Enhancing gravitational-wave burst detection confidence in expanded detector networks with the BayesWave pipeline

TL;DR

This paper evaluates how the BayesWave pipeline improves confidence in gravitational-wave burst detection as more detectors join the network, using analytic and empirical methods to assess detection confidence, waveform reconstruction, and sky localisation.

Contribution

It introduces an analytic scaling for the BayesWave signal-to-glitch Bayes factor with network size and confirms it through injections, demonstrating improved detection confidence and localisation with expanded detector networks.

Findings

BayesWave's detection confidence increases with more detectors.

Waveform reconstruction accuracy improves with larger networks.

Sky localisation improves significantly with additional detectors.

Abstract

The global gravitational-wave detector network achieves higher detection rates, better parameter estimates, and more accurate sky localisation, as the number of detectors, $\mathcal{I}$ increases. This paper quantifies network performance as a function of $\mathcal{I}$ for BayesWave, a source-agnostic, wavelet-based, Bayesian algorithm which distinguishes between true astrophysical signals and instrumental glitches. Detection confidence is quantified using the signal-to-glitch Bayes factor, $\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{S},\mathcal{G}}$. An analytic scaling is derived for $\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{S},\mathcal{G}}$ versus $\mathcal{I}$, the number of wavelets, and the network signal-to-noise ratio, SNR$_\text{net}$, which is confirmed empirically via injections into detector noise of the Hanford-Livingston (HL), Hanford-Livingston-Virgo (HLV), and Hanford-Livingston-KAGRA-Virgo (HLKV) networks at projected sensitivities for the fourth observing run (O4). The empirical and analytic scalings are consistent; $\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{S},\mathcal{G}}$ increases with $\mathcal{I}$. The accuracy of waveform reconstruction is quantified using the overlap between injected and recovered waveform, $\mathcal{O}_\text{net}$. The HLV and HLKV network recovers $87\%$ and $86\%$ of the injected waveforms with $\mathcal{O}_\text{net}>0.8$ respectively, compared to $81\%$ with the HL network. The accuracy of BayesWave sky localisation is $\approx 10$ times better for the HLV network than the HL network, as measured by the search area, $\mathcal{A}$, and the sky areas contained within $50\%$ and $90\%$ confidence intervals. Marginal improvement in sky localisation is also observed with the addition of KAGRA.