please see the poster by Takahashi.
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
14
Burst analysis (1)
- overview -
Target:
Unmodelled: Stellar-core collapse, etc
Ref. waveforms by numerical sim.
Schemes:
Excess-power filter
Fake reduction:
Veto with auxiliary channel
Time-scale selection
Galactic simulation
 detection efficiency
 Upper limit for event rate
GW RSS Amplitude and
1/2
Detector Noise Level [1/Hz ]
• Excess-power filter analysis (Ando et al. gr-qc/0411027)
–18
10
TAMA
noise level
(DT9)
–20
10
100pc events
–22
10
10kpc events
LCGT design sensitivity
–24
10
2
3
10
10
Frequency [Hz]
Detectable range : ~ 300 pc
(optimal direction, polarization)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
15
Burst analysis (2)
- Excess power filter -
Evaluate signal power
in given time-freqency regions
Raw Data (time series)
Noise + signal
500
Spectrogram
0
Time- Frequency plane
(spectrogram)
–500
Burst signal
2
6
Total power [arb. unit]
Amplitude [arb. unit]
• Burst filter : Excess power filter
4
3
4
5
Time [sec]
Total power in given T-F region
Freq. sum
Signal !!
Threshold
2
0
2
3
4
Time [sec]
5
Assumptions for signal …
time scale, frequency band
Robust for waveform uncertainties
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
16
Burst analysis (3)
- Target waveforms •Burst waves by stellar core collapse.
Reference waveforms
Amplitude :
h rss : 4 x 10-22 /Hz1/2
(at Galactic center: 8.5kpc)
Energy :
-8
2
E tot : 9 x 10 Moc
Common characteristics
Short burst waves
Spike wave ~1msec
Duration time <30msec
A 1B1G1
A 3B3G1
A 4B1G2
1
–20
Amplitude [x 10 ]
general relativistic,
conformal flat,
axisymmetric simulation
by Dimmelmeier et al. (DFM)
26 waveforms
H.Dimmelmeier et al, Astron. Astrophys. 393 (2002) 523.
1.5
0.5
0
–0.5
Gravitational w ave for m s
fr om s te llar–cor e collaps e
(10k pc fr om the e arth)
–1
–1.5
0
10
20
30
Time [msec]
40
50
•Determine time-frequency band
•Fake reduction
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
17
Burst analysis (4)
- Fake reduction • Fake reduction, Injection test
Two veto methods
1. Time-scale selection Burst signal < 100 msec
Most detector noises > a few seconds Confirm that false
dismissal rate is small
remove long-duration triggers
by injection tests
2. Veto with monitor channels Correlated bursts in intensity monitor channel
Hardware and software injections
Safety check :
not to reject real signals
Confirm that monitor channel
bursts were not caused by real GW signal
False-dismissal rate estimation
Less than 2%
Calibration : SNR (filter output)  hrss
Power in
Intensity monitor channel
Effective to short spikes
2
10
Event
threshold
DT8 analysis results
(before veto)
1
10
veto threshold
0
10
Hardware injection results
0
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
GW channel power (SNR)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
18
Burst analysis (5)
- Analysis results -
• Analysis results
Trigger rate with vetoes
Rate [events/sec]
Much larger than
results with
Gaussian noise
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0
DT8
–1
–2
–3
–4
–5
Gaussian noise
Improvement in rates
with veto analyses
Better in DT9 than DT8
Fake rate : 30 –100 times
Sensitivity : 3-6 times
DT9
DT6
–6
10
Still many fake events
DT9 (before veto)
0
10
1
2
3
4
10
10
10
Event Power Threshold (
10
5
10
6
Pth)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
19
Burst analysis (6)
- Results • Results of Galactic injection test
DT9, 2nd half : 200 hours
Event-selection threshold : SNR>2.9
Detection efficiency : 1.5x10-5
Observation result : 7.5x10-2 events/sec
Upper limit
Assume a Poisson distribution
for the observed event number
N obs  N ul
Mo c
2/sec
(90% C.L.)
–4
–1
10
–5
10
–6
10
–7
–3
10
Efficiency for
Galactic events
10
–4
10
Threshold
–8
10
Event rate in DT9 10–2
(after vetos)
0
10
1
10
Rate [events/sec]
Detection efficiency
10
n noise
4x
10–4
Better noise level
Stable environment
Gaussia
Galactic event rate
5 x 103 events/sec
GW energy rate
(Christmas, new-year holidays)
2
10
3
10
Event Power Threshold (Pth)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
20
Burst analysis (7)
- Summary – Burst-wave analysis with TAMA300 data
TAMA300 DT9, 200hours of data
Excess Power filter, Fake reduction
Galactic event simulation
Galactic event rate
5 x 103 events/sec
Galactic GW energy rate
4 x 10–4 Moc 2/sec
Too large for real events
Originate in residual fake triggers
(90% C.L.)
Details can be found in Ando et al., gr-qc/0411027
Other activities of burst analysis in TAMA
• Akutsu et al. (Poster): DT9 analysis by an ALF filter
• Hayama (Poster): Development of a wavelet-based filter
• LIGO-TAMA coincidence analysis
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
21
Ringdown analysis (1)
Binary,
SN expl.
inspiral-merger
BH formation
core collapse
Ringdown
Kerr BH
QNMs
perturbed BH
Waveform: Damped sinusoid (Quasi-normal modes)
h(t)=exp(－πfct/Q)sin(2πfct)
central frequency
Quality factor
3.2 104
fc 
[1  (1  a)0.3 ][Hz]
M / M solar
Q  2.0(1  a)
0.45
Fitting formula for the
least damped QNM by
Echeverria (1989)
M: mass
a: angular momentum (non-dimension)
* Probe for BH direct observation
* BH physics in inspiral-merger, core collapses, ...
* Good SNR expected, ~ 100@10kpc (TAMA sensitivity)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
22
Ringdown analysis (2)
- template space ~*
~
s ( f )h ( f ; f c , Q)
 ( f c , Q)  2
df
Sn ( f )
s(f): signal + noise
h(f): template
Sn(f): noise power spectrum
Template space (parameter space) construction in (fc, Q) plane
which is slightly more efficient than previously proposed methods.
(Nakano et al., PRD68, 102003 (2003), PTP 111, 781 (2004) )
Q
fc = 100 ~ 2500 [Hz]
(a = 0 ~ 0.998)
Q = 2 ~ 33.3
682 templates
(SNR loss < 2%)
This template space is effectively independent
to Sn(f) because of its narrow band nature.
fc
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
23
Ringdown analysis (3)
- Event selection True signal :
* exponential tail
* symmetric around the local maximum
Fake triggers :
* exp rising, no tail
Time t
Time Domain Cuts:
-cut
filter output
expected tail
Time t
-cut
True signal
B F
---> smaller
Time
t School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the
Winter
24
Ringdown analysis (4)
- Detection probability Larger Mass
for Galactic events
Lower Mass
100%
50%
Assumption:
E～0.03MBHis
radiated by QNM
gravitational wave
10%
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
25
Ringdown analysis (5)
- Galactic event rate Tobs [Hours]
DT6: 959
DT8: 1086
DT9: 430
Integrated over Q axis
Preliminary
fc > 1500Hz:
(M < 20Msolar)
DT6:
DT8:
DT9:
(SNR > 20)
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
26
Ringdown analysis (6)
- Summary -
* BH ringdown is promising GW source
* Matched filtering code developed
* TAMA has good sensitivity to detect
Galactic events, detection probability > 10%
* DT6, DT8, DT9 analysis is almost done
See Tsunesada et al. gr-qc/0410037 :
Initial results which include
detection probability, pamameter estimation errors, etc.
and poster by Tsunesada for more
discussion of the results
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
27
Summary
•Inspiral analysis, burst analysis, ringdown analysis have been developed and
the results for DT6-9 are now being obtained.
• The tasks needed to be done;
inspiral :
lower and higher mass search, spin, etc.
burst:
other filters, more effective fake reduction method,
ringdown: more effective fake reduction method.
All of these are now under investigation.
• Coincidence analysis
LIGO-TAMA joint analysis for inspiral and burst is in progress.
ROG-TAMA (bar-interferometer)
•Other activity
Continuous wave search (target: 1987A remnant) K.Soida et al., Class. Quantum Grav. 20 (2003) S645
ALF filter analysis, Wavelet method,
Veto analysis, ……
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
28
End
The 4th TAMA Symposium and the Winter School of GW @ Osaka City University, 2005.2.17
29