Gravitational waveform accuracy requirements for future ground-based detectors

By Michael Pürrer, C. Haster. Physical Review Research, 2019

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Future third generation (3G) ground-based GW detectors, such as the Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer, will have unprecedented sensitivities enabling studies of the entire population of stellar mass binary black hole coalescences in the Universe. To infer binary parameters from a GW signal we require accurate models of the gravitational waveform as a function of black hole masses, spins, etc. Such waveform models are built from numerical relativity (NR) simulations and/or semi-analytical expressions in the inspiral. We investigate the limits of the current waveform models and study at what detector sensitivity these models will yield unbiased parameter inference for loud ''golden'' binary black hole systems, what biases we can expect beyond these limits, and what implications such biases will have for GW astrophysics. For 3G detectors we find that the mismatch error for semi-analytical models needs to be reduced by at least \emph{three orders of magnitude} and for NR waveforms by \emph{one order of magnitude}. In addition, we show that for a population of one hundred high mass precessing binary black holes, measurement errors sum up to a sizable population bias, about 10 -- 30 times larger than the sum of 90\% credible intervals for key astrophysical parameters. Furthermore we demonstrate that the residual signal between the GW data recorded by a detector and the best fit template waveform obtained by parameter inference analyses can have significant SNR ratio. This coherent power left in the residual could lead to the observation of erroneous deviations from general relativity. To address these issues and be ready to reap the scientific benefits of 3G GW detectors in the 2030s, waveform models that are significantly more physically complete and accurate need to be developed in the next decade along with major advances in efficiency and accuracy of NR codes.

Subfields: Aerospace Engineering, Astronomy and Astrophysics, Oceanography

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/191d3e55d511fde26ffc32ba4491c54a2da48458

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aerospace Engineering

  1. M. Colpi
  2. E. A. Huerta
  3. D. Holz
  4. Daniel George
  5. Javier Mauricio Antelis
  6. Paul M. Ricker
  7. Vicky Kalogera
  8. Barry C. Barish

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. Michela Mapelli
  2. D. Holz
  3. Mario Spera
  4. Maya Fishbach
  5. N. Giacobbo
  6. Ilya Mandel
  7. T. Bulik
  8. R. O’Shaughnessy

In Oceanography

  1. Rana X. Adhikari
  2. B. Sathyaprakash
  3. E. Thrane
  4. Simon Stevenson
  5. C. Berry
  6. P. Lasky
  7. K. Chatziioannou
  8. P. Jaranowski

Citations in the corpus