Paper detail

Performance of Random Template Banks

When searching for new gravitational-wave or electromagnetic sources, the $n$ signal parameters (masses, sky location, frequencies,...) are unknown. In practice, one hunts for signals at a discrete set of points in parameter space, called a template bank. These may be constructed systematically as a lattice, or alternatively, by placing templates at randomly selected points in parameter space. Here, we calculate the fraction of signals lost by an $n$-dimensional random template bank (compared to a very finely spaced bank). This fraction is compared to the corresponding loss fraction for the best possible lattice-based template banks containing the same number of grid points. For dimensions $n<4$ the lattice-based template banks significantly outperform the random ones. However, remarkably, for dimensions $n>8$, the difference is negligible. In high dimensions, random template banks outperform the best known lattices.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.