S5 Qpipeline High-Frequency Review Telecon 18th of November 2008 10:00 Eastern
Agenda and minutes of the S5 Qpipeline High-Frequency Review Telecon for Tuesday the 18th of November at 10:00 Eastern time.
Agenda and Contact Info
- Review document
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#
Nov 25, 2008 Attendence: Matt, Jonah, Brennan Review document discussion xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jonah - Section I - E - comment Q /is/ a maximum. Brennan - will fill in ... in section E. Jonah - in S5 low frequency search they quote they UL in the abstract - we should try and keep the style parallel to that search, so we may want to put limit in there. Brennan - not convinced we should start trying to parallelise them too much yet as low freq search paper is quite inconsistent - but nothing wrong with putting limit in abstract Matt - yep limit in abstract would be nice for people who just look at abstract and conclusion of papers Jonah - should we add links to our own review website in the paper. Matt - It would be nice, but we have to be careful in linking to our own websites as they can be transient and disappear with time (could put them in CVS), but for the moment it should be ok Brennan - Section II - C -explain difference in cat 2 and 3 flags Jonah - II E - some discussion of false alarm rate, and how this didn't mater as much as this was a detection only search. Jonah - II F - add a couple of sentences on history of how waveforms have changed Jonah - eq 13 should N_a scale with sqrt(T) rather than T as seems to be the case from eq 12 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Brennan - looking into R0 issue highlighted by Siong (see email conversation) - negative values could be attributed to some minor bug in CorrPower, but doesn't effect our observable - so isn't big deal for us. Jonah - would like to understand it a bit better - doesn't R0 go into the gamma calculation somewhere? Brennan - it could be R0 that goes into calculation, but it's more likely to by the r values from a couple of bins off from 0. Jonah - agree that there's strong evidence that this doesn't effect analysis (but still a bit irksome) - it could have been in code for a long time, but has never been seen in the parameter ranges that have been used before. Have you looked into CorrPower code? Brennan - Have delved into it a a fair bit, but could do a little more investigation. Brennan - around 4kHz some R0 values start to go negative, and by 5kHz pretty much all values are negative. May be a filtering issue. Jonah - is it possible filter aren't the same and could be introducing some phase delay? Brennan - maybe. current best made up guess is that they are a sample or two off. Shouldn't be any different treatment for different IFOs, so don't see why they'd be filtered (or have anything else) done differently. Brennan - get negatives in H1/H2 R0 value if you include L1, but not if you don't include L1! Weird! Jonah - That's very weird. I think we should find the cause of this. Brennan - I'll try and track this down. Will let people know what I find.