pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.10076 · v1 · pith:FBLDJBUNnew · submitted 2026-06-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.CO· gr-qc

Method to get Better Sky Maps in a GstLAL Low-Latency Analysis

Prathamesh Joshi , Becca Ewing , Chad Hanna , Zach Yarbrough , Jolien D. E. Creighton , Shomik Adhicary , Pratyusava Baral , Amanda Baylor
show 35 more authors
Kipp Cannon Sarah Caudill Michael W. Coughlin Bryce Cousins Heather Fong Richard N. George Shaon Ghosh Patrick Godwin Reiko Harada Yun-Jing Huang Rachael Huxford James Kennington Soichiro Kuwahara Alvin K. Y. Li Ryan Magee Duncan Meacher Cody Messick Soichiro Morisaki Debnandini Mukherjee Wanting Niu Alexander Pace Cort Posnansky Anarya Ray Surabhi Sachdev Shio Sakon Stefano Schmidt Urja Shah Divya Singh Ron Tapia Leo Tsukada Koh Ueno Aaron Viets Leslie Wade Madeline Wade Noah Zhang
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 14:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords gravitational wavesGstLALsky localizationlow-latency searchhierarchical searchmulti-messenger astronomyLIGOparameter estimation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A targeted follow-up search on GstLAL low-latency candidates recovers more accurate parameters and improves sky localization by 16.75 percent on average.

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

The paper describes a method that takes the rapid but approximate outputs from the GstLAL gravitational-wave search and runs a small, focused hierarchical search on those candidates. This step operates on a medium-latency timescale of seconds to minutes and returns refined estimates of the signal parameters. When tested on forty days of LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA data from the third observing run, the refined parameters raised overall search performance by 5.38 percent and sky-location accuracy by 16.75 percent while also reducing systematic error. The approach has already been incorporated into the GstLAL pipeline for the fourth observing run.

Core claim

The central claim is that ingesting GstLAL low-latency results into a small targeted hierarchical search recovers the same candidates with more accurate parameters on a medium-latency timescale, thereby improving both the detection statistics and the derived sky locations without the full computational cost of a complete re-analysis.

What carries the argument

The targeted hierarchical search, which re-processes selected GstLAL candidates with a focused template bank to refine intrinsic and extrinsic parameters.

If this is right

  • Sky maps delivered to astronomers for electromagnetic follow-up become measurably tighter.
  • The same candidates receive both higher ranking statistics and lower false-alarm rates.
  • The pipeline can supply improved localizations while still meeting the low-latency requirement for alerts.
  • The method slots into the existing GstLAL workflow and has been adopted for the fourth observing run.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same hierarchical-refinement step could be applied to other modeled searches that already produce rapid but approximate triggers.
  • Extending the test to the full O3 dataset or to simulated populations with known sky locations would quantify how often the accuracy gain holds.
  • If the refinement step can be made faster, the overall latency between detection and telescope pointing could shrink further.

Load-bearing premise

The targeted search improves parameter estimates without introducing new biases or missing genuine signals.

What would settle it

A side-by-side comparison on an independent set of injected signals or real events in which the refined parameters produce sky maps that are no more accurate than the original GstLAL maps.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.10076 by Aaron Viets, Alexander Pace, Alvin K. Y. Li, Amanda Baylor, Anarya Ray, Becca Ewing, Bryce Cousins, Chad Hanna, Cody Messick, Cort Posnansky, Debnandini Mukherjee, Divya Singh, Duncan Meacher, Heather Fong, James Kennington, Jolien D. E. Creighton, Kipp Cannon, Koh Ueno, Leo Tsukada, Leslie Wade, Madeline Wade, Michael W. Coughlin, Noah Zhang, Patrick Godwin, Prathamesh Joshi, Pratyusava Baral, Rachael Huxford, Reiko Harada, Richard N. George, Ron Tapia, Ryan Magee, Sarah Caudill, Shaon Ghosh, Shio Sakon, Shomik Adhicary, Soichiro Kuwahara, Soichiro Morisaki, Stefano Schmidt, Surabhi Sachdev, Urja Shah, Wanting Niu, Yun-Jing Huang, Zach Yarbrough.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. This figure shows two examples of sky maps. The one on the left is relatively well constrained in terms of sky location, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. This figure shows a schematic of the template [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. This figure shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. This plot shows a histogram of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. A histogram of the combined SNR improvement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. This plot shows the mean percent improvement in SNR due to the SNR Optimizer as a function of minimum SNR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. This plot shows the average percent of times the SNR Optimizer finds a higher SNR than GstLAL (i.e. it is the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. This plot shows cumulative histograms of the 90% [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. This plot shows cumulative histograms of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The end-to-end latencies (left) and internal latencies (right) of the SNR Optimizer. The SNR Optimizer has an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. This plot shows the contributions from finding a better template (top left), real-time template whitening (top right), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Modeled gravitational wave searches correlate the strain data with a bank of gravitational wave template waveforms to make detections of gravitational wave candidates, and these results are processed by downstream tools to calculate the likely sky location and distance of the source of the candidates. This is crucial for multi-messenger efforts, since it informs astronomers where to point their telescopes to facilitate electromagnetic follow-up of the gravitational wave candidates. We present a novel method to improve the low-latency results of the GstLAL gravitational wave search pipeline, and thus improving sky location estimates of low-latency candidates. This method involves ingesting the GstLAL low-latency results, and performing a small targeted hierarchical search to recover the candidates with more accurate parameters, in a medium-latency timescale (few seconds to five minutes). To test our method, we perform a GstLAL low-latency analysis on forty days of data from the third observing run of LIGO, Virgo, and KAGRA, and show that our method improves the GstLAL results by 5.38% and the subsequent sky location results by 16.75% on average. In addition to this increase in precision, we also show that these results are more accurate as compared to the GstLAL results. This method has been adopted by GstLAL for the fourth observing run.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a method to improve low-latency GstLAL gravitational-wave candidate parameters by ingesting those results and running a targeted hierarchical search on a medium-latency timescale (seconds to minutes). On forty days of O3 data the method is reported to yield average improvements of 5.38 % in the candidate parameters and 16.75 % in the derived sky locations, with an additional claim that the new parameters are more accurate; the method has been adopted by GstLAL for O4.

Significance. If the accuracy claim is substantiated, the approach would be a practical, low-overhead enhancement for low-latency multi-messenger follow-up. The reported adoption for O4 already indicates operational utility, but the strength of that utility rests on whether the hierarchical step demonstrably recovers parameters closer to truth rather than merely different ones.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (and corresponding results section): the claim that the recovered parameters are 'more accurate' is evaluated solely on real O3 data. Without injected signals whose true parameters are known, no independent metric exists to establish that the new values are closer to truth; any systematic offset introduced by the hierarchical search would remain undetectable in the reported comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and for highlighting an important limitation in our accuracy claim. We address the major comment below and agree that revisions are needed to avoid overstating what the O3 data alone can demonstrate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (and corresponding results section): the claim that the recovered parameters are 'more accurate' is evaluated solely on real O3 data. Without injected signals whose true parameters are known, no independent metric exists to establish that the new values are closer to truth; any systematic offset introduced by the hierarchical search would remain undetectable in the reported comparison.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that the current wording overstates the result. On real O3 data we can only demonstrate that the targeted hierarchical search produces different (and, by our metrics, improved) parameter estimates relative to the low-latency GstLAL output; we have no independent ground truth with which to verify that the new values are closer to the true source parameters. We will revise the abstract and the corresponding results section to remove the unqualified claim that the recovered parameters are “more accurate.” The revised text will instead emphasize the measured improvements in candidate parameters (5.38 %) and sky localization (16.75 %) while explicitly noting that accuracy relative to truth cannot be assessed without injections. We will also add a short limitations paragraph acknowledging this point. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical validation on independent data

full rationale

The paper describes a targeted hierarchical search method applied to GstLAL low-latency outputs and validates it via direct numerical comparison of precision and accuracy metrics on 40 days of real O3 strain data. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-definitional steps, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation or testing chain. The reported 5.38% and 16.75% improvements are measured against the baseline pipeline on the same external dataset, making the result falsifiable and independent of the method's own construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, no specific free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable in the provided information.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5958 in / 1123 out tokens · 26253 ms · 2026-06-27T14:46:19.381288+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    discrete nature of the fixed template bank

  2. [2]

    templates not whitened with a PSD measured in 4 real time

  3. [3]

    low FFT length for PSD measurement and data whitening

  4. [4]

    SNR Optimizer Methods

    low rate of data sampling B. SNR Optimizer Methods

  5. [5]

    It implements a targeted, hierarchical, and sub-threshold search in or- der to follow-up on candidates reported by GstLAL, and recover them with a higher SNR

    Design Principles The SNR Optimizer is designed to mitigate any loss in SNR due to the aforementioned reasons, and maxi- mize SNR, leading to better sky maps. It implements a targeted, hierarchical, and sub-threshold search in or- der to follow-up on candidates reported by GstLAL, and recover them with a higher SNR. The SNR Optimizer has evolved from the ...

  6. [6]

    Template Bank The SNR Optimizer does not rely on a fixed bank of pre-created templates. Instead, because of its hierarchi- cal nature, it starts off with a fixed template bank, and dynamically creates new templates in between the gaps of the original templates, as it closes in on the true lo- cation of the signal in the intrinsic parameter space. To do th...

  7. [7]

    online” mode, or a high-latency “offline

    Search Algorithm Similar to GstLAL, the SNR Optimizer can be run in a low-latency “online” mode, or a high-latency “offline” mode. In the offline mode, it reads in a gstlal event file for a particular candidate, and analyzes a small amount of data around it. The offline mode is meant only for test- ing purposes. More importantly, in the online mode, the S...

  8. [8]

    Coincidence Formation The method implemented by the SNR Optimizer for forming coincidences across detectors when creating a candidate is different than that implemented by GstLAL, because of two reasons:

  9. [9]

    This means that the SNR Optimizer can create triggers even below an SNR of 4, unlike GstLAL, and consider them for forming coincidences

    The SNR Optimizer is a sub-threshold search, whereas GstLAL is not. This means that the SNR Optimizer can create triggers even below an SNR of 4, unlike GstLAL, and consider them for forming coincidences

  10. [10]

    Since GstLAL calculates a LR based on the prop- erties of the coincidence itself, it can afford to be less strict when forming coincidences, because if it forms a “bad” coincidence (i.e. with an unphysi- cal combination of arrival times, phases and SNRs at different detectors), the part of the LR equation that calculates the probability of such a combina-...

  11. [11]

    up- loads

    O4 Configuration The SNR Optimizer has been adopted by GstLAL for use during fourth observing run (O4). Here, we will pro- vide details about the configuration used for the SNR Op- 7 timizer in O4. The initial template bank used by the SNR Optimizer is the full O4 GstLAL template bank, since it has been generated viamanifold. It is generated in the 3 dime...

    2048

  12. [12]

    The SNR Optimizer relies on the GstLAL job which 12 FIG. 12. This plot shows the contributions from finding a better template (top left), real-time template whitening (top right), higher FFT length (bottom left), and higher data sampling rate (bottom right) towards the overall SNR gain obtained by the SNR Optimizer. During the process of finding a better ...

  13. [13]

    Sincekafkais not necessarily used by all search pipelines, this method of communication can instead by changed to be through GraceDB

    The SNR Optimizer relies on theApache Kafka software package to get information from the GstLAL low-latency analysis about candidates it found. Sincekafkais not necessarily used by all search pipelines, this method of communication can instead by changed to be through GraceDB. There already exists code to continuously communicate with GraceDB about upload...

  14. [14]

    The SNR Optimizer can stop doing any maximiza- tion over templates, and to only use the template reported by GstLAL to produce the SNR Opti- mizer’s trigger

  15. [15]

    The SNR Optimizer can re-use the Hanford and Livingston data supplied by GstLAL, and only matched filter Virgo data and add it to the can- didate, while still observing the coincidence forma- tion method discussed in Sec. II

  16. [16]

    The SNR Optimizer can set its FFT length to be low, like GstLAL does (4 seconds worth of data)

  17. [17]

    The average internal la- tency of the SNR Optimizer in this low-latency mode is less than 1 second, with end-to-end latencies averaging around 10 seconds

    The SNR Optimizer can set its data sampling rate to be low, like GstLAL does (2048Hz) By doing so, the SNR Optimizer is able to very quickly add Virgo data to the candidates formed by GstLAL from Hanford and Livingston data. The average internal la- tency of the SNR Optimizer in this low-latency mode is less than 1 second, with end-to-end latencies averag...

  18. [18]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collab- oration, GCN21505(2017)

    2017

  19. [19]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collabora- tion and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. X9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collabora- tion and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 161101 (2018)

    2018

  22. [22]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collabora- tion and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 011102 (2019)

    2019

  23. [23]

    Aasiet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration), Class

    J. Aasiet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration), Class. Quant. Grav.32, 074001 (2015), arXiv:1411.4547 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    Acerneseet al.(The Virgo Collaboration), Class

    F. Acerneseet al.(The Virgo Collaboration), Class. Quant. Grav.32, 024001 (2015), arXiv:1408.3978 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  25. [25]

    T. Akutsuet al., Progress of Theoretical and Exper- imental Physics2021(2020), 10.1093/ptep/ptaa125, 05A101, https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2021/5/05A101/37974994/ptaa125.pdf

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptaa125 2020

  26. [26]

    GraceDB: A Gravitational Wave Candidate Event Database,

    B. Moe, P. Brady, B. Stephens, E. Katsavounidis, R. Williams, and F. Zhang, “GraceDB: A Gravitational Wave Candidate Event Database,” (2014)

    2014

  27. [27]

    Messicket al., Phys

    C. Messicket al., Phys. Rev. D95, 042001 (2017), arXiv:1604.04324 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    GstLAL: A software framework for gravitational wave discovery,

    K. Cannonet al., “GstLAL: A software framework for gravitational wave discovery,” (2020), arXiv:2010.05082 [astro-ph.IM]

    arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    The GstLAL Search Analysis Methods for Compact Binary Mergers in Advanced LIGO’s Second and Advanced Virgo’s First Observing Runs,

    S. Sachdevet al., “The GstLAL Search Analysis Methods for Compact Binary Mergers in Advanced LIGO’s Second and Advanced Virgo’s First Observing Runs,” (2019), arXiv:1901.08580 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  30. [30]

    Hannaet al., Phys

    C. Hannaet al., Phys. Rev.D101, 022003 (2020), arXiv:1901.02227 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Venumadhav, B

    T. Venumadhav, B. Zackay, J. Roulet, L. Dai, and M. Zaldarriaga, Phys. Rev. D100, 023011 (2019)

    2019

  32. [32]

    2021, PhRvD, 104, 063030, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.063030

    B. Zackay, L. Dai, T. Venumadhav, J. Roulet, and M. Zaldarriaga, Physical Review D104(2021), 10.1103/physrevd.104.063030

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.063030 2021

  33. [33]

    Aubin, F

    F. Aubin, F. Brighenti, R. Chierici, D. Estevez, G. Greco, G. M. Guidi, V. Juste, F. Marion, B. Mours, E. Nitoglia, O. Sauter, and V. Sordini, Classical and Quantum Grav- ity38, 095004 (2021)

    2021

  34. [34]

    Adams, D

    T. Adams, D. Buskulic, V. Germain, G. M. Guidi, F. Marion, M. Montani, B. Mours, F. Piergiovanni, and G. Wang, Classical and Quantum Gravity33, 175012 (2016)

    2016

  35. [35]

    T. D. Canton, A. H. Nitz, B. Gadre, G. S. C. Davies, V. Villa-Ortega, T. Dent, I. Harry, and L. Xiao, The Astrophysical Journal923, 254 (2021)

    2021

  36. [36]

    G. S. Davies, T. Dent, M. T´ apai, I. Harry, C. McIsaac, and A. H. Nitz, Physical Review D102(2020), 10.1103/physrevd.102.022004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.022004 2020

  37. [38]

    Barra and P

    Q. Chu, Physical Review D105(2022), 10.1103/Phys- RevD.105.024023

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2022

  38. [39]

    Chu,Low-latency detection and localization of gravi- tational waves from compact binary coalescences, Ph.D

    Q. Chu,Low-latency detection and localization of gravi- tational waves from compact binary coalescences, Ph.D. thesis, The University of Western Australia (2017)

    2017

  39. [40]

    Lsc algorithm library,

    LSC Algorithm Library, “Lsc algorithm library,”http:// www.lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/lal, uRLhttp://www. lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/lal

  40. [41]

    Aasiet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys

    J. Aasiet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D88, 062001 (2013)

    2013

  41. [42]

    Rapid Bayesian position re- construction for gravitational-wave transients,

    L. P. Singer and L. R. Price, “Rapid Bayesian position re- construction for gravitational-wave transients,” (2016), arXiv:1508.03634 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [43]

    L. P. Singeret al., Astrophys. J. Lett.829, L15 (2016), arXiv:1603.07333 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  43. [44]

    Ashtonet al., Astrophys

    G. Ashtonet al., Astrophys. J. Suppl.241, 27 (2019), arXiv:1811.02042 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  44. [45]

    I. M. Romero-Shawet al., Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 499, 3295 (2020), arXiv:2006.00714 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  45. [46]

    Template bank for compact binary merg- ers in the fourth observing run of Advanced LIGO, Ad- vanced Virgo, and KAGRA,

    S. Sakonet al., “Template bank for compact binary merg- ers in the fourth observing run of Advanced LIGO, Ad- vanced Virgo, and KAGRA,” (2022), arXiv:2211.16674 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2022

  46. [47]

    How many times should we matched fil- ter gravitational wave data? a comparison of gstlal’s on- line and offline performance,

    P. Joshi, W. Niu, C. Hanna, R. Huxford, D. Singh, L. Tsukada, S. Adhicary, P. Baral, A. Baylor, K. Can- non, S. Caudill, M. W. Coughlin, B. Cousins, J. D. E. Creighton, B. Ewing, H. Fong, R. N. George, S. Ghosh, P. Godwin, R. Harada, Y.-J. Huang, C. Messick, S. Morisaki, D. Mukherjee, A. Pace, C. Posnansky, A. Ray, S. Sachdev, S. Sakon, U. Shah, R. Tapia,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  47. [48]

    Background Fil- ter: A method for removing signal contamination during significance estimation of a GstLAL anaysis,

    P. Joshi, L. Tsukada, and C. Hanna, “Background Fil- ter: A method for removing signal contamination during significance estimation of a GstLAL anaysis,” (2023), arXiv:2305.18233 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  48. [49]

    Tsukada, P

    L. Tsukada, P. Joshi, S. Adhicary, R. George, A. Guimaraes, C. Hanna, R. Magee, A. Zimmerman, P. Baral, A. Baylor, K. Cannon, S. Caudill, B. Cousins, J. D. E. Creighton, B. Ewing, H. Fong, P. Godwin, R. Harada, Y.-J. Huang, R. Huxford, J. Kennington, S. Kuwahara, A. K. Y. Li, D. Meacher, C. Messick, S. Morisaki, D. Mukherjee, W. Niu, A. Pace, C. Posnan- s...

    arXiv 2023

  49. [50]

    Igwn public alerts user guide,

    “Igwn public alerts user guide,”https://emfollow. docs.ligo.org/userguide/analysis/index.html# alert-threshold

  50. [51]

    C. A. Rose,Rapid Parameter Estimation of Compact Bi- nary Coalescences with Gravitational Waves, Ph.D. the- sis, The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (2024)

    2024

  51. [52]

    When to Point Your Telescopes: Gravitational Wave Trigger Classification for Real- Time Multi-Messenger Followup Observations,

    A. Rayet al., “When to Point Your Telescopes: Gravitational Wave Trigger Classification for Real- Time Multi-Messenger Followup Observations,” (2023), arXiv:2306.07190 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2023

  52. [53]

    Villa-Ortega, T

    V. Villa-Ortega, T. Dent, and A. C. Barroso, arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.10080 (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  53. [54]

    Andres, M

    N. Andres, M. Assiduo, F. Aubin, R. Chierici, D. Estevez, F. Faedi, G. M. Guidi, V. Juste, F. Marion, B. Mours, E. Nitoglia, and V. Sordini, Classical and Quantum 15 Gravity39, 055002 (2022)

    2022

  54. [55]

    Ewing, R

    B. Ewing, R. Huxford, D. Singh, L. Tsukada, C. Hanna, Y.-J. Huang, P. Joshi, A. K. Y. Li, R. Magee, C. Mes- sick, A. Pace, A. Ray, S. Sachdev, S. Sakon, R. Tapia, S. Adhicary, P. Baral, A. Baylor, K. Cannon, S. Caudill, S. S. Chaudhary, M. W. Coughlin, B. Cousins, J. D. E. Creighton, R. Essick, H. Fong, R. N. George, P. Godwin, R. Harada, J. Kennington, S...

    arXiv 2023

  55. [56]

    Hanna, P

    C. Hanna, P. Joshi, R. Huxford, K. Cannon, S. Caudill, C. Chan, B. Cousins, J. D. E. Creighton, B. Ew- ing, M. Fernandez, H. Fong, P. Godwin, R. Magee, D. Meacher, C. Messick, S. Morisaki, D. Mukherjee, H. Ohta, A. Pace, S. Privitera, S. Sachdev, S. Sakon, D. Singh, R. Tapia, L. Tsukada, D. Tsuna, T. Tsutsui, K. Ueno, A. Viets, L. Wade, M. Wade, and J. Wa...

    2022

  56. [57]

    Hanna, J

    C. Hanna, J. Kennington, S. Sakon, S. Privitera, M. Fer- nandez, J. Wang, C. Messick, A. Pace, K. Cannon, P. Joshi, R. Huxford, S. Caudill, C. Chan, B. Cousins, J. D. E. Creighton, B. Ewing, H. Fong, P. Godwin, R. Magee, D. Meacher, S. Morisaki, D. Mukherjee, H. Ohta, S. Sachdev, D. Singh, R. Tapia, L. Tsukada, D. Tsuna, T. Tsutsui, K. Ueno, A. Viets, L. ...

    2023

  57. [58]

    gwcelery,

    “gwcelery,”https://git.ligo.org/emfollow/gwcelery (2023)

    2023

  58. [59]

    Apache kafka,

    A. S. Foundation, “Apache kafka,”

  59. [60]

    Low-latency alert products and their performance in anticipation of the fourth ligo-virgo- kagra observing run,

    S. S. Chaudharyet al., “Low-latency alert products and their performance in anticipation of the fourth ligo-virgo- kagra observing run,” (in prep) (2023)

    2023

  60. [61]

    Sidery, B

    T. Sidery, B. Aylott, N. Christensen, B. Farr, W. Farr, F. Feroz, J. Gair, K. Grover, P. Graff, C. Hanna, V. Kalogera, I. Mandel, R. O’Shaughnessy, M. Pitkin, L. Price, V. Raymond, C. R¨ over, L. Singer, M. van der Sluys, R. J. E. Smith, A. Vecchio, J. Veitch, and S. Vi- tale, Phys. Rev. D89, 084060 (2014)

    2014

  61. [62]

    Newmarch and J

    J. Newmarch and J. Newmarch, Linux Sound Program- ming , 211 (2017)

    2017