Understanding the LIGO GW150914 event

@article{Naselsky2016UnderstandingTL,
  title={Understanding the LIGO GW150914 event},
  author={Pavel D. Naselsky and Andrew D. Jackson and Hao Liu},
  journal={Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics},
  year={2016},
  volume={2016},
  pages={029 - 029}
}
We present a simplified method for the extraction of meaningful signals from Hanford and Livingston 32 second data for the GW150914 event made publicly available by the LIGO collaboration, and demonstrate its ability to reproduce the LIGO collaboration's own results quantitatively given the assumption that all narrow peaks in the power spectrum are a consequence of physically uninteresting signals and can be removed. After the clipping of these peaks and return to the time domain, the GW150914… 

On the time lags of the LIGO signals

To date, the LIGO collaboration has detected three gravitational wave (GW) events appearing in both its Hanford and Livingston detectors. In this article we reexamine the LIGO data with regard to

On signal estimation and detection in LIGO signals

. This article analyzes the data for the first three gravitational wave (GW) events detected in both Hanford (H1) and Livingston (L1) detectors by the LIGO collaboration, from the viewpoint of signal

On the Signal Processing Operations in LIGO signals

TLDR
This article analyzes the data for the five gravitational wave (GW) events detected in Hanford(H1), Livingston(L1) and Virgo(V1) detectors by the LIGO collaboration to show very weak signals whose amplitude does not rise significantly during the GW event, and they are indistinguishable from non-stationary detector noise.

Looking for ancillary signals around GW150914

We replicated the procedure in Liu and Jackson [1], who had found evidence for a low amplitude signal in the vicinity of GW150914. This was based upon the large correlation between the time integral

Investigating the noise residuals around the gravitational wave event GW150914

We use the Pearson cross-correlation statistic proposed by Liu and Jackson [1], and employed by Creswell et al. [2], to look for statistically significant correlations between the LIGO Hanford and

Possible associated signal with GW150914 in the LIGO data

We present a simple method for the identification of weak signals associated with gravitational wave events. Its application reveals a signal with the same time lag as the GW150914 event in the

On signal detection and interference rejection in LIGO signals

This article analyzes from the viewpoint of signal detection and interference rejection, the data for the first three gravitational wave (GW) events detected in both Hanford (H1) and Livingston (L1)

An independent search of gravitational waves in the first observation run of advanced LIGO using cross-correlation

This work describes a template-free method to search gravitational waves (GW) using data from the LIGO observatories simultaneously. The basic idea of this method is that a GW signal is present in a

Convenient filtering techniques for LIGO strain of the GW150914 event

  • O. Moreschi
  • Physics
    Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics
  • 2019
We present a new strategy for the pre-processing filtering techniques of the LIGO strain of the GW150914 [1,2] event that intends to extract as much physical information as possible, minimizing the

Degeneracy of gravitational waveforms in the context of GW150914

We study the degeneracy of theoretical gravitational waveforms for binary black hole mergers using an aligned-spin effective-one-body model. After appropriate truncation, bandpassing, and matching,

References

SHOWING 1-9 OF 9 REFERENCES

GW151226: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a 22-Solar-Mass Binary Black Hole Coalescence.

TLDR
This second gravitational-wave observation provides improved constraints on stellar populations and on deviations from general relativity.

Observing gravitational-wave transient GW150914 with minimal assumptions

The gravitational-wave signal GW150914 was first identified on Sept 14 2015 by searches for short-duration gravitational-wave transients. These searches identify time-correlated transients in

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

Model-Based Cross-Correlation Search for Gravitational Waves from Scorpius X-1

of one hour, compared with a directed stochastic background search with 0.25-Hz-wide bins is about a factor of 5.4. We show that a search of one year of data from the Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo

Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger

On September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC the two detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory simultaneously observed a transient gravitational-wave signal. The signal sweeps

In this work, we use the strain time series centered at GPS 1126259462 with a 16384 Hz sampling rate and 32 and 4096 second length. An official tutorial about how to use the data is

    LIGO Open Science Center release of GW150914

    • 2016, DOI 10.7935/K5MW2F23. – 11 – Figure 9. From top to bottom: The A-D events of Fig. 8 (right panel) compared to the GW150914 event. H-H and L-L comparisons are shown in the left and right columns, respectively. – 12 – Figure 10. Comparison of the noise spectrum derived from the 4096 second ra
    • 1509

    Observing gravitational-wave transient GW150914 with minimal assumptions

    The gravitational-wave signal GW150914 was first identified on Sept 14 2015 by searches for short-duration gravitational-wave transients. These searches identify time-correlated transients in

    LIGO Open Science Center release of GW150914

    • 2016, DOI 10.7935/K5MW2F23. – 11 – Figure 9. From top to bottom: The A-D events of Fig. 8 (right panel) compared to the GW150914 event. H-H and L-L comparisons are shown in the left and right columns, respectively. – 12 – Figure 10. Comparison of the noise spectrum derived from the 4096 second raw d