pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21531 · v1 · pith:NTZXTPIOnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · gr-qc

Fisher Information Velocity: A New Geometric Channel for Precision Glitch Identification in Gravitational-Wave Detectors

James Kennington , Zach Yarbrough This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 01:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM gr-qc
keywords gravitational wavesdetector characterizationFisher informationglitch detectionRiemannian manifoldLIGOinstrumental noisespectral analysis
0
0 comments X

The pith

A geometric velocity measure on the noise spectrum separates instrumental glitches from real gravitational-wave signals in LIGO detectors.

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

The paper introduces Fisher information velocity as a way to track how the detector's power spectral density changes over time by treating it as a point moving on a Riemannian manifold. Using exterior algebra to compute the tangent divergence, it distinguishes between simple increases in noise energy and actual shifts in the frequency distribution of that noise. This matters for gravitational-wave astronomy because better glitch detection means fewer false alarms and more reliable identification of rare astrophysical events like black hole mergers. The method is shown to complement existing monitors by catching different types of anomalies.

Core claim

By modeling the detector PSD as a point on a Riemannian manifold and computing its Fisher information velocity through the exterior algebra calculation of tangent divergence (sin θ), the approach mathematically decouples simple energy surges from spectral warps, enabling a precise classification of instrumental non-stationarities into structural pivots and isotropic surges while remaining insensitive to astrophysical signals.

What carries the argument

Fisher information velocity, which treats the power spectral density as a manifold point and uses tangent divergence to separate overall amplitude changes from frequency redistributions.

If this is right

  • Among events detected by both, the geometric channel has higher significance in 74% of cases with median sensitivity ratio of 1.65.
  • The method increases the anomaly catalog by 87% by identifying non-overlapping populations of glitches.
  • Classification shows 87.2% structural pivots and 12.8% isotropic surges in the data.
  • Validation confirms no confusion with 10 confirmed GW events and thousands of simulated injections.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This could lead to combined use with BLRMS monitors for more complete glitch vetoing in GW searches.
  • Manifold tracking of noise might extend to other non-stationary sensor data in physics experiments.
  • Testing the method on future detector data like LIGO O5 could reveal if the performance gains persist at higher sensitivities.

Load-bearing premise

That the power spectral density of the detector can be usefully modeled as a point moving on a curved geometric surface where divergence math cleanly splits loudness changes from shape changes.

What would settle it

Running the sgn-drift pipeline on the same O4a data and finding that it does not detect more anomalies than BLRMS or that it flags some of the confirmed GWTC-4.0 events as glitches.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21531 by James Kennington, Zach Yarbrough.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Sensitivity comparison between the geometric channel and BLRMS. (A) Paired MAD-normalized significance ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Statistical taxonomy of O4a non-stationarity, re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Kinematic examples of the bimodal taxonomy. Each row shows (left) the spectrogram, (center) the instability budget [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. High-resolution phase space map of tangent diver ⃗ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The mathematical bridge demonstrating the continu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Gravitational-wave detectors operate in inherently non-stationary environments, requiring robust detector characterization (DetChar) to distinguish instrumental transients from astrophysical signals. Traditional DetChar frameworks typically rely on morphological classifiers or energy-based projections, such as band-limited root-mean-square (BLRMS) metrics, which can conflate global amplitude scaling with physical reconfigurations of the spectrum. In this work, we introduce Fisher information velocity, a novel geometric channel that models the detector's power spectral density (PSD) as a point on a Riemannian manifold. By tracking the kinematic drift of the noise floor and utilizing exterior algebra to calculate tangent divergence ($\sin \theta$), we mathematically decouple simple energy surges from spectral warps, or differential redistributions of power across frequency bands. Applying this framework via the sgn-drift streaming pipeline to ~40 hours of high-cadence Advanced LIGO O4a data, we evaluate N=282,080 independent manifold velocity samples. High-resolution phase space mapping reveals a bimodal taxonomy of severe instrumental non-stationarity, classifying events into structural pivots (87.2%) and isotropic surges (12.8%). Among co-detected events, the geometric channel achieves higher significance than standard BLRMS monitors in 74% of cases with a median sensitivity ratio of $\Gamma = 1.65$. The two channels detect largely non-overlapping populations, increasing the total anomaly catalog by 87% over BLRMS alone. Systematic validation on 10 confirmed GWTC-4.0 events and ~5,000 simulated injections demonstrates robust insensitivity to astrophysical signals, establishing this geometric channel as a sensitive, complementary, and veto-safe diagnostic for current and next-generation detector networks.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to introduce Fisher information velocity as a novel geometric channel for glitch identification in gravitational-wave detectors. It models the detector PSD as a point on a Riemannian manifold and employs exterior algebra to compute tangent divergence (sin θ) in order to decouple isotropic energy surges from spectral warps. Applied via the sgn-drift pipeline to ~40 hours of Advanced LIGO O4a data (N=282,080 samples), the work reports a bimodal taxonomy (87.2% structural pivots, 12.8% isotropic surges), claims higher significance than BLRMS in 74% of co-detected events with median sensitivity ratio Γ=1.65, an 87% increase in the anomaly catalog, and robust insensitivity to astrophysical signals validated on 10 GWTC-4.0 events plus ~5,000 injections.

Significance. If the claimed geometric decoupling is rigorously established and the empirical gains are shown to be statistically robust and non-circular, the method could supply a useful complementary diagnostic for detector characterization. It would help enlarge the catalog of identified instrumental transients while remaining veto-safe for astrophysical searches, which is valuable for both current LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA operations and next-generation detectors.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that exterior algebra on the Riemannian PSD manifold 'mathematically decouples' energy surges from spectral warps via sin θ is load-bearing for the reported complementarity (non-overlapping populations and 87% catalog increase). No derivation, explicit equation, or calculation is supplied showing that isotropic scaling lies in the kernel of the divergence operator under the chosen metric; without this, the separation is not guaranteed by the geometry.
  2. [Results] Results (performance metrics): the headline figures (74% of co-detected events, median Γ=1.65, 87% catalog increase) are stated without error bars, confidence intervals, or a description of how significance ratios and overlap are computed. The evaluation uses the same ~40-hour dataset for both pipeline construction and performance assessment, leaving open the possibility that the reported gains arise from threshold tuning rather than intrinsic geometric complementarity.
  3. [Validation] Validation section: the claim of 'robust insensitivity to astrophysical signals' rests on tests with only 10 GWTC-4.0 events and ~5,000 injections, yet no quantitative metrics (false-alarm rates, ROC curves, or direct comparison against BLRMS on the same injections) are provided to substantiate the statement.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] The terms 'Fisher information velocity' and 'sgn-drift streaming pipeline' are introduced without explicit connection to the standard Fisher information matrix or to existing information-geometry literature; a brief reference or one-sentence definition would improve accessibility.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels for the phase-space maps and taxonomy histograms should explicitly state the binning, normalization, and any smoothing applied so that the bimodal classification percentages can be reproduced.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us identify opportunities to clarify the geometric foundations, strengthen the statistical presentation, and improve the validation of our results. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that exterior algebra on the Riemannian PSD manifold 'mathematically decouples' energy surges from spectral warps via sin θ is load-bearing for the reported complementarity (non-overlapping populations and 87% catalog increase). No derivation, explicit equation, or calculation is supplied showing that isotropic scaling lies in the kernel of the divergence operator under the chosen metric; without this, the separation is not guaranteed by the geometry.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation of the kernel property would make the geometric decoupling more transparent. In the revised manuscript we will insert a short derivation (new Equation in Section 2) demonstrating that, under the Fisher information metric, an isotropic scaling vector is orthogonal to the tangent directions associated with spectral warps; consequently the exterior-algebra divergence operator yields sin θ = 0 for pure energy surges, placing them in the kernel. This step follows directly from the metric definition and the decomposition of the tangent space into radial and tangential components. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results (performance metrics): the headline figures (74% of co-detected events, median Γ=1.65, 87% catalog increase) are stated without error bars, confidence intervals, or a description of how significance ratios and overlap are computed. The evaluation uses the same ~40-hour dataset for both pipeline construction and performance assessment, leaving open the possibility that the reported gains arise from threshold tuning rather than intrinsic geometric complementarity.

    Authors: The 74 % figure and median Γ were obtained by comparing peak significances for events detected in both channels, with overlap defined by temporal coincidence within a fixed 1 s window; the 87 % catalog increase is the relative growth in unique triggers. We will add bootstrap-derived 68 % confidence intervals for these quantities and a brief description of the overlap criterion in the revised Results section. While the full 40-hour segment was used for final evaluation, the sgn-drift thresholds were set on an earlier 10-hour subset; we acknowledge that this procedure could be more clearly documented and will add a short discussion of possible tuning effects together with a note on planned cross-validation studies. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Validation] Validation section: the claim of 'robust insensitivity to astrophysical signals' rests on tests with only 10 GWTC-4.0 events and ~5,000 injections, yet no quantitative metrics (false-alarm rates, ROC curves, or direct comparison against BLRMS on the same injections) are provided to substantiate the statement.

    Authors: We will expand the Validation section to report the false-alarm rate of the geometric channel on the injection ensemble and to include a direct side-by-side comparison of detection efficiency versus BLRMS. ROC curves contrasting the two methods on the same ~5,000 injections will also be added. The original choice of 10 real GWTC-4.0 events plus 5,000 injections was intended to sample a broad range of morphologies and SNRs; the additional quantitative metrics will make the insensitivity claim more rigorously supported. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained with external validation

full rationale

The paper introduces Fisher information velocity via Riemannian manifold modeling of PSD and exterior algebra for tangent divergence (sin θ) to separate energy surges from spectral warps, then applies the sgn-drift pipeline to ~40 hours of LIGO O4a data yielding N=282,080 samples. Reported metrics (74% higher significance, Γ=1.65, 87% catalog increase, 87.2%/12.8% bimodal split) are direct empirical counts from this application and comparison to BLRMS on the observed events, not parameters fitted to a subset then renamed as predictions. Validation on 10 independent GWTC-4.0 events plus ~5,000 simulated injections provides external benchmarks outside the fitted values. No self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes from prior author work are invoked as load-bearing; the decoupling is presented as a geometric consequence rather than defined circularly in terms of the target separation. The chain does not reduce to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on treating PSD as a Riemannian manifold point and using exterior algebra for tangent divergence to achieve decoupling; these are introduced without independent evidence or derivation in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The power spectral density of the detector can be represented as a point on a Riemannian manifold
    Core modeling step stated in abstract to enable kinematic drift tracking.
  • domain assumption Exterior algebra applied to the tangent space yields a divergence (sin θ) that decouples energy scaling from spectral redistribution
    Used to define the geometric channel's distinguishing power.
invented entities (2)
  • Fisher information velocity no independent evidence
    purpose: Geometric channel to track noise floor drift and classify instrumental non-stationarity
    Newly defined quantity based on manifold velocity samples.
  • tangent divergence (sin θ) no independent evidence
    purpose: Quantify spectral warps independent of amplitude surges
    Derived via exterior algebra on the PSD manifold.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5845 in / 1606 out tokens · 73211 ms · 2026-05-22T01:05:07.443064+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

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · 13 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    and pipeline-informed noise characterization tools [31], flattenthetime-frequencydataintotwo-dimensional spectrograms [26]. While these image-based methods are highly effective for visual categorization and pattern recognition, theyoftenover-splitorunder-splitcategories based on transient visual shape rather than the underly- ing physical origin of the in...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    (see Appendix A). A comprehensive follow-up analy- sis, currently in preparation, will extend this framework across the full O4a observing run and all active detec- tors, including systematic cross-correlation with estab- lished transient classification tools such as Omicron [33] triggers, iDQ [28] scores, and hveto [29] rounds, as well as characterizatio...

    work page

  3. [3]

    L. A. Wainstein and V. D. Zubakov,Extraction of sig- nals from noise, republ ed., Dover books on physics and mathematical physics (Dover Publ, 1970)

    work page 1970

  4. [4]

    L. S. Finn, Detection, measurement, and gravitational radiation, Physical Review D46, 5236 (1992)

    work page 1992

  5. [5]

    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, Physical Review D85, 122006 (2012), gr- qc/0509116

    work page arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Cutler and E

    C. Cutler and E. Flanagan, Gravitational waves from merging compact binaries: How accurately can one extract the binary’s parameters from the inspiral waveform?, Physical Review D49, 2658 (1994), gr- qc/9402014

    work page arXiv 1994

  7. [7]

    Thrane and C

    E. Thrane and C. Talbot, An introduction to bayesian in- ference in gravitational-wave astronomy: parameter esti- mation, model selection, and hierarchical models, Publi- cations of the Astronomical Society of Australia36, e010 (2019), 1809.02293 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Advanced LIGO, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 074001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  9. [9]

    Acernese and others, Advanced virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 024001 (2015)

    F. Acernese and others, Advanced virgo: a second- generation interferometric gravitational wave detector, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 024001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Akutsu and others, Overview of KAGRA: Detector design and construction history, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2021, 05A101 (2021)

    T. Akutsu and others, Overview of KAGRA: Detector design and construction history, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2021, 05A101 (2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Kennington, Dual Cutler-Vallisneri corrections: Mit- igating PSD drift in zero-latency gravitational-wave searches (2026), arXiv:2603.09132 [gr-qc]

    J. Kennington, Dual Cutler-Vallisneri corrections: Mit- igating PSD drift in zero-latency gravitational-wave searches (2026), arXiv:2603.09132 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  12. [12]

    Gauge Theoretic Signal Processing I: The Commutative Formalism for Single-Detector Adaptive Whitening

    J. Kennington and J. Black, Gauge theoretic signal pro- cessing I: The commutative formalism for single-detector adaptive whitening (2026), arXiv:2604.06432 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    Gauge Theoretic Signal Processing II: Zero-Latency Whitening for Early Warning Pipelines

    J. Kennington, J. Black, Z. Yarbrough, Y.-J. Huang, C. Hanna, L. Tsukada, A. Baylor, O. Godwin, P. Joshi, C. Messick, S. Sachdev, and R. Tapia, Gauge theoretic signal processing II: Zero-latency whitening for early warning pipelines (2026), arXiv:2604.25116 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  14. [14]

    D. V. Martynov and others, Sensitivity of the advanced LIGO detectors at the beginning of gravitational wave astronomy, Physical Review D93, 112004 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    Buikema et al., Sensitivity and performance of the ad- vanced LIGO detectors in the third observing run, Phys- ical Review D102, 062003 (2020)

    A. Buikema et al., Sensitivity and performance of the ad- vanced LIGO detectors in the third observing run, Phys- ical Review D102, 062003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    Capoteet al., Phys

    E. Capote, W. Jia, N. Aritomi, M. Nakano, V. Xu,et al., Advanced LIGO detector performance in the fourth ob- serving run, Physical Review D111, 062002 (2025), arXiv:2411.14607

    work page arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Matichard, B

    F. Matichard, B. Lantz, R. Mittleman, K. Mason, J.Kissel,andothers,SeismicisolationofadvancedLIGO: Review of strategy, instrumentation and performance, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 185003 (2015)

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    P. R. Saulson, Thermal noise in mechanical experiments, Physical Review D42, 2437 (1990)

    work page 1990

  19. [19]

    S. Soni, C. Austin, A. Effler, R. M. S. Schofield, G. González, V. V. Frolov, J. C. Driggers, K. Kawabe, N. McCuller, A. Lazzarini, and L. Barsotti, Reducing 9 scattered light in LIGO’s third observing run, Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 025016 (2021)

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

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

    S. Sachdev, S. Caudill, H. Fong, R. K. L. Lo, C. Mes- sick, D. Mukherjee, R. Magee, L. Tsukada, K. Black- burn, P. Brady, P. Brockill, K. Cannon, S. J. Cham- berlin, D. Chatterjee, J. D. E. Creighton, P. Godwin, A. Gupta, C. Hanna, S. Kapadia, R. N. Lang, T. G. F. Li, D. Meacher, A. Pace, S. Privitera, L. Sadeghian, L. Wade, M. Wade, A. Weinstein, and S. ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    A. H. Nitz, T. D. Canton, D. Davis, and S. Reyes, Py- CBC live: Rapid detection of gravitational waves from compact binary mergers, Physical Review D98, 024050 (2018), 1805.11174 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [22]

    Ewing et al., Performance of the low-latency Gst- LAL inspiral search towards LIGO, virgo, and KAGRA’s fourth observing run, Physical Review D109, 042008 (2024)

    B. Ewing et al., Performance of the low-latency Gst- LAL inspiral search towards LIGO, virgo, and KAGRA’s fourth observing run, Physical Review D109, 042008 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Biscoveanu, C.-J

    S. Biscoveanu, C.-J. Haster, S. Vitale, and J. Davies, Quantifying the effect of power spectral density uncer- tainty on gravitational-wave parameter estimation for compact binary sources, Physical Review D102, 023008 (2020), 2004.05149 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    J. C. Driggers et al., Improving astrophysical parame- ter estimation via offline noise subtraction for advanced LIGO, Physical Review D99, 042001 (2019), 1806.00532 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  25. [25]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Characterization of transient noise in advanced LIGO relevant to gravita- tional wave signal GW150914, Classical and Quantum Gravity33, 134001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    T. B. Littenberg and N. J. Cornish, Separating gravita- tional wave signals from instrument artifacts, Physical Review D82, 103007 (2010), 1008.1577 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  27. [27]

    B. P. Abbott and others, A guide to LIGO–virgo de- tector noise and extraction of transient gravitational- wave signals, Classical and Quantum Gravity37, 055002 (2020), tex.collaboration: LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    Davis and others, LIGO detector characterization in the second and third observing runs, Classical and Quan- tum Gravity38, 135014 (2021)

    D. Davis and others, LIGO detector characterization in the second and third observing runs, Classical and Quan- tum Gravity38, 135014 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    S. Soni, B. K. Berger, D. Davis, F. Di Renzo, A. Effler, et al., LIGO detector characterization in the first half of the fourth observing run, Classical and Quantum Gravity 42, 085016 (2025), arXiv:2409.02831

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Essick, P

    R. Essick, P. Godwin, C. Hanna, L. Blackburn, and E. Katsavounidis, iDQ: Statistical inference of non- Gaussian noise with auxiliary degrees of freedom in gravitational-wave detectors, Machine Learning: Science and Technology2, 015004 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [31]

    J. R. Smith, T. Abbott, E. Hirose, N. Leroy, D. Macleod, J. McIver, P. Saulson, and P. Shawhan, A hierarchical method for vetoing noise transients in gravitational-wave detectors, Classical and Quantum Gravity28, 235005 (2011)

    work page 2011

  32. [32]

    Zevin, S

    M. Zevin, S. Coughlin, S. Bahaadini, E. Besler, N. Ro- hber, S. Allen, M. Cabero, K. Crowston, A. K. Katsagge- los, S. L. Larson, T. K. Lee, C. Lintott, T. B. Littenberg, A. Lundgren, C. Österlund, J. R. Smith, L. Trouille, and V. Kalogera, Gravity Spy: integrating Advanced LIGO detector characterization, machine learning, and citi- zen science, Classical...

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    Yarbrough, A

    Z. Yarbrough, A. Guimaraes, P. Joshi, G. González, and A. Valentini, PINCH: Pipeline-informed noise charac- terization in LIGO’s third observing run, Classical and Quantum Gravity42, 165014 (2025), 2505.14949 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    D.Davis, T.J.Massinger, A.P.Lundgren, J.C.Driggers, A. L. Urban, and L. K. Nuttall, Improving the sensitivity of advanced LIGO using noise subtraction, Classical and Quantum Gravity36, 055011 (2019), 1809.05348 [astro- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    Robinet, N

    F. Robinet, N. Arnaud, N. Leroy, A. Lundgren, D. Macleod, and J. McIver, Omicron: a tool to char- acterize transient noise in gravitational-wave detectors, SoftwareX12, 100620 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    J. M. Lee,Riemannian manifolds: An introduction to curvature, Graduate texts in mathematics (Springer, 1997)

    work page 1997

  37. [37]

    C. R. Rao, Information and the accuracy attainable in the estimation of statistical parameters, Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society37, 81 (1945)

    work page 1945

  38. [38]

    Amari and H

    S.-i. Amari and H. Nagaoka,Methods of information ge- ometry, Translations of mathematical monographs, Vol. 191 (American Mathematical Society, 2000)

    work page 2000

  39. [39]

    T. T. Georgiou, Distances between power spectral den- sities, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing54, 2204 (2006)

    work page 2006

  40. [40]

    M. P. do Carmo,Riemannian geometry(Birkhäuser, 1992)

    work page 1992

  41. [41]

    Nakahara,Geometry, topology, and physics, 2nd ed., Graduate student series in physics (Inst

    M. Nakahara,Geometry, topology, and physics, 2nd ed., Graduate student series in physics (Inst. of Physics Pub- lishing, 2005)

    work page 2005

  42. [42]

    T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas,Elements of information theory, 2nd ed. (Wiley-Interscience, 2006)

    work page 2006

  43. [43]

    Jiang, N

    X. Jiang, N. Li, and T. T. Georgiou, Geodesic curves on the manifold of power spectral densities, IEEE Transac- tions on Signal Processing60, 2163 (2012)

    work page 2012

  44. [44]

    F. Barbaresco, Information geometry of covariance ma- trix: Cartan-siegel homogeneous bounded domains, mostow/berger fibration and fréchet median, Matrix In- formation Geometry , 199 (2013)

    work page 2013

  45. [45]

    C. W. Helstrom,Statistical theory of signal detection, 2nd ed., International series of monographs in electronics and instrumentation No. v. 9 (Pergamon Press, 1968)

    work page 1968

  46. [46]

    Papoulis,Probability, random variables, and stochas- tic processes, 3rd ed

    A. Papoulis,Probability, random variables, and stochas- tic processes, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, 1991)

    work page 1991

  47. [47]

    J. D. E. Creighton and W. G. Anderson,Gravitational- wave physics and astronomy: An introduction to theory, experiment and data analysis(Wiley-VCH, 2011)

    work page 2011

  48. [48]

    Maggiore,Gravitational waves

    M. Maggiore,Gravitational waves. Vol. 1: Theory and experiments(Oxford University Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  49. [49]

    Pistone and C

    G. Pistone and C. Sempi, An infinite-dimensional geo- metric structure on the space of probability measures, The Annals of Statistics23, 1543 (1995)

    work page 1995

  50. [50]

    Lindquist and G

    A. Lindquist and G. Picci,Linear stochastic systems: a geometric approach, Series in contemporary mathematics (Springer, 2015)

    work page 2015

  51. [51]

    Aasiet al., Advanced LIGO, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 074001 (2015)

    J. Aasiet al., Advanced LIGO, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 074001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  52. [52]

    C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interfer- ometer, Physical Review D23, 1693 (1981)

    work page 1981

  53. [53]

    M. Tse, H. Yu, N. Kijbunchoo, A. Fernandez-Galiana, L. Barsotti, C. D. Blair, D. D. Brown, S. E. Dwyer, A. Effler, M. Evans,et al., Quantum-enhanced advanced 10 LIGO detectors in the era of gravitational-wave astron- omy, Physical Review Letters123, 231107 (2019)

    work page 2019

  54. [54]

    Spivak,A comprehensive introduction to differential geometry, vol

    M. Spivak,A comprehensive introduction to differential geometry, vol. 2, 3rd ed. (Publish or Perish, 1999)

    work page 1999

  55. [55]

    Huang, C

    Y.-J. Huang, C. Hanna, B. Ewing, P. Godwin, J. Gonsalves, R. Magee, C. Messick, L. Tsukada, Z. Yarbrough,et al., Scalable matched-filtering pipeline for gravitational-wave searches of compact binary mergers, Physical Review D112, 082002 (2025), arXiv:2511.04730 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    P. Welch, The use of fast Fourier transform for the esti- mation of power spectra: a method based on time aver- aging over short, modified periodograms, IEEE Transac- tions on Audio and Electroacoustics15, 70 (1967)

    work page 1967

  57. [57]

    T. B. Littenberg and N. J. Cornish, BayesLine: Bayesian inference for spectral estimation of gravitational wave detector noise, Physical Review D91, 084034 (2015), 1410.3852 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  58. [58]

    Haykin,Adaptive filter theory, 4th ed

    S. Haykin,Adaptive filter theory, 4th ed. (Prentice Hall, 2002)

    work page 2002

  59. [59]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collabo- ration, and the KAGRA Collaboration, Open data from LIGO, virgo, and KAGRA through the first part of the fourth observing run (2025), number: arXiv:2508.18079, 2508.18079 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Col- laboration, and the KAGRA Collaboration, GWTC- 4.0: Updating the gravitational-wave transient cata- log with observations from the first part of the fourth LIGO-virgo-KAGRA observing run (2025), number: arXiv:2508.18082, 2508.18082 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    S. Khan, S. Husa, M. Hannam, F. Ohme, M. Pürrer, X. Jiménez Forteza, and A. Bohé, Frequency-domain gravitational waves from nonprecessing black-hole bina- ries. II. A phenomenological model for the advanced de- tector era, Physical Review D93, 044007 (2016)

    work page 2016

  62. [62]

    ligo.org/lscsoft/lalsuite(2018)

    LIGO Scientific Collaboration, LALSuite: LIGO scien- tific collaboration algorithm library suite,https://git. ligo.org/lscsoft/lalsuite(2018)

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    Efron, Bootstrap methods: another look at the jack- knife, The Annals of Statistics7, 1 (1979)

    B. Efron, Bootstrap methods: another look at the jack- knife, The Annals of Statistics7, 1 (1979)

    work page 1979

  64. [64]

    Schwarz, Estimating the dimension of a model, The Annals of Statistics6, 461 (1978)

    G. Schwarz, Estimating the dimension of a model, The Annals of Statistics6, 461 (1978)

    work page 1978

  65. [65]

    R. E. Kass and A. E. Raftery, Bayes factors, Journal of the American Statistical Association90, 773 (1995)

    work page 1995

  66. [66]

    N. J. Cornish and T. B. Littenberg, BayesWave: Bayesian inference for gravitational wave bursts and in- strument glitches, Classical and Quantum Gravity32, 135012 (2015), 1410.3835 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  67. [67]

    Robust parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the LALInference software library

    J. Veitch, V. Raymond, B. Farr, W. M. Farr, P. Graff, S. Vitale, B. Aylott, K. Blackburn, N. Christensen, M. Coughlin, W. D. Pozzo, F. Feroz, J. Gair, C.- J. Haster, V. Kalogera, T. Littenberg, I. Mandel, R. O’Shaughnessy, M. Pitkin, C. Rodriguez, C. Röver, T.Sidery, R.Smith, M.V.D.Sluys, A.Vecchio, W.Vous- den, and L. Wade, Robust parameter estimation fo...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  68. [68]

    Magee, D

    R. Magee, D. Chatterjee, L. P. Singer, S. Sachdev, M. Kovalam, G. Mo, S. Anderson, P. Brady, P. Brockill, K. Cannon, T. D. Canton, Q. Chu, P. Clearwa- ter, A. Codoreanu, M. Drago, P. Godwin, S. Ghosh, G. Greco, C. Hanna, S. J. Kapadia, E. Katsavounidis, V. Oloworaran, A. E. Pace, F. Panther, A. Patwary, R. D. Pietri, B. Piotrzkowski, T. Prestegard, L. Rei...

    work page arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    M.Punturo, M.Abernathy, F.Acernese, B.Allen, N.An- dersson, K. Arun, F. Barone, B. Barr, M. Barsuglia, M. Beker, and others, The einstein telescope: a third- generation gravitational wave observatory, Classical and Quantum Gravity27, 194002 (2010)

    work page 2010

  70. [70]

    Reitze, R

    D. Reitze, R. X. Adhikari, S. Ballmer, B. Barish, L. Bar- sotti, G. Billingsley, D. A. Brown, Y. Chen, D. Coyne, R. Eisenstein, and others, Cosmic explorer: The US con- tributiontogravitational-waveastronomy,Bulletinofthe American Astronomical Society51, 35 (2019)

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    A. Bhattacharyya, On a measure of divergence between two statistical populations defined by their probability distributions, Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical So- ciety35, 99 (1943)

    work page 1943