pSEOBNRv4HM_tgr-review.md

@@ -61,16 +61,28 @@ UNUSED REAL8 domega220 = XLALSimInspiralWaveformParamsLookupDOmega220(LALparams)
 
 **Injection set**  
 
-For each non-GR injection, perform a GR run to compare posteriors in the two cases.  
+Two subpopulations: 
+1. q~1, spins~0, face on, M~70 (reproduce known LIGO observed population);
+Simulation parameters:  
+
+MISSING  
+
+2. q>1, spins>0, not face on, M \in [150, 250] (reproduce possible IMBH population);  
+
+Simulation parameters:  
+
+MISSING 
+
+10 injections for each subpopulation, each of the injections to be runned with SNR=15,30,50.
+Different values of parameters for NR and GR-template injections, to explore a larger parameter space.  
+Prioritise given CPU hours constraints.  
 
 - GR-template injections: we expect to recover 0-centered posteriors on deviation parameters and all other parameters consistent with GR. Also useful to study correlations with the other parameters.     
-How many? Which population?  
 
 - NR injections: we expect to recover 0-centered posteriors on deviation parameters and all other parameters consistent with GR. Also useful to study correlations with the other parameters.    
-How many? Which population?   
 
 - Non-GR template injections: inject either pEOB+domega/=0 and/or a physically motivated model (e.g. a model with modified flux as in the IMR consistency test review).  
-How many? Which population?  
+Same parameters as the GR cases with non-zero (domega220, tau220) for the lower-mass population, non-zero (domega220, tau220, domega330, tau330) for the higher mass population.   
 
 **Waveform infrastructure call**  
 
@@ -93,15 +105,21 @@ How many? Which population?
 
 *Attendees*  
 
+Abhirup, Roland, Richard, Max, Gregorio
 
 *Minutes*  
  
 *Action items*  
 
-- Abhirup to fill in info on how to run the test;  
-- Abhirup to fill in info on real events results;  
-- Reviewers to have a careful read of the [paper](https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.084038)    
-- ...  
+- Reviewers to fill in info on how to run the test;  
+- Reviewers to fill in info on real events results;  
+- Reviewers to have a careful read of the [paper](https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.084038) ;    
+- Write down a proposal on the injection set values along the lines discussed in the telecon;  
+- Reviewees to ask the TGR chairs how many CPU hours we can use;
+- Abhirup to create:  
+1. Corner plots with (Mf,af,domega)   
+2. A plot showing (Mf,af) from a GR run vs the ones recovered when domega was varying.  
+(These plots are to check that a deviation in Mf does not compensate a deviation in domega in such a way that omega(Mf,af)*(1+domega) still matches the GR prediction) 
 
 ***19/06/2019***