<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Search for Gravitational Waves from Low Mass Compact Binary Coalescence in LIGO's Sixth Science Run and Virgo's Science Runs 2 and 3 · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1111.7314/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1111.7314/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Search for Gravitational Waves from Low Mass Compact Binary Coalescence in LIGO's Sixth Science Run and Virgo's Science Runs 2 and 3 — mentioned by topquark</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11102315</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1111.7314:11102315</guid><pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:15:51 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It sounds like you&amp;#x27;ve already read about how we estimate the false-alarm rate for signals, so I&amp;#x27;ll just add that the estimated rate of BBH mergers was highly uncertain before this observation; the error bars spanned three orders of magnitude. See, for example, Fig 5 of http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7314, which compares the previous LIGO-Virgo upper limits on similar events to the expected rate from population synthesis models and observations of high-mass X-ray binaries, known BNS systems, etc. The rate inferred from GW150914 is on the high end of the rate estimates from astronomers, but it&amp;#x27;s…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1111.7314/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
