Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 34 references

Expanding the Quantum-Limited Gravitational-Wave Detection Horizon

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a new front-surface heating actuator, FROSTI, can lower the LIGO A+ noise floor by up to 20% and add 4 Mpc to the binary neutron star detection range.

desk verdict A solid simulation study of a genuinely new thermal-correction concept, with the headline gain conditional on an undemonstrated actuator noise requirement. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06702 v1 pith:MX7FKDFR submitted 2025-02-10 astro-ph.IM gr-qc

Liu Tao , Mohak Bhattacharya , Peter Carney , Luis Martin Gutierrez , Luke Johnson , Shane Levin , Cynthia Liang , Xuesi Ma
show 4 more authors
Michael Padilla Tyler Rosauer Aiden Wilkin Jonathan W. Richardson
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMgr-qc
keywords gravitational-wavedetectorsquantumnoisesqueezedlightthermalcompensationadaptiveopticsFROSTIwavefrontcorrectionLIGOA+
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the next step in gravitational-wave sensitivity, higher laser power and stronger squeezing, is currently blocked by thermal distortions in the interferometer's mirrors, and that a new actuator called FROSTI can remove that block. FROSTI projects carefully shaped infrared radiation directly onto the front surface of each test mass, correcting wavefront errors on few-centimeter scales that the existing thermal compensation system cannot reach. In simulated projections for LIGO A+ with 125 W input power and 9 dB of effective injected squeezing, this correction reduces the noise floor by up to 20% from 200 Hz to 5 kHz, corresponding to a 4 Mpc increase in sky-averaged detection range for binary neutron star mergers. The same approach is projected to reach the 750 kW A+ arm-power target at 120 W input and to move toward the 1.5 MW arm power planned for the next detector generation.

What carries the argument

The central object is FROSTI, a vacuum-mounted ring heater whose infrared radiation is reshaped by nonimaging reflectors into a custom annular irradiance pattern on the test mass front surface. It works by producing corrective surface heating that cancels beam-induced thermoelastic deformation and thermorefractive substrate lensing, and the paper couples ray-tracing designs with finite-element models of those distortions inside a frequency-domain interferometer simulation to predict power buildup, squeezing, and strain sensitivity.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be to measure the relative intensity noise of a FROSTI heating profile near 20 Hz on the operating prototype and then compare achieved arm power, observed squeezing, and strain noise in a powered A+ interferometer with the projections in Figs. 4 and 5; if the RIN exceeds $3 \times 10^{-8}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$ or the thermally induced mode-mismatch losses exceed the model's, the projected 20% noise reduction and 4 Mpc range gain will not materialize.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that thermal aberrations, not laser power or squeezing technology themselves, will set the practical ceiling on quantum-limited sensitivity in current and future gravitational-wave detectors, and that a new adaptive optical actuator, FROSTI (FROnt Surface Type Irradiator), can break that ceiling. FROSTI mounts close to the test mass and projects 3-14 µm blackbody radiation, shaped by nonimaging reflectors, onto the front surface where it is absorbed within microns and corrects thermoelastic and thermorefractive distortions with spatial resolution of 2-5 cm. In frequency-domain interferometer simulations of LIGO A+ coupled to finite-element thermal models, correcting both input and end test masses yields up to a 20% noise reduction from 200 Hz to 5 kHz at 125 W input and 9 dB injected squeezing, adding 4 Mpc to the binary neutron star range while maintaining observed squeezing near the A+ target and reaching higher arm powers than the current thermal compensation system allows.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that FROSTI can deliver the optimized heating patterns with relative intensity noise below $3 \times 10^{-8}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$ near 20 Hz, so that the actuator's own thermoelastic and photothermal displacement noise does not swamp the quantum-noise gain.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With FROSTI on both input and end test masses, LIGO A+ reaches its 750 kW arm-power target at 120 W input power, whereas the current thermal compensation system requires about 50% more input power.
  • The same dual-FROSTI correction keeps observed squeezing near the A+ target of 7 dB at increasing arm power, where current thermal compensation degrades it.
  • At nominal A+ parameters, the noise floor falls by up to 20% across 200 Hz to 5 kHz, adding 4 Mpc to the sky-averaged binary neutron star detection range.
  • The end-test-mass profile intentionally creates edge roll-off to suppress a problematic higher-order arm cavity mode and reduce future point-absorber impacts.
  • The technology is positioned as a key step toward the 1.5 MW arm power and 10 dB squeezing targets of the next US detector generation and the planned 40-km observatory.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An implication the paper leaves implicit is that the same front-surface heating approach could be adapted to the 40-km next-generation observatory, where thermal compensation will be even more demanding, although the paper does not model that detector directly.
  • The edge roll-off designed for the end test masses may yield a robustness benefit beyond the sensitivity curves by reducing parametric instabilities and point-absorber losses, a benefit not captured in the projected strain noise.
  • Because A+ test masses are relatively light, pushing arm power raises radiation-pressure noise at low frequencies, so the practical astrophysical gain depends on input power choice; a full population-injection study would clarify whether the 4 Mpc range gain survives in real observing runs.
  • If nested multi-zone heater rings deliver more complex irradiance profiles, the residual wavefront error could shrink further, and this improvement could be quantified in FEA before new hardware is built.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a simulation-based projection of a new adaptive-optics technology, FROSTI, designed to correct thermal distortions on LIGO A+ test masses. The authors couple finite-element models of thermoelastic and thermorefractive deformations to Finesse interferometer simulations, self-consistently powering up the interferometer and re-optimizing TCS actuator levels. They find that FROSTI, applied to the ITMs or to both ITMs and ETMs, can reduce the noise floor by up to 20% between 200 Hz and 5 kHz at 125 W input power and 9 dB effective injected squeezing, corresponding to a 4 Mpc increase in the binary-neutron-star detection range. They also project that FROSTI enables the A+ arm-power target of 750 kW at 120 W input and maintains higher observed squeezing than current TCS. The experimental demonstration of the prototype is deferred to an in-preparation companion paper.

Significance. If the projections are correct, the work identifies a concrete technology with quantitative performance targets, potentially enabling higher circulating power and squeezing in LIGO A+ and future detectors. The simulation methodology is a strength: the FROSTI irradiance profiles are optimized to minimize wavefront error rather than to achieve a preset noise reduction, and the FEA-Finesse coupling captures the power dependence of thermal distortions. The headline predictions are clear and falsifiable. However, the central claim is conditional on the actuator meeting a strict relative-intensity-noise requirement and on several assumed parameters (0.5 ppm absorption, 9 dB injected squeezing, 6% static loss), none of which are demonstrated or error-budgeted in the manuscript. The letter is therefore a useful projection rather than a demonstration of the technology.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section II, RIN requirement] The projected 20% noise reduction and the corresponding 4 Mpc range gain assume that FROSTI can deliver the optimized heating profiles with relative intensity noise (RIN) at or below 3e-8/sqrtHz near 20 Hz. The paper states this requirement and defers experimental verification to companion paper [21], which is in preparation. Since the text identifies flexure (bending) noise as the dominant actuator-noise coupling, the headline improvement is conditional on an unverified actuator property. Please either (a) provide a measured RIN spectrum of the prototype or a representative blackbody source, (b) present a noise budget showing the margin between the 3e-8/sqrtHz requirement and the implied displacement noise relative to the quantum noise floor, or (c) show a sensitivity curve of the projected strain sensitivity for RIN values above the requirement. Without one of these, the central claim is not fully supported.
  2. [Section III, simulation assumptions] The quantitative claims in Figs. 4 and 5 are computed for a single set of assumptions: 0.5 ppm coating absorption, 9 dB effective injected squeezing, and 6% static attenuation loss. These values are plausible but are not justified with error bars or used in a sensitivity analysis. In particular, the 0.5 ppm absorptivity is a fixed input that strongly affects the thermal-lensing magnitude and the required compensation power; a variation between 0.3 and 1 ppm could change the relative benefit of FROSTI. I request a sensitivity study varying these parameters within their plausible ranges to confirm that the qualitative ordering of the curves (FROSTI Dual > FROSTI ITM > Current TCS) and the headline 20% improvement are robust. This is a load-bearing issue because the paper presents a single-number projection rather than a range.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table I] The column layout is confusing: the headers 'FROSTI RH CP' and 'Current TCS RH CP' appear to combine two actuator types. Please reformat so that ring-heater (RH) and compensation-plate (CP) powers are in separate columns for each case.
  2. [Section II] There is a typo 'thermorefrective' in the description of the FEA model; it should be 'thermorefractive'.
  3. [Section II] The term 'HOM7' is used without definition; a brief parenthetical explanation would make the text accessible to readers outside the LIGO community.
  4. [Figures 3 and 4] The figures show simulation outputs without any indication of numerical uncertainty or sensitivity. A brief statement that these are deterministic model results with no statistical errors would set appropriate expectations.
  5. [References] References [21] and [25] are not publicly available at the time of writing; please indicate their status (e.g., in preparation, LIGO internal) so that readers can judge the support for claims grounded in those documents.
  6. [Data availability] Since this is a simulation paper, providing the Finesse input files and FEA mirror maps would improve reproducibility and allow independent verification of the central claims.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

The central Finesse/FEA projection is self-contained; only the motivational and RIN-requirement premises rely on the authors' own technical reports.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section I (Introduction), paragraph 5]
    "Modeling has shown that sufficiently mitigating thermally-induced aberrations will require a qualitatively new form of active wavefront correction on the test masses [20], with actuation on smaller spatial scales (2-5 cm) than are accessible to LIGO's existing thermal compensation system (TCS) [19]."

    The necessity premise that a new actuator is required is supported by LIGO technical report [20], whose author list includes the present corresponding author J. W. Richardson and collaborators. This is a self-citation that is load-bearing for the motivation: the paper does not re-derive that modeling, so the conclusion that FROSTI is needed is imported from the same group's prior unshown work. However, the projected 20% noise-floor reduction and 4 Mpc range gain are not taken from [20]; they are produced by the independent Finesse and FEA simulation chain in Sections III and IV, so the central claim does not reduce to the citation.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section II, paragraph 2 (Next-Generation Adaptive Optics)]
    "For annular-like heating patterns, the requirements on their relative intensity noise (RIN) in A+ and A # are 3 × 10−8/√Hz and 1 × 10−8/√Hz, respectively, around 20 Hz [25]."

    The RIN thresholds that bound the actuator-noise coupling are cited to [25], another LIGO technical report from the same group (Cao, Rosauer, Wilkin, Brooks, Richardson). This paper does not exhibit the optomechanical and photothermal flexure calculation behind these numbers; it takes them as given inputs. The feasibility claim that FROSTI can be made sufficiently low-noise therefore rests on a self-citation. This requirement is a gating assumption for the sensitivity projection rather than a fitted output, so it does not make the headline improvement circular by construction, but it is a self-cited premise.

full rationale

The main derivation in Sections III-IV is self-contained: the FROSTI irradiance profiles in Fig. 3 are optimized with ray tracing and FEA to minimize residual wavefront errors, and the projected strain sensitivity is then obtained by running Finesse with the corresponding mirror maps, TCS re-optimization, and fixed inputs of 125 W input power and 9 dB injected squeezing. The 20% noise-floor reduction and 4 Mpc BNS range gain are outputs of that forward model, not fitted targets, so no prediction reduces by construction. The two flagged items are self-citations that support secondary premises: the need for a new wavefront actuator ([20]) and the RIN requirement ([25]) are imported from the same group's LIGO technical reports rather than re-derived here. The paper also explicitly defers the experimental demonstration of the actual prototype to companion paper [21], which is a missing-support limitation but not a circular step. Because the central sensitivity projection has independent computational content and is benchmarked against current TCS under identical assumptions, the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central projection depends on several chosen detector parameters and on the unverified feasibility of the FROSTI actuator itself. No natural entities are introduced; FROSTI is a proposed device whose independent validation is deferred to a companion paper.

free parameters (5)
  • Coating absorptivity of test masses = 0.5 ppm
    Assumed constant in the FEA self-heating model; it sets the magnitude of thermal distortion and therefore the size of the FROSTI benefit. Cited from A+ design assumptions, not measured here.
  • Effective injected squeezing = 9 dB
    Assumed at the interferometer input; observed squeezing is then derived through modeled losses. A different level would change the noise floor projections.
  • Static attenuation loss in main optics and readout = 6%
    Used to convert injected squeezing to observed squeezing; value is stated without derivation in Section IV.
  • Input laser power = 125 W
    Nominal A+ input power scenario at which the 20% noise reduction and 4 Mpc range increment are quoted.
  • Nominal A+ thermal and technical noise = A+ design curves
    Injected as external inputs into the sensitivity calculation; the curves are not reproduced in the letter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Finite element analysis of thermoelastic and thermorefractive distortions accurately predicts real wavefront errors on test masses.
    The entire FROSTI benefit is computed from FEA mirror maps coupled to Finesse; no comparison to measured distortions is shown in this letter.
  • domain assumption Finesse simulations with Pound-Drever-Hall locking and injected squeezed states faithfully represent LIGO A+ performance.
    Finesse is a standard tool, but the locking and noise models are not validated against experiment here.
  • domain assumption FROSTI can deliver the optimized irradiance profiles with relative intensity noise below 3e-8/sqrtHz around 20 Hz.
    The paper states this requirement in Section II and defers experimental verification to companion paper [21]; if unmet, actuator noise could offset the quantum noise gain.
  • domain assumption Thermal distortions are azimuthally symmetric so that azimuthally averaged irradiance profiles are sufficient.
    The optimization averages along the azimuth; point absorbers and asymmetric heating are not treated in this projection.
invented entities (1)
  • FROSTI (FROnt Surface Type Irradiator)
    purpose: Project blackbody radiation onto test mass front surfaces to correct thermally induced wavefront errors at 2-5 cm scales.
    The device concept is introduced here; experimental evidence is claimed in companion paper [21], which is not available in this preprint, and no falsifiable prediction is made beyond simulated sensitivity projections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Expanding the Quantum-Limited Gravitational-Wave Detection Horizon." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MX7FKDFR

@misc{pith2026250206702,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Expanding the Quantum-Limited Gravitational-Wave Detection Horizon},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MX7FKDFR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06702}
}
read the original abstract

We demonstrate the potential of new adaptive optical technology to expand the detection horizon of gravitational-wave observatories. Achieving greater quantum-noise-limited sensitivity to spacetime strain hinges on achieving higher circulating laser power, in excess of 1~MW, in conjunction with highly-squeezed quantum states of light. The new technology will enable significantly higher levels of laser power and squeezing in gravitational-wave detectors, by providing high-precision, low-noise correction of limiting sources of thermal distortions directly to the core interferometer optics. In simulated projections for LIGO~A+, assuming an input laser power of 125~W and an effective injected squeezing level of 9~dB entering the interferometer, an initial concept of this technology can reduce the noise floor of the detectors by up to 20\% from 200~Hz to 5~kHz, corresponding to an increment of 4~Mpc in the sky-averaged detection range for binary neutron star mergers. This work lays the foundation for one of the key technology improvements essential to fully utilize the scientific potential of the existing 4-km LIGO facilities, to observe black hole merger events past a redshift of~5, and opens a realistic pathway towards a next-generation 40-km gravitational-wave observatory in the United States, Cosmic~Explorer.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06702 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. shows the impact of the FROSTI actuators on the key performance metrics that determine LIGO’s quantum-limited sensitivity. The left panel shows the projected arm cavity power, as a function of the input power, when the corrective heating profiles from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [21]

    C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interfer- ometer, Phys. Rev. D 23, 1693 (1981)

    1981

  2. [1]

    Rescale the mirror maps obtained from the FEA models of the thermal distortions in the test masses to reflect the interferometer’s operating power

    work page

  3. [2]

    Re-optimize the power levels of the available TCS actuators at each test mass, to minimize the resid- ual Gaussian-weighted RMS wavefront errors

    work page

  4. [3]

    Run the Finesse simulation with mirror maps corresponding to the updated self-heating and re- optimized TCS corrections for each test mass

    work page

  5. [4]

    The coating absorptivity of each test mass is assumed to be 0.5 ppm

    Calculate the required input power from the optical gains of the arm and power recycling cavities. The coating absorptivity of each test mass is assumed to be 0.5 ppm. Thus, each test mass absorbs 0.375 W at the nominal A+ arm power of 750 kW [11]. IV. ASTROPHYSICAL IMP ACT Fig. 4 shows the impact of the FROSTI actuators on the key performance metrics tha...

    work page

  6. [5]

    Skenderis and M

    K. Skenderis and M. Taylor, The fuzzball proposal for black holes, Phys. Rep. 467, 117 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [6]

    B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observ- ing Runs, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [7]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-2: Compact Binary Co- alescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First Half of the Third Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021053 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 34 references
  1. [8]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-2.1: Deep ex- tended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third ob- serving run, Phys. Rev. D 109, 022001 (2024)

    2024

  2. [9]

    Abbott et al

    R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Virgo Collaboration, and KAGRA Collaboration), GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041039 (2023)

    2023

  3. [10]

    Tsang, J

    D. Tsang, J. S. Read, T. Hinderer, A. L. Piro, and R. Bondarescu, Resonant Shattering of Neutron Star Crusts, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 011102 (2012)

    2012

  4. [11]

    Cardoso and P

    V. Cardoso and P. Pani, Tests for the existence of black holes through gravitational wave echoes, Nat. Astron. 1, 586 (2017)

    2017

  5. [12]

    Brustein and A

    R. Brustein and A. J. M. Medved, Quantum hair of black holes out of equilibrium, Phys. Rev. D 97, 044035 (2018)

    2018

  6. [13]

    H. Y. Chen, M. Fishbach, and D. E. Holz, A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years, Nature 562, 545 (2018)

    2018

  7. [14]

    W. M. Farr, M. Fishbach, J. Ye, and D. E. Holz, A Fu- ture Percent-level Measurement of the Hubble Expansion at Redshift 0.8 with Advanced LIGO, ApJL 883, L42 (2019)

    2019

  8. [15]

    C. M. Caves, K. S. Thorne, R. W. P. Drever, V. D. Sand- berg, and M. Zimmermann, On the measurement of a weak classical force coupled to a quantum-mechanical os- cillator. I. Issues of principle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 52, 341 (1980)

    1980

  9. [16]

    Barsotti, L

    L. Barsotti, L. McCuller, M. Evans, and P. Fritschel, The A+ design curve, LIGO Technical Report LIGO- T1800042 (2018)

    2018

  10. [17]

    Fritschel, K

    P. Fritschel, K. Kuns, J. Driggers, A. Effler, B. Lantz, D. Ottaway, S. Ballmer, K. Dooley, R. X. Adhikari, M. Evans, B. Farr, G. Gonzalez, P. Schmidt, and S. Raja, Report of the LSC Post-O5 Study Group, LIGO Techni- cal Report LIGO-T2200287 (2022)

    2022

  11. [18]

    Evans, R

    M. Evans, R. X. Adhikari, C. Afle, S. W. Ballmer, S. Bis- coveanu, S. Borhanian, D. A. Brown, Y. Chen, R. Eisen- stein, A. Gruson, A. Gupta, E. D. Hall, R. Huxford, B. Kamai, R. Kashyap, J. S. Kissel, K. Kuns, P. Landry, A. Lenon, G. Lovelace, L. McCuller, K. Ng, A. H. Nitz, J...

    2021 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Punturo, M

    M. Punturo, M. Abernathy, F. Acernese, B. Allen, N. An- dersson, K. Arun, F. Barone, B. Barr, M. Barsuglia, M. Beker, N. Beveridge, S. Birindelli, S. Bose, L. Bosi, S. Braccini, C. Bradaschia, T. Bulik, E. Calloni, G. Cella, E. C. Mottin, S. Chelkowski, A. Chincarini, J. Clark...

    2010

  13. [20]

    H. T. Cao, A. Brooks, K. Kuns, D. Brown, H. Ya- mamoto, and J. W. Richardson, Post-O5 Thermal Mod- eling: A# TCS Requirements, LIGO Technical Report LIGO-G2300624 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    McCuller, S

    L. McCuller, S. E. Dwyer, A. C. Green, H. Yu, K. Kuns, L. Barsotti, C. D. Blair, D. D. Brown, A. Effler, M. Evans, A. Fernandez-Galiana, P. Fritschel, V. V. Frolov, N. Kijbunchoo, G. L. Mansell, F. Matichard, N. Mavalvala, D. E. McClelland, T. McRae, A. Mullavey, D. Sigg, B. J...

    2021

  15. [23]

    Ganapathy, W

    D. Ganapathy, W. Jia, M. Nakano, V. Xu, N. Aritomi, T. Cullen, N. Kijbunchoo, S. E. Dwyer, A. Mullavey, L. McCuller, R. Abbott, I. Abouelfettouh, R. X. Ad- hikari, A. Ananyeva, S. Appert, K. Arai, S. M. Aston, M. Ball, S. W. Ballmer, D. Barker, L. Barsotti, B. K. Berger, J. Be...

    2023

  16. [24]

    A. F. Brooks, B. Abbott, M. A. Arain, G. Ciani, A. Cole, G. Grabeel, E. Gustafson, C. Guido, M. Heintze, A. Hep- tonstall, M. Jacobson, W. Kim, E. King, A. Lynch, S. O’Connor, D. Ottaway, K. Mailand, G. Mueller, J. Munch, V. Sannibale, Z. Shao, M. Smith, P. Veitch, T. Vo, C. V...

    2016

  17. [25]

    H. T. Cao, T. Rosauer, A. Wilkin, A. Brooks, and J. W. Richardson, Updates of FROSTI for use in LIGO, LIGO Technical Report LIGO-G2300506 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Rosauer et al., Demonstration of Next-Generation Wavefront Control for Gravitational-Wave Detection, Optica (2025), in preparation

    T. Rosauer et al., Demonstration of Next-Generation Wavefront Control for Gravitational-Wave Detection, Optica (2025), in preparation

    2025

  19. [27]

    A. F. Brooks, G. Vajente, H. Yamamoto, R. Abbott, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, A. Ananyeva, S. Appert, K. Arai, J. S. Areeda, Y. Asali, S. M. Aston, C. Austin, A. M. Baer, M. Ball, S. W. Ballmer, S. Banagiri, D. Barker, L. Barsotti, J. Bartlett, B. K. Berger, J. Bet- zwieser, D. ...

    2021

  20. [28]

    S. W. Ballmer, LIGO interferometer operating at de- sign sensitivity with application to gravitational radiome- try, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2006)

    2006

  21. [29]

    Willems, TCS Actuator Noise Couplings, LIGO Tech- nical Report LIGO-T060224 (2011)

    P. Willems, TCS Actuator Noise Couplings, LIGO Tech- nical Report LIGO-T060224 (2011)

    2011

  22. [31]

    Buikema, C

    A. Buikema, C. Cahillane, G. L. Mansell, C. D. Blair, R. Abbott, C. Adams, R. X. Adhikari, A. Ananyeva, S. Appert, K. Arai, J. S. Areeda, Y. Asali, S. M. As- ton, C. Austin, A. M. Baer, M. Ball, S. W. Ballmer, S. Banagiri, D. Barker, L. Barsotti, J. Bartlett, B. K. Berger, J. ...

    2020

  23. [32]

    D. D. Brown, P. Jones, S. Rowlinson, S. Leavey, A. C. Green, D. T¨ oyr¨ a, and A. Freise, PYKAT: Python pack- age for modelling precision optical interferometers, Soft- wareX 12, 100613 (2020)

    2020

  24. [33]

    R. W. P. Drever, J. L. Hall, F. V. Kowalski, J. Hough, G. M. Ford, A. J. Munley, and H. Ward, Laser phase and frequency stabilization using an optical resonator, Appl. Phys. B 31, 97 (1983)

    1983

  25. [34]

    Izumi and D

    K. Izumi and D. Sigg, Advanced LIGO: length sensing and control in a dual recycled interferometric gravita- tional wave antenna, Class. Quantum Grav. 34, 015001 (2017)

    2017

  26. [2029]

    test masses,

    The A+ upgrades are primarily aimed at reducing Brownian thermal noise on the mirror surfaces, through improved optical coatings. The A # upgrades will in- clude larger 100-kg test masses, new improved suspen- sions, and a significantly higher laser power of 1.5 MW in the 4-km...

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.