### Abstract

Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations.

Original language | English |
---|---|

Article number | 104002 |

Number of pages | 48 |

Journal | Classical and Quantum Gravity |

Volume | 34 |

Issue number | 10 |

DOIs | |

Publication status | Published - 12 Apr 2017 |

### Keywords

- gravitational waves
- GW150914
- numerical relativity
- parameter estimation
- systematic errors
- waveform models

### Cite this

*Classical and Quantum Gravity*,

*34*(10), [104002]. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

}

*Classical and Quantum Gravity*, vol. 34, no. 10, 104002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

**Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914.** / LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of waveform model systematics on the interpretation of GW150914

AU - Ackley, Kendall Danielle

AU - Lasky, P D

AU - Levin, Y

AU - Qiu, S

AU - Sammut, L

AU - Thrane, E

AU - Whittle, C

AU - Zhu, Xingjiang

AU - LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration

PY - 2017/4/12

Y1 - 2017/4/12

N2 - Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations.

AB - Parameter estimates of GW150914 were obtained using Bayesian inference, based on three semi-analytic waveform models for binary black hole coalescences. These waveform models differ from each other in their treatment of black hole spins, and all three models make some simplifying assumptions, notably to neglect sub-dominant waveform harmonic modes and orbital eccentricity. Furthermore, while the models are calibrated to agree with waveforms obtained by full numerical solutions of Einstein's equations, any such calibration is accurate only to some non-zero tolerance and is limited by the accuracy of the underlying phenomenology, availability, quality, and parameter-space coverage of numerical simulations. This paper complements the original analyses of GW150914 with an investigation of the effects of possible systematic errors in the waveform models on estimates of its source parameters. To test for systematic errors we repeat the original Bayesian analysis on mock signals from numerical simulations of a series of binary configurations with parameters similar to those found for GW150914. Overall, we find no evidence for a systematic bias relative to the statistical error of the original parameter recovery of GW150914 due to modeling approximations or modeling inaccuracies. However, parameter biases are found to occur for some configurations disfavored by the data of GW150914: for binaries inclined edge-on to the detector over a small range of choices of polarization angles, and also for eccentricities greater than ∼0.05. For signals with higher signal-to-noise ratio than GW150914, or in other regions of the binary parameter space (lower masses, larger mass ratios, or higher spins), we expect that systematic errors in current waveform models may impact gravitational-wave measurements, making more accurate models desirable for future observations.

KW - gravitational waves

KW - GW150914

KW - numerical relativity

KW - parameter estimation

KW - systematic errors

KW - waveform models

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018959494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

DO - 10.1088/1361-6382/aa6854

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85018959494

VL - 34

JO - Classical and Quantum Gravity

JF - Classical and Quantum Gravity

SN - 0264-9381

IS - 10

M1 - 104002

ER -