4.7 Article

Understanding and analysing time-correlated stochastic signals in pulsar timing

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 428, Issue 2, Pages 1147-1159

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sts097

Keywords

gravitational waves; methods: data analysis; pulsars: general

Funding

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) through VIDI grant [639.042.607]
  2. Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although it is widely understood that pulsar timing observations generally contain time-correlated stochastic signals (TCSSs; red timing noise is of this type), most data analysis techniques that have been developed make an assumption that the stochastic uncertainties in the data are uncorrelated, i.e. 'white'. Recent work has pointed out that this can introduce severe bias in the determination of timing-model parameters and that better analysis methods should be used. This paper presents a detailed investigation of timing-model fitting in the presence of TCSSs and gives closed expressions for the post-fit signals in the data. This results in a Bayesian technique to obtain timing-model parameter estimates in the presence of TCSSs, as well as computationally more efficient expressions of their marginalized posterior distribution. A new method to analyse hundreds of mock data set realizations simultaneously without significant computational overhead is presented, as well as a statistically rigorous method to check the internal consistency of the results. As a by-product of the analysis, closed expressions of the rms introduced by a stochastic background of gravitational waves in timing residuals are obtained, valid for regularly sampled data. Using T as the length of the data set and h(c)(1 yr(-1)) as the characteristic strain, this is sigma(2)(GWB) = h(c)(1 yr(-1)) 2(9(3)root 2 pi(4)Gamma (-10/3)/8008) yr(-4/3)T(10/3).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available