I have made an updated noise budget using the Cal Delta L trace. Currently, there is no channel with online cleaning implemented, although that is a work in progress. We can use this noise budget and the traces to estimate how much more sensitivity we might gain when the cleaning is applied. Also, The current cal delta L trace is calibrated, so no calibration"fudge" was required to make this budget.

I reran all injections for the ASC, LSC, Laser and Input Jitter budget. Kevin and Vicky have been working on the proper calculation of the quantum vacuum trace, and the quantum subbudget. This budget uses the "semiclassical" estimation, which may not be fully accurate. However, for these purposes, I think it is sufficient.

I purposefully removed the PUM DAC noise from this budget, as I am worried that the calculation may be inaccurate. Craig recently switched coil driver states to get a projection of our current PUM DAC noise (alog 68489). Craig states that this projection is 20 times lower than what the noisemons are telling us. I think it is best to leave out the DAC noise until we can determine what is correct.

Subbudgets:

• LSC: we are currently limited the most by MICH noise
• ASC: we are currently limited the most by CHARD P
• Laser noise: At low frequency, the jitter and frequency noise are comprable, at the mid range we are limited the most by jitter
• Input Jitter: the largest contribution seems to be in yaw

Overall, compared to the 60W noise budget (alog 68382), the noise traces are about the same. That budget showed us limited by MICH (if you ignore PUM DAC), and limited by jitter. The high frequency laser noise has improved. The ASC budget has improved. We are still limited by unknown noise in the mid range.

I will follow up with a comparison of the NB traces at 60W and 76W. I think if we can subtract the jitter noise, especially in the bucket, the comparison will show us improved sensitivity in the region when operating at higher power.