Separating deterministic and stochastic gravitational wave signals in realistic pulsar timing array datasets

TL;DR

This study demonstrates that combined analysis methods are essential for accurately distinguishing and recovering both stochastic and deterministic gravitational wave signals in pulsar timing array data, preventing biases and misinterpretations.

Contribution

The paper introduces a comprehensive simulation-based investigation into separating GWB and CGW signals, highlighting the necessity of combined searches for unbiased parameter estimation in PTA datasets.

Findings

Independent searches can misinterpret GWB and CGW signals.

Combined searches recover true signals without bias.

Proper modeling prevents misinterpretation of pulsar term signals.

Abstract

Recent observations by pulsar timing arrays indicate the presence of gravitational wave signals, likely from supermassive black hole binaries. These binaries can produce two types of signals: a stochastic gravitational wave background (GWB) or deterministic continuous gravitational waves (CGW). Correctly separating these signals is essential for accurate signal recovery and interpretation. This paper investigates the interaction between GWB and CGW signals within current analysis pipelines, focusing on misinterpretations and biases in parameter estimation when these signals are analyzed separately or together. We conducted several simulations based on the European PTA 24.8-year dataset. First, we injected either a GWB or a CGW. We compared parameter estimation using different search models, including Earth term only, combined Earth and pulsar term CGW templates, and correlated (HD) or uncorrelated (CURN) power law GWB templates. Our findings show that, when searched independently, the GWB and CGW signals can be misinterpreted as each other, and only a combined search can recover the true signal present. For datasets containing both a GWB and a CGW, failure to account for the CGW biases the recovery of the GWB. However, a combined search allows for the recovery of both GWB and CGW parameters without significant bias. Care must be taken with the method used to perform combined searches on these multi-component datasets, as the CGW pulsar term can be misinterpreted as a CURN. This can be avoided by direct searches for an HD correlated GWB plus a CGW. Our study underscores the importance of combined searches to ensure unbiased recovery of GWB parameters in the presence of strong CGWs, which is crucial for interpreting signals recently found in PTA data and represents a step toward a robust framework for disentangling stochastic and deterministic GW signals in future, more sensitive datasets.