Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 464

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Matched filtering of gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries: Computational cost and template placement

Open access
Owen, Benjamin J., Sathyaprakash, B. S.·1999·Physical Review D

Abstract

We estimate the number of templates, computational power, and storage required for a one-step matched filtering search for gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries. Our estimates for the one-step search strategy should serve as benchmarks for the evaluation of more sophisticated strategies such as hierarchical searches. We use a discrete family of two-parameter wave form templates based on the second post-Newtonian approximation for binaries composed of nonspinning compact bodies in circular orbits. We present estimates for all of the large- and mid-scale interferometers now under construction: LIGO (three configurations), VIRGO, GEO600, and TAMA. To search for binaries with components more massive than ${m}_{\mathrm{min}}{=0.2M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}$ while losing no more than $10%$ of events due to coarseness of template spacing, the initial LIGO interferometers will require about $1.0\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{11}$ flops (floating point operations per second) for data analysis to keep up with data acquisition. This is several times higher than estimated in previous work by Owen, in part because of the improved family of templates and in part because we use more realistic (higher) sampling rates. Enhanced LIGO, GEO600, and TAMA will require computational power similar to initial LIGO. Advanced LIGO will require $7.8\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{11}$ flops, and VIRGO will require $4.8\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{12}$ flops to take full advantage of its broad target noise spectrum. If the templates are stored rather than generated as needed, storage requirements range from $1.5\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{11}$ real numbers for TAMA to $6.2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{14}$ for VIRGO. The computational power required scales roughly as ${m}_{\mathrm{min}}^{\ensuremath{-}8/3}$ and the storage as ${m}_{\mathrm{min}}^{\ensuremath{-}13/3}.$ Since these scalings are perturbed by the curvature of the parameter space at second post-Newtonian order, we also provide estimates for a search with ${m}_{\mathrm{min}}{=1M}_{\ensuremath{\bigodot}}.$ Finally, we sketch and discuss an algorithm for placing the templates in the parameter space.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.60.022002

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Metadata

Authors
Owen, B. J., & Sathyaprakash, B. S.
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
1999-06-22
Volume
60
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-4918
OpenAlex
W2070717869
Cited by
464
References
0
FWCI
8.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.