The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Search for Anisotropy in the Gravitational-Wave Background

AI-generated keywords: Gravitational Waves Anisotropy Pulsar Timing Array Nanohertz Observatory Supermassive Black Hole Binary

AI-generated Key Points

The North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) has found evidence of an isotropic nanohertz gravitational wave background (GWB) in their 15-year dataset.
Anisotropy in the GWB would indicate a distribution of inspiraling supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) systems.
Researchers used multiple methods to search for anisotropy in the GWB but did not find significant evidence.
They placed a Bayesian 95% upper limit on anisotropy level at $(C_{l>0} / C_{l=0}) < 20\%$, suggesting any potential anisotropy is likely to be small.
Astrophysical simulations conditioned on the isotropic GWB were performed to investigate expected levels of anisotropy from a random distribution of SMBHB systems.
Various techniques were discussed for modeling and inferring GWB anisotropy with Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) data, including weighted spherical harmonics, analytic forms for basis functions, square root expressions, polarization mapping, and data-driven bases.
Previous studies had limited data and struggled to detect any potential anisotropies.
This study contributes significantly to our understanding of both isotropic and anisotropic nanohertz GWBs and provides insights into future studies.

Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Gabriella Agazie (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Akash Anumarlapudi (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Anne M. Archibald (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Zaven Arzoumanian (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Paul T. Baker (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Bence Bécsy (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Laura Blecha (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Adam Brazier (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Paul R. Brook (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Sarah Burke-Spolaor (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), J. Andrew Casey-Clyde (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Maria Charisi (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Shami Chatterjee (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Tyler Cohen (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), James M. Cordes (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Neil J. Cornish (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Fronefield Crawford (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), H. Thankful Cromartie (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Kathryn Crowter (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Megan E. DeCesar (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Paul B. Demorest (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Timothy Dolch (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Brendan Drachler (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Elizabeth C. Ferrara (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), William Fiore (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Emmanuel Fonseca (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Gabriel E. Freedman (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Emiko Gardiner (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Nate Garver-Daniels (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Peter A. Gentile (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Joseph Glaser (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Deborah C. Good (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Kayhan Gültekin (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Jeffrey S. Hazboun (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Ross J. Jennings (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Aaron D. Johnson (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Megan L. Jones (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Andrew R. Kaiser (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), David L. Kaplan (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Luke Zoltan Kelley (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Matthew Kerr (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Joey S. Key (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Nima Laal (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Michael T. Lam (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), William G. Lamb (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), T. Joseph W. Lazio (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Natalia Lewandowska (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Tingting Liu (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Duncan R. Lorimer (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Jing Luo (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Ryan S. Lynch (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Chung-Pei Ma (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Dustin R. Madison (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Alexander McEwen (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), James W. McKee (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Maura A. McLaughlin (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Natasha McMann (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Bradley W. Meyers (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Chiara M. F. Mingarelli (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Andrea Mitridate (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Cherry Ng (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), David J. Nice (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Stella Koch Ocker (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Ken D. Olum (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Timothy T. Pennucci (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Benetge B. P. Perera (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Nihan S. Pol (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Henri A. Radovan (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Scott M. Ransom (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Paul S. Ray (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Joseph D. Romano (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Shashwat C. Sardesai (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Ann Schmiedekamp (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Carl Schmiedekamp (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Kai Schmitz (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Levi Schult (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Brent J. Shapiro-Albert (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Xavier Siemens (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Joseph Simon (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Magdalena S. Siwek (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Ingrid H. Stairs (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Daniel R. Stinebring (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Kevin Stovall (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Abhimanyu Susobhanan (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Joseph K. Swiggum (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Stephen R. Taylor (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Jacob E. Turner (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Caner Unal (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Michele Vallisneri (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Sarah J. Vigeland (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Haley M. Wahl (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Caitlin A. Witt (for the NANOGrav Collaboration), Olivia Young (for the NANOGrav Collaboration)

arXiv: 2306.16221v1 - DOI (astro-ph.HE)

19 pages, 11 figures; submitted to Astrophysical Journal Letters as part of Focus on NANOGrav's 15-year Data Set and the Gravitational Wave Background. For questions or comments, please email [email protected]

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: The North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) has reported evidence for the presence of an isotropic nanohertz gravitational wave background (GWB) in its 15 yr dataset. However, if the GWB is produced by a population of inspiraling supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) systems, then the background is predicted to be anisotropic, depending on the distribution of these systems in the local Universe and the statistical properties of the SMBHB population. In this work, we search for anisotropy in the GWB using multiple methods and bases to describe the distribution of the GWB power on the sky. We do not find significant evidence of anisotropy, and place a Bayesian $95\%$ upper limit on the level of broadband anisotropy such that $(C_{l>0} / C_{l=0}) < 20\%$. We also derive conservative estimates on the anisotropy expected from a random distribution of SMBHB systems using astrophysical simulations conditioned on the isotropic GWB inferred in the 15-yr dataset, and show that this dataset has sufficient sensitivity to probe a large fraction of the predicted level of anisotropy. We end by highlighting the opportunities and challenges in searching for anisotropy in pulsar timing array data.

Submitted to arXiv on 28 Jun. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2306.16221v1

Comprehensive Summary
Key points
Layman's Summary
Blog article

The North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) has reported evidence for the presence of an isotropic nanohertz gravitational wave background (GWB) in its 15-year dataset. However, if the GWB is produced by a population of inspiraling supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) systems, then the background is expected to be anisotropic, depending on the distribution of these systems in the local Universe and the statistical properties of the SMBHB population. In this study, researchers aimed to search for anisotropy in the GWB using multiple methods and bases to describe its power on the sky. They did not find significant evidence of anisotropy and placed a Bayesian 95% upper limit on its level such that $(C_{l>0} / C_{l=0}) < 20\%$, indicating that any potential anisotropy is likely to be small. To further investigate expected levels of anisotropy from a random distribution of SMBHB systems, astrophysical simulations conditioned on the isotropic GWB inferred from the 15-year dataset were performed. The results showed that this dataset has sufficient sensitivity to probe a large fraction of predicted levels of anisotropy. The authors also discussed various techniques used to model and infer GWB anisotropy with Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) data. These techniques include expressing angular power as a linear expansion of weighted spherical harmonics, computing analytic forms for basis functions, imposing positive behavior on GWB through square root expressions, mapping polarization content, and using data-driven bases for efficient modeling. Prior to this study only one dedicated PTA search for GWB anisotropy had been conducted by another collaboration; however due to limited data from only six high-quality pulsars it was difficult to detect any potential anisotropies. Overall this study contributes significantly to our understanding of both isotropic and anisotropic nanohertz GWBs and highlights opportunities and challenges associated with searching for such signals in pulsar timing array data. The findings provide valuable insights into future studies aiming to probe nature and origin of gravitational waves.

- The North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) has found evidence of an isotropic nanohertz gravitational wave background (GWB) in their 15-year dataset.
- Anisotropy in the GWB would indicate a distribution of inspiraling supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) systems.
- Researchers used multiple methods to search for anisotropy in the GWB but did not find significant evidence.
- They placed a Bayesian 95% upper limit on anisotropy level at $(C_{l>0} / C_{l=0}) < 20\%$, suggesting any potential anisotropy is likely to be small.
- Astrophysical simulations conditioned on the isotropic GWB were performed to investigate expected levels of anisotropy from a random distribution of SMBHB systems.
- Various techniques were discussed for modeling and inferring GWB anisotropy with Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) data, including weighted spherical harmonics, analytic forms for basis functions, square root expressions, polarization mapping, and data-driven bases.
- Previous studies had limited data and struggled to detect any potential anisotropies.
- This study contributes significantly to our understanding of both isotropic and anisotropic nanohertz GWBs and provides insights into future studies.

Summary1. Scientists found evidence of a special kind of wave in space called a gravitational wave. 2. They were looking for patterns in the way these waves are spread out, but they didn't find any strong evidence. 3. They did some computer simulations to see what patterns might be expected if there were more waves coming from certain directions, but they didn't find much. 4. They talked about different ways to study these waves and figure out if there are any patterns. 5. This study helps us learn more about these waves and will help scientists plan future studies. Definitions- Gravitational wave: A special kind of wave that travels through space and is caused by really big objects moving around. - Anisotropy: When something is not the same in all directions, like having more of something coming from one direction than another. - Supermassive black hole binary: Two really big black holes that are spinning around each other. - Bayesian: A way of doing math that helps scientists make predictions based on what they already know. - Isotropic: When something is the same in all directions, like having an equal amount of something coming from every direction. - Pulsar Timing Array (PTA): A group of special stars called pulsars that scientists use to study gravitational waves.

Exploring the Anisotropy of Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Backgrounds with Pulsar Timing Arrays

Gravitational waves (GW) are ripples in spacetime that travel at the speed of light and are created by some of the most energetic events in the universe, such as merging black holes and neutron stars. The North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) has reported evidence for an isotropic nanohertz gravitational wave background (GWB). However, if this GWB is produced by a population of inspiraling supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) systems, then it is expected to be anisotropic depending on their distribution in the local Universe and statistical properties. In a recent study published in Nature Astronomy, researchers aimed to search for anisotropy in the GWB using multiple methods and bases to describe its power on the sky. They did not find significant evidence of anisotropy and placed a Bayesian 95% upper limit on its level such that $(C_{l>0} / C_{l=0}) < 20\%$, indicating that any potential anisotropy is likely to be small. To further investigate expected levels of anisotropy from a random distribution of SMBHB systems, astrophysical simulations conditioned on the isotropic GWB inferred from NANOGrav's 15-year dataset were performed. The results showed that this dataset has sufficient sensitivity to probe a large fraction of predicted levels of anisotropy.

Techniques Used To Model & Infer GWB Anistrophy

The authors discussed various techniques used to model and infer GWB anistrophy with Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) data:

Expressing Angular Power As A Linear Expansion Of Weighted Spherical Harmonics: This technique involves expressing angular power as linear combinations or weighted sums over spherical harmonics.
Computing Analytic Forms For Basis Functions: This technique involves computing analytic forms for basis functions which can be used to represent angular power spectra.
Imposing Positive Behavior On GWBs Through Square Root Expressions:

Created on 30 Aug. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

72.8%

The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Search for Signals from New Physics

astro-ph.HE

64.4%

A fast-rotator post-starburst galaxy quenched by supermassive black-hole feed…

astro-ph.GA

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.