Report on the second Mock LISA data challenge

Stanislav Babak, John G. Baker, Matthew J. Benacquista, Neil J. Cornish, Jeff Crowder, Curt Cutler, Shane L. Larson, Tyson B. Littenberg, Edward K. Porter, Michele Vallisneri, Alberto Vecchio, Gerard Auger, Leor Barack, Arkadiusz Błaut, Ed Bloomer, Duncan A. Brown, Nelson Christensen, James Clark, Stephen Fairhurst, Jonathan R. GairHubert Halloin, Martin Hendry, Arturo Jimenez, Andrzej Królak, Ilya Mandel, Chris Messenger, Renate Meyer, Soumya Mohanty, Rajesh Nayak, Antoine Petiteau, Matt Pitkin, Eric Plagnol, Reinhard Prix, Emma L. Robinson, Christian Roever, Pavlin Savov, Alexander Stroeer, Jennifer Toher, John Veitch, Jean Yves Vinet, Linqing Wen, John T. Whelan, Graham Woan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

50 Scopus citations


The Mock LISA data challenges are a program to demonstrate LISA data-analysis capabilities and to encourage their development. Each round of challenges consists of several data sets containing simulated instrument noise and gravitational waves from sources of undisclosed parameters. Participants are asked to analyze the data sets and report the maximum information about the source parameters. The challenges are being released in rounds of increasing complexity and realism: here we present the results of Challenge 2, issued in Jan 2007, which successfully demonstrated the recovery of signals from nonspinning supermassive-black-hole binaries with optimal SNRs between ∼10 and 2000, from ∼20 000 overlapping galactic white-dwarf binaries (among a realistically distributed population of 26 million), and from the extreme-mass-ratio inspirals of compact objects into central galactic black holes with optimal SNRs ∼100.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number114037
JournalClassical and Quantum Gravity
Issue number11
StatePublished - Jun 7 2008

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physics and Astronomy (miscellaneous)


Dive into the research topics of 'Report on the second Mock LISA data challenge'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this