Sensitivity of the Advanced LIGO detectors at the beginning of gravitational wave astronomy

The Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO) consists of two widely separated 4 km laser interferometers designed to detect gravitational waves from distant astrophysical sources in the frequency range from 10 Hz to 10 kHz. The first observation run of the Advanced LIGO detectors started in September 2015 and ended in January 2016. A strain sensitivity of better than 10−23/Hz−−−√ was achieved around 100 Hz. Understanding both the fundamental and the technical noise sources was critical for increasing the astrophysical strain sensitivity. The average distance at which coalescing binary black hole systems with individual masses of 30  M⊙ could be detected above a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 8 was 1.3 Gpc, and the range for binary neutron star inspirals was about 75 Mpc. With respect to the initial detectors, the observable volume of the Universe increased by a factor 69 and 43, respectively. These improvements helped Advanced LIGO to detect the gravitational wave signal from the binary black hole coalescence, known as GW150914

Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies

Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner's ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person's own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships

Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies

Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner’s ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person’s own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships

Methods and results of a search for gravitational waves associated with gamma-ray bursts using the GEO 600, LIGO, and Virgo detectors

Paper producido por "The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration". (En el registro se mencionan solo algunos autores de las decenas de personas que participan).In this paper we report on a search for short-duration gravitational wave bursts in the frequency range 64 Hz–1792 Hz associated with gamma-ray bursts (GRBs), using data from GEO 600 and one of the LIGO or Virgo detectors. We introduce the method of a linear search grid to analyze GRB events with large sky localization uncertainties, for example the localizations provided by the Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM). Coherent searches for gravitational waves (GWs) can be computationally intensive when the GRB sky position is not well localized, due to the corrections required for the difference in arrival time between detectors. Using a linear search grid we are able to reduce the computational cost of the analysis by a factor of Oð10Þfor GBM events. Furthermore, we demonstrate that our analysis pipeline can improve upon the sky localization of GRBs detected by the GBM, if a high-frequency GW signal is observed in coincidence. We use the method of the linear grid in a search for GWs associated with 129 GRBs observed satellite-based gamma-ray experiments between 2006 and 2011. The GRBs in our sample had not been previously analyzed for GW counterparts. A fraction of our GRB events are analyzed using data from GEO 600 while the detector was using squeezed-light states to improve its sensitivity; this is the first search for GWs using data from a squeezed-light interferometric observatory. We find no evidence for GW signals, either with any individual GRB in this sample or with the population as a whole. For each GRB we place lower bounds on the distance to the progenitor, under an assumption of a fixed GWemission energy of 10−2M⊙c2, with a median exclusion distance of 0.8 Mpc for emission at 500 Hz and 0.3 Mpc at 1 kHz. The reduced computational cost associated with a linear search grid will enable rapid searches for GWs associated with Fermi GBM events once the advanced LIGO and Virgo detectors begin operation.http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.122004publishedVersionFil: Aasi, J. LIGO. California Institute of Technology; Estados Unidos de América.Fil: Domínguez, E. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Maglione, C. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Reula, O. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Ortega, W. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Wolovick, N. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Schilman, M. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Física de Partículas y Campo

First all-sky search for continuous gravitational waves from unknown sources in binary systems

We present the first results of an all-sky search for continuous gravitational waves from unknown spinning neutron stars in binary systems using LIGO and Virgo data. Using a specially developed analysis program, the TwoSpect algorithm, the search was carried out on data from the sixth LIGO Science Run and the second and third Virgo Science Runs. The search covers a range of frequencies from 20 Hz to 520 Hz, a range of orbital periods from 2 to ~2,254 h and a frequency- and period-dependent range of frequency modulation depths from 0.277 to 100 mHz. This corresponds to a range of projected semi-major axes of the orbit from ~0.6e-3 ls to ~6,500 ls assuming the orbit of the binary is circular. While no plausible candidate gravitational wave events survive the pipeline, upper limits are set on the analyzed data. The most sensitive 95% confidence upper limit obtained on gravitational wave strain is 2.3e-24 at 217 Hz, assuming the source waves are circularly polarized. Although this search has been optimized for circular binary orbits, the upper limits obtained remain valid for orbital eccentricities as large as 0.9. In addition, upper limits are placed on continuous gravitational wave emission from the low-mass x-ray binary Scorpius X-1 between 20 Hz and 57.25 Hz.Comment: 16 pages, 6 figure

Improved upper limits on the stochastic gravitational-wave background from 2009-2010 LIGO and Virgo data

Paper producido por "The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration". (En el registro se mencionan solo algunos autores de las decenas de personas que participan).Gravitational waves from a variety of sources are predicted to superpose to create a stochastic background. This background is expected to contain unique information from throughout the history of the Universe that is unavailable through standard electromagnetic observations, making its study of fundamental importance to understanding the evolution of the Universe. We carry out a search for the stochastic background with the latest data from the LIGO and Virgo detectors. Consistent with predictions from most stochastic gravitational-wave background models, the data display no evidence of a stochastic gravitational-wave signal. Assuming a gravitational-wave spectrum of ΩGWðfÞ ¼ Ωαðf=frefÞα, we place 95% confidence level upper limits on the energy density of the background in each of four frequency bands spanning 41.5–1726 Hz. In the frequency band of 41.5–169.25 Hz for a spectral index of α¼ 0, we constrain the energy density of the stochastic background to be ΩGWðfÞ <5.6 × 10−6. For the 600–1000 Hz band, ΩGWðfÞ <0.14ðf=900 HzÞ3, a factor of 2.5 lower than the best previously reported upper limits. We find ΩGWðfÞ <1.8 × 10−4 using a spectral index of zero for 170–600 Hz and ΩGWðfÞ < 1.0ðf=1300 HzÞ3 for 1000–1726 Hz, bands in which no previous direct limits have been placed. The limits in these four bands are the lowest direct measurements to date on the stochastic background. We discuss the implications of these results in light of the recent claim by the BICEP2 experiment of the possible evidence for inflationary gravitational waves.http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.231101publishedVersionFil: Aasi, J. LIGO. California Institute of Technology; Estados Unidos de América.Fil: Maglione, C. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Matemática, Astronomía y Física; Argentina.Fil: Maglione, C. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Fil: Quiroga, G. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Matemática, Astronomía y Física; Argentina.Fil: Quiroga, G. Argentinian Gravitational Wave Group; Argentina.Física de Partículas y Campo

Search for high-energy neutrinos from gravitational wave event GW151226 and candidate LVT151012 with ANTARES and IceCube

The Advanced LIGO observatories detected gravitational waves from two binary black hole mergers during their first observation run (O1). We present a high-energy neutrino follow-up search for the second gravitational wave event, GW151226, as well as for gravitational wave candidate LVT151012. We find two and four neutrino candidates detected by IceCube, and one and zero detected by Antares, within ±500 s around the respective gravitational wave signals, consistent with the expected background rate. None of these neutrino candidates are found to be directionally coincident with GW151226 or LVT151012. We use nondetection to constrain isotropic-equivalent high-energy neutrino emission from GW151226, adopting the GW event's 3D localization, to less than 2×1051-2×1054 erg. © 2017 American Physical Society

Directional Limits on Persistent Gravitational Waves from Advanced LIGO's First Observing Run

We employ gravitational-wave radiometry to map the stochastic gravitational wave background expected from a variety of contributing mechanisms and test the assumption of isotropy using data from the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory's (aLIGO) first observing run. We also search for persistent gravitational waves from point sources with only minimal assumptions over the 20-1726 Hz frequency band. Finding no evidence of gravitational waves from either point sources or a stochastic background, we set limits at 90% confidence. For broadband point sources, we report upper limits on the gravitational wave energy flux per unit frequency in the range Fα,Θ(f)<(0.1-56)×10-8 erg cm-2 s-1 Hz-1(f/25 Hz)α-1 depending on the sky location Θ and the spectral power index α. For extended sources, we report upper limits on the fractional gravitational wave energy density required to close the Universe of Ω(f,Θ)<(0.39-7.6)×10-8 sr-1(f/25 Hz)α depending on Θ and α. Directed searches for narrowband gravitational waves from astrophysically interesting objects (Scorpius X-1, Supernova 1987 A, and the Galactic Center) yield median frequency-dependent limits on strain amplitude of h0<(6.7,5.5, and 7.0)×10-25, respectively, at the most sensitive detector frequencies between 130-175 Hz. This represents a mean improvement of a factor of 2 across the band compared to previous searches of this kind for these sky locations, considering the different quantities of strain constrained in each case. © 2017 Published by the American Physical Society

Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914

PAPER Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914 B P Abbott1, R Abbott1, T D Abbott2, M R Abernathy3, F Acernese4,5, K Ackley6, C Adams7, T Adams8, P Addesso9,144, R X Adhikari1, V B Adya10, C Affeldt10, M Agathos11, K Agatsuma11, N Aggarwal12, O D Aguiar13, L Aiello14,15, A Ain16, P Ajith17, B Allen10,18,19, A Allocca20,21, P A Altin22, A Ananyeva1, S B Anderson1, W G Anderson18, S Appert1, K Arai1, M C Araya1, J S Areeda23, N Arnaud24, K G Arun25, S Ascenzi15,26, G Ashton10, M Ast27, S M Aston7, P Astone28, P Aufmuth19, C Aulbert10, A Avila-Alvarez23, S Babak29, P Bacon30, M K M Bader11, P T Baker31, F Baldaccini32,33, G Ballardin34, S W Ballmer35, J C Barayoga1, S E Barclay36, B C Barish1, D Barker37, F Barone4,5, B Barr36, L Barsotti12, M Barsuglia30, D Barta38, J Bartlett37, I Bartos39, R Bassiri40, A Basti20,21, J C Batch37, C Baune10, V Bavigadda34, M Bazzan41,42, C Beer10, M Bejger43, I Belahcene24, M Belgin44, A S Bell36, B K Berger1, G Bergmann10, C P L Berry45, D Bersanetti46,47, A Bertolini11, J Betzwieser7, S Bhagwat35, R Bhandare48, I A Bilenko49, G Billingsley1, C R Billman6, J Birch7, R Birney50, O Birnholtz10, S Biscans1,12, A Bisht19, M Bitossi34, C Biwer35, M A Bizouard24, J K Blackburn1, J Blackman51, C D Blair52, D G Blair52, R M Blair37, S Bloemen53, O Bock10, M Boer54, G Bogaert54, A Bohe29, F Bondu55, R Bonnand8, B A Boom11, R Bork1, V Boschi20,21, S Bose16,56, Y Bouffanais30, A Bozzi34, C Bradaschia21, P R Brady18, V B Braginsky49,145, M Branchesi57,58, J E Brau59, T Briant60, A Brillet54, M Brinkmann10, V Brisson24, P Brockill18, J E Broida61, A F Brooks1, D A Brown35, D D Brown45, N M Brown12, S Brunett1, C C Buchanan2, A Buikema12, T Bulik62, H J Bulten11,63, A Buonanno29,64, D Buskulic8, C Buy30, R L Byer40, M Cabero10, L Cadonati44, G Cagnoli65,66, C Cahillane1, J Calderón Bustillo44, T A Callister1, E Calloni5,67, J B Camp68, K C Cannon69, H Cao70, J Cao71, C D Capano10, E Capocasa30, F Carbognani34, S Caride72, J Casanueva Diaz24, C Casentini15,26, S Caudill18, M Cavaglià73, F Cavalier24, R Cavalieri34, G Cella21, C B Cepeda1, L Cerboni Baiardi57,58, G Cerretani20,21, E Cesarini15,26, S J Chamberlin74, M Chan36, S Chao75, P Charlton76, E Chassande-Mottin30, B D Cheeseboro31, H Y Chen77, Y Chen51, H-P Cheng6, A Chincarini47, A Chiummo34, T Chmiel78, H S Cho79, M Cho64, J H Chow22, N Christensen61, Q Chu52, A J K Chua80, S Chua60, S Chung52, G Ciani6, F Clara37, J A Clark44, F Cleva54, C Cocchieri73, E Coccia14,15, P-F Cohadon60, A Colla28,81, C G Collette82, L Cominsky83, M Constancio Jr13, L Conti42, S J Cooper45, T R Corbitt2, N Cornish84, A Corsi72, S Cortese34, C A Costa13, M W Coughlin61, S B Coughlin85, J-P Coulon54, S T Countryman39, P Couvares1, P B Covas86, E E Cowan44, D M Coward52, M J Cowart7, D C Coyne1, R Coyne72, J D E Creighton18, T D Creighton87, J Cripe2, S G Crowder88, T J Cullen23, A Cumming36, L Cunningham36, E Cuoco34, T Dal Canton68, S L Danilishin36, S D'Antonio15, K Danzmann10,19, A Dasgupta89, C F Da Silva Costa6, V Dattilo34, I Dave48, M Davier24, G S Davies36, D Davis35, E J Daw90, B Day44, R Day34, S De35, D DeBra40, G Debreczeni38, J Degallaix65, M De Laurentis5,67, S Deléglise60, W Del Pozzo45, T Denker10, T Dent10, V Dergachev29, R De Rosa5,67, R T DeRosa7, R DeSalvo91, J Devenson50, R C Devine31, S Dhurandhar16, M C Díaz87, L Di Fiore5, M Di Giovanni92,93, T Di Girolamo5,67, A Di Lieto20,21, S Di Pace28,81, I Di Palma28,29,81, A Di Virgilio21, Z Doctor77, V Dolique65, F Donovan12, K L Dooley73, S Doravari10, I Dorrington94, R Douglas36, M Dovale Álvarez45, T P Downes18, M Drago10, R W P Drever1,146, J C Driggers37, Z Du71, M Ducrot8, S E Dwyer37, T B Edo90, M C Edwards61, A Effler7, H-B Eggenstein10, P Ehrens1, J Eichholz1, S S Eikenberry6, R A Eisenstein12, R C Essick12, Z Etienne31, T Etzel1, M Evans12, T M Evans7, R Everett74, M Factourovich39, V Fafone14,15,26, H Fair35, S Fairhurst94, X Fan71, S Farinon47, B Farr77, W M Farr45, E J Fauchon-Jones94, M Favata95, M Fays94, H Fehrmann10, M M Fejer40, A Fernández Galiana12, I Ferrante20,21, E C Ferreira13, F Ferrini34, F Fidecaro20,21, I Fiori34, D Fiorucci30, R P Fisher35, R Flaminio65,96, M Fletcher36, H Fong97, S S Forsyth44, J-D Fournier54, S Frasca28,81, F Frasconi21, Z Frei98, A Freise45, R Frey59, V Frey24, E M Fries1, P Fritschel12, V V Frolov7, P Fulda6,68, M Fyffe7, H Gabbard10, B U Gadre16, S M Gaebel45, J R Gair99, L Gammaitoni32, S G Gaonkar16, F Garufi5,67, G Gaur100, V Gayathri101, N Gehrels68, G Gemme47, E Genin34, A Gennai21, J George48, L Gergely102, V Germain8, S Ghonge17, Abhirup Ghosh17, Archisman Ghosh11,17, S Ghosh11,53, J A Giaime2,7, K D Giardina7, A Giazotto21, K Gill103, A Glaefke36, E Goetz10, R Goetz6, L Gondan98, G González2, J M Gonzalez Castro20,21, A Gopakumar104, M L Gorodetsky49, S E Gossan1, M Gosselin34, R Gouaty8, A Grado5,105, C Graef36, M Granata65, A Grant36, S Gras12, C Gray37, G Greco57,58, A C Green45, P Groot53, H Grote10, S Grunewald29, G M Guidi57,58, X Guo71, A Gupta16, M K Gupta89, K E Gushwa1, E K Gustafson1, R Gustafson106, J J Hacker23, B R Hall56, E D Hall1, G Hammond36, M Haney104, M M Hanke10, J Hanks37, C Hanna74, M D Hannam94, J Hanson7, T Hardwick2, J Harms57,58, G M Harry3, I W Harry29, M J Hart36, M T Hartman6, C-J Haster45,97, K Haughian36, J Healy107, A Heidmann60, M C Heintze7, H Heitmann54, P Hello24, G Hemming34, M Hendry36, I S Heng36, J Hennig36, J Henry107, A W Heptonstall1, M Heurs10,19, S Hild36, D Hoak34, D Hofman65, K Holt7, D E Holz77, P Hopkins94, J Hough36, E A Houston36, E J Howell52, Y M Hu10, E A Huerta108, D Huet24, B Hughey103, S Husa86, S H Huttner36, T Huynh-Dinh7, N Indik10, D R Ingram37, R Inta72, H N Isa36, J-M Isac60, M Isi1, T Isogai12, B R Iyer17, K Izumi37, T Jacqmin60, K Jani44, P Jaranowski109, S Jawahar110, F Jiménez-Forteza86, W W Johnson2, D I Jones111, R Jones36, R J G Jonker11, L Ju52, J Junker10, C V Kalaghatgi94, V Kalogera85, S Kandhasamy73, G Kang79, J B Kanner1, S Karki59, K S Karvinen10, M Kasprzack2, E Katsavounidis12, W Katzman7, S Kaufer19, T Kaur52, K Kawabe37, F Kéfélian54, D Keitel86, D B Kelley35, R Kennedy90, J S Key112, F Y Khalili49, I Khan14, S Khan94, Z Khan89, E A Khazanov113, N Kijbunchoo37, Chunglee Kim114, J C Kim115, Whansun Kim116, W Kim70, Y-M Kim114,117, S J Kimbrell44, E J King70, P J King37, R Kirchhoff10, J S Kissel37, B Klein85, L Kleybolte27, S Klimenko6, P Koch10, S M Koehlenbeck10, S Koley11, V Kondrashov1, A Kontos12, M Korobko27, W Z Korth1, I Kowalska62, D B Kozak1, C Krämer10, V Kringel10, B Krishnan10, A Królak118,119, G Kuehn10, P Kumar97, R Kumar89, L Kuo75, A Kutynia118, B D Lackey29,35, M Landry37, R N Lang18, J Lange107, B Lantz40, R K Lanza12, A Lartaux-Vollard24, P D Lasky120, M Laxen7, A Lazzarini1, C Lazzaro42, P Leaci28,81, S Leavey36, E O Lebigot30, C H Lee117, H K Lee121, H M Lee114, K Lee36, J Lehmann10, A Lenon31, M Leonardi92,93, J R Leong10, N Leroy24, N Letendre8, Y Levin120, T G F Li122, A Libson12, T B Littenberg123, J Liu52, N A Lockerbie110, A L Lombardi44, L T London94, J E Lord35, M Lorenzini14,15, V Loriette124, M Lormand7, G Losurdo21, J D Lough10,19, G Lovelace23, H Lück10,19, A P Lundgren10, R Lynch12, Y Ma51, S Macfoy50, B Machenschalk10, M MacInnis12, D M Macleod2, F Magaña-Sandoval35, E Majorana28, I Maksimovic124, V Malvezzi15,26, N Man54, V Mandic125, V Mangano36, G L Mansell22, M Manske18, M Mantovani34, F Marchesoni33,126, F Marion8, S Márka39, Z Márka39, A S Markosyan40, E Maros1, F Martelli57,58, L Martellini54, I W Martin36, D V Martynov12, K Mason12, A Masserot8, T J Massinger1, M Masso-Reid36, S Mastrogiovanni28,81, F Matichard1,12, L Matone39, N Mavalvala12, N Mazumder56, R McCarthy37, D E McClelland22, S McCormick7, C McGrath18, S C McGuire127, G McIntyre1, J McIver1, D J McManus22, T McRae22, S T McWilliams31, D Meacher54,74, G D Meadors10,29, J Meidam11, A Melatos128, G Mendell37, D Mendoza-Gandara10, R A Mercer18, E L Merilh37, M Merzougui54, S Meshkov1, C Messenger36, C Messick74, R Metzdorff60, P M Meyers125, F Mezzani28,81, H Miao45, C Michel65, H Middleton45, E E Mikhailov129, L Milano5,67, A L Miller6,28,81, A Miller85, B B Miller85, J Miller12, M Millhouse84, Y Minenkov15, J Ming29, S Mirshekari130, C Mishra17, S Mitra16, V P Mitrofanov49, G Mitselmakher6, R Mittleman12, A Moggi21, M Mohan34, S R P Mohapatra12, M Montani57,58, B C Moore95, C J Moore80, D Moraru37, G Moreno37, S R Morriss87, B Mours8, C M Mow-Lowry45, G Mueller6, A W Muir94, Arunava Mukherjee17, D Mukherjee18, S Mukherjee87, N Mukund16, A Mullavey7, J Munch70, E A M Muniz23, P G Murray36, A Mytidis6, K Napier44, I Nardecchia15,26, L Naticchioni28,81, G Nelemans11,53, T J N Nelson7, M Neri46,47, M Nery10, A Neunzert106, J M Newport3, G Newton36, T T Nguyen22, A B Nielsen10, S Nissanke11,53, A Nitz10, A Noack10, F Nocera34, D Nolting7, M E N Normandin87, L K Nuttall35, J Oberling37, E Ochsner18, E Oelker12, G H Ogin131, J J Oh116, S H Oh116, F Ohme10,94, M Oliver86, P Oppermann10, Richard J Oram7, B O'Reilly7, R O'Shaughnessy107, D J Ottaway70, H Overmier7, B J Owen72, A E Pace74, J Page123, A Pai101, S A Pai48, J R Palamos59, O Palashov113, C Palomba28, A Pal-Singh27, H Pan75, C Pankow85, F Pannarale94, B C Pant48, F Paoletti21,34, A Paoli34, M A Papa10,18,29, H R Paris40, W Parker7, D Pascucci36, A Pasqualetti34, R Passaquieti20,21, D Passuello21, B Patricelli20,21, B L Pearlstone36, M Pedraza1, R Pedurand65,132, L Pekowsky35, A Pele7, S Penn133, C J Perez37, A Perreca1, L M Perri85, H P Pfeiffer97, M Phelps36, O J Piccinni28,81, M Pichot54, F Piergiovanni57,58, V Pierro9, G Pillant34, L Pinard65, I M Pinto9, M Pitkin36, M Poe18, R Poggiani20,21, P Popolizio34, A Post10, J Powell36, J Prasad16, J W W Pratt103, V Predoi94, T Prestegard18,125, M Prijatelj10,34, M Principe9, S Privitera29, G A Prodi92,93, L G Prokhorov49, O Puncken10, M Punturo33, P Puppo28, M Pürrer29, H Qi18, J Qin52, S Qiu120, V Quetschke87, E A Quintero1, R Quitzow-James59, F J Raab37, D S Rabeling22, H Radkins37, P Raffai98, S Raja48, C Rajan48, M Rakhmanov87, P Rapagnani28,81, V Raymond29, M Razzano20,21, V Re26, J Read23, T Regimbau54, L Rei47, S Reid50, D H Reitze1,6, H Rew129, S D Reyes35, E Rhoades103, F Ricci28,81, K Riles106, M Rizzo107, N A Robertson1,36, R Robie36, F Robinet24, A Rocchi15, L Rolland8, J G Rollins1, V J Roma59, J D Romano87, R Romano4,5, J H Romie7, D Rosińska43,134, S Rowan36, A Rüdiger10, P Ruggi34, K Ryan37, S Sachdev1, T Sadecki37, L Sadeghian18, M Sakellariadou135, L Salconi34, M Saleem101, F Salemi10, A Samajdar136, L Sammut120, L M Sampson85, E J Sanchez1, V Sandberg37, J R Sanders35, B Sassolas65, B S Sathyaprakash74,94, P R Saulson35, O Sauter106, R L Savage37, A Sawadsky19, P Schale59, J Scheuer85, E Schmidt103, J Schmidt10, P Schmidt1,51, R Schnabel27, R M S Schofield59, A Schönbeck27, E Schreiber10, D Schuette10,19, B F Schutz29,94, S G Schwalbe103, J Scott36, S M Scott22, D Sellers7, A S Sengupta137, D Sentenac34, V Sequino15,26, A Sergeev113, Y Setyawati11,53, D A Shaddock22, T J Shaffer37, M S Shahriar85, B Shapiro40, P Shawhan64, A Sheperd18, D H Shoemaker12, D M Shoemaker44, K Siellez44, X Siemens18, M Sieniawska43, D Sigg37, A D Silva13, A Singer1, L P Singer68, A Singh10,19,29, R Singh2, A Singhal14, A M Sintes86, B J J Slagmolen22, B Smith7, J R Smith23, R J E Smith1, E J Son116, B Sorazu36, F Sorrentino47, T Souradeep16, A P Spencer36, A K Srivastava89, A Staley39, M Steinke10, J Steinlechner36, S Steinlechner27,36, D Steinmeyer10,19, B C Stephens18, S P Stevenson45, R Stone87, K A Strain36, N Straniero65, G Stratta57,58, S E Strigin49, R Sturani130, A L Stuver7, T Z Summerscales138, L Sun128, S Sunil89, P J Sutton94, B L Swinkels34, M J Szczepańczyk103, M Tacca30, D Talukder59, D B Tanner6, M Tápai102, A Taracchini29, R Taylor1, T Theeg10, E G Thomas45, M Thomas7, P Thomas37, K A Thorne7, E Thrane120, T Tippens44, S Tiwari14,93, V Tiwari94, K V Tokmakov110, K Toland36, C Tomlinson90, M Tonelli20,21, Z Tornasi36, C I Torrie1, D Töyrä45, F Travasso32,33, G Traylor7, D Trifirò73, J Trinastic6, M C Tringali92,93, L Trozzo21,139, M Tse12, R Tso1, M Turconi54, D Tuyenbayev87, D Ugolini140, C S Unnikrishnan104, A L Urban1, S A Usman94, H Vahlbruch19, G Vajente1, G Valdes87, N van Bakel11, M van Beuzekom11, J F J van den Brand11,63, C Van Den Broeck11, D C Vander-Hyde35, L van der Schaaf11, J V van Heijningen11, A A van Veggel36, M Vardaro41,42, V Varma51, S Vass1, M Vasúth38, A Vecchio45, G Vedovato42, J Veitch45, P J Veitch70, K Venkateswara141, G Venugopalan1, D Verkindt8, F Vetrano57,58, A Viceré57,58, A D Viets18, S Vinciguerra45, D J Vine50, J-Y Vinet54, S Vitale12, T Vo35, H Vocca32,33, C Vorvick37, D V Voss6, W D Vousden45, S P Vyatchanin49, A R Wade1, L E Wade78, M Wade78, M Walker2, L Wallace1, S Walsh10,29, G Wang14,58, H Wang45, M Wang45, Y Wang52, R L Ward22, J Warner37, M Was8, J Watchi82, B Weaver37, L-W Wei54, M Weinert10, A J Weinstein1, R Weiss12, L Wen52, P Weßels10, T Westphal10, K Wette10, J T Whelan107, B F Whiting6, C Whittle120, D Williams36, R D Williams1, A R Williamson94, J L Willis142, B Willke10,19, M H Wimmer10,19, W Winkler10, C C Wipf1, H Wittel10,19, G Woan36, J Woehler10, J Worden37, J L Wright36, D S Wu10, G Wu7, W Yam12, H Yamamoto1, C C Yancey64, M J Yap22, Hang Yu12, Haocun Yu12, M Yvert8, A Zadrożny118, L Zangrando42, M Zanolin103, J-P Zendri42, M Zevin85, L Zhang1, M Zhang129, T Zhang36, Y Zhang107, C Zhao52, M Zhou85, Z Zhou85, S J Zhu10,29, X J Zhu52, M E Zucker1,12, J Zweizig1 (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration), M Boyle143, T Chu97, D Hemberger51, I Hinder29, L E Kidder143, S Ossokine29, M Scheel51, B Szilagyi51, S Teukolsky143 and A Vano Vinuales94 Hide full author list Published 12 April 2017 • © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd Classical and Quantum Gravity, Volume 34, Number 10 Focus Issue: Gravitational Waves Article PDF Figures References Citations PDF 258 Total downloads Cited by 1 articles Article has an altmetric score of 3 Turn on MathJax Get permission to re-use this article Share this article Article information Abstract Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ~0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations

First Search for Gravitational Waves from Known Pulsars with Advanced LIGO

We present the result of searches for gravitational waves from 200 pulsars using data from the first observing run of the Advanced LIGO detectors. We find no significant evidence for a gravitational-wave signal from any of these pulsars, but we are able to set the most constraining upper limits yet on their gravitational-wave amplitudes and ellipticities. For eight of these pulsars, our upper limits give bounds that are improvements over the indirect spin-down limit values. For another 32, we are within a factor of 10 of the spin-down limit, and it is likely that some of these will be reachable in future runs of the advanced detector. Taken as a whole, these new results improve on previous limits by more than a factor of two