Details
| Originalsprache | Englisch |
|---|---|
| Aufsatznummer | 041014 |
| Fachzeitschrift | Physical Review X |
| Jahrgang | 6 |
| Ausgabenummer | 4 |
| Publikationsstatus | Veröffentlicht - 4 Juni 2016 |
Abstract
This paper presents updated estimates of source parameters for GW150914, a binary black-hole coalescence event detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) in 2015 [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016).]. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] presented parameter estimation of the source using a 13-dimensional, phenomenological precessing-spin model (precessing IMRPhenom) and an 11-dimensional nonprecessing effective-one body (EOB) model calibrated to numerical-relativity simulations, which forces spin alignment (nonprecessing EOBNR). Here, we present new results that include a 15-dimensional precessingspin waveform model (precessing EOBNR) developed within the EOB formalism. We find good agreement with the parameters estimated previously [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).], and we quote updated component masses of 35 +5 -3 M· and 30 +5 -3 M· (where errors correspond to 90% symmetric credible intervals). We also present slightly tighter constraints on the dimensionless spin magnitudes of the two black holes, with a primary spin estimate < 0.65 and a secondary spin estimate < 0.75 at 90% probability. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] estimated the systematic parameter-extraction errors due to waveform-model uncertainty by combining the posterior probability densities of precessing IMRPhenom and nonprecessing EOBNR. Here, we find that the two precessing-spin models are in closer agreement, suggesting that these systematic errors are smaller than previously quoted.
ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete
Zitieren
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTex
- RIS
in: Physical Review X, Jahrgang 6, Nr. 4, 041014, 04.06.2016.
Publikation: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift › Artikel › Forschung › Peer-Review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Improved analysis of GW150914 using a fully spin-precessing waveform model
AU - The LIGO Scientific Collaboration
AU - The Virgo Collaboration
AU - Abbott, B. P.
AU - Abbott, R.
AU - Abbott, T. D.
AU - Abernathy, M. R.
AU - Acernese, F.
AU - Ackley, K.
AU - Adams, C.
AU - Adams, T.
AU - Addesso, P.
AU - Adhikari, R. X.
AU - Adya, V. B.
AU - Affeldt, C.
AU - Agathos, M.
AU - Agatsuma, K.
AU - Aggarwal, N.
AU - Aguiar, O. D.
AU - Aiello, L.
AU - Ain, A.
AU - Ajith, P.
AU - Allen, Bruce
AU - Allocca, A.
AU - Altin, P. A.
AU - Bose, S.
AU - Brown, D. A.
AU - Chen, Y.
AU - Danilishin, S. L.
AU - Danzmann, Karl
AU - Hanke, M. M.
AU - Hennig, J.
AU - Heurs, Michele
AU - Lee, H. K.
AU - Lück, Harald
AU - Nguyen, T. T.
AU - Schmidt, J.
AU - Schmidt, P.
AU - Shaltev, M.
AU - Steinmeyer, Daniel
AU - Sun, L.
AU - Vahlbruch, Henning Fedor Cornelius
AU - Wang, M.
AU - Wang, X.
AU - Wang, Y.
AU - Wei, L. W.
AU - Willke, Benno
AU - Wittel, Holger
AU - Zhang, L.
AU - Zhang, Y.
AU - Zhou, M.
AU - Aufmuth, Peter
AU - Bisht, A.
AU - Kaufer, Stefan
AU - Krüger, Christian
AU - Lough, J. D.
AU - Sawadsky, A.
AU - Singh Mehra, Aditya
N1 - Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/6/4
Y1 - 2016/6/4
N2 - This paper presents updated estimates of source parameters for GW150914, a binary black-hole coalescence event detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) in 2015 [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016).]. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] presented parameter estimation of the source using a 13-dimensional, phenomenological precessing-spin model (precessing IMRPhenom) and an 11-dimensional nonprecessing effective-one body (EOB) model calibrated to numerical-relativity simulations, which forces spin alignment (nonprecessing EOBNR). Here, we present new results that include a 15-dimensional precessingspin waveform model (precessing EOBNR) developed within the EOB formalism. We find good agreement with the parameters estimated previously [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).], and we quote updated component masses of 35 +5 -3 M· and 30 +5 -3 M· (where errors correspond to 90% symmetric credible intervals). We also present slightly tighter constraints on the dimensionless spin magnitudes of the two black holes, with a primary spin estimate < 0.65 and a secondary spin estimate < 0.75 at 90% probability. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] estimated the systematic parameter-extraction errors due to waveform-model uncertainty by combining the posterior probability densities of precessing IMRPhenom and nonprecessing EOBNR. Here, we find that the two precessing-spin models are in closer agreement, suggesting that these systematic errors are smaller than previously quoted.
AB - This paper presents updated estimates of source parameters for GW150914, a binary black-hole coalescence event detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) in 2015 [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016).]. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] presented parameter estimation of the source using a 13-dimensional, phenomenological precessing-spin model (precessing IMRPhenom) and an 11-dimensional nonprecessing effective-one body (EOB) model calibrated to numerical-relativity simulations, which forces spin alignment (nonprecessing EOBNR). Here, we present new results that include a 15-dimensional precessingspin waveform model (precessing EOBNR) developed within the EOB formalism. We find good agreement with the parameters estimated previously [Abbott et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).], and we quote updated component masses of 35 +5 -3 M· and 30 +5 -3 M· (where errors correspond to 90% symmetric credible intervals). We also present slightly tighter constraints on the dimensionless spin magnitudes of the two black holes, with a primary spin estimate < 0.65 and a secondary spin estimate < 0.75 at 90% probability. Abbott et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 241102 (2016).] estimated the systematic parameter-extraction errors due to waveform-model uncertainty by combining the posterior probability densities of precessing IMRPhenom and nonprecessing EOBNR. Here, we find that the two precessing-spin models are in closer agreement, suggesting that these systematic errors are smaller than previously quoted.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995417589&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041014
DO - 10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041014
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84995417589
VL - 6
JO - Physical Review X
JF - Physical Review X
SN - 2160-3308
IS - 4
M1 - 041014
ER -