Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

The Impact of Spin in Compact Binary Foreground Subtraction for Estimating the Residual Stochastic Gravitational-wave Background in Ground-based Detectors

Published 2 Jan 2024 in gr-qc and astro-ph.CO | (2401.00984v2)

Abstract: Stochastic gravitational-wave (GW) background (SGWB) contains information about the early Universe and astrophysical processes. The recent evidence of SGWB by pulsar timing arrays in the nanohertz band is a breakthrough in the GW astronomy. For ground-based GW detectors, while in data analysis, the SGWB can be masked by loud GW events from compact binary coalescences (CBCs). Assuming a next-generation ground-based GW detector network, we investigate the potential for detecting the astrophysical and cosmological SGWB with non-CBC origins by subtracting recovered foreground signals of loud CBC events. The Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) method is adopted for quick calculation. As an extension of the studies by Sachdev {\it et al.} (2020) and Zhou {\it et al.} (2023), two more essential features are considered. Firstly, we incorporate non-zero aligned or anti-aligned spin parameters in our waveform model. Because of the inclusion of spins, we obtain significantly more pessimistic results than the previous work, where the residual energy density of foreground is even larger than the original CBC foreground. For the most extreme case, we observe that the subtraction results are approximately 10 times worse for binary black hole events and 20 times worse for binary neutron star events than the scenarios without accounting for spins. The degeneracy between the spin parameters and the symmetric mass ratio is strong in the parameter estimation process, and it contributes most to the imperfect foreground subtraction. Secondly, in this work, extreme CBC events with condition numbers of FIMs $c_{\rm{\Gamma}}>10{15}$ are preserved. The impacts of these extreme events on foreground subtraction are discussed. Our results have important implications for assessing the detectability of SGWB from non-CBC origins for ground-based GW detectors.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (55)
  1. R. W. Hellings and G. S. Downs, Astrophys. J. Lett. 265, L39 (1983).
  2. G. Agazie et al. (NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L9 (2023a), arXiv:2306.16217 [astro-ph.HE] .
  3. G. Agazie et al. (NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L8 (2023b), arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE] .
  4. J. Antoniadis et al. (EPTA), Astron. Astrophys. 678, A48 (2023a), arXiv:2306.16224 [astro-ph.HE] .
  5. J. Antoniadis et al. (EPTA), Astron. Astrophys. 678, A49 (2023b), arXiv:2306.16225 [astro-ph.HE] .
  6. J. Antoniadis et al. (EPTA), Astron. Astrophys. 678, A50 (2023c), arXiv:2306.16214 [astro-ph.HE] .
  7. A. Zic et al., Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 40, e049 (2023), arXiv:2306.16230 [astro-ph.HE] .
  8. D. J. Reardon et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L6 (2023), arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE] .
  9. H. Xu et al., Res. Astron. Astrophys. 23, 075024 (2023), arXiv:2306.16216 [astro-ph.HE] .
  10. N. Christensen, Rept. Prog. Phys. 82, 016903 (2019), arXiv:1811.08797 [gr-qc] .
  11. M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 55, R435 (1997), arXiv:astro-ph/9607066 .
  12. T. Damour and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 71, 063510 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0410222 .
  13. S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin, JCAP 09, 022 (2008), arXiv:0806.1828 [hep-ph] .
  14. C. L. Fryer and K. C. B. New, Living Rev. Rel. 14, 1 (2011).
  15. C. Cutler and J. Harms, Phys. Rev. D 73, 042001 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0511092 .
  16. E. S. Phinney, e-prints  (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0108028 .
  17. P. A. Rosado, Phys. Rev. D 84, 084004 (2011), arXiv:1106.5795 [gr-qc] .
  18. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), Nature 460, 990 (2009), arXiv:0910.5772 [astro-ph.CO] .
  19. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019a), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE] .
  20. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. X 11, 021053 (2021b), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr-qc] .
  21. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), Phys. Rev. D 109, 022001 (2024), arXiv:2108.01045 [gr-qc] .
  22. M. Punturo et al., Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 194002 (2010).
  23. B. S. Sathyaprakash et al., Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 251 (2019), arXiv:1903.09221 [astro-ph.HE] .
  24. D. Reitze et al., Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 035 (2019), arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM] .
  25. V. Kalogera et al., e-prints  (2021), arXiv:2111.06990 [gr-qc] .
  26. S. Borhanian and B. S. Sathyaprakash, e-prints  (2022), arXiv:2202.11048 [gr-qc] .
  27. Z. Pan and H. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 107, 123036 (2023), arXiv:2301.04529 [gr-qc] .
  28. V. Kalogera, Astrophys. J. 541, 319 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9911417 .
  29. I. Mandel and R. O’Shaughnessy, Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 114007 (2010), arXiv:0912.1074 [astro-ph.HE] .
  30. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Astrophys. J. Lett. 913, L7 (2021c), arXiv:2010.14533 [astro-ph.HE] .
  31. D. Bhattacharya and E. P. J. van den Heuvel, Physics Reports 203, 1 (1991).
  32. X.-J. Zhu and G. Ashton, Astrophys. J. Lett. 902, L12 (2020), arXiv:2007.08198 [astro-ph.HE] .
  33. M. Vallisneri, Phys. Rev. D 77, 042001 (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/0703086 .
  34. S. Borhanian, Class. Quant. Grav. 38, 175014 (2021), arXiv:2010.15202 [gr-qc] .
  35. T. mpmath development team, mpmath: a Python library for arbitrary-precision floating-point arithmetic (version 1.3.0) (2023), http://mpmath.org/.
  36. E. Nakar, Phys. Rept. 442, 166 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0701748 .
  37. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 131102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03847 [gr-qc] .
  38. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 091101 (2018), arXiv:1710.05837 [gr-qc] .
  39. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Astrophys. J. Lett. 882, L24 (2019b), arXiv:1811.12940 [astro-ph.HE] .
  40. L. S. Finn, Phys. Rev. D 46, 5236 (1992), arXiv:gr-qc/9209010 .
  41. C. Cutler and E. E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev. D 49, 2658 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9402014 .
  42. J. Aasi et al. (LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), Phys. Rev. D 88, 062001 (2013), arXiv:1304.1775 [gr-qc] .
  43. J. Veitch et al., Phys. Rev. D 91, 042003 (2015), arXiv:1409.7215 [gr-qc] .
  44. C. P. L. Berry et al., Astrophys. J. 804, 114 (2015), arXiv:1411.6934 [astro-ph.HE] .
  45. B. Farr et al., Astrophys. J. 825, 116 (2016), arXiv:1508.05336 [astro-ph.HE] .
  46. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. D 102, 043015 (2020a), arXiv:2004.08342 [astro-ph.HE] .
  47. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Astrophys. J. Lett. 896, L44 (2020b), arXiv:2006.12611 [astro-ph.HE] .
  48. K. Chatziioannou et al., Phys. Rev. D 100, 104015 (2019), arXiv:1903.06742 [gr-qc] .
  49. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Astrophys. J. Lett. 900, L13 (2020c), arXiv:2009.01190 [astro-ph.HE] .
  50. V. Varma and P. Ajith, Phys. Rev. D 96, 124024 (2017), arXiv:1612.05608 [gr-qc] .
  51. C. Cutler and M. Vallisneri, Phys. Rev. D 76, 104018 (2007), arXiv:0707.2982 [gr-qc] .
  52. M. Pürrer and C.-J. Haster, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023151 (2020), arXiv:1912.10055 [gr-qc] .
  53. Q. Hu and J. Veitch, Astrophys. J. 945, 103 (2023), arXiv:2210.04769 [gr-qc] .
  54. T. Regimbau et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 122001 (2012), arXiv:1201.3563 [gr-qc] .
  55. P. Relton and V. Raymond, Phys. Rev. D 104, 084039 (2021), arXiv:2103.16225 [gr-qc] .
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate All Videos Subscribe on YouTube

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 1 like about this paper.

Sign Up for Free