Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Scattered light noise at LIGO Livingston Observatory during the fourth observation run

Debasmita Nandi1,*, Anamaria Effler2, Siddharth Soni3, Tabata Aira Ferreira1, Robert Schofield4, Huyen Pham2, Timothy O’Hanlon2, V. V. Frolov2, and Gabriela González1

  • *Contact author: dnandi1@lsu.edu

APS Open Sci. 1, 000159 – Published 2 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tb1c-s6g1

Abstract

Scattered light is one of the most common sources of noise in the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave observatories (LIGO). Light scattering is a highly nonlinear process through which motion at low frequencies gets up-converted and creates noise in a higher-frequency band in the detector data. From the beginning of the fourth observation run, many glitches appeared in the data of LIGO Livingston detector in the frequency range 10–40 Hz, and the morphology of these glitches suggested that they were produced by scattered light. From our analysis, we identified two different populations of scattered light glitches, one group having higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) than the other. The glitches of the high-SNR group were solely modulated by microseismic ground motion (ground motion in 0.1–1.0 Hz), and in this paper, we present models of possible coupling mechanisms for these glitches. We also present results of a statistical correlation analysis based on our models, which indicates that the microseismic ground motion at the corner station along the X direction is the one most correlated with the noise that creates these high-SNR glitches. After installing baffles very close to the test mass mirrors, we have noticed a significant reduction in the rate and SNR of these glitches. The low-SNR glitches were primarily modulated by high-frequency (10–30 Hz) vertical ground motion at the corner station, and this motion was coupling through a specific vacuum chamber at the corner station. After installing an additional seismic isolation platform in that vacuum chamber, these glitches have disappeared.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (17)

  1. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016).
  2. A. G. Abac et al. (The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, the Virgo Collaboration, and the KAGRA Collaboration), GWTC-4.0: Updating the gravitational-wave transient catalog with observations from the first part of the fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, Astrophys. J. Lett. 1004, L22 (2026).
  3. E. Capote et al., Advanced LIGO detector performance in the fourth observing run, Phys. Rev. D 111, 062002 (2025).
  4. S. Soni et al. (The LIGO Scientific Collaboration), LIGO detector characterization in the first half of the fourth observing run, Class. Quantum Grav. 42, 085016 (2025).
  5. J. Glanzer et al., Data quality up to the third observing run of advanced LIGO: Gravity Spy glitch classifications, Class. Quantum Grav. 40, 065004 (2023).
  6. R. Udall, S. Bini, K. Chatziioannou, D. Davis, S. Hourihane, Y. Lecoeuche, J. McIver, and S. Miller, Inferring the spins of merging black holes in the presence of data-quality issues, Phys. Rev. D 113, 042005 (2026).
  7. T. Accadia et al., Noise from scattered light in Virgo's second science run data, Class. Quantum Grav. 27, 194011 (2010).
  8. B. Canuel, E. Genin, G. Vajente, and J. Marque, Displacement noise from back scattering and specular reflection of input optics in advanced gravitational wave detectors, Opt. Express 21, 10546 (2013).
  9. D. J. Ottaway, P. Fritschel, and S. J. Waldman, Impact of upconverted scattered light on advanced interferometric gravitational wave detectors, Opt. Express 20, 8329 (2012).
  10. S. Soni et al. (The LIGO Scientific Collaboration), Reducing scattered light in LIGO's third observing run, Class. Quantum Grav. 38, 025016 (2021).
  11. S. Soni, J. Glanzer, A. Effler, V. Frolov, G. González, A. Pele, and R. Schofield, Modeling and reduction of high frequency scatter noise at LIGO Livingston, Class. Quantum Grav. 41, 135015 (2024).
  12. T. A. Ferreira, G. González, and O. Salas, An analysis of LIGO glitches using t-SNE during the first part of the fourth LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA observing run, arXiv:2512.03440.
  13. F. Robinet, N. Arnaud, N. Leroy, A. Lundgren, D. Macleod, and J. McIver, Omicron: A tool to characterize transient noise in gravitational-wave detectors, SoftwareX 12, 100620 (2020).
  14. P. Nguyen et al. (AdvLIGO), Environmental noise in advanced LIGO detectors, Class. Quantum Grav. 38, 145001 (2021).
  15. F. Matichard et al., Seismic isolation of Advanced LIGO: Review of strategy, instrumentation and performance, Class. Quantum Grav. 32, 185003 (2015).
  16. S. M. Aston et al., Update on quadruple suspension design for Advanced LIGO, Class. Quantum Grav. 29, 235004 (2012).
  17. J. R. Smith, T. Abbott, E. Hirose, N. Leroy, D. Macleod, J. McIver, P. Saulson, and P. Shawhan, A hierarchical method for vetoing noise transients in gravitational-wave detectors, Class. Quantum Grav. 28, 235005 (2011).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation