arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2503.08050gr-qcastro-ph.IM

使用 BayesWave 算法对引力波爆张量偏振的多探测器表征

Multi-detector characterization of gravitational-wave burst tensor polarizations with the BayesWave algorithm

Yi Shuen C. Lee, Siddhant Doshi, Margaret Millhouse, Andrew Melatos

AI总结:

本文使用 BayesWave 算法对比了椭圆和松弛两种张量偏振模型,发现对于多数事件前者因简单而占优,但在高进动多探测器场景下后者更具优势,且能测量通用偏振内容。

摘要:

爱因斯坦的广义相对论预测引力波(GWs)是张量偏振的,具有两种偏振模式:plus($h_+$)和 cross($h_\ imes$)。无模板的 GW 爆发分析流水线 BayesWave 提供了两种张量偏振信号模型:椭圆偏振模型($E$)和松弛偏振模型($R$)。全球 GW 探测器网络的未来扩展将使得利用 GW 爆发对 GW 偏振进行更准确的研究成为可能。本文进行了多探测器分析,以比较 $E$ 和 $R$ 在表征椭圆和非椭圆 GW 偏振方面的性能,分别使用非进动和进动的双黑洞(BBHs)作为代表性合成源。研究发现,两个模型都能准确重建椭圆非进动 BBH 信号,但由于 $E$ 具有更少的模型参数,其贝叶斯证据高于 $R$。对于两个模型重建效果同样好的进动 BBHs 情况也是如此。然而,对于一些具有高进动且特别是有三个或更多探测器的事件,$R$ 的重建精度和证据超过了 $E$。对第三次 LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA 观测运行的 BBH 事件重复了该分析,结果表明对于现有探测,$E$ 优于 $R$。尽管 $E$ 因其简单性而通常被优先选择,但它坚持椭圆偏振,而 $R$ 可以用 Stokes 参数测量通用的 GW 偏振内容。随着探测器网络的扩展,$R$ 恢复偏振内容的准确性得到提高,且其性能与 GW 信号形态无关。

英文摘要:

Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that gravitational waves (GWs) are tensor-polarized, with two modes of polarization: plus ($h_+$) and cross ($h_\times$). The unmodeled GW burst analysis pipeline, \textit{BayesWave}, offers two tensor-polarized signal models: the elliptical polarization model ($E$) and the relaxed polarization model ($R$). Future expansion of the global GW detector network will enable more accurate studies of GW polarizations with GW bursts. Here a multi-detector analysis is conducted to compare the performance of $E$ and $R$ in characterizing elliptical and nonelliptical GW polarizations, using nonprecessing and precessing binary black holes (BBHs) respectively as representative synthetic sources. It is found that both models reconstruct the elliptical nonprecessing BBH signals accurately, but $E$ has a higher Bayesian evidence than $R$ as it is has fewer model parameters. The same is true for precessing BBHs that are reconstructed equally well by both models. However, for some events with high precession and especially with three or more detectors, the reconstruction accuracy and evidence of $R$ surpass $E$. The analysis is repeated for BBH events from the third LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, and the results show that $E$ is preferred over $R$ for existing detections. Although $E$ is generally preferred for its simplicity, it insists on elliptical polarizations, whereas $R$ can measure generic GW polarization content in terms of Stokes parameters. The accuracy of $R$ in recovering polarization content improves as the detector network expands, and the performance is independent of the GW signal morphology.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑