LSC-Virgo Burst Analysis Working Group


Burst Group Home
ExtTrig Home
CBC Group Home
LSC, LIGO, Virgo


'How-to' docs
[2008, 2007, earlier]
Talks/Posters [pre-wiki]
Paper plans
White papers


Analysis projects
Old notebook [General, S2, S3, S4, S5]
Virgo workarea
External collabs


Main review page

Review Committee Meeting Monday June 8 2009 08:00 Pacific / 11:00 Eastern

Minutes: Monday June 8 2009 08:00 Pacific / 11:00 Eastern

Agenda and Contact Info


  1. Announcements
  2. Update on the PRC review
  3. A.O.B.

Contact Info

InterCall telecon service:
Phone: 1-866-380-5536, participant code: 435 672 9587 #
International callers ++1-816-249-4731 with same code
International access numbers [ HTML ]
Handy participant command: Press *6 ["*M"] to mute, #6 to unmute


  1. Announcements
    • From LV meeting: is it possible for the GRB search results to be reviewed for Amaldi?
    • Discussion of the issue with binomial test: not really possible to reject null hypothesis due to limited number of background jobs. However, useful to show that the result is not significance.
    • File called "outstanding issues".
    • Goal is to bring to executive committee meeting June 18.
    • Discussion about the U-test, how does CBC do it? Do we want to drop the statement in the burst paper saying that we don't want to do it.
    • Sergey: what would happen if the efficiency curve did not go to 90%? For example, when calibration errors are included and if the GRB is in a bad location? Patrick: reran 7 GRBs with jittered calibration, phases, timing errors, sky-position; not much effect at low frequencies (10% rms but small systematics), at high frequencies there was a 10% systematic.
    • James Clark talked about pulsar glitch analysis. Is it about ready for review? Still a couple of weeks away. This will come on Ben's watch.
  2. Update on the PRC review
    • PRC = Position Reconstruction Challenge.
    • Started review more than one month ago. Talk submitted to Amaldi, three methods. Used JW1 data. MDC injections. One method has results, other two do not. Some code review has been done for cWB. Review report is being written.
    • Study does not really make any statement about the sky. It is methodological. Will want to write a paper on behalf of the collaboration, but two methods do not have results yet so paper is not available.
    • Sergey's proposed options: (i) Talk on PRC with preliminary results from one method. (ii) Don't show anything.
    • There are already parallel talks based on simulated data for the methods.
    • The point of this talk is a proof of principle, a demonstration that it is possible to reconstruct signals to a certain precision. But does this represent the full LV collaboration.
    • Not important if simulated or real data is used. Using simulated data will alleviate reviewing. Get sign-off from LSC-PP and VSB. And the burst group.
    • Sergey will try to give a draft of the talk to the burst group.
  3. A.O.B.
$Id: minutes-2009-06-08.html,v 1.2 2009/06/08 15:58:51 jolien Exp $