LIGO I Science Run Barry Barish PAC Meeting - LHO December 13, 2000

1
LIGO IScience RunBarry BarishPAC Meeting -
LHODecember 13, 2000
2
The LIGO I Science RunData Computing Group
Operations Plan

• 9th Meeting of the LIGO PAC
• LIGO Livingston Observatory
• Livingston, Louisiana
• 13 December 2000
• Albert Lazzarini
• LIGO Laboratory Caltech

3
LIGO Plansschedule

• 1996 Construction Underway (mostly civil)
• 1997 Facility Construction (vacuum system)
• 1998 Interferometer Construction (complete
  facilities)
• 1999 Construction Complete (interferometers in
  vacuum)
• 2000 Detector Installation (commissioning
  subsystems)
• 2001 Commission Interferometers (first
  coincidences)
• 2002 Sensitivity studies (initiate LIGO I
  Science Run)
• 2003 LIGO I data run (one year integrated
  data at h 10-21)
• 2005 Begin advanced LIGO installation

4
Revised Schedule
As proposed to the NSF May 2000
5
Significant Events
6
Strain Sensitivity Nov 2000

• operating as a Michelson with Fabry-Perot arms
• reduced input laser power (about 100 mW)
• without recycling
• noise level is a factor of 104-105 above the
  final specification
• sources of excess noise are under investigation

2-km Hanford Interferometer
7
LIGO Isteps to science run

• commissioning interferometer
• robust locking
• three interferometers
• sensitivity
• duty cycle
• interleave engineering runs
• implement and test acquisition and analysis tools
• characterization and diagnostics studies
• reduced data sets
• merging data streams
• upper limits

8
LIGO/LSC Data Analysis Model

• Now
• Initial engineering runs starting to set the
  stage for how science, research is done
• Data being archived at Caltech in HPSS
• Access from archive according to LIGO Laboratory
  MOUs
• Stress testing of software and hardware systems
  - both LDAS and GDS/DAQS/CDS
• Initial data analyses focus on
• sorting out commissioning issues,
• understanding environment,
• Calibrations, data conditioning, pre-processing

9
LIGO/LSC Data Analysis Model

• Near-term (2Q2001)
• LIGO science will focus on using engineering runs
  to extract meaningful first upper limits
• Organized around 4 upper limits papers using 1
  week of data in 2Q2001
• Opportunity to set current best upper limits on
  these classes of sources
• Provides a basis to "exercise" the LSC data
  analysis groups
• Provides a basis for future organization of the
  LIGO I Science Run search teams
• groups will expand as interest grows in LIGO
  science.
• Problems
• LDAS readiness to support the engineering run
  goal
• Strategy is to limit scope primarily to LDAS
  supported goals

10
Astrophysical Signaturesdata analysis

• Compact binary inspiral chirps
• NS-NS waveforms are well described
• BH-BH need better waveforms
• search technique matched templates
• Supernovae / GRBs bursts
• burst search algorithms eg. excess power
  time-frequency patterns
• burst signals in coincidence with signals in
  electromagnetic radiation
• prompt alarm ( one hour) with neutrino detectors
• Pulsars in our galaxy periodic
• search for observed neutron stars (frequency,
  doppler shift)
• all sky search (computing challenge)
• r-modes
• Cosmological Signals stochastic background

11
LIGO/LSC Data Analysis Model

• LIGO I Science Run (2Q2002)
• Key astrophysical searches follow the LSC Data
  Analysis White Paper plan
• Organized around teams, as in near-term upper
  limit studies
• Open to all who are willing to work
• LIGO Lab LDAS resources to be used for searches
  will be shared among the teams
• LSC member institutional resources used by
  individual researchers
• Longer term establish 5 LIGO/LSC Tier 2 centers
  (University Research Centers or URCs) to
  provide additional computational, data
  distribution resources across collaboration

12
Inspiral Sources Co-chair Patrick
Brady, Gabriela Gonzalez ------------------------
------------------------------------------- Bruce
Allen ballen_at_gravity.phys.uwm.edu Sukanta
Bose bose_at_aei-potsdam.mpg.de Douglas
Boyd Douglas.Boyd_at_astro.cf.ac.uk Patrick
Brady patrick_at_gravity.phys.uwm.edu
Duncan Brown duncan_at_gravity.phys.uwm.edu
Jordan Camp camp_j_at_ligo.caltech.edu Nelson
Christensen nchriste_at_carleton.edu Jolien
Creighton jolien_at_gravity.phys.uwm.edu S.V.
Dhurander sdh_at_iucaa.ernet.in Gabriela
Gonzalez gig1_at_psu.edu Andri Gretarsson andri_at_suhe
p.phy.syr.edu Gregg Harry gharry_at_phy.syr.edu
Syd Meshkov meshkov_s_at_ligo.caltech.edu Tom
Prince prince_at_srl.caltech.edu David
Reitze reitze_at_phys.ufl.edu B.S.
Sathyaprakash B.Sathyaprakash_at_astro.cf.ac.uk Pete
r Shawhan shawhan_p_at_ligo.caltech.edu
Inspiral Sources
LSC Upper Limit Group
13
Interferometersastrophysical sources
Binary inspiral chirp signal
Sensitivity to coalescing binaries
2002
2007
Compact binary mergers
future
14
Interferometer Data40 m
Real interferometer data is UGLY!!! (Gliches -
known and unknown)
LOCKING
NORMAL
RINGING
ROCKING
15
The Problem
How much does real data degrade complicate the
data analysis and degrade the sensitivity ??
Test with real data by setting an upper limit on
galactic neutron star inspiral rate using 40 m
data
16
Clean up data stream
Effect of removing sinusoidal artifacts using
multi-taper methods
Non stationary noise Non gaussian tails
17
Inspiral Chirp Signal
Template Waveforms matched filtering 687
filters 44.8 hrs of data 39.9 hrs arms
locked 25.0 hrs good data sensitivity to our
galaxy h 3.5 10-19 mHz-1/2 expected rate
10-6/yr
18
Detection Efficiency

• Simulated inspiral events provide end to end
  test of analysis and simulation code for
  reconstruction efficiency
• Errors in distance measurements from presence of
  noise are consistent with SNR fluctuations

19
Setting a limit
Upper limit on event rate can be determined from
SNR of loudest event Limit on rate R lt
0.5/hour with 90 CL e 0.33 detection
efficiency An ideal detector would set a
limit R lt 0.16/hour
20

• Two Sites - Three Interferometers
• Single Interferometer non-gaussian level 50/hr
• Hanford (Doubles) correlated rate
  (x1000) 1/day
• Hanford Livingston uncorrelated
  (x5000) lt0.1/yr

Coincidences between LLO LHO
21
LSC Upper Limit Group
Burst Souces
Burst Sources Co-chair Sam Finn,
Peter Saulson -----------------------------------
------------------------ Warren
Anderson wganderson_at_utb1.utb.edu Barry
Barish barish_at_ligo.caltech.edu Biplab
Bhawal bbhawal_at_ligo.caltech.edu Jim
Brau jimbrau_at_faraday.uoregon.edu Eric
Black black_e_at_ligo.caltech.edu Kent
Blackburn blackburn_k_at_ligo.caltech.edu Ed
Daw daw_at_lsuligo.phys.lsu.edu Ronald
Drever rdrever_at_caltech.edu Sam
Finn finn_at_phys.psu.edu Ray Frey rayfrey_at_cosmic.
uoregon.edu Ken Ganezer ganezer_at_DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU
Joe Giaime giaime_at_lsuligo.
phys.lsu.edu Gabriela Gonzalez gig1_at_psu.edu And
ri Gretarsson andri_at_suhep.phy.syr.edu Bill
Hamilton hamilton_at_dave.phys.lsu.edu Warren
Johnson johnson_at_dave.phys.lsu.edu Masahiro
Ito S. Klimenko klimenko_at_phys.ufl.edu Al
Lazzarini lazz_at_ligo.caltech.edu Szabi
Marka marka_s_at_ligo.caltech.edu Genakh
Mitselmakher mitselmakher_at_phys.ufl.edu Soumya
Mohanty mohanty_at_aei-potsdam.mpg.de Benoit
Mours mours_b_at_ligo.caltech.edu Soma
Mukherjee soma_at_aei-potsdam.mpg.de Fred
Raab fjr_at_ligo.caltech.edu Ravha
Rahkola Peter Saulson saulson_at_ligo-la.caltech.
edu
22
Supernovae asymmetric collapse?

• pulsar proper motions
• Velocities -
• young SNR(pulsars?)
• gt 500 km/sec

23
LIGO Iscience run

• Strategy
• initiate science run when good coincidence data
  can be reliably taken and straightforward
  sensitivity improvements have been implemented (
  7/02)
• Then, interleave periods of science running with
  periods of sensitivity improvements
• Goals
• obtain 1 year of integrated data at h 10-21
• searches in coincidence with astronomical
  observations (eg. supernovae, gamma ray bursts)
• searches for known sources (eg. neutron stars)
• stand alone searches for compact binary
  coalescence, periodic sources, burst sources,
  stochastic background and unknown sources at h
  10-21 sensitivities
• Exploit science at h 10-21 before initiating
  advanced LIGO upgrades

24
LIGO/LSC Data Analysis Model

• Throughout Engineering Science Runs, the
  Laboratorys Data Computing Group fulfills the
  following roles
• LIGO science, data analysis scientific staff are
  actively engaged in the astrophysics searches
• Simulation Modeling detector support, data
  analysis
• Continuous management and movement of large
  volumes of data
• Maintaining pipeline analyses running, archive
  running
• Software maintenance/improvements/enhancements
• LSC support, visitors
• LIGO Laboratory-wide IT support

25
Data Computing Group Principal LDAS activities
during operations
26
Data Computing Group Principal Modeling
Simulationactivities during operations
27
Data Computing Group Principal General
Computingactivities during operations
28
LDAS OperationsStatistics derived from actual
experience
29
MIT, LHO, and LLO have local General Computing
staff
LHO, and LLO have local LDAS staff
30
Data and Computing Budget Breakdown
31
LDAS Operations BudgetHardware Support
32
Requested Increment - Operations
33
Conclusionsscience run

• Short term --
• implement LDAS
• 4 sites computing archiving
• engineering runs
• data handling and access, reduced data sets
• diagnostics characterize instrument and data
• algorithms statistics
• Longer Term
• LIGO Lab support for Science Run
• Support Required
• LDAS procurement and implementation
• incremental resources requested
• manpower
• maintenance and networking
• support of LSC