Short gravitational wave signal searches in TAMA300 data : stellar - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
short gravitational wave signal searches in tama300 data
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Short gravitational wave signal searches in TAMA300 data : stellar - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 28, 2023 380 likes •594 views

Short gravitational wave signal searches in TAMA300 data : stellar core collapse and black hole Nobuyuki Kanda TAMA collaboration @ TAUP2007, 11th Sep. 2007, Sendai Special Thanks to M.Ando, T.Akutsu, R.Honda and Y.Tsunesada 1-1 Excess Power

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Short gravitational wave signal searches in TAMA300 data : stellar core collapse and black hole

Nobuyuki Kanda TAMA collaboration @ TAUP2007, 11th Sep. 2007, Sendai

Special Thanks to M.Ando, T.Akutsu, R.Honda and Y.Tsunesada

slide-2
SLIDE 2

TAMA's searches for Short GW

  • 1. Stelar-core collapse (SN) : Burst GW

1-1 Excess Power Filter 1-2 ALF 1-3 TF-Cluster

  • 2. Black-hole quasi-normal mode : Ringdown GW

Matched filter

  • 3. Keyword for short signal searches
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Observational runs and data

Data Taking period actual data amount remarks DT1 8/6 - 7/1999 ~3 + ~7 hours continuous lock first whole system test DT2 9/17 - 20/1999 31 hours first Physics run DT3 4/20 - 23/2000 13 hours

  • 8/14/2000

World best sensitivity h ~ 5x10-21 [1/√Hz] DT4 8/21 - 9/3/2000 167 hours stable long run DT5 3/1 - 3/8/2001 111 hours Test Run 1 6/4 - 6/6/2001 Longest stretch of continuous lock is 24:50 keep running all day DT6 8/1 - 9/20/2001 1038 hours duty cycle 86% full-dressed run DT7 8/31 - 9/2/2002 24 hours with duty cycle 76.7% Recycling, h ~ 3x10-21 [1/√Hz], Simultaneous obs with LIGO & GEO DT8 2/14 – 4/14/2003 1168 hours, duty cycle 81.1% coincidence obs with LIGO S2 DT9 10/31(Actually 11/28)/2003 – 1/5/2003 558 hours, (weekday: night time, weekend: full time) partial coincidence run with LIGO S3 ‘crewless’ operation

slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • 1. Burst Gravitational Waves

from Stellar-core collapse

Numerical Simulation Predicts GW Waveform.

Komatsu et al. (1989) Zwerger & Müler (1997)

Dimmelmeier et.al., (2001,2002)

10 20 30 40 50 –1.5 –1 –0.5 0.5 1 1.5 Amplitude [x 10

–20

] Time [msec]

Gravitational waveforms from stellar–core collapse (10kpc from the earth) A1B1G1 A3B3G1 A4B1G2

slide-5
SLIDE 5

TAMA300 Sensitivity : Range of Detection for Burst GW from Stellar-Core Collapse

102 103 10–24 10–22 10–20 10–18 Detector Noise Level [1/Hz

1/2

Frequency [Hz] TAMA LCGT design sensitivity noise level

(DT9)

GW RSS Amplitude and 10kpc events 100pc events

Figure by M.Ando, GW signals by Dimmelmeier, et al. (2002)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

1-1. Excess Power Filter

by M.Ando (Tokyo Univ.)

slide-7
SLIDE 7

by M.Ando

  • Phy. Rev. D71, 082002 (2005)
slide-8
SLIDE 8

1-2. ALF (Alternative Linear Filter)

by Tomomi Akutsu (ICRR, Tokyo Univ. / Osaka City Univ.),

slide-9
SLIDE 9

by Tomomi Akutsu , et al.

  • Class. Quantum Grav. 23 (2006) S715

U.L. for hrss>10 -17 0.55 [events/day] , C.L.90%

slide-10
SLIDE 10
  • 10
  • 8
  • 6
  • 4
  • 2

2 4

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 25 30 strain amplitude [x 10-20] time [msec]

A1B1G1 @ 1kpc

1-3 TF (Time-Frequency) - cluster

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 1000 2000 3000 2 4 6 8 10 power [x 10-42 / Hz] time [msec] frequency [Hz] power [x 10-42 / Hz]

2 4 6 8 10 time [msec] frequency [Hz] x 10-42 power [/Hz]

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 20 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

by R.Honda (Osaka City Univ.)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Example

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 time [msec] frequency [Hz] TAMA noise power

  • 8
  • 6
  • 4
  • 2

2 4 6 8 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Spike noise @100pc @500pc @1kpc

100 200 300 time [msec] frequency [Hz] 100pc

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 3 6 9 12 time [msec] frequency [Hz] 500pc

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 2 4 6 time [msec] frequency [Hz] 1000pc

  • 10
  • 5

5 10 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Type I

100 200 300 time [msec] frequency [Hz] A4B2G2 type I/II

  • 15
  • 10
  • 5

5 10 15 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

by R.Honda (Osaka City Univ.)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Clustering (recognization of connected region)

S =

  • t,f

1 V =

  • t,f

P(t, f) t1s = t S t2s = (t − t1s)2 S t3s = (t − t1s)3 S(t2s)3/2 t4s = (t − t1s)4 S(t2s)4/2

t1v = tP(t, f) V t2v = (t − t1v)2P(t, f) V t3v = (t − t1v)3P(t, f) V (t2v)3/2 t4v = (t − t1v)4P(t, f) V (t2v)4/2

peak hight : P(t0,f0) cluster threshold : P (t0,f0)1/2

t0 f0

cluster characteristics parameters :

by R.Honda (Osaka City Univ.)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

exclude TAMA noises f1s vs f2s exclude Gauss noise t1s/S vs f1s/S

5 10 15 20 25

  • 10.0
  • 8.0
  • 6.0
  • 4.0
  • 2.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 t2s t1s TAMA SNR>100 gauss noise DFM 1pc DFM 10pc DFM 50pc DFM 100pc

  • 0.4
  • 0.3
  • 0.2
  • 0.1

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

  • 0.4
  • 0.3
  • 0.2
  • 0.1

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 f1s/S t1s/S TAMA SNR>100 gauss noise DFM 1pc DFM 10pc DFM 50pc DFM 100pc

  • 2.0≤f1s≤2.0

f2s≤5.0 (t1s2+f1s2)1/2/S ≤0.15

S≥4 F≤4 (1250Hz)

  • 1.5≤t1v≤1.5

t2v≤3.0 f4v≤6.0 t2v1/2/S≥0.04

TF-cluster : Event Selection

by R.Honda (Osaka City Univ.)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Efficiency and Selected Events

by R.Honda (Osaka City Univ.), Master Thesis, Feb. 2007 efficiency = 86 % within 10pc (SNR > 70) N = 152 event for 1.26 x 105 sec data Rate = N / (T x efficiency) = 1.4 x 10-3 events/sec = 4.9 events/hour

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • 2. Ringdown GW

from black-hole quasi-normal mode

inspiral-merger Binary, SN expl. BH formation Ringdown Kerr BH core collapse

perturbed BH

Waveform: Damped sinusoid (Quasi-normal modes)

h(t) = exp(−πfct/Q) sin(2πfct)

Q = 2.0(1 − a)−0.45 fc = 3.2 × 104[Hz] M/M

  • 1 − (1 − a)0.3

central frequency Quality factor

Echeverria (1989)

* Probe for BH direct observation * BH physics in inspiral-merger, core collapses, ... * Good SNR expected, ~ 100@10kpc (TAMA sensitivity)

QNMs

M: Mass a: Spin by Y.Tsunesada (NAO, Tokyo Institute of Technology)

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Matched Filter Design for BH Ringdown

Template construction in (fc, Q) plane (Nakano, Takahashi, Tagoshi, Sasaki, PRD 2003)

ρ = s(f)h∗(f; fc, Q) Sn(f) df

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400 450 500 550 600 Q fc [Hz]

s(f): signal + noise h(f): template Sn(f): Weight (noise power)

fc = 100 ~ 2500 [Hz] Q = 2 ~ 33.3 (a = 0 ~ 0.998)

T 1

50s = 130

Ntmplt 682

  • [sec]

T1000h = 6.5 Ntmplt 682 16 NCPU

  • [days]

Intel PenIV 2.5GHz

CPU Time 682 templates (SNR loss < 2%)

fc Q

by Y.Tsunesada

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Trigger Rate of the Ringdown Search

R(fc) = Ntrg(fc) Tobs 1 (fc) 1 1 − (false dismissal)

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Rate [H-1] (SNR > 20) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Ringdown Frequency [Hz]

DT6 diff DT6 cum DT8 diff DT8 cum DT9 diff DT9 cum

fc > 1500Hz:

R < 3.4 × 10−2 [H−1]

R < 1.8 × 10−1 [H−1]

R < 4.6 [H−1]

DT6: DT8: DT9: (M < 20Msolar) (SNR > 20)

Preliminary

Trigger Rate (DT9) < 1ev/day

by Y.Tsunesada

slide-18
SLIDE 18

BH Mass Spectroscopy ...

Ringdown GW detection can measure; Q = Kerr parameter fc = Mass of BH

% % % % Tsunesada, Kanda et al. Phys.Rev.D 71, 103005 (2005)

slide-19
SLIDE 19
  • 3. Keyword for short signal searches

Different types of ‘waveforms’ and search methods Burst : only numerical predicted, power filter Ringdown : anlytical prediction, matched filter Even so, there are same noise sources ! Spike, Glitch, Steps... Non-Gaussianity Instabilit Short GW search requires ‘silent detector’.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Summary

TAMA searched for short GW signals, and derive upper limits: Burst GW Excess power filter, ALF, TF cluster BH ringdown GW Matched Filter The data analysis evaluated a kind of TAMA detector noise characteristics.