H. Fong
University of Toronto
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by H. Fong.
Physical Review D | 2017
A. Bohe; L. Shao; A. Taracchini; A. Buonanno; S. Babak; I. W. Harry; Ian Hinder; S. Ossokine; M. Pürrer; V. Raymond; Tony Chu; H. Fong; P. Kumar; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Michael Boyle; Daniel A. Hemberger; Lawrence E. Kidder; Geoffrey Lovelace; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi
We improve the accuracy of the effective-one-body (EOB) waveforms that were employed during the first observing run of Advanced LIGO for binaries of spinning, nonprecessing black holes by calibrating them to a set of 141 numerical-relativity (NR) waveforms. The NR simulations expand the domain of calibration toward larger mass ratios and spins, as compared to the previous EOBNR model. Merger-ringdown waveforms computed in black-hole perturbation theory for Kerr spins close to extremal provide additional inputs to the calibration. For the inspiral-plunge phase, we use a Markov-chain Monte Carlo algorithm to efficiently explore the calibration space. For the merger-ringdown phase, we fit the NR signals with phenomenological formulae. After extrapolation of the calibrated model to arbitrary mass ratios and spins, the (dominant-mode) EOBNR waveforms have faithfulness—at design Advanced-LIGO sensitivity—above 99% against all the NR waveforms, including 16 additional waveforms used for validation, when maximizing only on initial phase and time. This implies a negligible loss in event rate due to modeling for these binary configurations. We find that future NR simulations at mass ratios ≳4 and double spin ≳0.8 will be crucial to resolving discrepancies between different ways of extrapolating waveform models. We also find that some of the NR simulations that already exist in such region of parameter space are too short to constrain the low-frequency portion of the models. Finally, we build a reduced-order version of the EOBNR model to speed up waveform generation by orders of magnitude, thus enabling intensive data-analysis applications during the upcoming observation runs of Advanced LIGO.
Physical Review D | 2016
P. Kumar; Tony Chu; H. Fong; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Michael Boyle; Daniel A. Hemberger; Lawrence E. Kidder; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi
Coalescing binary black holes are among the primary science targets for second generation ground-based gravitational wave detectors. Reliable gravitational waveform models are central to detection of such systems and subsequent parameter estimation. This paper performs a comprehensive analysis of the accuracy of recent waveform models for binary black holes with aligned spins, utilizing a new set of 84 high-accuracy numerical relativity simulations. Our analysis covers comparable mass binaries (mass-ratio 1≤q≤3), and samples independently both black hole spins up to a dimensionless spin magnitude of 0.9 for equal-mass binaries and 0.85 for unequal mass binaries. Furthermore, we focus on the high-mass regime (total mass ≳50M⊙). The two most recent waveform models considered (PhenomD and SEOBNRv2) both perform very well for signal detection, losing less than 0.5% of the recoverable signal-to-noise ratio ρ, except that SEOBNRv2’s efficiency drops slightly for both black hole spins aligned at large magnitude. For parameter estimation, modeling inaccuracies of the SEOBNRv2 model are found to be smaller than systematic uncertainties for moderately strong GW events up to roughly ρ≲15. PhenomD’s modeling errors are found to be smaller than SEOBNRv2’s, and are generally irrelevant for ρ≲20. Both models’ accuracy deteriorates with increased mass ratio, and when at least one black hole spin is large and aligned. The SEOBNRv2 model shows a pronounced disagreement with the numerical relativity simulation in the merger phase, for unequal masses and simultaneously both black hole spins very large and aligned. Two older waveform models (PhenomC and SEOBNRv1) are found to be distinctly less accurate than the more recent PhenomD and SEOBNRv2 models. Finally, we quantify the bias expected from all four waveform models during parameter estimation for several recovered binary parameters: chirp mass, mass ratio, and effective spin.
Classical and Quantum Gravity | 2016
Tony Chu; H. Fong; P. Kumar; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Michael Boyle; Daniel A. Hemberger; Lawrence E. Kidder; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi
We present a new set of 95 numerical relativity simulations of non-precessing binary black holes (BBHs). The simulations sample comprehensively both black-hole spins up to spin magnitude of 0.9, and cover mass ratios 1–3. The simulations cover on average 24 inspiral orbits, plus merger and ringdown, with low initial orbital eccentricities e < 10^(-4). A subset of the simulations extends the coverage of non-spinning BBHs up to mass ratio q = 10. Gravitational waveforms at asymptotic infinity are computed with two independent techniques: extrapolation and Cauchy characteristic extraction. An error analysis based on noise-weighted inner products is performed. We find that numerical truncation error, error due to gravitational wave extraction, and errors due to the Fourier transformation of signals with finite length of the numerical waveforms are of similar magnitude, with gravitational wave extraction errors dominating at noise-weighted mismatches of ~3 x 10^(-4). This set of waveforms will serve to validate and improve aligned-spin waveform models for gravitational wave science.
Physical Review D | 2017
J. Lange; R. O'Shaughnessy; Michael Boyle; Juan Calderón Bustillo; Manuela Campanelli; Tony Chu; J. A. Clark; Nicholas Demos; H. Fong; James Healy; Daniel A. Hemberger; Ian Hinder; K. Jani; Bhavesh Khamesra; Lawrence E. Kidder; P. Kumar; Pablo Laguna; Carlos O. Lousto; Geoffrey Lovelace; S. Ossokine; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Mark A. Scheel; Deirdre Shoemaker; Bela Szilagyi; Saul A. Teukolsky; Yosef Zlochower
We present and assess a Bayesian method to interpret gravitational wave signals from binary black holes. Our method directly compares gravitational wave data to numerical relativity (NR) simulations. In this study, we present a detailed investigation of the systematic and statistical parameter estimation errors of this method. This procedure bypasses approximations used in semianalytical models for compact binary coalescence. In this work, we use the full posterior parameter distribution for only generic nonprecessing binaries, drawing inferences away from the set of NR simulations used, via interpolation of a single scalar quantity (the marginalized log likelihood, lnL) evaluated by comparing data to nonprecessing binary black hole simulations. We also compare the data to generic simulations, and discuss the effectiveness of this procedure for generic sources. We specifically assess the impact of higher order modes, repeating our interpretation with both l ≤ 2 as well as l ≤ 3 harmonic modes. Using the l ≤ 3 higher modes, we gain more information from the signal and can better constrain the parameters of the gravitational wave signal. We assess and quantify several sources of systematic error that our procedure could introduce, including simulation resolution and duration; most are negligible. We show through examples that our method can recover the parameters for equal mass, zero spin, GW150914-like, and unequal mass, precessing spin sources. Our study of this new parameter estimation method demonstrates that we can quantify and understand the systematic and statistical error. This method allows us to use higher order modes from numerical relativity simulations to better constrain the black hole binary parameters.
Bulletin of the American Physical Society | 2016
P. Kumar; H. Fong; K. Barkett; S. Bhagwat; Nousha Afshari; Tony Chu; D. A. Brown; Geoffrey Lovelace; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi
Bulletin of the American Physical Society | 2016
H. Fong; Tony Chu; P. Kumar; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Michael Boyle; Daniel A. Hemberger; Lawrence E. Kidder; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi
Bulletin of the American Physical Society | 2015
P. Kumar; K. Barkett; S. Bhagwat; Tony Chu; H. Fong; D. A. Brown; Harald P. Pfeiffer; Mark A. Scheel; Bela Szilagyi