Noise-Weighted Waveform Inner Products
Scrollable formula. Use Left and Right arrow keys to reveal hidden content.
Scrollable table. Use Left and Right arrow keys to reveal additional columns.
Scrollable figure. Use Left and Right arrow keys to inspect hidden content.
A waveform difference becomes a task-dependent distance only after a frequency band and positive weighting are chosen. For detector applications the conventional weight is an assumed one-sided noise power spectral density, but the geometry can be studied without adopting any current instrument curve. This page defines that geometry, checks its normalization, and explains which waveform components it deliberately ignores. Event-specific inference and current detector noise curves are excluded.
Required background. Probability and Statistical Inference supplies covariance weighting, likelihood geometry, and the distinction between a norm and a posterior conclusion.
Helpful background. Einstein Equations supplies the radiative field. Waves, Green Functions, and Geometric Optics supplies Fourier transforms and positive-frequency representations. Gravitational Radiation and Waveforms supplies strain and frame conventions. Computational Relativity supplies numerical waveform products and error estimates.
A positive-frequency inner product
Section titled “A positive-frequency inner product”Use
Let be a declared one-sided weighting PSD on . Define the real inner product
The factor four combines the negative-frequency contribution of real time series with the convention that is one sided. If a two-sided PSD is used instead, its positive-frequency value is half as large and the prefactor changes. The noise-weighted construction is introduced in Cutler and Flanagan 1994, §§II–III, PDF.
For stationary real noise, the convention at positive frequencies is
Equivalently, its two-sided PSD is . Starting from , pair the and terms of the real signals. They are complex conjugates; their sum supplies , and supplies the other factor of two. Stationarity fixes the spectral covariance; Gaussianity is needed only when this quadratic geometry is used as an exact Gaussian log likelihood.
Norm, units, and positivity
Section titled “Norm, units, and positivity”The squared norm is
Strain is dimensionless, so and . Multiplying the ratio by leaves a dimensionless norm. It vanishes only when the waveform is zero almost everywhere in the weighted band. Components outside the band, or inside a deliberately zero-weight region, are identified with zero in this geometry even if the spacetime waveforms differ there.
Symmetry follows from the real part. Linearity over real scalars and positivity make this a real inner-product space after quotienting unweighted components. Cauchy–Schwarz gives
This inequality is the reason normalized overlaps lie between and before phase maximization.
Whitening and Euclidean geometry
Section titled “Whitening and Euclidean geometry”Define a positive-frequency whitened waveform
Then
The PSD therefore stretches waveform space: a fixed physical error counts more where the declared noise is small and less where it is large. Changing , the band, or the response changes the geometry without changing the underlying waveform. A claim that one model is “closer” than another is incomplete until these choices are stated.
Field, response, and frame
Section titled “Field, response, and frame”The weight applies to detector-frame channel waveforms. A source-frame asymptotic mode must first be redshifted, rotated, summed over harmonics, scaled by distance, and contracted with a declared response. Weighting a source-frame directly by a detector PSD mixes incompatible units and frames.
For correlated channels, define the one-sided Hermitian spectral matrix by at positive frequencies. The natural extension is
Positive definiteness of replaces positivity of scalar . Singular channel combinations must be projected out or regularized explicitly; they cannot be inverted as though independently measured.
Difference norms and accuracy use
Section titled “Difference norms and accuracy use”Using the chapter’s truth-minus-model convention, ,
This is a useful summary of weighted discrepancy, not a universal scientific verdict. It does not say whether the error is parallel to a parameter degeneracy, whether a prior absorbs it, or whether a calibration uncertainty is correlated with it. Norm-based sufficient accuracy conditions and their assumptions are derived in Lindblom, Owen, and Brown 2008, §§II–IV, PDF.
Common pitfalls
Section titled “Common pitfalls”Mixing one- and two-sided spectra. Re-derive the variance normalization before importing a factor of two or four.
Calling an out-of-band difference zero physics. It is zero distance only in the chosen quotient geometry. Another band or instrument can expose it.
Using a mutable curve silently. This chapter uses declared reference weights. Current instrument curves and event-specific conclusions belong to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy.
Exercises
Section titled “Exercises”1. Verify the factor and units. Suppose and are constant over a positive-frequency band of width . Find .
Solution
Direct integration gives
Since has units seconds, has units seconds, and has units inverse seconds, the result is dimensionless. A two-sided PSD convention would redistribute the prefactor while preserving the same physical norm.
2. Quotient an unweighted component. Let , where has Fourier support entirely above . Compare in this band with the unweighted time-domain difference.
Solution
Inside the declared integral , so
The time-domain waveforms can nevertheless differ because is nonzero. The weighted space has quotiented out that high-frequency component. Extending the band or choosing a different task makes the difference visible again.
References
Section titled “References”- Cutler, Curt, and Éanna É. Flanagan. “Gravitational Waves from Merging Compact Binaries: How Accurately Can One Extract the Binary’s Parameters from the Inspiral Waveform?” Physical Review D 49 (1994): 2658–2697. DOI. Open PDF.
- Lindblom, Lee, Benjamin J. Owen, and Duncan A. Brown. “Model Waveform Accuracy Standards for Gravitational Wave Data Analysis.” Physical Review D 78 (2008): 124020. DOI. Open PDF.