Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration

Ling Sun; Evan Goetz; Jeffrey S. Kissel; Joseph Betzwieser; Sudarshan Karki; Aaron Viets; Madeline Wade; Dripta Bhattacharjee; Vladimir Bossilkov; Pep B. Covas; Laurence E.H. Datrier; Rachel Gray; Shivaraj Kandhasamy; Yannick K. Lecoeuche; Gregory Mendell; Timesh Mistry; Ethan Payne; Richard L. Savage; Alan J. Weinstein; Stuart Aston; Aaron Buikema; Craig Cahillane; Jenne C. Driggers; Sheila E. Dwyer; Rahul Kumar; Alexander Urban

doi:10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration

Ling Sun, Evan Goetz, Jeffrey S. Kissel, Joseph Betzwieser, Sudarshan Karki, Aaron Viets, Madeline Wade, Dripta Bhattacharjee, Vladimir Bossilkov, Pep B. Covas, Laurence E.H. Datrier, Rachel Gray, Shivaraj Kandhasamy, Yannick K. Lecoeuche, Gregory Mendell, Timesh Mistry, Ethan Payne, Richard L. Savage, Alan J. Weinstein, Stuart AstonAaron Buikema, Craig Cahillane, Jenne C. Driggers, Sheila E. Dwyer, Rahul Kumar, Alexander Urban

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

113 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The raw outputs of the detectors within the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory need to be calibrated in order to produce the estimate of the dimensionless strain used for astrophysical analyses. The two detectors have been upgraded since the second observing run and finished the year-long third observing run. Understanding, accounting, and/or compensating for the complex-valued response of each part of the upgraded detectors improves the overall accuracy of the estimated detector response to gravitational waves. We describe improved understanding and methods used to quantify the response of each detector, with a dedicated effort to define all places where systematic error plays a role. We use the detectors as they stand in the first half (six months) of the third observing run to demonstrate how each identified systematic error impacts the estimated strain and constrain the statistical uncertainty therein. For this time period, we estimate the upper limit on systematic error and associated uncertainty to be <7% in magnitude and <4 deg in phase (68% confidence interval) in the most sensitive frequency band 20-2000 Hz. The systematic error alone is estimated at levels of <2% in magnitude and <2 deg in phase.

Original language	English
Article number	225008
Journal	Classical and Quantum Gravity
Volume	37
Issue number	22
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e
Publication status	Published - Nov 2020

Access to Document

10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

Cite this

Sun, L., Goetz, E., Kissel, J. S., Betzwieser, J., Karki, S., Viets, A., Wade, M., Bhattacharjee, D., Bossilkov, V., Covas, P. B., Datrier, L. E. H., Gray, R., Kandhasamy, S., Lecoeuche, Y. K., Mendell, G., Mistry, T., Payne, E., Savage, R. L., Weinstein, A. J., ... Urban, A. (2020). Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 37(22), Article 225008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

@article{be711ca8368441c09a437ea072aa4ded,

title = "Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration",

abstract = "The raw outputs of the detectors within the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory need to be calibrated in order to produce the estimate of the dimensionless strain used for astrophysical analyses. The two detectors have been upgraded since the second observing run and finished the year-long third observing run. Understanding, accounting, and/or compensating for the complex-valued response of each part of the upgraded detectors improves the overall accuracy of the estimated detector response to gravitational waves. We describe improved understanding and methods used to quantify the response of each detector, with a dedicated effort to define all places where systematic error plays a role. We use the detectors as they stand in the first half (six months) of the third observing run to demonstrate how each identified systematic error impacts the estimated strain and constrain the statistical uncertainty therein. For this time period, we estimate the upper limit on systematic error and associated uncertainty to be <7% in magnitude and <4 deg in phase (68% confidence interval) in the most sensitive frequency band 20-2000 Hz. The systematic error alone is estimated at levels of <2% in magnitude and <2 deg in phase.",

keywords = "LIGO calibration, astrophysics, data analysis, general relativity, gravitational waves, interferometry, systematic error",

author = "Ling Sun and Evan Goetz and Kissel, {Jeffrey S.} and Joseph Betzwieser and Sudarshan Karki and Aaron Viets and Madeline Wade and Dripta Bhattacharjee and Vladimir Bossilkov and Covas, {Pep B.} and Datrier, {Laurence E.H.} and Rachel Gray and Shivaraj Kandhasamy and Lecoeuche, {Yannick K.} and Gregory Mendell and Timesh Mistry and Ethan Payne and Savage, {Richard L.} and Weinstein, {Alan J.} and Stuart Aston and Aaron Buikema and Craig Cahillane and Driggers, {Jenne C.} and Dwyer, {Sheila E.} and Rahul Kumar and Alexander Urban",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 IOP Publishing Ltd.",

year = "2020",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e",

language = "English",

volume = "37",

journal = "Classical and Quantum Gravity",

issn = "0264-9381",

publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",

number = "22",

}

Sun, L, Goetz, E, Kissel, JS, Betzwieser, J, Karki, S, Viets, A, Wade, M, Bhattacharjee, D, Bossilkov, V, Covas, PB, Datrier, LEH, Gray, R, Kandhasamy, S, Lecoeuche, YK, Mendell, G, Mistry, T, Payne, E, Savage, RL, Weinstein, AJ, Aston, S, Buikema, A, Cahillane, C, Driggers, JC, Dwyer, SE, Kumar, R & Urban, A 2020, 'Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration', Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 37, no. 22, 225008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

TY - JOUR

T1 - Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration

AU - Sun, Ling

AU - Goetz, Evan

AU - Kissel, Jeffrey S.

AU - Betzwieser, Joseph

AU - Karki, Sudarshan

AU - Viets, Aaron

AU - Wade, Madeline

AU - Bhattacharjee, Dripta

AU - Bossilkov, Vladimir

AU - Covas, Pep B.

AU - Datrier, Laurence E.H.

AU - Gray, Rachel

AU - Kandhasamy, Shivaraj

AU - Lecoeuche, Yannick K.

AU - Mendell, Gregory

AU - Mistry, Timesh

AU - Payne, Ethan

AU - Savage, Richard L.

AU - Weinstein, Alan J.

AU - Aston, Stuart

AU - Buikema, Aaron

AU - Cahillane, Craig

AU - Driggers, Jenne C.

AU - Dwyer, Sheila E.

AU - Kumar, Rahul

AU - Urban, Alexander

PY - 2020/11

Y1 - 2020/11

N2 - The raw outputs of the detectors within the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory need to be calibrated in order to produce the estimate of the dimensionless strain used for astrophysical analyses. The two detectors have been upgraded since the second observing run and finished the year-long third observing run. Understanding, accounting, and/or compensating for the complex-valued response of each part of the upgraded detectors improves the overall accuracy of the estimated detector response to gravitational waves. We describe improved understanding and methods used to quantify the response of each detector, with a dedicated effort to define all places where systematic error plays a role. We use the detectors as they stand in the first half (six months) of the third observing run to demonstrate how each identified systematic error impacts the estimated strain and constrain the statistical uncertainty therein. For this time period, we estimate the upper limit on systematic error and associated uncertainty to be <7% in magnitude and <4 deg in phase (68% confidence interval) in the most sensitive frequency band 20-2000 Hz. The systematic error alone is estimated at levels of <2% in magnitude and <2 deg in phase.

AB - The raw outputs of the detectors within the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory need to be calibrated in order to produce the estimate of the dimensionless strain used for astrophysical analyses. The two detectors have been upgraded since the second observing run and finished the year-long third observing run. Understanding, accounting, and/or compensating for the complex-valued response of each part of the upgraded detectors improves the overall accuracy of the estimated detector response to gravitational waves. We describe improved understanding and methods used to quantify the response of each detector, with a dedicated effort to define all places where systematic error plays a role. We use the detectors as they stand in the first half (six months) of the third observing run to demonstrate how each identified systematic error impacts the estimated strain and constrain the statistical uncertainty therein. For this time period, we estimate the upper limit on systematic error and associated uncertainty to be <7% in magnitude and <4 deg in phase (68% confidence interval) in the most sensitive frequency band 20-2000 Hz. The systematic error alone is estimated at levels of <2% in magnitude and <2 deg in phase.

KW - LIGO calibration

KW - astrophysics

KW - data analysis

KW - general relativity

KW - gravitational waves

KW - interferometry

KW - systematic error

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092717554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

DO - 10.1088/1361-6382/abb14e

M3 - Article

SN - 0264-9381

VL - 37

JO - Classical and Quantum Gravity

JF - Classical and Quantum Gravity

IS - 22

M1 - 225008

ER -

Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this