Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

GstLAL O4 Online Results Paper

T0 review · 1 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-20 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read GstLAL produced initial gravitational-wave candidate uploads at a median latency of 15.8 seconds with 98% effective uptime during O4.

desk verdict GstLAL ran reliably on O4 data with 15.8 s median latency and 98% uptime, contributing to 250 candidates and matching final classifications 93% of the time, but this is straightforward operational reporting on an existing pipeline. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.19153 v1 pith:KDJRNCVO submitted 2026-05-18 gr-qc astro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM

Shomik Adhicary , Pratyusava Baral , Amanda Baylor , Becca Ewing , Yun-Jing Huang , Rachael Huxford , Prathamesh Joshi , James Kennington
show 34 more authors
Ryan Magee Cody Messick Wanting Niu Cort Posnansky Surabhi Sachdev Shio Sakon Urja Shah Divya Singh Leo Tsukada Zach Yarbrough Noah Zhang Kipp Cannon Sarah Caudill Bryce Cousins Jolien D. E. Creighton Heather Fong Richard N. George Olivia Godwin Reiko Harada Soichiro Kuwahara Alvin K. Y. Li Duncan Meacher Soichiro Morisaki Debnandini Mukherjee Alexander Pace Anarya Ray Stefano Schmidt Ron Tapia Koh Ueno Aaron Viets Leslie Wade Madeline Wade Graham Woan Chad Hanna
This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.HEastro-ph.IM
keywords gravitationalwavesreal-timeanalysisGstLALO4observingrunlowlatencybinarymergersastrophysicalclassificationfalsealarmrate
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 evaluates the GstLAL real-time analysis pipeline during the fourth observing run of the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network. It reports that the pipeline delivered candidate uploads quickly while staying operational for nearly the entire period examined. The search contributed to hundreds of plausible events, supplied the first public information for most of them, and matched final catalog results on the majority of classifications. These outcomes show how a low-latency pipeline supports rapid follow-up observations of potential electromagnetic or neutrino signals from mergers.

What carries the argument

The GstLAL real-time analysis pipeline, which ranks candidates using a statistic and background model to separate signals from noise and issues low-latency uploads.

What would settle it

Finding that more than 12 percent of events with false-alarm rates below one per year were not flagged as significant in low latency, or that classification agreement with the final catalog fell substantially below 93 percent, would undermine the reported performance.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The GstLAL real-time analysis is designed to identify candidates with low latency, high detection efficiency, and sustained operational uptime over long observing periods. Across O4, it produced initial candidate uploads with a median latency of 15.8 s while maintaining an effective uptime of 98% during the first two parts of the observing run. During the run, the analysis contributed to 250 candidates classified as astrophysically plausible, provided the first upload for 222 of these, and was the sole contributor for 75. Among Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog events with a false-alarm rate below one per year, 88% were identified as significant in low latency and promoted for expert vet팅

Load-bearing premise

The pipeline's ranking statistic and background model correctly separate real gravitational-wave signals from detector noise.

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, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports operational performance metrics for the GstLAL real-time gravitational-wave search pipeline during the O4 run of the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network. Key results include a median latency of 15.8 s for initial candidate uploads, 98% effective uptime in the first two parts of the run, contributions to 250 astrophysically plausible candidates (first upload for 222, sole contributor for 75), identification of 88% of GWTC events with FAR below 1/yr as significant in low latency, and 93% agreement between low-latency astrophysical classifications and final catalog classifications.

Significance. If the reported counts and timings hold, this work supplies a concrete benchmark for the reliability of an established low-latency pipeline over a multi-month observing run. The quantitative documentation of latency, uptime, and classification agreement is useful for planning multi-messenger follow-up campaigns and for comparing real-time search performance across pipelines.

major comments (1)
  1. [Results / classification agreement paragraph] The 93% classification agreement and 88% identification rate are presented without an explicit statement of the event sample size, selection cuts, or statistical uncertainties. If these percentages are load-bearing for the claim of reliable low-latency performance, the manuscript should specify the denominator (number of events considered) and any error estimation in the relevant results section.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and § on uptime] The abstract and main text use 'effective uptime' without a precise definition or formula; a short parenthetical or footnote clarifying how downtime intervals are excluded would improve reproducibility.
  2. [Latency results] Table or figure showing the distribution of upload latencies would strengthen the median 15.8 s claim; if such a figure exists, ensure axis labels and caption explicitly state the time window used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript and recommendation for minor revision. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results / classification agreement paragraph] The 93% classification agreement and 88% identification rate are presented without an explicit statement of the event sample size, selection cuts, or statistical uncertainties. If these percentages are load-bearing for the claim of reliable low-latency performance, the manuscript should specify the denominator (number of events considered) and any error estimation in the relevant results section.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from greater explicitness on these points to support the claims of reliable low-latency performance. In the revised version, we have updated the relevant results section to state the exact number of events in the denominator for both percentages, clarify the selection cuts (GWTC events with FAR below 1/yr for the identification rate; events with available low-latency and catalog classifications for the agreement rate), and include statistical uncertainties on the percentages. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; factual operational metrics

full rationale

The paper reports empirical performance metrics from running the established GstLAL pipeline on O4 data, including direct counts of candidate uploads, latency timings, uptime percentages, and classification agreement rates with the final catalog. These are observational results logged from the run rather than any derivation chain, fitted parameters, or predictions. No equations or self-referential steps appear; references to prior GstLAL work provide context for the pipeline but are not load-bearing for the reported numbers, which stand independently as factual records.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is an observational performance report with no mathematical model, free parameters, or new postulated entities. All numbers are empirical tallies of pipeline outputs during the run.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of GstLAL O4 Online Results Paper." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KDJRNCVO

@misc{pith2026260519153,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: GstLAL O4 Online Results Paper},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KDJRNCVO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.19153}
}
read the original abstract

Gravitational-wave observations of merging binary neutron stars and black holes are now routinely made by detectors in the Advanced LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network. Neutron star binary systems may also produce detectable electromagnetic and particle emission over times scales ranging from seconds to years. Real-time gravitational-wave searches play a central role in enabling time-critical electromagnetic and/or neutrino follow-up observations. During the fourth observing run (O4) of the Advanced LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA network, multiple real-time searches operated continuously to identify candidate gravitational-wave events and publicly disseminate information about these discoveries. Here, the performance and results of the GstLAL real-time analysis are reported. The analysis is designed to identify candidates with low latency, high detection efficiency, and sustained operational uptime over long observing periods. Across O4, it produced initial candidate uploads with a median latency of 15.8 s while maintaining an effective uptime of 98% during the first two parts of the observing run. During the run, the analysis contributed to 250 candidates classified as astrophysically plausible, provided the first upload for 222 of these, and was the sole contributor for 75. Among Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog events with a false-alarm rate below one per year, 88% were identified as significant in low latency and promoted for expert vetting and public dissemination. The low-latency astrophysical classifications agreed with the final catalog classifications for 93% of the events considered.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19153 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Overview of the monitoring and alerting infrastruc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Distribution of the percentage of data dropped by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Distribution of upload latencies for GstLAL on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Cumulative number of detections and candidates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Comparison of the online and offline FARs for all [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Gravitational Wave Modeling of White-Dwarf--Compact-Object Binaries and Observational Outlook

    astro-ph.HE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    WD–CO binaries produce unique GW waveforms with a sharp f_max cutoff; LGWA/DECIGO will detect many end stages, while terrestrial detectors will not mistake them for sub-solar compact objects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Mészáros, D

    P. M´ esz´ aros, D. B. Fox, C. Hanna, and K. Murase, Multi- messenger astrophysics, Nature Reviews Physics1, 585 (2019), arXiv:1906.10212 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 061102 (2016), arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, KAGRA, VIRGO), Observation of Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 2.5–4.5 M ⊙ Compact Object and a Neutron Star, Astrophys. J. Lett.970, L34 (2024), arXiv:2404.04248 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neu- tron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi GBM, INTEGRAL, IceCube, AstroSat Cadmium Zinc Telluride Imager Team, IPN, Insight-Hxmt, ANTARES, Swift, AGILE Team, 1M2H Team, Dark Energy Camera GW-EM, DES, DLT40, GRAWITA, Fermi-LAT, ATCA, ASKAP, Las Cumbres Observatory Group, OzGrav, DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program), AST3, CAAS- TRO, VINROUGE, MASTER, J...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    A. Albertet al.(ANTARES, IceCube, Pierre Auger, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Search for High-energy Neutri- nos from Binary Neutron Star Merger GW170817 with ANTARES, IceCube, and the Pierre Auger Observatory, Astrophys. J. Lett.850, L35 (2017), arXiv:1710.05839 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2017

  7. [7]

    Mageeet al., First demonstration of early warning gravitational wave alerts, Astrophys

    R. Mageeet al., First demonstration of early warning gravitational wave alerts, Astrophys. J. Lett.910, L21 (2021), arXiv:2102.04555 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    readthedocs.io/(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collabo- ration, gwcelery documentation,https://gwcelery. readthedocs.io/(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    work page 2026

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Cabero, A

    M. Cabero, A. Mahabal, and J. McIver, GWSkyNet: a real-time classifier for public gravitational-wave candidates, Astrophys. J. Lett.904, L9 (2020), arXiv:2010.11829 [gr-qc]

    2020

  2. [10]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Low- latency Gravitational-wave Alerts for Multimessenger Astronomy during the Second Advanced LIGO and Virgo Observing Run, Astrophys. J.875, 161 (2019), arXiv:1901.03310 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Messicket al., Analysis Framework for the Prompt Discovery of Compact Binary Mergers in Gravitational-wave Data, Phys

    C. Messicket al., Analysis Framework for the Prompt Discovery of Compact Binary Mergers in Gravitational-wave Data, Phys. Rev. D95, 042001 (2017), arXiv:1604.04324 [astro-ph.IM]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Dal Canton, A

    T. Dal Canton, A. H. Nitz, B. Gadre, G. S. Cabourn Davies, V. Villa-Ortega, T. Dent, I. Harry, and L. Xiao, Real-time Search for Compact Binary Merg- ers in Advanced LIGO and Virgo’s Third Observing Run Using PyCBC Live, Astrophys. J.923, 254 (2021), arXiv:2008.07494 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021

  5. [13]

    Klimenkoet al., Method for detection and reconstruc- tion of gravitational wave transients with networks of advanced detectors, Phys

    S. Klimenkoet al., Method for detection and reconstruc- tion of gravitational wave transients with networks of advanced detectors, Phys. Rev. D93, 042004 (2016), arXiv:1511.05999 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  6. [14]

    All´ en´ eet al., The MBTA pipeline for detecting compact binary coalescences in the fourth LIGO-Virgo- KAGRA observing run, Class

    C. All´ en´ eet al., The MBTA pipeline for detecting compact binary coalescences in the fourth LIGO-Virgo- KAGRA observing run, Class. Quant. Grav.42, 105009 (2025), arXiv:2501.04598 [gr-qc]

    2025

  7. [15]

    Chuet al., SPIIR online coherent pipeline to search for gravitational waves from compact binary coalescences, Phys

    Q. Chuet al., SPIIR online coherent pipeline to search for gravitational waves from compact binary coalescences, Phys. Rev. D105, 024023 (2022), arXiv:2011.06787 [gr- qc]

    2022

  8. [16]

    org/userguide/content.html(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collabora- tion, Gravitational-wave candidate event follow-up: User guide — alert content,https://emfollow.docs.ligo. org/userguide/content.html(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    2026

  9. [17]

    L. P. Singer and L. R. Price, Rapid Bayesian position reconstruction for gravitational-wave transients, Phys. Rev. D93, 024013 (2016), arXiv:1508.03634 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  10. [18]

    W. M. Farr, J. R. Gair, I. Mandel, and C. Cutler, Count- ing And Confusion: Bayesian Rate Estimation With Multiple Populations, Phys. Rev. D91, 023005 (2015), arXiv:1302.5341 [astro-ph.IM]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    S. J. Kapadiaet al., A self-consistent method to estimate the rate of compact binary coalescences with a Poisson mixture model, Class. Quant. Grav.37, 045007 (2020), arXiv:1903.06881 [astro-ph.HE]

    2020

  12. [20]

    Davis and M

    D. Davis and M. Walker, Detector Characterization and Mitigation of Noise in Ground-Based Gravitational-Wave Interferometers, Galaxies10, 12 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, KAGRA, VIRGO), GWTC-4.0: An Introduction to Version 4.0 of the Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog, Astrophys. J. Lett.995, L18 (2025), arXiv:2508.18080 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Cannon, C

    K. Cannon, C. Hanna, and D. Keppel, Interpolating com- pact binary waveforms using the singular value decompo- sition, Phys. Rev. D85, 081504 (2012), arXiv:1108.5618 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Hannaet al., Fast evaluation of multidetector con- sistency for real-time gravitational wave searches, Phys

    C. Hannaet al., Fast evaluation of multidetector con- sistency for real-time gravitational wave searches, Phys. Rev. D101, 022003 (2020), arXiv:1901.02227 [gr-qc]

    2020

  16. [24]

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

    S. Sachdevet al., The GstLAL Search Analysis Methods for Compact Binary Mergers in Advanced LIGO’s Sec- ond and Advanced Virgo’s First Observing Runs (2019), arXiv:1901.08580 [gr-qc]. 15

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

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

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

    2020

  18. [26]

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

    S. Sakonet al., Template bank for compact binary merg- ers in the fourth observing run of Advanced LIGO, Ad- vanced Virgo, and KAGRA, Phys. Rev. D109, 044066 (2024), arXiv:2211.16674 [gr-qc]

    2024

  19. [27]

    Tsukadaet al., Improved ranking statistics of the GstLAL inspiral search for compact binary coalescences, Phys

    L. Tsukadaet al., Improved ranking statistics of the GstLAL inspiral search for compact binary coalescences, Phys. Rev. D108, 043004 (2023), arXiv:2305.06286 [astro-ph.IM]

    2023

  20. [28]

    Ewinget al., Performance of the low-latency Gst- LAL inspiral search towards LIGO, Virgo, and KAGRA’s fourth observing run, Phys

    B. Ewinget al., Performance of the low-latency Gst- LAL inspiral search towards LIGO, Virgo, and KAGRA’s fourth observing run, Phys. Rev. D109, 042008 (2024), arXiv:2305.05625 [gr-qc]

    2024

  21. [29]

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

    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]

    2023

  22. [30]

    Joshiet al., New Methods for Offline GstLAL Analyses (2025), arXiv:2506.06497 [gr-qc]

    P. Joshiet al., New Methods for Offline GstLAL Analyses (2025), arXiv:2506.06497 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Joshiet al., How Many Times Should We Matched Filter Gravitational Wave Data? A Comparison of GstLAL’s Online and Offline Performance (2025), arXiv:2505.23959 [gr-qc]

    P. Joshiet al., How Many Times Should We Matched Filter Gravitational Wave Data? A Comparison of GstLAL’s Online and Offline Performance (2025), arXiv:2505.23959 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    B. J. Owen and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Matched filtering of gravitational waves from inspiraling compact binaries: Computational cost and template placement, Phys. Rev. D60, 022002 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9808076

    1999 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Allen, W

    B. Allen, W. G. Anderson, P. R. Brady, D. A. Brown, and J. D. E. Creighton, FINDCHIRP: An Algorithm for detection of gravitational waves from inspiraling com- pact binaries, Phys. Rev. D85, 122006 (2012), arXiv:gr- qc/0509116

    2012

  26. [34]

    Cannon, C

    K. Cannon, C. Hanna, and J. Peoples, Likelihood-Ratio Ranking Statistic for Compact Binary Coalescence Can- didates with Rate Estimation (2015), arXiv:1504.04632 [astro-ph.IM]

    2015 arXiv

  27. [35]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GWTC- 1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs, Phys. Rev. X9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run, Phys

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GWTC-2: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo During the First Half of the Third Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X11, 021053 (2021), arXiv:2010.14527 [gr- qc]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    R. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), GWTC-2.1: Deep extended catalog of compact binary coalescences observed by LIGO and Virgo during the first half of the third observing run, Phys. Rev. D109, 022001 (2024), arXiv:2108.01045 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Abbottet al.(KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scien- tific), GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run, Phys

    R. Abbottet al.(KAGRA, VIRGO, LIGO Scien- tific), GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X13, 041039 (2023), arXiv:2111.03606 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Updating the Gravitational-Wave Tran- sient Catalog with Observations from the First Part of the Fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA Observing Run (2025), arXiv:2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  32. [40]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), GWTC-4.0: Methods for Identifying and Characterizing Gravitational-wave Transients (2025), arXiv:2508.18081 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Aasiet al.(LIGO Scientific), Advanced LIGO, Class

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

    2015 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Acerneseet al.(VIRGO), Advanced Virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Class

    F. Acerneseet al.(VIRGO), Advanced Virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 024001 (2015), arXiv:1408.3978 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Akutsuet al.(KAGRA), Overview of KAGRA: Detec- tor design and construction history, PTEP2021, 05A101 (2021), arXiv:2005.05574 [physics.ins-det]

    T. Akutsuet al.(KAGRA), Overview of KAGRA: Detec- tor design and construction history, PTEP2021, 05A101 (2021), arXiv:2005.05574 [physics.ins-det]

    2021

  36. [44]

    B. Moe, P. Brady, B. Stephens, E. Katsavounidis, R. Williams, F. Zhang,et al.,GraceDB: A Gravitational Wave Candidate Event Database, Tech. Rep. LIGO- T1400365-v5 (LIGO Scientific Collaboration, 2014) lIGO Technical Document

    2014

  37. [45]

    ligo.org/userguide/analysis/superevents.html(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collabora- tion, Gravitational-wave candidate event follow-up: User guide — superevents,https://emfollow.docs. ligo.org/userguide/analysis/superevents.html(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    2026

  38. [46]

    ligo.org/userguide/analysis/superevents.html# selection-of-the-preferred-event(), accessed: 2026-03-24

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Col- laboration, Gravitational-wave candidate event follow-up: User guide — superevents: Selection of the preferred event,https://emfollow.docs. ligo.org/userguide/analysis/superevents.html# selection-of-the-preferred-event(), accessed: ...

    2026

  39. [47]

    Hannaet al., Binary tree approach to template place- ment for searches for gravitational waves from com- pact binary mergers, Phys

    C. Hannaet al., Binary tree approach to template place- ment for searches for gravitational waves from com- pact binary mergers, Phys. Rev. D108, 042003 (2023), arXiv:2209.11298 [gr-qc]

    2023

  40. [48]

    A. G. Abacet al.(LIGO Scientific, VIRGO, KAGRA), Open Data from LIGO, Virgo, and KAGRA through the First Part of the Fourth Observing Run (2025), arXiv:2508.18079 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Icinga GmbH, Icinga monitoring system,https:// icinga.com/, accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

  42. [50]

    InfluxData Inc., Influxdata: Time series platform, https://www.influxdata.com/, accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

  43. [51]

    Center for High Throughput Computing, Htcondor: High throughput computing,https://htcondor.org/, accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

  44. [52]

    docs.ligo.org/userguide/analysis/index.html# false-alarm-rate-for-alerts-and-trials-factor (), accessed: 2026-04-20

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, False alarm rate for alerts and trials factor,https://emfollow. docs.ligo.org/userguide/analysis/index.html# false-alarm-rate-for-alerts-and-trials-factor (), accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

  45. [53]

    Joshi,Advancements in and operations of gravitational-wave searches during the fourth observing run, Ph.D

    P. Joshi,Advancements in and operations of gravitational-wave searches during the fourth observing run, Ph.D. thesis, Penn State U. (2025)

    2025

  46. [54]

    Piotrzkowski,Searching for gravitational wave asso- ciations with high-energy astrophysical transients, Ph.D

    B. Piotrzkowski,Searching for gravitational wave asso- ciations with high-energy astrophysical transients, Ph.D. thesis, The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Alert timeline, https://emfollow.docs.ligo.org/userguide/ analysis/index.html#alert-timeline(), accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

  48. [56]

    Mattermost, Inc., Mattermost collaboration platform, https://mattermost.com/, accessed: 2026-04-20

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed May 20, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.