Paper detail

Setting confidence intervals in coincidence search analysis

The main technique that has been used to estimate the rate of gravitational wave (gw) bursts is to search for coincidence among times of arrival of candidate events in different detectors. Coincidences are modeled as a (possibly non-stationary) random time series background with gw events embedded in it, at random times but constant average rate. It is critical to test whether the statistics of the coincidence counts is Poisson, because the counts in a single detector often are not. At some point a number of parameters are tuned to increase the chance of detection by reducing the expected background: source direction, epoch vetoes based on sensitivity, goodness-of-fit thresholds, etc. Therefore, the significance of the confidence intervals itself has to be renormalized. This review is an insight of the state-of-the-art methods employed in the recent search performed by the International Gravitational Event Collaboration for the worldwide network of resonant bar detectors.

preprint2003arXivOpen 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.