Agenda and Minutes, 18 Nov 2010
Agenda: Thurs, 18 Nov 2010
- Discussion of S5/VSR1 LIGO/Virgo paper
Minutes of Nov 18, 2010 Stochastic Review Telecon Attending: Nelson, Warren, Robert - Robert will look at data quality/selection - Warren will ask Fabio - BOE calculaton - Warren - Nelson's general comments: - Nelson thinks it's light on content - too much jargon - Title: - Robert doesn't think "Setting" should be there, makes it sound like a methods paper. - Put frequency into the title. - Abstract/Introduction - Frequency should be highlighted. - Need to highlight that this is the first analysis using both LIGO and Virgo. - Motivation for why high frequency is analyzed. - Note that upper limit is concordant with expectations given sensitivity. - Introduction - Clean up descriptions of interferometers. - No references for interferometers. - Explain why GEO is not used. - List length of GEO as with others. - More on geometry and why 900 Hz. - Big deal that this is first LIGO-GEO stochastic - It is not impossible in principle to distinguish a stochastic signal from stochastic noise - it depends on the amplitude of the signal and how well modeled the noise is. Qualify this statement. - replace "Michelson interferometer" with "interferometric gravitational wave detector". - explain why GEO is not included in this paper. - if the band is 600 Hz to 1000 Hz, why is this being called the Omega_GW at 900 Hz. - examples of jargon is "H1", "BBN" etc - Analysis Method (until the end of page 2) - "noise and signal are both *assumed* to be stochastic". - reference to H1-H2 paper is premature - maybe Nick's paper instead. - reword "can assume that the noise will not be correlated". - "white in strain" should be "white in strain amplitude" - "ORF" is jargon and needs to be referenced. - need to remind reader that "HV" is both "H1-V1" and "H2-V1" - need to be more explicit in discussing removal of data - maybe summarize the data quality cuts information from S5 isotropic. Also, should explain data quality cuts from Virgo, which have not been discussed in stochastic papers before. - timing accuracy should maybe be discussed closer to here since they are "data quality" discussions. - is there some way to see that the LV ORF decays more slowly at high frequencies than the H1-L1 ORF? It would be nice to explain that. - if LV is more sensitive above 200Hz, why not start the analysis there? - explain why you are choosing the f^3 spectrum.
$Id: 20101118.html,v 1.1 2010/12/09 00:45:40 warren Exp $