These pages are complementary to the data and figures released with the GWTC-2 catalog.
Comparison between un-modeled and modeled waveform reconstructions: cWB vs LALInference
cWB is a wavelet-based burst method while LALInference is a parameter estimation method that uses the best available binary coalescence models. The comparisons shown here are performed between the cWB wavelet-based reconstruction and the LALInference results on the models listed in the GWTC-2 catalog.
Summary plots
Comparison of cWB and LALInference(LI) maximum likelihood waveforms
| Summary plots | Content |
|---|---|
 |
Maximum likelihood whitened waveforms in time-domain |
 |
Maximum likelihood whitened waveform residuals in time-domain |
 |
90% skymaps |
 |
90% skymaps with cWB constrained to HL network only |
 |
cWB 90% confidence intervals (time-domain) |
 |
cWB 90% confidence intervals (frequency-domain) |
 |
cWB 90% confidence intervals (time envelope) |
 |
Strain noise amplitude spectral density |
GW events in O3a (i.e. the first half of the third observing run by LIGO and Virgo)
cWB GW events list: detected and reconstructed events are shown with a green badge. Those reconstructed with a fine tuning of production thresholds are shown with an orange badge.
| April 2019 | May 2019 | June 2019 |
|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
| July 2019 | August 2019 | September 2019 |
|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
||
 |