this is for holding javascript data
Christopher Berry Specifying waveform families (since there may be systematic differences in other cases)
over 9 years ago
Commit id: cf71ea459dd3bc29aa2011f62c1ca0ae174e709d
deletions | additions
diff --git a/prior constraints1.tex b/prior constraints1.tex
index 53f122b..9f27216 100644
--- a/prior constraints1.tex
+++ b/prior constraints1.tex
...
\subsection{prior constraints on spin}
\label{subsec:prior_constraints}
Since spin is largely degenerate with mass ratio, and spin is expected to be small for BNS sources, it is interesting to ask how the mass constraints are affected by making stonger prior assumptions about the spin of NSs.
First First, we make the extreme assumption that NSs have negligible spin, as was done in \citet{Singer_2014}. Figure \ref{fig:mass_std} compares the distribution of uncertainties in
chirp mass chirp-mass and
mass ratio mass-ratio estimates for the spinning, and
the two non-spinning analyses. The consistency between the non-spinning analyses using different waveform families shows that the drastic increases in the uncertainty of mass parameters from the spinning analysis is due to degeneracies with spin, and not systematic
difference differences between
the SpinTaylorT4 and TaylorF2 waveform families.