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

Minutes of 2008-July-03 S5 QPipeline Review Teleconference


Shourov Chatterji, Jonah Kanner, Isabel Leonor, Dave Reitze

Minutes by Jonah




1)  Review status
2)  Look at cWB document

Dave:  On 1), what's been done on Shourov's
action items

Shourov:  Not everything, but have done table based 
of loudest events.  Table is on
open box page.  Amber Stuver may compare
lists of loud events from various pipelines.

Shourov:  Isabel asked to produce upper limit curves 
for Q-pipeline only.  Laura has made eff. curves - 
it is a short jump to upper limit curves

Shourov:  Other action items have not had progress
My highest priority is documentation/fixing broken

Isabel had requested some plots - those are not
done yet

Need to run on MDC's produced for calibration 

Need to run on irrational time lags

Dave:  Let's try to prioritize.  The goal is
to bring the paper to maturity by September.  
What do you think is most important?  I suggested
the irrational time lags - that is probably less

Shourov:  MDCs are a priority.  The thing that 
needs the most work is the documentation.  
I think there is a lot lacking in terms of 

Dave:  Yes, I find being able to go back very

Jonah:  I'm trying to make a list of checks we've
done.  I also took a stab at a first principles
sensitivity estimate.  I multiplyed the 
noise curve by 7.

Shourov:  To do the estimate, go to the 
open box page.  Take the thresholds, 
and convert those to an SNR.  At these 
thresholds, do I get the number of injections
I expect.

Dave:  Shourov, you seemed to get a number
that was higher.  Where did you get that?

Shourov:  Go to  
You see that the estimates sit ~10x above the 
noise curve.

Dave:   Isabel,
what are your plans?

Isabel:  I've already gone through the minutes, and started
to summarize what we've looked at.  I think we have 
looked at a lot of the things that we've needed to look at
in detail.  It would have been good to write the document as
we reviewed!

Dave:  I DO think we've been pretty good at putting in the
minutes what we've done.  We should be able to look back
at those to recall what we did.  

2) Dave walks us through cWB document

-first part is review process - we can write that
I don't think we looked deeply into production of 
science segments.  I think we took it at face 

Jonah:  Shourov did check against Laura

Shourov:  I did check against Laura - the list
of DQ and vetoes - is common to all algorithms, 
so it should likely not be reviewed three times.
Maybe we should make a statement that we 
have NOT done this.

Dave:  Ok, I think we should touch base
with others on this.

- continues through cWB document - most 
of items mentioned we have at least touched

It is not clear that we have to follow 
this exact format - but it is certainly a 
good first starting point.  

Shourov, we've asked you to follow-up 
on loud events.  

Dave continues through document.

Dave:  I think it will be stimulating
to take the time and put things in coherently.
I think we will want to assign tasks for different

Dave:  Isabel, you are making a separate
code review document

Isabel:  Yes.
Isabel:  Who actually types this?

Dave:  I think, by next week, I will go down the list, 
and use my judgement to put a list of names by items.
Then, circulate and discuss.  We should also discuss
if we are not clear what goes into document.

Shourov:  Timescale for burst group as a whole
is waiting for a more mature draft.  ~ a few weeks

Dave:  I think we should try to have this done by
the middle of August.  

Isabel:  That might work

Dave:  What about before the L-V meeting?  I think 
that is doable.

Shourov:  This is not prerequisite for larger review to start

Dave:  How does this get folded into review?

Isabel:  I think the main review is more for the paper.

Shourov:  Also, DQ, segments, combining results, etc...

Dave:  For next week, I'll asign tasks and comment on template.

Dave:  What are the prospects for improving the documentation 
in the next week or 2.

Shourov:  Yes I can.

Dave:  Let's meet at the same time next week.  

Jonah:  Let's try to make a table of things we've checked.

Dave:  Great.  I think we have a clear picture of next steps.  

Action Items

* Shourov works on improved documentation
* Dave assigns tasks/comments on template
* Jonah works on list of completed tasks

$Id: minutes_20080703.html,v 1.3 2008/07/03 21:31:53 jkanner Exp $