Assessing the model waveform accuracy of gravitational waves

With the improvement in sensitivity of gravitational wave (GW) detectors and the increasing diversity of GW sources, there is a strong need for accurate GW waveform models for data analysis. While the current model accuracy assessments require waveforms generated by numerical relativity (NR) simulations as the “true waveforms”, in this paper we propose a new assessment approach that does not require NR simulations, which enables us to assess model accuracy everywhere in the parameter space. By measuring the difference between two waveform models, we derive a necessary condition for a pair of waveform models to both be accurate, for a particular set of parameters. We then apply this method to the parameter estimation samples of the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalogs GWTC-3 and GWTC-2.1, and find that the waveform accuracy for high signal-to-noise ratio events in some cases fails our assessment criterion. Based on analysis of real events’ posterior samples, we discuss the correlation between our quantified accuracy assessments and systematic errors in parameter estimation. We find waveform models that perform worse in our assessment are more likely to give inconsistent estimations. We also investigate waveform accuracy in different parameter regions, and find the accuracy degrades as the spin effects go up or the mass ratio deviates from one. Furthermore, we make predictions of waveform accuracy requirements for future detectors and find the accuracy of current waveform models should be improved by at least 3 orders of magnitude, which is consistent with previous works. Finally, we discuss some potential applications of our method on constraining physical theories and future waveform modelling.

[1]  Measurement of general-relativistic precession in a black-hole binary , 2021, 2112.11300.

[2]  M. Coughlin,et al.  Quantifying modeling uncertainties when combining multiple gravitational-wave detections from binary neutron star sources , 2021, Physical Review D.

[3]  P. K. Panda,et al.  GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the Second Part of the Third Observing Run , 2021, 2111.03606.

[4]  P. K. Panda,et al.  Population of Merging Compact Binaries Inferred Using Gravitational Waves through GWTC-3 , 2021, Physical Review X.

[5]  M. J. Williams,et al.  GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run , 2021, Physical Review D.

[6]  M. J. Williams,et al.  Observation of Gravitational Waves from Two Neutron Star–Black Hole Coalescences , 2021 .

[7]  S. Biscoveanu,et al.  Measuring the spins of heavy binary black holes , 2021, Physical Review D.

[8]  Marlin B. Schäfer,et al.  3-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact-binary Mergers , 2021, The Astrophysical Journal.

[9]  M. Melamed Detection , 2021, SETI: Astronomy as a Contact Sport.

[10]  M. J. Williams,et al.  GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First Half of the Third Observing Run , 2021 .

[11]  D. Shoemaker,et al.  Assessing the readiness of numerical relativity for LISA and 3G detectors , 2020, Physical Review D.

[12]  D. Keitel,et al.  Computationally efficient models for the dominant and subdominant harmonic modes of precessing binary black holes , 2020, Physical Review D.

[13]  B. Zackay,et al.  Detecting gravitational waves with disparate detector responses: Two new binary black hole mergers , 2019, Physical Review D.

[14]  Arpan Bhattacharyya,et al.  The prospect of distinguishing astrophysical objects with LISA , 2021 .

[15]  A. Z. Jan,et al.  Assessing and marginalizing over compact binary coalescence waveform systematics with RIFT , 2020, Physical Review D.

[16]  D. Keitel,et al.  Towards the routine use of subdominant harmonics in gravitational-wave inference: Reanalysis of GW190412 with generation X waveform models , 2020, 2010.05830.

[17]  B. A. Boom,et al.  Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA , 2020, Living reviews in relativity.

[18]  M. Agathos,et al.  Waveform systematics in the gravitational-wave inference of tidal parameters and equation of state from binary neutron-star signals , 2020, 2009.08467.

[19]  P. K. Panda,et al.  GW190521: A Binary Black Hole Merger with a Total Mass of 150  M_{⊙}. , 2020, Physical review letters.

[20]  P. B. Covas,et al.  Characterization of systematic error in Advanced LIGO calibration , 2020, Classical and Quantum Gravity.

[21]  Lawrence E. Kidder,et al.  Multipolar effective-one-body waveforms for precessing binary black holes: Construction and validation , 2020, Physical Review D.

[22]  P. K. Panda,et al.  GW190412: Observation of a binary-black-hole coalescence with asymmetric masses , 2020 .

[23]  A. Nagar,et al.  Faithful analytical effective-one-body waveform model for spin-aligned, moderately eccentric, coalescing black hole binaries , 2020, 2001.11736.

[24]  M. Colleoni,et al.  Setting the cornerstone for a family of models for gravitational waves from compact binaries: The dominant harmonic for nonprecessing quasicircular black holes , 2020, 2001.11412.

[25]  M. Colleoni,et al.  Multimode frequency-domain model for the gravitational wave signal from nonprecessing black-hole binaries , 2020, 2001.10914.

[26]  G. Pratten,et al.  Multipolar effective one body waveform model for spin-aligned black hole binaries , 2020, 2001.09082.

[27]  A. Lundgren,et al.  2-OGC: Open Gravitational-wave Catalog of Binary Mergers from Analysis of Public Advanced LIGO and Virgo Data , 2019, The Astrophysical Journal.

[28]  S. Fairhurst,et al.  Two-harmonic approximation for gravitational waveforms from precessing binaries , 2019, Physical Review D.

[29]  G. Pratten,et al.  Multipolar effective one body model for nonspinning black hole binaries , 2019, Physical Review D.

[30]  B. Zackay,et al.  New binary black hole mergers in the second observing run of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo , 2019, Physical Review D.

[31]  J. Gair,et al.  Precessing numerical relativity waveform surrogate model for binary black holes: A Gaussian process regression approach , 2019, Physical Review D.

[32]  M. Pürrer,et al.  Gravitational waveform accuracy requirements for future ground-based detectors , 2019, Physical Review Research.

[33]  Scott E. Field,et al.  Surrogate models for precessing binary black hole simulations with unequal masses , 2019, Physical Review Research.

[34]  A. Samajdar,et al.  Improving the NRTidal model for binary neutron star systems , 2019, Physical Review D.

[35]  Michael Boyle,et al.  The SXS collaboration catalog of binary black hole simulations , 2019, Classical and Quantum Gravity.

[36]  B. Zackay,et al.  New search pipeline for compact binary mergers: Results for binary black holes in the first observing run of Advanced LIGO , 2019, Physical Review D.

[37]  B. Zackay,et al.  Highly spinning and aligned binary black hole merger in the Advanced LIGO first observing run , 2019, Physical Review D.

[38]  B. A. Boom,et al.  GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs , 2018 .

[39]  Alexander H. Nitz,et al.  1-OGC: The First Open Gravitational-wave Catalog of Binary Mergers from Analysis of Public Advanced LIGO Data , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[40]  P. Lasky,et al.  Bilby: A User-friendly Bayesian Inference Library for Gravitational-wave Astronomy , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series.

[41]  Duncan A. Brown,et al.  PyCBC Inference: A Python-based Parameter Estimation Toolkit for Compact Binary Coalescence Signals , 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific.

[42]  B. A. Boom,et al.  Properties of the Binary Neutron Star Merger GW170817 , 2019 .

[43]  Thibault Damour,et al.  Time-domain effective-one-body gravitational waveforms for coalescing compact binaries with nonprecessing spins, tides, and self-spin effects , 2018, Physical Review D.

[44]  Andrea Taracchini,et al.  Enriching the symphony of gravitational waves from binary black holes by tuning higher harmonics , 2018, Physical Review D.

[45]  B. A. Boom,et al.  Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA , 2013, Living Reviews in Relativity.

[46]  U. Toronto,et al.  Systematic challenges for future gravitational wave measurements of precessing binary black holes , 2017, 1709.03095.

[47]  P. Ajith,et al.  Effects of nonquadrupole modes in the detection and parameter estimation of black hole binaries with nonprecessing spins , 2016, 1612.05608.

[48]  Michael Boyle,et al.  Improved effective-one-body model of spinning, nonprecessing binary black holes for the era of gravitational-wave astrophysics with advanced detectors , 2016, 1611.03703.

[49]  Karan Jani,et al.  Georgia tech catalog of gravitational waveforms , 2016, 1605.03204.

[50]  Michael Boyle,et al.  Accuracy of binary black hole waveform models for aligned-spin binaries , 2016, 1601.05396.

[51]  Michael Purrer,et al.  Frequency-domain gravitational waves from nonprecessing black-hole binaries. II. A phenomenological model for the advanced detector era , 2015, 1508.07253.

[52]  B. Lackey,et al.  Aligned spin neutron star-black hole mergers: A gravitational waveform amplitude model , 2015, 1509.00512.

[53]  Lawrence E. Kidder,et al.  Approaching the Post-Newtonian Regime with Numerical Relativity: A Compact-Object Binary Simulation Spanning 350 Gravitational-Wave Cycles. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[54]  P. Graff,et al.  Parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the LALInference software library , 2014, 1409.7215.

[55]  S. Klimenko,et al.  Advanced LIGO , 2014, 1411.4547.

[56]  Scott E. Field,et al.  Fast and Accurate Prediction of Numerical Relativity Waveforms from Binary Black Hole Coalescences Using Surrogate Models , 2015 .

[57]  C. Broeck,et al.  Advanced Virgo: a second-generation interferometric gravitational wave detector , 2014, 1408.3978.

[58]  V. Raymond,et al.  Measuring the spin of black holes in binary systems using gravitational waves. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[59]  M. Purrer Frequency domain reduced order models for gravitational waves from aligned-spin compact binaries , 2014, 1402.4146.

[60]  Yi Pan,et al.  Inspiral-merger-ringdown waveforms of spinning, precessing black-hole binaries in the effective-one-body formalism , 2013, 1307.6232.

[61]  Luc Blanchet,et al.  Gravitational Radiation from Post-Newtonian Sources and Inspiralling Compact Binaries , 2002, Living reviews in relativity.

[62]  F. Barone,et al.  Advanced Virgo: a 2nd generation interferometric gravitational wave detector , 2014 .

[63]  Jan S. Hesthaven,et al.  Fast prediction and evaluation of gravitational waveforms using surrogate models , 2013, ArXiv.

[64]  Michael Boyle,et al.  Catalog of 174 binary black hole simulations for gravitational wave astronomy. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[65]  Bruce Allen,et al.  FINDCHIRP: an algorithm for detection of gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries , 2005, gr-qc/0509116.

[66]  W. Marsden I and J , 2012 .

[67]  T. Damour,et al.  Accuracy and effectualness of closed-form, frequency-domain waveforms for nonspinning black hole binaries , 2010, 1009.5998.

[68]  P. Ajith,et al.  Matching post-Newtonian and numerical relativity waveforms: Systematic errors and a new phenomenological model for nonprecessing black hole binaries , 2010, 1005.3306.

[69]  S. McWilliams,et al.  Observing mergers of non-spinning black-hole binaries , 2010, 1004.0961.

[70]  Vitor Cardoso,et al.  Quasinormal modes of black holes and black branes , 2009, 0905.2975.

[71]  Duncan A. Brown,et al.  Model waveform accuracy standards for gravitational wave data analysis , 2008, 0809.3844.

[72]  M. Vallisneri,et al.  LISA detections of massive black hole inspirals: Parameter extraction errors due to inaccurate template waveforms , 2007, 0707.2982.

[73]  P. Ajith,et al.  A phenomenological template family for black-hole coalescence waveforms , 2007, 0704.3764.

[74]  Thibault Damour,et al.  Coalescence of two spinning black holes: an effective one-body approach , 2001, gr-qc/0103018.

[75]  T. Damour,et al.  Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynamics , 1998, gr-qc/9811091.

[76]  B. Schutz,et al.  Data analysis of gravitational-wave signals from spinning neutron stars. I. The signal and its detection , 1998, gr-qc/9804014.

[77]  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.

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

[79]  R. Stephenson A and V , 1962, The British journal of ophthalmology.