Forgot your username or password?
Document Actions
Cyg X-1 directional analysis
by
Michal Was
—
last modified
2009-05-06 19:50
Search: Damped oscillation matched filtering; coincidence in OR configuration between H1L1V1 during S5/VSR1; directed at Cyg X-1
parameter space (f,Q), correspond to BH mass and spin
ccH1L1 = rhocomb/(|rhoH1 - rhoL1| +rhocomb)
cuts tuned after aplying CAT2 DQ
No event found above thresholds, loudest event in each pair (H1L1, H1V1, L1V1) detailed below
In the legend are noted the hrss at 50% efficiency
For FA=1e-8 Hz the 50% et 90% hrss are
To compare with the high frequency cWB S5/VSR1 analysis (results extracted from here)the 50% hrss for FA=5e-9 Hz are
sensitivity better by 10-30%, but results are difficult to compare
parameter space (f,Q), correspond to BH mass and spin
Cuts
- coincidence window +/- 1ms
- overlap in the (f,Q) plane of templates with SNR > 0.97 x SNRmax - 1
- cuts on rho1 rho2 rho3 ccH1L1 tuned on 2000 time slides and injections into JW1, optimization for a false alarm of 10-8 Hz gives:
| H1 SNR | L1 SNR | V1 SNR | H1L1 cc |
| 9.8 | 7.8 | 11.3 | 0.62 |
cuts tuned after aplying CAT2 DQ
- The effects of this cuts on the 2000 bacground slides is (full size images availabel here)
Box opening
No event found above thresholds, loudest event in each pair (H1L1, H1V1, L1V1) detailed below
H1V1
happened at 866035464.402, vetoed by a CAT3 veto on H1 (vetoes are from Lindy's page)| SNR | F min | F peak | F max | Q min | Q peak | Q max | |
| H1 | 9 | 1000 | 3793 | 4185 | 2.6 | 9 | 34 |
| V1 | 7.7 | 3874 | 3950 | 3988 | 17 | 34 | 34 |
H1L1
happened at 870884359.915, vetoed by a CAT3 veto on H1 (vetoes are from Lindy's page)| SNR | F min | F peak | F max | Q min | Q peak | Q max | |
| H1 | 7.8 | 918 | 3110 | 4126 | 2.6 | 4.8 | 34 |
| L1 | 6.6 | 918 | 918 | 1960 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 9 |
L1V1
happened at 863644925.118, vetoed by a CAT3 veto on L1 (vetoes are from Lindy's page)| SNR | F min | F peak | F max | Q min | Q peak | Q max | |
| L1 | 78 | 1468 | 2581 | 3297 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 4.8 |
| V1 | 6.9 | 918 | 918 | 2349 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.6 |
Upper limits
Using the formula R=2.3/(T*eff) we obtain the following conservative upper limitsIn the legend are noted the hrss at 50% efficiency
For FA=1e-8 Hz the 50% et 90% hrss are
| 1e-21 | 1e-20 | |
| freq2374Q3 | 3.40 | 1.094 |
| freq1846Q3 | 2.83 | 0.944 |
| freq1511Q3 | 2.43 | 0.798 |
| freq3515Q9 | 5.51 | 1.753 |
| freq2734Q9 | 4.58 | 1.420 |
| freq2237Q9 | 3.85 | 1.193 |
| freq3951Q20 | 6.84 | 2.136 |
| freq3073Q20 | 5.55 | 1.720 |
| freq2514Q20 | 4.55 | 1.474 |
To compare with the high frequency cWB S5/VSR1 analysis (results extracted from here)the 50% hrss for FA=5e-9 Hz are
| 1e-21 | HF cWB | 1e-21 | |||
| freq2374Q3 | 3.66 | SG2477Q3 | 5.82 | ||
| freq1846Q3 | 3.03 | SG2000Q3 | 4.32 | ||
| freq1511Q3 | 2.61 | SG1615Q3 | 3.75 | ||
| freq3515Q9 | 5.94 | SG3413Q9 | 7.30 | RDL3067Q9 | 8.11 |
| freq2734Q9 | 4.87 | SG2756Q9 | 5.85 | ||
| freq2237Q9 | 4.09 | SG2226Q9 | 4.47 | RDL2000Q9 | 4.52 |
| freq3951Q20 | 7.26 | ||||
| freq3073Q20 | 6.05 | ||||
| freq2514Q20 | 4.91 |
sensitivity better by 10-30%, but results are difficult to compare