Testing the robustness of simulation-based gravitational-wave population inference

Damon H. T. Cheung, Kaze W. K. Wong, Otto A. Hannuksela, Tjonnie G. F. Li, and Shirley Ho
Phys. Rev. D 106, 083014 – Published 19 October 2022

Abstract

Gravitational-wave population studies have become more important in gravitational-wave astronomy because of the rapid growth of the observed catalog. In recent studies, emulators based on different machine learning techniques are used to emulate the outcomes of the population synthesis simulation quickly. In this study, we benchmark the performance of two emulators that learn the truncated power-law phenomenological model by using Gaussian process regression and normalizing flows technique to see which one is a more capable likelihood emulator in the population inference. We benchmark the characteristic of the emulators by comparing their performance in the population inference to the phenomenological model using mock and real observation data. Our results suggest that the normalizing flows emulator can recover the posterior distribution by using the phenomenological model in the population inference with up to 300 mock injections. The normalizing flows emulator also underestimates the uncertainty for some posterior distributions in the population inference on real observation data. On the other hand, the Gaussian process regression emulator has poor performance on the same task and can only be used effectively in low-dimension cases.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
1 More
  • Received 14 January 2022
  • Revised 4 May 2022
  • Accepted 26 September 2022

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.106.083014

© 2022 American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Gravitation, Cosmology & Astrophysics

Authors & Affiliations

Damon H. T. Cheung1,*, Kaze W. K. Wong2, Otto A. Hannuksela1, Tjonnie G. F. Li1,3,4, and Shirley Ho2,5,6,7

  • 1Department of Physics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong
  • 2Center for Computational Astrophysics, Flatiron Institute, New York, New York 10010, USA
  • 3Institute for Theoretical Physics, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200D, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium
  • 4Department of Electrical Engineering (ESAT), KU Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium
  • 5Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA
  • 6Physics Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
  • 7Department of Physics, New York University, New York, New York 10012, USA

  • *damoncheung@link.cuhk.edu.hk

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 106, Iss. 8 — 15 October 2022

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
CHORUS

Article Available via CHORUS

Download Accepted Manuscript
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

Log In

×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×