christopher.biwer@LIGO.ORG - posted 13:53, Wednesday 23 September 2015 - last comment - 12:53, Friday 25 September 2015(21852)
single-IFO hardware injection tests at H1
L1 went out of lock. At H1 we turned off the intent bit and injected some hardware injections. The hardware injections were the same waveform that was injected on September 21. For more information about those injections see aLog entry 21759 For information about the waveform see aLog entry 21774. tinj was not used to do the injections.The commands to do the injections were: awgstream H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC 16384 H1-HWINJ_CBC-1126257410-12.txt 0.5 -d -d >> log2.txt awgstream H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC 16384 H1-HWINJ_CBC-1126257410-12.txt 1.0 -d -d >> log2.txt ezcawrite H1:CAL-INJ_TINJ_TYPE 1 awgstream H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC 16384 H1-HWINJ_CBC-1126257410-12.txt 1.0 -d -d >> log2.txt awgstream H1:CAL-INJ_TRANSIENT_EXC 16384 H1-HWINJ_CBC-1126257410-12.txt 1.0 -d -d >> log2.txt To my chagrin the first two injections were labeled as burst injections. Taken from the awgstream log the corresponding times are approximates of the injection time: 1127074640.002463000 1127074773.002417000 1127075235.002141000 1127075742.002100000 The expected SNR of the injection is ~18 without any scaling factor. I've attached omegascans of the injections. There is no sign of the "pre-glitch" that was seen on September 21.
Images attached to this report
Comments related to this report
Attached stdout of command line.
Non-image files attached to this comment
Neat! looks good.
Hi Chris, It looks like there is a 1s offset between the times you report and the rough coalescence time of the signal. Do you know if it is exactly 1s difference?
Yes, as John said, all of the end times of the waveforms are just about 1 second later that what's in the original post. I ran a version my simple bandpass-filtered overlay script for these waveforms. Filtering both the model (strain waveform injected into the system) and the data from 70-260 Hz, it overlays them, and also does a crude (non-optimal) matched filter to estimate the relative amplitude and time offset. The four plots attached are for the four injected signals; note that the first one was injected with a scale factor of 0.5 and is not "reconstructed" by my code very accurately. The others actually look rather good, with reasonably consistent amplitudes and time delays. Note that the sign of the signal came out correctly!
Images attached to this comment
Non-image files attached to this comment
I ran the daily BBH search with the injected template on the last two injections (1127075235 and 1127075742). For 1127075235; the recovered end time was 1127075235.986, the SNR was 20.42, the chi-squared was 29.17, and the newSNR was 19.19. For 1127075242; the recovered end time was 1127075242.986, the SNR was 20.04, the chi-squared was 35.07, and the newSNR was 19.19.
KW sees all the injections with the +1 sec delay, some of them in multiple frequency bands.
From
/gds-h1/dmt/triggers/H-KW_RHOFT/H-KW_RHOFT-11270/H-KW_RHOFT-1127074624-64.trg
/gds-h1/dmt/triggers/H-KW_RHOFT/H-KW_RHOFT-11270/H-KW_RHOFT-1127074752-64.trg
/gds-h1/dmt/triggers/H-KW_RHOFT/H-KW_RHOFT-11270/H-KW_RHOFT-1127075200-64.trg
/gds-h1/dmt/triggers/H-KW_RHOFT/H-KW_RHOFT-11270/H-KW_RHOFT-1127075712-64.trg
tcent fcent significance channel
1127074640.979948 146 26.34 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_32_2048
1127074774.015977 119 41.17 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_8_128
1127074773.978134 165 104.42 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_32_2048
1127075235.980545 199 136.82 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_32_2048
1127075743.018279 102 74.87 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_8_128
1127075742.982020 162 113.65 H1_GDS-CALIB_STRAIN_32_2048
Omicron also sees them with the same delay
From :
/home/reed.essick/Omicron/test/triggers/H-11270/H1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN/H1-GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_Omicron-1127074621-30.xml
/home/reed.essick/Omicron/test/triggers/H-11270/H1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN/H1-GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_Omicron-1127074771-30.xml
/home/reed.essick/Omicron/test/triggers/H-11270/H1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN/H1-GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_Omicron-1127075221-30.xml
/home/reed.essick/Omicron/test/triggers/H-11270/H1:GDS-CALIB_STRAIN/H1-GDS_CALIB_STRAIN_Omicron-1127075731-30.xml
peak time fcent snr
1127074640.977539062 88.77163 6.3716
1127074773.983397960 648.78342 11.41002 <- surprisingly high fcent, could be due to clustering
1127075235.981445074 181.39816 13.09279
1127075742.983397960 181.39816 12.39437
LIB single-IFO jobs also found all the events. Post-proc pages can be found here:
https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~reed.essick/O1/2015_09_23-HWINJ/1127074640.98-0/H1L1/H1/posplots.html
https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~reed.essick/O1/2015_09_23-HWINJ/1127074773.98-1/H1L1/H1/posplots.html
https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~reed.essick/O1/2015_09_23-HWINJ/1127075235.98-2/H1L1/H1/posplots.html
https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~reed.essick/O1/2015_09_23-HWINJ/1127075742.98-3/H1L1/H1/posplots.html
all runs appear to have reasonable posteriors.
Here is how Omicron detects these injections: https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~frobinet/scans/hd/1127074641/ https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~frobinet/scans/hd/1127074774/ https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~frobinet/scans/hd/1127075236/ https://ldas-jobs.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/~frobinet/scans/hd/1127075743/ Here are the parameters measured by Omicron (loudest tile): 1127074640: t=1127074640.981, f=119.9 Hz, SNR=6.7 1127074773: t=1127074773.981, f=135.3 Hz, SNR=11.8 1127075235: t=1127075235.981, f=114.9 Hz, SNR=12.8 1127075742: t=1127075742.981, f=135.3 Hz, SNR=12.4
The BayesWave single IFO (glitch only) analysis recovers these injections with the following SNRs: 4640: 8.65535 4773: 19.2185 5253: 20.5258 5742: 20.1666 The results are posted here: https://ldas-jobs.ligo.caltech.edu/~meg.millhouse/O1/CBC_hwinj/
Images attached to this comment
