Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914

B. P. Abbott, N.A. Lockerbie, K.V. Tokmakov, LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Citations (Scopus)
16 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations. © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd.
Original languageEnglish
Article number104002
Number of pages49
JournalClassical and Quantum Gravity
Volume34
Issue number10
Early online date12 Apr 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 May 2017

Fingerprint

waveforms
systematic errors
eccentricity
Einstein equations
estimates
configurations
inference
phenomenology
mass ratios
complement
gravitational waves
coalescing
availability
signal to noise ratios
simulation
recovery
harmonics
orbitals
detectors
polarization

Keywords

  • waveform models
  • GW150914
  • gravitational waves

Cite this

Abbott, B. P., Lockerbie, N. A., Tokmakov, K. V., & LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration (2017). Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 34(10), [104002]. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854
Abbott, B. P. ; Lockerbie, N.A. ; Tokmakov, K.V. ; LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration. / Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914. In: Classical and Quantum Gravity. 2017 ; Vol. 34, No. 10.
@article{664f0e17764049a7a6ef185d50e726ff,
title = "Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914",
abstract = "Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations. {\circledC} 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd.",
keywords = "waveform models, GW150914, gravitational waves",
author = "Abbott, {B. P.} and N.A. Lockerbie and K.V. Tokmakov and {LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration}",
note = "Please consult manuscript for full attribution details.",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
journal = "Classical and Quantum Gravity",
issn = "0264-9381",
number = "10",

}

Abbott, BP, Lockerbie, NA, Tokmakov, KV & LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration 2017, 'Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914', Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 34, no. 10, 104002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914. / Abbott, B. P.; Lockerbie, N.A.; Tokmakov, K.V.; LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration.

In: Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 34, No. 10, 104002, 18.05.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914

AU - Abbott, B. P.

AU - Lockerbie, N.A.

AU - Tokmakov, K.V.

AU - LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration

N1 - Please consult manuscript for full attribution details.

PY - 2017/5/18

Y1 - 2017/5/18

N2 - Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations. © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd.

AB - Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations. © 2017 IOP Publishing Ltd.

KW - waveform models

KW - GW150914

KW - gravitational waves

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85018959494&doi=10.1088%2f1361-6382%2faa6854&partnerID=40&md5=33cfa48a6944287a17b4d552e3d6ac57

U2 - 10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

DO - 10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

M3 - Article

VL - 34

JO - Classical and Quantum Gravity

JF - Classical and Quantum Gravity

SN - 0264-9381

IS - 10

M1 - 104002

ER -

Abbott BP, Lockerbie NA, Tokmakov KV, LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration. Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914. Classical and Quantum Gravity. 2017 May 18;34(10). 104002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854