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-Only Untriggered Review Checklist

Checklist for GWDAW 10 presentation

  1. The box is empty: 0 events +- 10%
    Checks required:
    • Careful bookkeeping of time: make sure that we've not missed anything (re-run of 22 segments)
      DONE
    • Check hrss reconstruction code changes
      DONE
    • Check changes to CorrPower
    • Is there something peculiar about the two high GS WB events?
      • Check why they are not in time-slides.
      • Try to find origin of events.

    • Look at remaining triggers after amplitude cuts (but below gamma-threshold). Are they gravitational waves?
    • Final look at R0 test: send Mike Landry details of HW injection (channel, actuation function) so that he can determine if the sign of the injection was correct.
      DONE: SEE EMAIL
  2. Timeslides:
    We know these are "wrong" in the sense:
    • Data is not treated consistently between foreground and background -- biases introduced
    • Foreground contaminates background
    We cannot say that these are write to within 10% but they are not vital to the analysis -- they are simply reassuring.
  3. Efficiencies: hrss50 values +- 10%
    Checks required:
    • Bookkeeping again: is everything the same?
    • Check software vs. hardware sensitivities.
    • Check MDC frames and software to produce them. Look at existing validations.
      EXISTING VALIDATIONS SUFFICIENT FOR GWDAW
    • Assess effect of calibration errors. Inject MDC frames with +-10% amplitude into pipeline? Estimate loss from each stage of pipeline? Also, estimate effect of phase errors on CorrPower.
      For GWDAW: just need to see if 50% hrss levels will be affected at the 10% level.
      SINCE H2 SENSITIVITY DOESN'T CHANGE MUCH, EXPECT CURVES ARE WITHIN 10%
      AMPLITUDE CUT SEEMS SAFE
    • Apply 10% adjustment (systematic) to account for final calibration, plus whatever "conservative" additional systematic is deemed necessary.
      • Contact calibration team....

      QUOTED HRSS_50% HAS SYSTEMATIC BUT EFFICIENCY CURVES DO NOT
    • Sanity check: noise curve level vs. hrss50% -- is it the same ratio as before?
      OK
    • Sanity check: do white-noise burst sensitivities scale with T-F volume correctly?
      DONE
    • High-hrss fall-off: how to deal with this? (Only 1% effect.)
      LESS THAN 10% EFFECT
$Id: checklist.html,v 1.2 2005/12/02 04:17:42 jolien Exp $