We extract gravitational waveforms from numerical simulations of black hole binaries computed using the Spectral Einstein Code. We compare two extraction methods: direct construction of the Newman-Penrose (NP) scalar $Psi_4$ at a finite distance from
the source and Cauchy-characteristic extraction (CCE). The direct NP approach is simpler than CCE, but NP waveforms can be contaminated by near-zone effects---unless the waves are extracted at several distances from the source and extrapolated to infinity. Even then, the resulting waveforms can in principle be contaminated by gauge effects. In contrast, CCE directly provides, by construction, gauge-invariant waveforms at future null infinity. We verify the gauge invariance of CCE by running the same physical simulation using two different gauge conditions. We find that these two gauge conditions produce the same CCE waveforms but show differences in extrapolated-$Psi_4$ waveforms. We examine data from several different binary configurations and measure the dominant sources of error in the extrapolated-$Psi_4$ and CCE waveforms. In some cases, we find that NP waveforms extrapolated to infinity agree with the corresponding CCE waveforms to within the estimated error bars. However, we find that in other cases extrapolated and CCE waveforms disagree, most notably for $m=0$ memory modes.
The Numerical-Relativity-Analytical-Relativity (NRAR) collaboration is a joint effort between members of the numerical relativity, analytical relativity and gravitational-wave data analysis communities. The goal of the NRAR collaboration is to produc
e numerical-relativity simulations of compact binaries and use them to develop accurate analytical templates for the LIGO/Virgo Collaboration to use in detecting gravitational-wave signals and extracting astrophysical information from them. We describe the results of the first stage of the NRAR project, which focused on producing an initial set of numerical waveforms from binary black holes with moderate mass ratios and spins, as well as one non-spinning binary configuration which has a mass ratio of 10. All of the numerical waveforms are analysed in a uniform and consistent manner, with numerical errors evaluated using an analysis code created by members of the NRAR collaboration. We compare previously-calibrated, non-precessing analytical waveforms, notably the effective-one-body (EOB) and phenomenological template families, to the newly-produced numerical waveforms. We find that when the binarys total mass is ~100-200 solar masses, current EOB and phenomenological models of spinning, non-precessing binary waveforms have overlaps above 99% (for advanced LIGO) with all of the non-precessing-binary numerical waveforms with mass ratios <= 4, when maximizing over binary parameters. This implies that the loss of event rate due to modelling error is below 3%. Moreover, the non-spinning EOB waveforms previously calibrated to five non-spinning waveforms with mass ratio smaller than 6 have overlaps above 99.7% with the numerical waveform with a mass ratio of 10, without even maximizing on the binary parameters.
We study the effectiveness of stationary-phase approximated post-Newtonian waveforms currently used by ground-based gravitational-wave detectors to search for the coalescence of binary black holes by comparing them to an accurate waveform obtained fr
om numerical simulation of an equal-mass non-spinning binary black hole inspiral, merger and ringdown. We perform this study for the Initial- and Advanced-LIGO detectors. We find that overlaps between the templates and signal can be improved by integrating the match filter to higher frequencies than used currently. We propose simple analytic frequency cutoffs for both Initial and Advanced LIGO, which achieve nearly optimal matches, and can easily be extended to unequal-mass, spinning systems. We also find that templates that include terms in the phase evolution up to 3.5 pN order are nearly always better, and rarely significantly worse, than 2.0 pN templates currently in use. For Initial LIGO we recommend a strategy using templates that include a recently introduced pseudo-4.0 pN term in the low-mass ($M leq 35 MSun$) region, and 3.5 pN templates allowing unphysical values of the symmetric reduced mass $eta$ above this. This strategy always achieves overlaps within 0.3% of the optimum, for the data used here. For Advanced LIGO we recommend a strategy using 3.5 pN templates up to $M=12 MSun$, 2.0 pN templates up to $M=21 MSun$, pseudo-4.0 pN templates up to $65 MSun$, and 3.5 pN templates with unphysical $eta$ for higher masses. This strategy always achieves overlaps within 0.7% of the optimum for Advanced LIGO.
Numerical simulations of 15 orbits of an equal-mass binary black hole system are presented. Gravitational waveforms from these simulations, covering more than 30 cycles and ending about 1.5 cycles before merger, are compared with those from quasi-cir
cular zero-spin post-Newtonian (PN) formulae. The cumulative phase uncertainty of these comparisons is about 0.05 radians, dominated by effects arising from the small residual spins of the black holes and the small residual orbital eccentricity in the simulations. Matching numerical results to PN waveforms early in the run yields excellent agreement (within 0.05 radians) over the first $sim 15$ cycles, thus validating the numerical simulation and establishing a regime where PN theory is accurate. In the last 15 cycles to merger, however, {em generic} time-domain Taylor approximants build up phase differences of several radians. But, apparently by coincidence, one specific post-Newtonian approximant, TaylorT4 at 3.5PN order, agrees much better with the numerical simulations, with accumulated phase differences of less than 0.05 radians over the 30-cycle waveform. Gravitational-wave amplitude comparisons are also done between numerical simulations and post-Newtonian, and the agreement depends on the post-Newtonian order of the amplitude expansion: the amplitude difference is about 6--7% for zeroth order and becomes smaller for increasing order. A newly derived 3.0PN amplitude correction improves agreement significantly ($<1%$ amplitude difference throughout most of the run, increasing to 4% near merger) over the previously known 2.5PN amplitude terms.
