The parameters of BBH signal were adjusted until it has a good SNR on each detector.
Then we injected a BH encounter with mass ratio of one, fixing its sky location and total mass, adjusting distance to make its amplitude similar with the BBH. Also it SNRs should look good.
## 1.1 BBH
> m1=78
> m2=72
...
...
@@ -51,55 +54,15 @@ The operation below were also adopted for 100 BH encounters.
> For VItamin, it makes more sense to calculate the JSD between BBH and BH encounter. It is possible to create reference posteriors with BBH waveforms since we know they exist and are a good approximation of what is actually observed, but we do not have any clear observations of BH encounters. So if we have a set of BBH posteriors to use as reference, then we can compute the JSD with any new BBH observation to test whether it is a BBH or BH encoutner.
We also injected BBH using BH encounter peak value given by VItamin. From four BH encounters(mass ratio = 1, 4, 8, 16), we got four BBHs. Then these BBHs' VItamin posteriors were calculated JSDs with corresponding BH encounters.
> JSD of t0 are 0.1732, 0.2894, 0.0110, and 0.0983, for mass ratio of 1, 4, 8 and 16 respectively.
They're blue lines on the Fig 3.1.1.
I think these four JSD values don't have an obvious distance from the BBH JSD distribution. Remember in the previous test, a big difference between BBH and BH encounter posterior is BH encounter has double peaks on t0. However, new injected BBH (using BH encounter peak values) also have double peaks on t0 expect m4. This makes me confusing.
Therefore, I think it may work if we perform more this kind of tests. We have 100 random noise, but only used one for each BH encounter waveform already.
