Maintenance will be performed on git.ligo.org, containers.ligo.org, and docs.ligo.org on Tuesday 22 April 2025 starting at approximately 9am PDT. It is expected to take around 30 minutes and there will be several periods of downtime throughout the maintenance. Please address any comments, concerns, or questions to the helpdesk. This maintenance will be upgrading the GitLab database in order to be ready for the migration.
The text beginning "A source-dependent weighting of matched-filter templates ...", that is intended to describe the multi-component p_astro calculation, seems to only apply to the gstlal calculation, and in any case I'm not sure if the description is accurate for gstlal. Other pipelines do something different, so it is definitely not accurate for them. There are also methods papers for what is done in other pipelines (eg https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/515/4/5718/6652117 for pycbc).
'The mean values are updated weekly based on observed matched-filter count rates.' : is this actually true for gstlal?
0 of 2 checklist items completed
· Edited
To upload designs, you'll need to enable LFS and have an admin enable hashed storage. More information
Child items ...
Show closed items
Linked items 0
Link issues together to show that they're related or that one is blocking others.
Learn more.
@shaon.ghosh my plan was to use the document that has been already put together to gather the p_astro assumptions: https://dcc.ligo.org/LIGO-T2300134. Though it may need some proper rewording to make it more easily accessible to non-experts.
@patrick-brady@leo-singer Can we do a P&P review of this document and make it public, so that this can be referred to in the Userguide which will let us minimize the text in the Userguide? Having the details from all the pipelines seems too much to me. People who are interested to know the details of the methods used by various pipeline can just navigate to the link like they would do for any publication.
@shaon.ghosh to be more explicit, I do not think it is a good idea to just throw that document out there. It is way too technical. I am working on editing the userguide, please give me some time.
I agree with @tito-canton. I think it is best if a much more concise version of that document is subsumed into the User Guide and becomes the source of truth for both the collaboration and for astronomers on this matter.
Is the intention that users need to look at the pipeline in an alert before they can interpret the classification? I skimmed through the current technical document. It does not currently look like something that could be released. I could imagine some digest, but it's hard for me to tell how closely the meaning of the BNS, NSBH and BBH classifications align at this time.
@patrick-brady I think the main purpose is to make sure that in this section the details provided are not just tied to the method used for gstlal. Tito said that he is working towards distilling the main points from the technical document into the Userguide. Hopefully, that will not be so technical. In my opinion, this will definitely take more time and a proper P&P review.