status of tama

The 9th Gravitational Wave Data Analysis Workshop (December 15-18, 2004, Annecy, France)

Status of TAMA Status of TAMA

Masaki Ando (Department of Physics, University of Tokyo)

on behalf of the TAMA Collaboration

The 9th Gravitational Wave Data Analysis Workshop (December 15-18, 2004, Annecy, France) 2

TAMA collaboratorsTAMA collaborators

Tomomi Akutsu, Tomotada Akutsu, Masaki Ando, Koji Arai, Akito Araya, Hideki Asada, Youichi Aso, Mark A. Barton, Peter Beyersdorf, Youhei Fujiki, Masa-Katsu Fujimoto, Ryuichi Fujita, Mitsuhiro Fukushima, Toshifumi Futamase, Yusaku Hamuro, Tomiyoshi Haruyama, Hideaki Hayakawa, Kazuhiro Hayama,Gerhard Heinzel, Gen'ichi Horikoshi, Hideo Iguchi, Yukiyoshi Iida, Kunihito Ioka, Hideki Ishitsuka, Norihiko Kamikubota, Nobuyuki Kanda, Takaharu Kaneyama, Yoshikazu Karasawa, Kunihiko Kasahara, Taketoshi Kasai, Mayu Katsuki, Keita Kawabe, Mari Kawamura, Seiji Kawamura, Nobuki Kawashima, Fumiko Kawazoe, Yasufumi Kojima, Keiko Kokeyama, Kazuhiro Kondo, Yoshihide Kozai, Hideaki Kudo, Kazuaki Kuroda, Takashi Kuwabara, Namio Matsuda, Norikatsu Mio, Kazuyuki Miura, Osamu Miyakawa, Shoken Miyama, Shinji Miyoki, Hiromi Mizusawa, Shigenori Moriwaki, Mitsuru Musha, Shigeo Nagano, Yoshitaka Nagayama, Ken'ichi Nakagawa, Takashi Nakamura, Hiroyuki Nakano, Ken-ichi Nakao, Yuhiko Nishi, Kenji Numata, Yujiro Ogawa, Masatake Ohashi, Naoko Ohishi, Akira Okutomi, Ken-ichi Oohara, Shigemi Otsuka, Yoshio Saito, Shihori Sakata, Misao Sasaki, Kouichi Sato, Nobuaki Sato, Shuichi Sato, Youhei Sato, Hidetsugu Seki, Aya Sekido, Naoki Seto, Masaru Shibata, Hisaaki Shinkai, Takakazu Shintomi, Kenji Soida, Kentaro Somiya, Toshikazu Suzuki, Hideyuki Tagoshi, Hirotaka Takahashi, Ryutaro Takahashi, Akiteru Takamori, Shuzo Takemoto, Kohei Takeno, Takahiro Tanaka, Keisuke Taniguchi, Shinsuke Taniguchi, Toru Tanji, Daisuke Tatsumi, C.T. Taylor, Souichi Telada, Kuniharu Tochikubo, Masao Tokunari, Takayuki Tomaru, Kimio Tsubono, Nobuhiro Tsuda, Yoshiki Tsunesada, Takashi Uchiyama, Akitoshi Ueda, Ken-ichi Ueda, Fumihiko Usui, Koichi Waseda, Yuko Watanabe, Hiromi Yakura, Akira Yamamoto, Kazuhiro Yamamoto, Toshitaka Yamazaki, Yuriko Yanagi, Tatsuo Yoda, Jun'ichi Yokoyama, Tatsuru Yoshida, Zong-Hong Zhu


OutlineOutline

TAMA300 overview

TAMA300 data-taking runs Data taking 9 (Nov. 2003 – Jan. 2004)

Efforts for detector improvement Noise hunting,

TAMA-SAS

TAMA data-analysis reviewChirp, Burst, Ringdown searches,

Detector characterization

Summary


TAMA300 (1)TAMA300 (1)- Overview -- Overview -

TAMA project (1995-)

National AstronomicalObservatory at Mitaka, Japan

Baseline 300m

Sufficient sensitivity for Galactic binary inspiralsAutomated crewless operation9 observation runs 　　 (Data : ~3000 hours)

First obs. run in 1999 (DT1)

Upgrade and observation runs

TAMA300, an interferometric GW detector in Japan Baseline length : 300m Fabry-Perot-Michelson interferometer with power recycling Placed at National Astronomical Observatory in Japan


TAMA300 (2)TAMA300 (2)- Detector configuration -- Detector configuration -

10W laser

10m MC

Main IFO


TAMA300 (3)TAMA300 (3)- Data acquisition and distribution -- Data acquisition and distribution -

Main IFO

Dataacquisition

Data storage

DataAnalysis


TAMA300 (4)TAMA300 (4)- Facilities -- Facilities -

Center Room Beam tube

End Room

InjectionBench

BSRM NM1

NM2

MC1

10W LaserOutput Bench

300m Tube

EM1


TAMA300 (5)TAMA300 (5) - Components -- Components -

Mirror suspension

Fused silica Mirror

10W laser source


TAMA observation runs

Data taking run (1)Data taking run (1)- Observation runs -- Observation runs -

Data Taking ObjectiveObservation

timeTypical strain noise level

Total data(Longest lock)

DT1 August, 1999 Calibration test 1 night 3x10-19 /Hz 1/210 hours

(7.7 hours)

DT2 September, 1999 First Observation run 3 nights 3x10-20 /Hz 1/2 31 hours

DT3 April, 2000Observation with

improved sensitivity3 nights 1x10-20 /Hz 1/2 13 hours

DT4Aug.-Sept.,

2000100 hours'

observation data2 weeks

(night-time operation)1x10-20 /Hz 1/2

(typical)167 hours

(12.8 hours)

DT5 March, 2001100 hours' observation with high duty cycle

1 week(whole-day operation)

1.7x10-20 /Hz 1/2

(LF improvement)111 hours

DT6Aug.-Sept.,

20011000 hours' observatio

n data 50 days 5x10-21 /Hz 1/21038 hours(22.0 hours)

DT7Aug.-Sept.,

2002Full operation with

Power recycling2 days 25 hours

DT8Feb.-April.,

20031000 hours

Coincidence2 months 3x10-21 /Hz 1/2

1157 hours(20.5 hours)

DT9Nov. 2003 -Jan., 2004

Automatic operation

6 weeks 1.5x10-21 /Hz 1/2 558 hours(27 hours)


Data taking run (2)Data taking run (2)- Data Taking 9 -- Data Taking 9 -

TAMA DT9

0 200 400 600 800 1000 120010

–21

10–20

10–19

No

ise

Le

ve

l [1

/Hz1/

2 ]

Time [hour]

DT9

DT8DT6Noise floor level drift

Thu SunTueMon Fri SatWed

Observation (continuous over 10min)

Date and Time in JST (UTC +9 hours) 29

6

17

24

313029

22

15

11

Nov. 28, 2003

54

12

16

23 25

18

7

30

Dec. 1

8

19

26 27

20

139

2 3

10 14

21

28

Jan. 1 32 4

8 95 106 7 11

Data Taking 9 Nov. 28, 2003 – Jan. 10, 2004 558 hours of data　　Noise level : 2x10-21 /Hz1/2

2nd half : 200 hours (Christmas, new-year Holiday terms) Better noise level Stable environment

In particular …


Data taking run (3)Data taking run (3)- Noise level in DT9 -- Noise level in DT9 -

Noise level

Data Taking 9 Noise level : 2x10-21 /Hz1/2 Mostly limited by shot noise and photo-detector noise

DT9

Shot noise+Detector noise

DT6

Improvements:

Implementation of power recycling (power gain: 4.5) Better stabilization for laser-frequency noise


Data taking run (4)Data taking run (4)- Observable range in DT9 -- Observable range in DT9 -

Observable distanceDetectable distance for binary inspiral (SNR=10, optimal condition)

DT9

DT6

72.8 kpc for 1.4 Mo binary inspirals

TAMA300 covers most part of our Galaxy


Data taking run (5)Data taking run (5)- Automated observation in DT9 -- Automated observation in DT9 -

Crewless observation in DT9Automated detector operation Master-system (intelligent switching) PC + PCI boards + LabVIEW 64ch digital I/O 16ch A/D + 24ch D/A Lock acquisition Auto adjustment Interface with external system

Self-switching sub-system Logic circuit + Embedded micro processor Laser source control MC control Laser intensity stabilization Beam axes control


Detector improvement (1)Detector improvement (1)- Noise hunting -- Noise hunting -

Noise investigation

DT9 noise level Seismic noise Alignment noise Shot noise

Unidentified noise Scattered light ? Beam jitter ? Laser source ? RF detection ? Electronics ?

Noise hunting!


Detector improvement (2)Detector improvement (2)- Noise hunting with RMI -- Noise hunting with RMI -

Strategy

Back to full configuration checking the noise level

Investigate noise behavior with simplified configuration

Power-recycled MichelsonRemove POsSingle PD at the dark port … etc


Detector improvement (3)Detector improvement (3)- Noise reduction -- Noise reduction -

RMI noise reductionImproved about 10 times after DT9

Simpler configurationScattered noise reduction

Back to full configuration step by step

Recent result … Re-installed POs keep best noise


Detector improvement (4)Detector improvement (4)- RMI phase noise -- RMI phase noise -

RMI noise

Contribution of RMI phase noise

Promising result

RMI phase noise

Alignment noise (can be improved)


Detector improvement (5)Detector improvement (5)- Seismic noise reduction -- Seismic noise reduction -

TAMA-SAS　　

Prototype test with a 3-m Fabry-Perot cavity

Expected Isolation @4Hz 10-8 ➞ 10-11 m/Hz1/2

Expected RMS velocity 3.7 ➞ 0.3 m/s

Installation in 2005

Design for TAMA : fixedMain parts : delivered

Development for better seismic attenuation

Seismic attenuation system (SAS) For low frequency (0.1 ～ 10Hz) R&D with Caltech and Univ. of Pisa


TAMA data analysis (1)TAMA data analysis (1)- Overview -- Overview -

TAMA data-analysis activities

Detector characterization Calibration, data conditioning, Noise behavior, Correlation between detectors

Coincidence analysis Chirp: LIGO-TAMA Burst: LIGO-TAMA Un-triggered search Triggered search for GRB ROG- TAMA

Compact binary inspirals: chirpChange in signal frequency (low high) Waveforms are well predicted (2.5 PN)

Stellar-core collapses, etc: burst Short GW signals from violent phenomenaPossible coincidence with electromagnetic and/or neutrino

New-born black hole: ringdown Damped sinusoidal waves from a quasi-normal modeWaveforms are predicted

Pulsars, Compact binaries:

periodic Continuous GW signalsGain SNR with long-term observations


TAMA data analysis (2)TAMA data analysis (2)- Chirp-wave analysis -- Chirp-wave analysis -

Chirp-wave analysis

Upper limit for Galactic event rate

DT6: 50-day observation (2001) Range : 33.1kpc 83 events /yr (1-2Msol)

DT8: 60-day observation (2003) Range : 42.2kpc 29 events /yr (1-3Msol)

DT9: 50-day observation (2003-

2004) Range : 72.8kpc Search in progress…

Target: Binary inspirals Waveforms by post-Newtonian approx.Schemes: Matched filtering Fake reduction with a 2-test Galactic simulation Upper limit for event rate

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

101

102

103

Det

acta

ble

ran

ge

Data–taking runs

Up

per

lim

it f

or

even

t ra

tes

[eve

nts

/yr]

(C

.L.=

90%

)

[kp

c] (

SN

R=

10)

Detactable

Event upper limit

upper limitGalactic–event

range

In this workshop … H. Takahashi, S. Fairhurst (Thu. PM)

TAMA DT8 - LIGO S2 coincidence analysis


TAMA data analysis (3)TAMA data analysis (3)- Burst-wave analysis -- Burst-wave analysis -

Burst-wave analysisTarget: Unmodelled: Stellar-core collapse, etc Ref. waveforms by numerical sim.Schemes: Matched filtering Excess-power filter, Linear-fit filter Wavelet-based filter Fake reduction: Veto with auxiliary channel Time-scale selection Galactic simulation Upper limit for event rate

In this workshop … M.Ando (Fri. PM): DT9 results with an excess-pow. filter T.Akutsu (Fri. PM): DT9 results with an ALF filter K.Hayama (Poster): Development of a wavelet-based filter P.Sutton (Fri. PM): LIGO-TAMA coincidence analysis

102 10310–24

10–22

10–20

10–18

De

tec

tor

No

ise

Le

ve

l [

1/H

z1/2 ]

Frequency [Hz]

TAMA

LCGT design sensitivity

noise level(DT9)

GW

RS

S A

mp

litu

de

an

d

10kpc events

100pc events


TAMA data analysis (4)TAMA data analysis (4)- Ringdown-wave analysis -- Ringdown-wave analysis -

Ringdown-wave analysis

Target: New-born BHs Damped sinusoidal waveform Mass, Kerr parameter of BHSchemes: Matched filtering Fake reduction: Selection of events with realistic freq. and Q-value Behavior in template space

In this workshop … Y.Tsunesada (Thu. PM): DT6-9 event search D.Tatsumi (Poster): Fake-reduction method


TAMA data analysis (5)TAMA data analysis (5)- Other activities -- Other activities -

Continuous-wave analysis

Target: Possible pulsar at SN1987A remnant Sinusoidal wave without precise freq. informationSchemes: Matched filtering (Heterodyne detection) DT8-9 analysis in progress…

In this workshop … S.Telada (Thu. AM): Calibration in time domain N.Kanda (Thu. AM): Effect of correlation of two detectors in LCGT

Characterization

K.Soida et al., Class. Quantum Grav. 20 (2003) S645


SummarySummary

TAMA detectorTAMA detector Data Taking 9Data Taking 9 Improve the sensitivity by a factor of 2Improve the sensitivity by a factor of 2 observable range 72kpc for 1.4observable range 72kpc for 1.4MMoo binaries binaries

Automated stable operationAutomated stable operation

Noise investigation with RMINoise investigation with RMI Preparation for TAMA-SAS installationPreparation for TAMA-SAS installation

Data analysisData analysis Inspiral, burst, and ringdownInspiral, burst, and ringdown searchessearches

results are being obtainedresults are being obtained

LIGO-TAMA coincidence analysesLIGO-TAMA coincidence analyses Some activities on data analysis:Some activities on data analysis:

Continuous waveContinuous wave search search Waveform estimationWaveform estimation Detector correlationsDetector correlations


　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　End

status of tama

Documents