LSC-Virgo Burst Analysis Working Group

Navigation

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

Documents

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

Investigations

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

Review

Main review page
Telecons

S4 LIGO-GEO Burst Review Committee Meeting Wednesday 05 December 2007 12:00 Eastern

Minutes: Wednesday 05 December 2007 10:00 Eastern

Agenda and Contact Info

Agenda

  1. Finish walk-through of (incoherent) Waveburst 3-detector vs. 4-detector codes.
  2. Comments on current draft of paper. [ Keith's marked-up version ]
  3. A.O.B.

Contact Info

  InterCall telecon service:

    USA (toll-free): 1-866-616-1738
    UK (toll-free): 0800 073 8914
    Italy (toll-free): 800-906-494
    Germany (toll-free): 0800-1014-907

    participant code: 251 288 9495#

Minutes

Attendance

Siong Heng, Sergey Klimenko, Keith Riles, Patrick Sutton (minutes), Igor Yakushin, Michele Zanolin.

Agenda

  1. Finish walk-through of (incoherent) Waveburst 3-detector vs. 4-detector codes.
    • Sergey finished the walk-through of the 3- vs. 4-detector incoherent WaveBurst codes.
    • Keith R. noted a lack of symmetry between how the final coincidence step is applied in the two codes. Sergey assured us that the code had been tested and the difference did not affect performance. This was done to keep the number of output triggers at a managable rate.
    • The reviewers were satisfied that there are no problems or remaining issues with the 3-detector vs. 4-detector codes.
  2. The group walked through the draft of the paper as marked up by Keith R. The main items are:
    1. There are numerous inconsistencies in wording, such as tense, GEO vs GEO 600, data singular vs. plural, etc.
    2. The paper needs to be examined carefully for technical jargon and undefined terms that may confuse a reader from outside the burst group.
    3. There is an inconsistency in the frequency range analysed: in some places it as quoted as [768,2000]Hz, while in the cWB section the lower limit is quoted as 500Hz.
    4. The figure captions need to be longer to properly explain the figures.
    • Action item: Michele and Patrick will read the paper draft and send detailed comments.
  3. A.O.B.
    • Sergey noted that we are still waiting on updated efficiencies for the resampled MDCs. In the S5 analysis, the hrss50% points changed by 5-7%.
      Action Item: Sergey and Igor will generate the cWB efficiencies.
    • Next week's telecon is cancelled due to the LSC-Virgo/GWDAW meetings.

MEETING ADJOURNED

$Id: minutes-2007-12-05.html,v 1.3 2007/12/05 16:19:43 psutton Exp $