Personal tools
You are here: Home Virgo Data Analysis VESF DA Schools School Spring 2011 Meeting October 29th, 2010
Document Actions

Meeting October 29th, 2010

by Andrea Vicere last modified 2010-10-29 12:08

Agenda, some topics for discussion.

Tentative schedule


Possible format: Four and 1/2 days in a week of February

Attendance: expect about 20 students

Time constraints (TBC):
  • GWPAW (former GWDAW) on January 26th - 29th
  • Andrea has exams until February 5th
  • Nicolas needs to be in Paris on February 17th.
  • Check for Virgo week in February.
  • LSC-Virgo @ Arcadia on March 12th - 17th.

What about the week of February 21st? This is probably the one thing we need to decide rapidly in order to circulate the announcement.

Example:
  • Day 0 (monday). Registration and generalities.
    Morning arrival and registration. Students receiving credentials, getting their computer accounts.
    Afternoon: continue registration, tour of Virgo, introduction to the Virgo detector, its science and recent results.
  • Day 1 (tuesday) Noise and DQ (main actors E.Cuoco, D.Verkindt)
    Morning: introduction to noisy time series: autocorrelation function, spectral densities, TF, Wavelet analysis.
                Identification of glitches by correlation with auxiliary channels.
                Description of software tools for noise analysis.
    Afternoon: guided exercises on noise. Helped by checklists / questions to be answered.
                   Ideally, students become able to generate both statistics about stationary noise and a priori vetoes.
  • Day 2 (wednesday) Burst search (main actors N.Leroy, D.Verkindt)
    Morning: introduction to burst searches. Which sources we expect, which signals. How do we search for them.
                Description of one ETG for burst analysis.
                Effects of vetoes on burst searches, including a posteriori vetoes. Concepts like safety, efficiency, dead time. Checks using hardware injections.
    Afternoon: exercises on burst searches. Enable the students to generate event lists on data with a-priori vetoes applied. Have them clean with a-posteriori vetoes. If possible, let them check about veto safety.
  • Day 3 (thursday) Follow-up (main actors E.C.Mottin, M.Branchesi(?))
    Morning: introduction to EM follow-up by searching for transients. Generalities, techniques specific of optical (say) or radio.
    Afternoon: a case study with a few events. Define the area of interest, look at images, etc.
  • Day 4 (friday) Stochastic background (main actor G.Cella)
    Morning: motivation for SB searches. Generalities on sources and analysis techniques.
                Introduction to software tools to be used.
    Afternoon: exercises. Compute estimate of Omega from real noise data plus simulated SB, for instance.

Data


  • Ideally, a dataset homogeneous (from the point of view of noise) throughout the topics.
  • How much data? Few hours? One full day? More? We need to keep in mind that each student will be able to run an analysis on (say) one CPU, to be completed in a reasonable time (tens of minutes, not hours).
    Need one week for burst and DQ !! Better, two weeks, good and bad data.
  • Recent so that there is no need to apply new tools to too old data.
    VSR2?
    Pro: VDQ more recent, sensitivity nicer. Cons: probably impossible to get LSC and Virgo approval, since, several analysis unfinished, and most unpublished. Andrea check with MAB and MAP if possible.
    VSR1
    Most analyses completed, some published. Data could be time-shifted to secure against theft, and a network could be simulated using data at different epochs for different detectors. Need anyway to secure LSC and Virgo approval (not obvious). We have GW1 as playground, we need a second week with bad data. Nicolas and Didier check. Need to decide in time to pull data out of HPSS.
      Simulated 
    Difficult to simulate also auxiliary channels (nothing is impossible, but ...).  

Computing

  • As last year, each student carries her/his own laptop.
  • A personal account on EGO machines is provided to each of them. Standard Virgo software is accessible.
  • New software for follow up to be installed.
  • Shared areas are arranged for data to be used in the exercise. Probably possible, with appropriate group permissions, to prevent access to recent data. Anyway, last year experience didn't show any risk of intellectual theft.
  • Each student provided with a personal area for results and scratch areas.
  • The only critical issue seems to devise exercises which are not too CPU intensive.
  • Network was last year an issue; the wireless is too slow, but it was possible to provide a cable to each of them.