Use and abuse of the Fisher information matrix in the assessment of gravitational-wave parameter-estimation prospects

The Fishermatrix formalism is used routinely in the literature on gravitational-wave detection to characterize the parameter-estimation performance of gravitational-wave measurements, given parametrized models of the waveforms, and assuming detector noise of known colored Gaussian distribution. Unfortunately, the Fisher matrix can be a poor predictor of the amount of information obtained from typical observations, especially for waveforms with several parameters and relatively low expected signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), or for waveforms depending weakly on one or more parameters, when their priors are not taken into proper consideration. In this paper I discuss these pitfalls; show how they occur, even for relatively strong signals, with a commonly used template family for binary-inspiral waveforms; and describe practical recipes to recognize them and cope with them. Specifically, I answer the following questions: (i) What is the significance of (quasi-)singular Fisher matrices, and how must we deal with them? (ii) When is it necessary to take into account prior probability distributions for the source parameters? (iii) When is the signal-to-noise ratio high enough to believe the Fisher-matrix result? In addition, I provide general expressions for the higher-order, beyond-Fisher-matrix terms in the 1/SNR expansions for the expected parameter accuracies.

[1]  D. Perepelitsa,et al.  Path integrals in quantum mechanics , 2013 .

[2]  T. Hughes,et al.  Signals and systems , 2006, Genome Biology.

[3]  B. Iyer,et al.  Erratum: Parameter estimation of inspiralling compact binaries using 3.5 post-Newtonian gravitational wave phasing: The nonspinning case [Phys. Rev. D 71, 084008 (2005)] , 2005 .

[4]  B. Iyer,et al.  Parameter estimation of inspiralling compact binaries using 3.5 post-Newtonian gravitational wave phasing : The nonspinning case , 2004, gr-qc/0411146.

[5]  Albert Tarantola,et al.  Inverse problem theory - and methods for model parameter estimation , 2004 .

[6]  T. Damour,et al.  Gravitational radiation from inspiralling compact binaries completed at the third post-Newtonian order. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[7]  N. Christensen,et al.  Metropolis-Hastings algorithm for extracting periodic gravitational wave signals from laser interferometric detector data , 2004, gr-qc/0402038.

[8]  M. Tribus,et al.  Probability theory: the logic of science , 2003 .

[9]  N. Makris,et al.  Necessary conditions for a maximum likelihood estimate to become asymptotically unbiased and attain the Cramer-Rao lower bound. II. Range and depth localization of a sound source in an ocean waveguide. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  T. Damour,et al.  Comparison of search templates for gravitational waves from binary inspiral: 3.5PN update , 2002, gr-qc/0207021.

[11]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical recipes in C , 2002 .

[12]  Kevin Barraclough,et al.  I and i , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  N. Makris,et al.  Necessary conditions for a maximum likelihood estimate to become asymptotically unbiased and attain the Cramer-Rao lower bound. Part I. General approach with an application to time-delay and Doppler shift estimation. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  T. Damour,et al.  A Comparison of search templates for gravitational waves from binary inspiral , 2000, gr-qc/0010009.

[15]  A. Rukhin.  Matrix Variate Distributions , 1999, The Multivariate Normal Distribution.

[16]  Nelson Christensen,et al.  Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for Bayesian gravitational radiation data analysis , 1998 .

[17]  A. Vecchio,et al.  Bayesian bounds on parameter extraction accuracy for compact coalescing binary gravitational wave signals , 1997, gr-qc/9705064.

[18]  Gene H. Golub,et al.  Matrix computations (3rd ed.) , 1996 .

[19]  Balasubramanian,et al.  Erratum: Gravitational waves from coalescing binaries: Detection strategies and Monte Carlo estimation of parameters , 1996, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[20]  C. Will,et al.  Gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries: Parameter estimation using second-post-Newtonian waveforms. , 1995, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[21]  Leonard Parker,et al.  MathTensor - a system for doing Tensor analysis by computer , 1994 .

[22]  Flanagan,et al.  Gravitational waves from merging compact binaries: How accurately can one extract the binary's parameters from the inspiral waveform? , 1994, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[23]  D. Cox,et al.  Inference and Asymptotics , 1994 .

[24]  S. Kay.  Fundamentals of statistical signal processing: estimation theory , 1993 .

[25]  Wiseman,et al.  Spin effects in the inspiral of coalescing compact binaries. , 1992, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[26]  Finn,et al.  Detection, measurement, and gravitational radiation. , 1992, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[27]  Joshua R. Smith,et al.  LIGO: the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory , 1992, Science.

[28]  E. T. Jaynes,et al.  Probability Theory as Logic , 1990 .

[29]  Marvin H. J. Guber.  Bayesian Spectrum Analysis and Parameter Estimation , 1988 .

[30]  G. Larry Bretthorst,et al.  Excerpts from Bayesian Spectrum Analysis and Parameter Estimation , 1988 .

[31]  W. K. Hastings,et al.  Monte Carlo Sampling Methods Using Markov Chains and Their Applications , 1970 .

[32]  Albert A. Mullin,et al.  Extraction of signals from noise , 1970 .

[33]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.