Skip to main content
Cornell University
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arxiv logo > astro-ph > arXiv:2201.04619v2

Help | Advanced Search

arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

quick links

  • Login
  • Help Pages
  • About

Astrophysics > Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics

arXiv:2201.04619v2 (astro-ph)
[Submitted on 12 Jan 2022 (v1), last revised 29 May 2023 (this version, v2)]

Title:Lensing or luck? False alarm probabilities for gravitational lensing of gravitational waves

Authors:Mesut Çalışkan, Jose María Ezquiaga, Otto A. Hannuksela, Daniel E. Holz
View a PDF of the paper titled Lensing or luck? False alarm probabilities for gravitational lensing of gravitational waves, by Mesut \c{C}al{\i}\c{s}kan and 3 other authors
View PDF
Abstract:Strong gravitational lensing of gravitational waves (GWs) has been forecasted to become detectable in the upcoming observing runs. However, definitively distinguishing pairs of lensed sources from random associations is a challenging problem. We investigate the degree to which unlensed events mimic lensed ones because of the overlap of parameters due to a combination of random coincidence and errors in parameter estimation. We construct a mock catalog of lensed and unlensed events. We find that the false alarm probability (FAP) based on coincidental overlaps of the chirp mass, sky location, and coalescence phase are approximately $9\%$, $1\%$, and $10\%$ per pair, respectively. Combining all three, the overall FAP per pair is $\sim10^{-4}$. As the number of events, $N$, in the GW catalogs increases, the number of random pairs of events increases as $\sim N^2$. Meanwhile, the number of lensed events will increase linearly with $N$, implying that for sufficiently high $N$, the false alarms will always dominate over the true lensing events. This issue can be compensated for by placing higher thresholds on the lensing candidates (e.g., selecting a higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) threshold), which will lead to better parameter estimation and, thus, lower FAP per pair -- at the cost of dramatically decreasing the size of the lensing sample (by $\sim 1/\mbox{SNR}^3$). We show that with our simple overlap criteria for current detectors at design sensitivity, the false alarms will dominate for realistic lensing rates ($\lesssim10^{-3}$) even when selecting the highest SNR pairs. These results highlight the necessity to design alternative identification criteria beyond simple waveform and sky location overlap. Future GW detectors Cosmic Explorer and Einstein Telescope may provide sufficient improvement in parameter estimation, allowing for the conclusive detection of strong lensing of GWs.
Comments: 17 pages, 14 figures. Matches the version published in Phys. Rev. D 107, 063023 (2023)
Subjects: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO); High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena (astro-ph.HE); General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc)
Cite as: arXiv:2201.04619 [astro-ph.CO]
  (or arXiv:2201.04619v2 [astro-ph.CO] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.04619
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
Journal reference: Physical Review D 107, 063023 (2023)
Related DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.063023
DOI(s) linking to related resources

Submission history

From: Mesut Çalışkan [view email]
[v1] Wed, 12 Jan 2022 18:56:01 UTC (3,399 KB)
[v2] Mon, 29 May 2023 20:52:11 UTC (3,398 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Lensing or luck? False alarm probabilities for gravitational lensing of gravitational waves, by Mesut \c{C}al{\i}\c{s}kan and 3 other authors
  • View PDF
  • TeX Source
view license
Current browse context:
astro-ph.CO
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2022-01
Change to browse by:
astro-ph
astro-ph.HE
gr-qc

References & Citations

  • INSPIRE HEP
  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar
export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
  • About
  • Help
  • Click here to contact arXiv Contact
  • Click here to subscribe Subscribe
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Web Accessibility Assistance
  • arXiv Operational Status