... | ... | @@ -23,84 +23,141 @@ Zero Likelihood test |
|
|
https://git.ligo.org/lscsoft/bilby_pipe/wikis/O3-review/zero-likelihood
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://git.ligo.org/lscsoft/bilby/pipeline_schedules
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some people can't see the test initially, Greg had to add them as Developer to bilby
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: Is there a reason to change the prior in the test?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Works either way, we can always reweight the posterior
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: We might want to add the prior cdf test for all priors
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Good idea
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: *Ticks off test as done*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simon: *approves*
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Prior files
|
|
|
Greg: Nothing to review, informational purpose
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: Simon and I have to go through them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: They're all the same, except for chirp_mass due to different ROQ bases, and luminosity_distance due to different SNR distribution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: The files look fine. a_1/2 don't go beyond 0.8 due to ROQ basis?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Yes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: Maximum spin is 0.1 in 128 s example?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: That's some old setting, that we might need to discuss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: We might want to increase this to 0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
*ACTION*: Greg should change the upper limit of the spin prior in the 128 s file to 0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simon: Are prior files specific to IMRPhenomD?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: You can use any other waveform in LAL if they make sense. We focus on IMRPhenomPv2 in the review. We would need a waveform expert to help us define priors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simon: Reason for the question is because I had trouble running with different waveforms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: We should add a test to run with aligned spins
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sylvia: Can we return likelihood -infinity if we hit forbidden parts of the parameter space?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: We can just use IMRPhenomPv2 for review. Can we compare waveforms between LALSuite and bilby?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Yes, Nikhil is working on it. He uses PyCBC. Is that sufficient? Who should we ask for LALSuite?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: PyCBC is fine, but there should be a way to call LALInference in a way to output the waveform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Sylvia open an issue for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Fiducial BBH tests
|
|
|
Greg: Injection in H1L1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Walk through 1D pdf/cdf page, there is a bug in the priors that has since been fixed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: @reviewers, is this what you want to see?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: This does look like it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
*ACTION*: Make sure cdfs are loading on the webpage
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: review table - fiducial BBH 128 s is equivalent to a LALInference run, let's skip fiducial runs for now
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: PP-tests, there should be no bias
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Need to be careful about SNR distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Sampling times are included as well because this is the best place to look at them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: looks good, similar to LALInference review, Simon and I have to go through it in our own time eventually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: For 128 s we used low spin prior, we have to check this
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: We did this for 0.5.2, we want to redo this for newer version
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: back to the table
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: There are other ongoing efforts, do calibration checks sound reasonable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: Yes
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### 15 D Gaussian
|
|
|
Matt: I might have pointed you to an older page, plots look correct and . I'll have to look for a more up to date page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moritz/Matt: We should use bilby default settings
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moritz: there are some technical issues with running this on a bimodal distribution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: It would be nice to include the sampler's quoted uncertainty in the evidence in your summary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Known event comparison
|
|
|
Isobel: Uses IMRPhenomPv2, posteriors have been downsampled, comparison plots look good
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: a_1/2 look slightly different, Carl said there was a waveform redefinition which might explain differences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isobel: phi_jl looks significantly different, could be a pi/2 shift
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: Why is this not just a shift
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Might be something more than just a shift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: We might ask somebody to convert them back to LALInference O2 definitions or vice versa
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: Either would be good. Analytic waveform comparison should be a good check. Maybe this is a problem with LALInferenceNest, it might not show up in LALInferenceMCMC because there were similar issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: We could re-run LALInference using the O3 branch. This should not have the spin issues in there. We could rerun it of GW150914. @Reviewers, what do you think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: GW150914, GW151226, one of the events with support for positive chi_eff
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: Boxing day event gives us positive chi_eff
|
|
|
|
|
|
*ACTION*: Re-run LALInference with O3 evemts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simon: If there is an easy way to convert, we should try, otherwise re-run LALInference with new, O3, convention. O1/O2 might have to be re-run with new convention anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: Let's ask Carl if there is an easy fix.
|
|
|
|
|
|
*ACTION*: Let's talk to Carl
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charlie: Phi_12 also seems to be different. They have different ranges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm/Greg: There might be a difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt: There are some difference between LALInferenceNest, LALInferenceMCMC if you look at a1/a2. Might be worth running with LALInferenceMCMC on GW150914
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg: AOB?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virginia: Are bilby devs going to the LVC meeting. I might want to run a bilby tutorial, can bilby devs support?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg, Moritz: Yes to both
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm: Yes to being at LVC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next meeting: Same time next week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... | ... | |