Gravitational wave chirp search: Economization of post-Newtonian matched filter bank via cardinal interpolation

Physical Review D - Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology

Volumn 62, Issue 12, 2000, Pages 1-5

  Croce, R P ^a   Demma, Th ^a   Pierro, V ^b   Pinto, I M ^b   Churches, D ^c   Sathyaprakash, B S ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALERNO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SANNIO   (Italy)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85037198803     PISSN: 05562821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.62.121101     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. B.F. Schutz, Class. Quantum Grav. 16, A131 (1999).
2. C.W. Helström, Statistical Theory of Signal Detection (Pergamoh, Oxford, 1968).
3. B. Owen and B.S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D 60, 022002 (1999).
4. Under the given assumptions, the correlators obtained from the scalar product between the noisy data and the templates will be random Gaussian, with mean (1.1).
5. 1/2, which is the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), the equality holding is g∝h.
6. n(f) [7].
7. B. Owen, Phys. Rev. D 53, 6749 (1996).
8. C maximized) correlator in [10].
9. Given a signal and a template bank, the largest match is called the fitting factor of the bank to that signal [Th. Apostolatos, Phys. Rev. D 54, 2421 (1996)]. The minimal match is thus the least fitting-factor among all admissible signals.
10. R.P. Croce et al., Phys. Rev. D (to be published), grqc0005012.
11. 2 are the masses of the component stars.
12. This simplification [C. Cutler and E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev. D 49, 2658 (1994)] entails a negligible error in terms of the overlaps [C. Cutler et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2984 (1993)].
13. This simplification [C. Cutler and E. Flanagan, Phys. Rev. D 49, 2658 (1994)] entails a negligible error in terms of the overlaps [C. Cutler et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2984 (1993)].
14. T. Damour et al., Phys. Rev. D 57, 885 (1998).
15. L. Blanchet, T. Damour, B.R. Iyer, C.M. Will, and A. Wiseman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 3515 (1995); L. Blanchet, Phys. Rev. D 54, 1417 (1996).
16. L. Blanchet, T. Damour, B.R. Iyer, C.M. Will, and A. Wiseman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 3515 (1995); L. Blanchet, Phys. Rev. D 54, 1417 (1996).
17. n(f), without explicit reference to H̃(f).
18. L.S. Finn and D. Chernoff, Phys. Rev. D 47, 2198 (1993).
19. B.S. Sathyaprakash and S.V. Dhurandhar, Phys. Rev. D 44, 3819 (1991).
20. A thorough discussion of Eq. (2.4) has been developed by T. Damour et al., Phys. Rev. D 62, 084036 (2000).
21. f).
22. The coalescency time is formally defined as the time when the orbital frequency diverges to infinity. The adiabatic inspiral model, however, is only valid up to a last stable circular orbit [see A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 59, 084006 (1999)].
23. B.S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D 50, R7111 (1994).
24. 1=0, because of the absence of O(v/c) terms in the PN expansion.
25. C. Cutler and E. Flanagan, Phys, Rev. D 49, 2659 (1994).
26. 0-0.5 exceed those on the descending one.
27. *=(0.5,0.5).
28. T. Tanaka and H. Tagoshi, Phys. Rev. D 62, 082001 (2000).