Multidetector characterization of gravitational-wave burst tensor polarizations with the <i>BayesWave</i> algorithm

Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that gravitational waves (GWs) are tensor-polarized, with two modes of polarization: plus (${h}_{+}$) and cross (${h}_{\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}}$). The unmodeled GW burst analysis pipeline, BayesWave, offers two tensor-polarized signal models: the elliptical polarization model ($E$) and the relaxed polarization model ($R$). Future expansion of the global GW detector network will enable more accurate studies of GW polarizations with GW bursts. Here a multidetector analysis is conducted to compare the performance of $E$ and $R$ in characterizing elliptical and nonelliptical GW polarizations, using nonprecessing and precessing binary black holes (BBHs) respectively as representative synthetic sources. It is found that both models reconstruct the elliptical nonprecessing BBH signals accurately, but $E$ has a higher Bayesian evidence than $R$ as it is has fewer model parameters. The same is true for precessing BBHs that are reconstructed equally well by both models. However, for some events with high precession and especially with three or more detectors, the reconstruction accuracy and evidence of $R$ surpass $E$. The analysis is repeated for BBH events from the third LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, and the results show that $E$ is preferred over $R$ for existing detections. Although $E$ is generally preferred for its simplicity, it insists on elliptical polarizations, whereas $R$ can measure generic GW polarization content in terms of Stokes parameters. The accuracy of $R$ in recovering polarization content improves as the detector network expands, and the performance is independent of the GW signal morphology.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Physical review. D/Physical review. D.
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.111.082002
Primary Topic
Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multidetector characterization of gravitational-wave burst tensor polarizations with the BayesWave algorithm

M. Millhouse, Siddhant Doshi, Yi Shuen C. Lee, A. Melatos
Physical review. D/Physical review. D.
Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
article

Multidetector characterization of gravitational-wave burst tensor polarizations with the BayesWave algorithm

M. Millhouse, Siddhant Doshi, Yi Shuen C. Lee, A. Melatos
article en

Abstract

Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that gravitational waves (GWs) are tensor-polarized, with two modes of polarization: plus (${h}_{+}$) and cross (${h}_{\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}}$). The unmodeled GW burst analysis pipeline, BayesWave, offers two tensor-polarized signal models: the elliptical polarization model ($E$) and the relaxed polarization model ($R$). Future expansion of the global GW detector network will enable more accurate studies of GW polarizations with GW bursts. Here a multidetector analysis is conducted to compare the performance of $E$ and $R$ in characterizing elliptical and nonelliptical GW polarizations, using nonprecessing and precessing binary black holes (BBHs) respectively as representative synthetic sources. It is found that both models reconstruct the elliptical nonprecessing BBH signals accurately, but $E$ has a higher Bayesian evidence than $R$ as it is has fewer model parameters. The same is true for precessing BBHs that are reconstructed equally well by both models. However, for some events with high precession and especially with three or more detectors, the reconstruction accuracy and evidence of $R$ surpass $E$. The analysis is repeated for BBH events from the third LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, and the results show that $E$ is preferred over $R$ for existing detections. Although $E$ is generally preferred for its simplicity, it insists on elliptical polarizations, whereas $R$ can measure generic GW polarization content in terms of Stokes parameters. The accuracy of $R$ in recovering polarization content improves as the detector network expands, and the performance is independent of the GW signal morphology.

Physical review. D/Physical review. D.Vol. 111(8)
Georgia Institute of Technology (US), Australian Research Council (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), ARC Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (AU)
National Science Foundation, Australian Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.