ligo-followup-advocate issueshttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues2023-05-31T20:12:15Zhttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/19Update circulars could include text comparing new skymap to previous one2023-05-31T20:12:15ZMin-A ChoUpdate circulars could include text comparing new skymap to previous oneSome sort of skymap comparison would be good. Here's an example from G298936:
Parameter estimation has been performed using LALInference (Veitch et al.,
PRD 91, 042003) and a new sky map, LALInference_r1.fits.gz, can be
retrieved from t...Some sort of skymap comparison would be good. Here's an example from G298936:
Parameter estimation has been performed using LALInference (Veitch et al.,
PRD 91, 042003) and a new sky map, LALInference_r1.fits.gz, can be
retrieved from the GraceDB event page:
https://gracedb.ligo.org/events/G298936
This is the preferred sky map at this time.
The new localization is consistent with but slightly smaller than the
BAYESTAR localization using HLV data (GCN 21661, bayestar-HLV.fits.gz).
The 50% area has decreased from 277 to 207 deg2 and the 90% area has
decreased from 1219 to 952 deg2. The all-sky, marginalized luminosity
distance estimate is 1738 +/- 477 Mpc (a posteriori mean +/- standard
deviation), largely consistent with the original estimate.O4bBrandon PiotrzkowskiBrandon Piotrzkowskihttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/25Write function to get the GCN Citation that reported the grb detection2023-04-07T13:24:01ZMin-A ChoWrite function to get the GCN Citation that reported the grb detectionWill write more instructions in a momentWill write more instructions in a momentpost-O4Brandon PiotrzkowskiBrandon Piotrzkowskihttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/61Correctly identify which pipeline has made low-latency detections vs medium-l...2023-04-18T12:28:51ZCody MessickCorrectly identify which pipeline has made low-latency detections vs medium-latency follow-upIn O3a, the pipelines credited with observing candidates in low latency included pipelines that did not automatically observe the candidate but instead saw something consistent in after-the-fact tests performed during the RRT call before...In O3a, the pipelines credited with observing candidates in low latency included pipelines that did not automatically observe the candidate but instead saw something consistent in after-the-fact tests performed during the RRT call before sending the circular. When I've discussed this with astronomers, they were shocked, and felt (in my opinion rightfully so) that the text in the circular was misleading. I believe it is important we make a distinction between the two situations. The only pipelines that should be credited as observing low latency candidates are the pipelines that had automated gracedb uploads at the time of the candidate. We can, and should, mention that offline follow-up showed consistent results in other pipelines, but equating the two processes is misleading.post-O4https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/73Circular template should mention of a single skymap in case contents are the ...2023-04-07T16:54:39ZBrandon PiotrzkowskiCircular template should mention of a single skymap in case contents are the same between first and second preliminary noticesFollowing https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/S200112r/view/ it was raised that in cases where the preferred event does not change between the first and the second preliminary notices, the circular template should mention of only a sing...Following https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/S200112r/view/ it was raised that in cases where the preferred event does not change between the first and the second preliminary notices, the circular template should mention of only a single skymap filename, or the fact that they are identical as is done in the circular for the event (https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/26715.gcn3)O4bBrandon PiotrzkowskiBrandon Piotrzkowskihttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/85Add circular templates for LLAMA detections2023-11-14T16:37:29ZBrandon PiotrzkowskiAdd circular templates for LLAMA detectionsTo implement this we need to do the following:
- [x] Add example templates to DCC document for P&P review: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-P2300108
- [ ] Define the conditions each type should be generated (e.g. a file or label being uploaded ...To implement this we need to do the following:
- [x] Add example templates to DCC document for P&P review: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-P2300108
- [ ] Define the conditions each type should be generated (e.g. a file or label being uploaded to GraceDB?)
- [ ] Define the data products unique to LLAMA available, with an example(s) of how to parse.
- [x] Create new compose method `compose_llama()` that grabs the correct data and use new `llama*.jinja2` template files.
- [x] Create at least one example of each using the tools of `ligo-followup-advocate` to show the new code works properly.
Templates from Zsuzsa:
```
SUBJECT: Neutrino candidate(s) from joint gravitational-wave and high-energy
neutrino search using LLAMA: low-significance LVK trigger SYYMMDDxx
The IceCube Collaboration ((http://icecube.wisc.edu/) together with the LIGO
Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, and the KAGRA Collaboration
reports:
Searches for track-like muon neutrino events detected by IceCube consistent
with the sky localization of gravitational-wave candidate SYYMMDDxx in a time range
of 1000 seconds [1] centered on the alert event time
(MM/DD/YY HH:MM:SS UTC to MM/DD/YY HH:MM:SS UTC) have been performed.
During this time period IceCube was collecting good quality data. The hypothesis
test employed by LLAMA uses a Bayesian approach to quantify the joint GW + neutrino
event significance. [2]
1(2,3) track-like event is found in spatial and temporal coincidence with the
gravitational-wave candidate SYYMMDDxx. The event’s properties can be found at
this URL:
https://gracedb.invalid/superevents/SYYMMDDxx
Based on the analysis of gravitational-wave data alone, this candidate does not
meet our criteria for a high-significance public alert.
Properties of the coincident neutrino(s) together with the p-value(s) associated
with the joint observation is(are) shown below.
dt ra dec Angular Uncertainty(deg) p-value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
xxx.xx rr.rr dd.dd uu.uu p.pppp
where:
dt = Time offset (sec) of track event with respect to GW trigger.
Angular uncertainty = Angular uncertainty of track event: the radius of a
Circle representing 90% CL containment by area.
p-value = the p-value for this specific track event from each search.
The IceCube Neutrino Observatory is a cubic-kilometer neutrino detector
operating at the geographic South Pole, Antarctica. The IceCube realtime alert
point of contact can be reached at roc@icecube.wisc.edu
For further information about analysis methodology can be found at
<https://multimessenger.science/>.
The LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA Public Alerts User Guide is available at
<https://emfollow.docs.ligo.org/userguide/>.
[1] Baret et al., Astroparticle Physics 35, 1 (2011)
[2] Bartos et al. arXiv:1810.11467 (2018) and Countryman et
al.arXiv:1901.05486 (2019)
```
and
```
SUBJECT: Multimessenger candidate from joint gravitational-wave and high-energy
neutrino search using LLAMA: low-significance LVK trigger SYYMMDDxx associated
with IceCube alert IceCube-YYMMDDA
The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, and the KAGRA
Collaboration reports:
A LLAMA search for LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA gravitational-wave candidate consistent
with the sky localization of IceCube alert IceCube-YYMMDDA (<link to notice>)
in a time range of 1000 seconds [1] centered on the alert event time
(MM/DD/YY HH:MM:SS UTC to MM/DD/YY HH:MM:SS UTC) have been performed.
The hypothesis test employed by LLAMA uses a Bayesian approach to quantify
the joint GW + neutrino event significance. [2]
Gravitational-wave candidate SYYMMDDxx is found to be in spatial and temporal
coincidence with IceCube-YYMMDDA public alert. The properties of the candidate
event, which based on the analysis of gravitational-wave data alone does not
meet the LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA criteria for a high-significance public alert can
be found at this URL:
https://gracedb.invalid/superevents/SYYMMDDxx
The neutrino trigger time is xxx.xx seconds before(after) the gravitational-wave
candidate event. The p-value associated with the joint observation is 0.00pp.
We encourage further observation of the localization area of IceCube-YYMMDDA
and we provide a joint localization probability map at:
<gracedb link here>
Further information about analysis methodology can be found at
<https://multimessenger.science/>.
The LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA Public Alerts User Guide is available at
<https://emfollow.docs.ligo.org/userguide/>.
[1] Baret et al., Astroparticle Physics 35, 1 (2011)
[2] Bartos et al. Phys. Rev. D 100, 083017 (2019) and Countryman et
al.arXiv:1901.05486 (2019)
```O4bBrandon PiotrzkowskiBrandon Piotrzkowskihttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/87update gstlal citation2023-08-07T17:27:31ZLeo Tsukadaupdate gstlal citationHi @brandon.piotrzkowski
Gstlal team has been writing two papers (one for MDC performance paper and one for method paper).
We would like to cite both papers for completeness, though they have not been submitted to Arxiv yet.
So I ...Hi @brandon.piotrzkowski
Gstlal team has been writing two papers (one for MDC performance paper and one for method paper).
We would like to cite both papers for completeness, though they have not been submitted to Arxiv yet.
So I would like to ask following questions:
1. would it be okay to cite the two papers?
2. I think the both papers will be in arxiv and citable in a couple of weeks. Is that reasonable timeline? or too late?
Thanks!O4https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/91Finalize remaining issues with LLAMA templates2024-02-26T20:19:17ZBrandon PiotrzkowskiFinalize remaining issues with LLAMA templatesCopied from comment here: https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/merge_requests/140#note_690532
Based on the output of the latest code changes, there are current open issues:
1. We need to concretely define when we shoul...Copied from comment here: https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/merge_requests/140#note_690532
Based on the output of the latest code changes, there are current open issues:
1. We need to concretely define when we should issue each of the two circulars, what the conditions/files/labels should be in GraceDB or else. In addition, we should define whether the creation of these circulars should be triggered automatically (e.g. by the application of `LLAMA_COMPLETE`?) or by-hand.
2. There are several pieces of data/files that are not currently being uploaded to superevents in the O3 replay that are used in the provided templates, so if these are planned to be uploaded during O4 we need to define them with filenames and have concrete examples. These missing pieces are the following:
- [ ] Joint localization (should we just point to the `.pdf`?)
- [ ] P-value for individual neutrinos (we have the overall p-value though)
- [ ] IceCube alert ID (I have included it as an argument in `compose_llama`)
- [ ] Time of IceCube alertO4a mid-run releasehttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/93Update Pastro Gstlal citation2023-06-13T02:43:03ZAnarya RayUpdate Pastro Gstlal citationHi @brandon.piotrzkowski,
The GstLAL team is working on putting together a methods paper for Pastro summarizing the improvements implemented in O4. We are aiming to put it out on arxiv in a couple of weeks. Would it be possible to inclu...Hi @brandon.piotrzkowski,
The GstLAL team is working on putting together a methods paper for Pastro summarizing the improvements implemented in O4. We are aiming to put it out on arxiv in a couple of weeks. Would it be possible to include the citation for it at that time? Thank you!O4a mid-run releasehttps://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/104Adding Waveform Citations to Bilby Updates2023-06-15T13:53:10ZGeraint PrattenAdding Waveform Citations to Bilby UpdatesThe Waveform Chairs (@geraint.pratten, @maria.haney, @vijay.varma) noted that current circulars only have a Bilby citation (Ashton et al. ApJS 241, 27 (2019) and there is no citation to the waveform model that was used to produce the pos...The Waveform Chairs (@geraint.pratten, @maria.haney, @vijay.varma) noted that current circulars only have a Bilby citation (Ashton et al. ApJS 241, 27 (2019) and there is no citation to the waveform model that was used to produce the posteriors (and hence the skymap, masses, and spins). We think it would be pertinent to add a citation to the waveform model used as appropriate. What is the best forum to have this discussion?https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/ligo-followup-advocate/-/issues/114GCN draft of SSM candidate2024-02-21T18:29:05ZBhooshan Uday Gadrebhooshan.gadre@ligo.orgGCN draft of SSM candidateSome work has already been done regarding this due to the GstLAL single SSM candidate trigger. [MR](https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/userguide/-/merge_requests/242) can be found here.
[Google doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X3-4zv...Some work has already been done regarding this due to the GstLAL single SSM candidate trigger. [MR](https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/userguide/-/merge_requests/242) can be found here.
[Google doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X3-4zvTzV-CiHb9bPFT2xNMICIsn7KSFAJMS93jnZcs/edit?usp=sharing) with the trigger-specific GCN is already available with relevant [slides](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12PtHQ6DuuhYZBXdNlwqemAdgWA1RmaKV3hUGlSIJlRg/edit?usp=sharing) presented on LL call.Bhooshan Uday Gadrebhooshan.gadre@ligo.orgDivya SinghBrandon PiotrzkowskiBhooshan Uday Gadrebhooshan.gadre@ligo.org