The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use and abuse of the Fisher information matrix in the assessment of gravitational-wave parameter-estimation prospects
Open accessAbstract
The Fisher-matrix 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 $1/\mathrm{SNR}$ expansions for the expected parameter accuracies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines
Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H., & Teller, E. (1953) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.1699114 · Cited by 37,192
Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., & Flannery, B. P. (1994) · Cited by 15,411
Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications.
Hastings, W. K. (1970) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/57.1.97 · Cited by 15,195
Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory
Sengijpta, S. K. (1995) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1995.10484391 · Cited by 11,076
Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation
Tarantola, A. (2005) · doi:10.1137/1.9780898717921 · Cited by 6,585
Golub, G. H., & Loan, C. F. V. (1996) · Johns Hopkins University Press eBooks · Cited by 6,027
Probability theory the logic of science
Jaynes, E. T., & Bretthorst, G. L. (2003) · Cited by 4,575
Probability Theory: The Logic of Science
Jaynes, E. T. (2003) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511790423 · Cited by 4,045
LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
Abramovici, A., Althouse, W. E., Drever, R. W. P., Gürsel, Y., Kawamura, S., Raab, F. J., Shoemaker, D., Sievers, L., Spero, R. E., Thorne, K. S., et al. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.256.5055.325 · Cited by 2,244
Cutler, C., & Flanagan, É. E. (1994) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.49.2658 · Cited by 1,615
Cited by
Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology with Gravitational Waves
Sathyaprakash, B. S., & Schutz, B. F. (2009) · Living Reviews in Relativity · doi:10.12942/lrr-2009-2 · Cited by 874
Yagi, K., & Yunes, N. (2013) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.023009 · Cited by 522
EXPLORING SHORT GAMMA-RAY BURSTS AS GRAVITATIONAL-WAVE STANDARD SIRENS
Nissanke, S., Holz, D. E., Hughes, S. A., Dalal, N., & Sievers, J. L. (2010) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/725/1/496 · Cited by 414
Metadata
- Authors
- Vallisneri, M.
- Venue
- Physical Review D
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2008-02-04
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-7998
- 1550-2368
- OpenAlex
- W2027523908
- Cited by
- 630
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 9.63
- 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.