1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %% %%
3: %% TITLE: Slice & Dice: Identifying and Removing Bright Galactic %%
4: %% Binaries from LISA Data %%
5: %% AUTHORS: Louis J. Rubbo, Neil J. Cornish, and Ronald W. Hellings %%
6: %% DATE: August 25, 2006 %%
7: %% %%
8: %% NOTES: This document requires the aipproc package to compile. %%
9: %% The package is available at the AIP conference proceedings web %%
10: %% page at %%
11: %% %%
12: %% http://proceedings.aip.org/proceedings/authors.jsp#latex %%
13: %% %%
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15:
16:
17: \documentclass[final, numberedheadings]{aipproc}
18:
19: %#### PACKAGES ####################################
20:
21: \usepackage{amsmath, amssymb, latexsym}
22:
23:
24:
25: %#### LENGTHS #####################################
26:
27: \layoutstyle{6x9}
28:
29:
30:
31: %#### NEW COMMANDS ################################
32:
33: % Shortcut for writing F-statistic
34: \newcommand{\fstat}{$\mathcal{F}$-statistic}
35:
36: % Shortcut for writing Slice & Dice
37: \newcommand{\snd}{\textit{Slice \& Dice}}
38:
39:
40:
41: %#### INFORMATION #################################
42:
43: \begin{document}
44:
45: \title{Slice \& Dice: Identifying and Removing Bright Galactic
46: Binaries from LISA Data}
47:
48: \classification{95.55.Ym, 04.80.Nn, 95.75.Wx}
49:
50: \keywords{binaries: close --- Galaxy: disk --- gravitational waves ---
51: methods: data analysis --- white dwarfs}
52:
53: \author{Louis J. Rubbo}{
54: address={Center for Gravitational Wave Physics, Pennsylvania State
55: University, University Park, PA 16802}
56: }
57:
58: \author{Neil J. Cornish}{
59: address={Department of Physics, Montana State University - Bozeman,
60: Bozeman, MT 59717}
61: }
62:
63: \author{Ronald W. Hellings}{
64: address={Department of Physics, Montana State University - Bozeman,
65: Bozeman, MT 59717}
66: }
67:
68:
69:
70: %#### MAIN DOCUMENT ###############################
71:
72: %==== Abstract ====================================
73:
74: \begin{abstract}
75: Here we describe a hierarchal and iterative data analysis algorithm
76: used for searching, characterizing, and removing bright, monochromatic
77: binaries from the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) data
78: streams. The algorithm uses the \fstat\ to provide an initial
79: solution for individual bright sources, followed by an iterative least
80: squares fitting for all the bright sources. Using the above
81: algorithm, referred to as \snd, we demonstrate the removal of
82: multiple, correlated galactic binaries from simulated LISA data.
83: Initial results indicate that \snd\ may be a useful tool for analyzing
84: the forthcoming LISA data.
85: \end{abstract}
86:
87: \maketitle
88:
89:
90:
91: %==== Main matter =================================
92:
93: \section{INTRODUCTION} \label{sec:intro}
94:
95: Inside the Milky Way galaxy there is a plethora of binaries whose
96: emitted gravitational waves have a frequency inside the Laser
97: Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) band~\cite{Evans:1987, Hils:1990,
98: Nelemans:2001, Benacquista:2004}. For the vast majority of these
99: sources, the measured signals will be buried in the instrument noise.
100: However, thousands of sources will have signals strong enough to be
101: detected above the instrument noise at low frequencies ($0.1 \lesssim
102: f \lesssim$~3~mHz). The superposition of these sources will form a
103: confusion limited background below which individual systems cannot be
104: distinguished from the collective population. This confusion
105: background will act as an additional noise component for the detector.
106:
107: Lying above the confusion background will be a number of individual
108: sources whose signals are stronger than the local rms value of the
109: background~\cite{Timpano:2006}. Due to their relative brightness,
110: they will be resolvable within the LISA data streams. Additionally,
111: at higher frequencies, where the confusion background drops below the
112: detector noise, individual sources will also be resolvable. Due to
113: the large orbital periods and low chirp masses associated with
114: galactic binaries, radiation reaction effects will not drive the
115: binaries to coalescence during the mission lifetime, so their signals
116: will be ever present in the detector output. It is these galactic
117: binaries that are prime targets for data analysis techniques used for
118: identification, characterization, and subtraction.
119:
120: Even though these target signals are relatively bright, significant
121: correlations may still exist between them. Consequently,
122: sophisticated data analysis techniques capable of resolving the
123: individual systems will be required. Here we present the \snd\
124: algorithm which was developed to resolve the bright galactic binary
125: signals that lie above the confusion limited background. \snd\ uses
126: the \fstat\ (a template based routine~\cite{Jaranowski:1998}) to
127: identify and initially characterize the bright signals. The \fstat\
128: results are then used to initiate a least squares fitting procedure
129: which refines the parameter estimates.
130:
131: The rest of this paper proceeds as follows. In
132: section~\ref{sec:order} we discuss the motivation for \snd\ by
133: illustrating the importance of when signals are identified and
134: subtracted from the data. In section~\ref{sec:snd} we describe the
135: \snd\ algorithm in detail and give a simple example of its use.
136: Finally in section~\ref{sec:conclusion} we discuss future
137: developments.
138:
139:
140:
141: \section{IDENTIFICATION AND SUBTRACTION ORDER} \label{sec:order}
142:
143: Template matching and least squares fitting provide a robust approach
144: to identifying and subtracting individual signals from LISA's
145: data~\cite{Hellings:2003}. However, when dealing with multiple
146: signals simultaneously the order of identification and removal is
147: crucial.
148:
149: Figure~\ref{fig:seqidenrem} shows the spectral amplitudes for a
150: sequential identification, ordered by frequency, followed by a global
151: removal using a template matching scheme on twenty signals within one
152: hundred frequency bins\footnote{A frequency bin $\Delta f$ is equal to
153: one on the observation time, $\Delta f = T^{-1}$. For a one year
154: observation, which is used here, $\Delta f = 3.2 \times 10^{-8}$~Hz.}
155: added to Gaussian noise. The solid line is the original data, the
156: dotted is the instrumental noise, and the dashed is the residue after
157: subtraction. The large residue indicates that this approached failed
158: to accurately identify the injected signals. The failure arose
159: because the algorithm treats the other comparable, bright signals as
160: noise while attempting to fit for one signal.
161: \begin{figure}
162: \includegraphics[height=0.29\textheight]{SeqIdenBW.eps}
163: \caption{Results of a sequential identification, ordered by
164: frequency, followed by a global removal scheme. The solid line is
165: the original data, the dashed is the residue, and the dotted is
166: the instrument noise.}
167: \label{fig:seqidenrem}
168: \end{figure}
169:
170: Figure~\ref{fig:seqiden} demonstrates the result of a sequential fit
171: and subtraction procedure where the order of fitting and removal is
172: based on the signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Although the residue
173: looks reasonable, a correlation comparison of the fitted signals to
174: the original injections indicates that the weaker signals were not
175: properly identified. As before, the interference from the other
176: bright signals as the algorithm attempts to fit for one signal causes
177: errors, which ultimately propagate through to the fits for the weaker
178: sources due to the intermediate subtractions.
179: \begin{figure}
180: \includegraphics[height=0.29\textheight]{SeqRemBW.eps}
181: \caption{Results of a sequential identification and removal
182: algorithm with the order is from highest SNR to the lowest. The
183: line identifications are the same as Figure~1.}
184: \label{fig:seqiden}
185: \end{figure}
186:
187: Figure~\ref{fig:simul} demonstrates the result from performing a
188: simultaneous fitting and removal scheme using a least squares fitting
189: routine initiated at the true parameter values. In this case there
190: are acceptable fits for each signal. However, for this approach to
191: work we had to assume the initial values for the least squares
192: procedure. Normally these values would be obtained from a search
193: algorithm, such as a template matching routine. Unfortunately, when
194: the number of bright systems increases, the resulting number of
195: templates required to sufficiently cover the parameter space make a
196: template approach impractical.
197: \begin{figure}
198: \includegraphics[height=0.29\textheight]{SimRemBW.eps}
199: \caption{Results of a simultaneous identification procedure. The
200: line identifications are the same as Figure~1.}
201: \label{fig:simul}
202: \end{figure}
203:
204: \snd\ was developed to incorporate the robust attributes of template
205: matching and least squares fitting while circumventing the problems of
206: a large template bank and providing initial guesses for the least
207: squares routine.
208:
209:
210:
211: \section{SLICE \& DICE ALGORITHM} \label{sec:snd}
212:
213: The \snd\ algorithm is an iterative routine that incorporates multiple
214: LISA data streams. Each iteration involves the following steps,
215: \begin{enumerate}
216: \item An \fstat\ (i.e. a template based) search is used to find the
217: brightest signal and return an initial estimate for its parameter
218: values.
219: \item The \fstat\ parameter estimates, along with previous iteration
220: estimates, are used to initiate a least squares fitting routine on the
221: original data. The least squares routine simultaneously solves for
222: $i$ signals, where $i$ is the number of sources found so far.
223: \item The least squares fitting routine is repeated until the change
224: in the $\chi^{2}$ is insignificant ($<0.01$). At each least squares
225: cycle the initial parameter value guesses are supplied from the
226: previous least squares iteration.
227: \item The estimated signals are subtracted from the original data
228: streams and this partially cleaned data is used to initiate the next
229: \snd\ iteration.
230: \end{enumerate}
231: These steps are repeated until each bright source (SNR $>$ 5) are
232: identified and removed.
233:
234: As an example of \snd\ results, consider two systems with SNRs of 17
235: and 12, separated in frequency by $0.07 \Delta f$, in sky location by
236: $90^{\circ}$, and with random orientations. The initial correlation
237: matrix between the injected signals is
238: \begin{displaymath}
239: r_{1 yr} = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
240: 1 & 0.090 \\
241: 0.090 & 1
242: \end{array} \right) \;.
243: \end{displaymath}
244: While their frequencies are nearly identical, these sources are
245: largely separated on the sky and therefore have small
246: cross-correlations.
247:
248: Figure~\ref{fig:snd2} shows the spectral amplitudes before and after
249: \snd\ has been applied to the data, along with the instrument noise.
250: \begin{figure}
251: \includegraphics[height=0.29\textheight]{SnD_ResultsBW.eps}
252: \caption{Results of \snd\ on two signals with nearly identical
253: frequencies but largely separated on the sky. The line
254: identifications are the same as Figure~1.}
255: \label{fig:snd2}
256: \end{figure}
257: The final comparison correlation matrix between the original and the
258: estimated signals is
259: \begin{displaymath}
260: r_{1 yr} = \left( \begin{array}{cc}
261: 0.94 & 0.11 \\
262: 0.06 & 0.99
263: \end{array} \right) \;.
264: \end{displaymath}
265: \snd\ was able to accurately identify the two signals.
266:
267:
268:
269: \section{FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS} \label{sec:conclusion}
270:
271: At this time we are testing \snd\ in order to understand its strengths
272: and limitations. We have successfully applied the algorithm on bright
273: source densities comparable to those shown in
274: Figures~\ref{fig:seqidenrem} through \ref{fig:simul} (i.e. one bright
275: source every five frequency bins). However, possible parameter
276: degeneracies and how their effects propagate through the iterative
277: \snd\ routine are not fully understood. We are currently testing how
278: the algorithm responds to such degeneracies, and how they may limit
279: its capabilities.
280:
281: In addition to the above mentioned tests, we are also expanding the
282: scope of applicability. \snd\ is currently only applicable on a small
283: segment of the LISA band. In the future we will expand and automate
284: the algorithm so that it can take the full bandwidth of data.
285: Additionally, we would like to compare and contrast \snd's performance
286: to other galactic binary search procedures such as
287: gCLEAN~\cite{Cornish:2003}, Markov Chain Monte Carlo
288: methods~\cite{Cornish:2005, Umstatter:2005}, genetic
289: algorithms~\cite{Crowder:2006}, and maximum entropy.
290:
291:
292:
293: %==== Acknowledgments =============================
294:
295: \begin{theacknowledgments}
296: The work by LJR was supported by the Center for Gravitational Wave
297: Physics. The Center for Gravitational Wave Physics is supported by
298: the NSF under Cooperative Agreement No. PHY 01-14375. NJC was
299: supported by NASA grant NNG05GI69G.
300: \end{theacknowledgments}
301:
302:
303:
304: %==== Bibliography ================================
305:
306: \bibliographystyle{aipproc}
307: \bibliography{References}
308:
309: \end{document}
310: