2017/07/31 by S. J. Zhu, Sylvia J. Zhu, Maria Alessandra Papa +2 · 28 citations
Physics and Astronomy · #Acoustics #Artifact (error) #Artificial intelligence #Astronomy #Astrophysics #Computer science #Detector #Doppler effect #Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae #Gravitational wave #LIGO #Modulation (music) #Outlier #Physics #Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research #Radio Astronomy Observations and Technology #SIGNAL (programming language) #Telecommunications #Veto #astro-ph.IM #gr-qc
paper · pdf · doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.124007
published in Physical review. D/Physical review. D. 96(12) (American Physical Society) · 10 pages, 6 figures, 2 tables
arxiv created 2017/09/11 · openalex publication_date 2017/12/08 · arxiv updated 2017/12/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
We present a new veto procedure to distinguish between continuous gravitational wave (CW) signals and the detector artifacts that can mimic their behavior. The veto procedure exploits the fact that a long-lasting coherent disturbance is less likely than a real signal to exhibit a Doppler modulation of astrophysical origin. Therefore, in the presence of an outlier from a search, we perform a multistep search around the frequency of the outlier with the Doppler modulation turned off (DM-off), and compare these results with the results from the original (DM-on) search. If the results from the DM-off search are more significant than those from the DM-on search, the outlier is most likely due to an artifact rather than a signal. We tune the veto procedure so that it has a very low false dismissal rate. With this veto, we are able to identify as coherent disturbances >99.9% of the 6349 candidates from the recent all-sky low-frequency Einstein@Home search on the data from the Advanced LIGO O1 observing run [LIGO and Virgo Collaborations, Phys. Rev. D 96, 122004 (2017)]. We present the details of each identified disturbance in the Appendix.