Arxiv:2008.05812V2 [Gr-Qc] 3 Feb 2021 -EIO[1,O[7,Adio[38]

arXiv:2008.05812v2 [gr-qc] 3 Feb 2021 -EIO[1,O[7,adIO[38]. INO and 36], [35, [37], AMIGO [31],DO 34], B-DECIGO subsequently [33, AIGSO proposed [32], AEDGE were including the missions for and various ap- proposals different [29] employing proaches, mission By BBO first detection. the GW space, mid-frequency are TOBA In 31] [30, and DECIGO 27], [28]. Interferometer) Antenna) [26, (Torsion-Bar (Michelson Observatory) Radiation MI Grav- Omni-directional itational ), (Superconducting ELGAR [24] SOGRO ap- [22], [25], AION ZAIGA ground-based and [21], (including MAGIS-100 The [23] Interferometer) 20], (Atom [19, MIGA AI proposed. include newly proaches detectors/concepts been GW have space-borne various Hz), and (0.1–10 band ground-based frequency middle frequency the other In the researches in bands. thriving the also are interferometers, developments and ground-based the by ing LIGO-Virgo- the by improved [18]. network be will KAGRA signals localization sky GW and the detectability for the 17], joining [16, the KAGRA With of as- therein]. and references physics and fundamental [10–15, the tronomy explore signals to used GW therein], fre- were references and run, were and coalescences [2–9, O3 binary detected/identified – quently compact O1 mass advanced stellar Virgo the from advanced During and [1]. LIGO GW150914 of detection – first LIGO the since advanced universe the observe to method ∗ ‡ † e-ioHn [email protected] Han: Wen-Biao [email protected] Ni: Wei-Tou [email protected] [email protected], Wang: Gang eie h ihfeunyG 1–00H)search- Hz) (10–2000 GW frequency high the Besides new a become to started (GW) wave Gravitational 2 colo srnm n pc cec,Uiest fChines of University Science, Space and Astronomy of School eiiigtm ea nefrmtyfrueulamLISA unequal-arm for interferometry delay time Revisiting flsrba ah,addrv oml o h ahdifferenc path the laser for the formula configurations. evaluate derive TDI also and first-generation se We paths, the beam lengths. that laser arm case, of find the equal-arm We of the inequality from channels. the differing T are Monitor and and e time-dela E, Michelson an first-generation A, from the optimal achieved of corresponding orbit s sensitivity mission to averaged numerical due the of frequency unequal set laser are a the spacecraft suppress employing to of proposed pairs is the interferometry by formed lengths 1 3 he pccato IATIImsinflo hi respec their follow mission LISA/TAIJI of spacecraft Three hnhiAtooia bevtr,CieeAaeyo Sci of Academy Chinese Observatory, Astronomical Shanghai ainlAtooia bevtre,CieeAaeyo S of Academy Chinese Observatories, Astronomical National .INTRODUCTION I. 5 eateto hsc,Ntoa sn u nvriy Hsin University, Hua Tsing National Physics, of Department 4 noainAaeyfrPeiinMaueetSineadT and Science Measurement Precision for Academy Innovation tt e aoaoyo antcRsnneadAoi n Mo and Atomic and Resonance Magnetic of Laboratory Key State agWang, Gang hns cdm fSine,Whn407,China 430071, Wuhan Sciences, of Academy Chinese ,2, 1, ∗ e-o Ni, Wei-Tou Dtd eray4 2021) 4, February (Dated: ,4 5, 4, 3, eetblt xeddt h ir-zfeunyband frequency micro-Hz the the (0.1 with to proposed extended detectors multiple detectability Beyond are there therein]. LISA, references the and are TianQin [43–50, orbit and ongoing TAIJI geocentric actively about a studies The in interferometry configuration. triangular uses Qin rqec os.Tepeiu tde hwdta the that showed studies laser the previous suppress The to noise. missions LISA-like frequency for proposed (TDI) is interferometry Time-delay GW the requirement. satisfy detection to overwhelming configuration Michelson is traditional noise for frequency laser the technology, art the 57]. satisfied [56, and requirement demonstrated drag-free December LISA’s successfully on has launched 2015, Pathfinder 3, dy- target- LISA achieve solar-system to sensitivity. to demanded ing due is control time Drag-free with constant namics. class, vary assumed (quasi-)geodesic lengths the the arm For the for [55]. TAIJI as and LISA well arm and be as configuration, DECIGO can missions, for arm requirement and constant AMIGO thruster the methods the For estimated both we [36]. use class can either AMIGO in class. ASTROD- TianQin, ond TAIJI, LISA, DO, and GW, are class, DECIGO first and the B-DECIGO in The class drag-free. second the mass keeps the proof and and configuration thrusters, (quasi-)geodesic the the space- employs using among by equal (S/C) arm distance craft constant keeps employs class which first configuration the formations, flight of [54]. Super-ASTROD and [53] mission Folkner’s [52], ini osdrdt eaLS-iecngrto na 20 in by configuration Earth LISA-like the a leading be orbit mis- to heliocentric TAIJI considered The were is [42]. missions sion TianQin space Chinese and two [41] 40], proposed–TAIJI [39, LISA the sides o h edscmsin ihtepresent/state-of-the- the with mission, geodesic the For classes two are there space, in interferometry laser For ntemliH rqec ad(. H– z,be- Hz), mHz–1 (0.1 band frequency milli-Hz the In † µ n e-ioHan Wen-Biao and nefrmtycngrtosadtheir and configurations interferometry y cdm fSine,Biig104,China 100049, Beijing Sciences, of Academy e Hz–100 os asdb h nqa-r-es By unequal-arm-ness. the by raised noise iegoei rjcois n h arm the and trajectories, geodesic tive n hi efrac r estv to sensitive are performance their and nteueulamseai o the for scenario arm unequal the in e rqec os u otemismatch the to due noise frequency hmrsfaeok einvestigate we framework, phemeris µ lrsse yais iedelay Time dynamics. system olar ine,Biig 002 China 100012, Beijing, ciences, Ais n ue-SRDaei h sec- the in are Super-ASTROD and -Aries, ne,Saga 000 China 200030, Shanghai ences, µ stvt fteTcanlfrom channel T the of nsitivity h,Tia,303 ROC 30013, Taiwan, chu, z nldn SRDG [51], ASTROD-GW including Hz) cnlg (APM), echnology eua Physics, lecular ,2, 1, ‡ n TAIJI and ◦ n Tian- and , µ -Aries 2

TDI could effectively suppress the laser noise [58–68, and II. RECIPE OF THE INVESTIGATIONS references therein]. In the process of TDI, the secondary noise and the GW signals also are canceled or accumu- A. Numerical mission orbits lated, and the final response of a TDI combination to a GW signal is formed by combining the measurements The current LISA formation is proposed to have 2.5 from time shifted laser links. 106 km arms and trailing the Earth by 20◦, and the con-× To investigate the response function and noise level in figuration formed by 3 S/C has about 60◦ inclination an- TDI, multiple simulators were developed for the LISA gle with respect to the ecliptic plane [40]. TAIJI mission mission. The LISA Simulator was developed by the is planned to be LISA-like formation with 3 106 km group at Montana State University to calculate the re- arms and leading (or trailing) the Earth by 20×◦ [41, 50]. sponse function and noise [69, 70]. The Synthetic LISA In previous works [55, 74–80], we developed a workflow was developed by Vallisneri to simulate the LISA mea- to design and optimize the mission orbits for GW space surement process considering the level of scientific and missions by using an ephemeris framework, as well as to technical requirements [64]. LISACode was built and tar- calculate the path differences of the TDI laser beams. geting to pave the road between the basic principles of Based on the orbital requirements for new LISA config- LISA and sophisticated simulator [65], and its successor uration [40], we achieved the numerical LISA orbit for LISANode is developed to adapt to the new LISA design 6 years satisfying the criteria: 1) the relative velocities [68]. For the unequal-arm scenario, Larson et al. [71] an- between S/C are smaller than 5 m/s; 2) the changes of alytically examined the impacts of unequal arm on the breathing angles are less than 1 deg, and 3) the trail- transfer function and the sensitivity for a LISA-like mis- ing angle is in the range [19◦, 23◦] [80]. For the TAIJI sion. mission with larger arm length, the relative velocities are In our previous paper [44], by using recipes in these loosened up to be less than 6 m/s. The optimized orbits simulators and the numerical orbit we achieved, we inves- achieved for LISA and TAIJI missions are shown in Fig. tigated average sensitivities of each first-generation TDI 1. The orbits are calculated in the solar system barycen- channels, and the angular resolution of LISA-TAIJI net- tric (SSB) coordinates, and start on March 22nd, 2028 work to the supermassive black hole binaries and the (JD2461853.0). As the plots shown, the orbits can main- monochromatic sources. We noticed that the perfor- tain in required status for 2200 days (6 years), and we mance of the optimal T channel from Michelson TDI select the first 400 days to investigate the performances observables is rather different from the previous results of the TDI channels in the unequal-arm case as shown by assuming the equal-arm case [72, 73]. In this paper, by the shadow areas. we focus on the sensitivity investigations of the optimal channels (A, E, and T) combined by the first-generation TDI channels. By considering the time-varying unequal- B. TDI configurations and the optimal channels arm numerical orbits and three noise sources (laser frequency noise, acceleration noise, and the optical path TDI is essential for LISA-like missions to suppress noise), we evaluate the response functions and the noise the laser frequency noise and achieve sensitivity goals. levels in the optimal channels with the unequal arms. The principle of TDI is to properly time shift and com- We find that the performances of the T channels from bine the link measurements to form a (nearly) equiva- Michelson and Monitor configurations are divergent from lent equal-arm interferometry. The first-generation TDI the equal-arm case for both response function and the combinations could cancel out the laser frequency noise noise level, and is sensitive to the inequality of the arm in a static unequal-arm configuration, and the second- lengths. We examine the laser frequency noise due to the generation TDI combinations could further cancel the mismatch of laser beam paths, and derive the formula of frequency noise in a configuration with relative move- the path difference in the unequal arm scenario for each ment. In Wang et al. [81], we have investigated the sen- TDI configurations. sitivities of various second-generation TDI combinations This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we in- by using a new numerical algorithm. In this work, we troduce the recipe in our investigation, review the nu- focus on the first-generation TDI configuration on the merical mission orbits, the TDI optimal channels, their unequal arm case. GW response function, and the noise assumptions for Five first-generation TDI configurations were devel- the sensitivity evaluations. In Sec. III, we specify the oped for LISA mission which are, Michelson (X, Y, Z), evaluations for the optimal channels from Michelson TDI Sagnac (α, β, γ), Relay (U, V, W), Beacon (P, Q, R) configuration including the GW response, noise levels, and Monitor (D, F, G) [58–61, 67, 73, 82, and references and their average sensitivities. And we investigate the therein]. Except the Sagnac, the first channels from other Michelson TDI performances with the inequality of the four TDI configurations are shown by S/C layout-time unequal arms especially for the optimal T channel. The delay diagrams in Fig. 2 as we specified in [81]. optimal channels from other first-generation TDI chan- The first-generation Michelson TDI configuration X nels are examined in Sec. IV. And we recapitulate our channel S/C layout-time delay diagram is shown by the conclusions in Sec. V. (We set G = c = 1 in this work.) first plot of Fig. 2. And the links a-h correspond to the 3

L12 L L13 L̇ 2.51 L23 L̇ km) 6 2.50 0

2.49 Arm Length (10 2.48

0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 00 000 00 000 Mission Time (day)

L12 L 3.02 L13 L̇ L L̇ 3.01 23

km) 6 3.00 0 2.99 2.98 Arm Length (10 2.97 0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 00 000 00 000 Mission Time (day)

FIG. 1. The numerical orbits for LISA (upper row) and TAIJI (lower row) missions used in the investigations. The arm length Lij changes with time are shown in the left plots, and the relative velocities L˙ ij between S/C are shown in the right panel. In the following calculation, the ﬁrst 400 days shown by the shadow areas are used to simulate the performances of the TDI channel in the unequal-arm situation.

①-X -U -P -D 0

① ① ① τ τ τ δ t δ τ t 0 δ δ ③ ③ ③ ③ ③ ③

FIG. 2. The S/C layout-time delay diagrams for Michelson-X, Relay-U, Beacon-P and Monitor-D channels as described in [81]. The links a-h combining Michelson-X correspond to the terms in Eq. (1). The δt indicates the mismatch of the combined beam paths and will be calculated for each channel.

terms of measurements in the X channel as, where ij is a time-delay operators and act on a mea- surementD η(t) by η(t) = η(t L ). The combined Dij − ij link a link b link c link d observables ηji for S/Cj to S/Ci (j i) denote the new designed measurements in [84–86] and→ specified in Ap- X =[ 31 13 21η12 + 31 13η21 + 31η13 + η31 ] pendix A. D D D D D D (1) [zη21 +}| 21η12{+ z21 }|12η31{+ z21}| 12{ 31η13], − D D D D D D z}|{ Three TDI channels in each TDI configuration are sup- link e link f link g link h posed to be not independent. By assuming a fully equal- |{z} | {z } | {z } | {z } 4 arm configuration, three optimal channels, (A, E, and 3 ◦ 2 and rotated by 45 with respect to each other. And T), can be formed from linear combinations of the three qthe T channel could be a null data stream to charac- channels (a, b, c) in each configuration [72, 73], terize the detector noise. However, in the unequal-arm scenario, the T channels will be divergent from the equal- c a a 2b+c a+b+c A= − , E= − , T= . (2) arm approximation at low frequency band as we would √2 √6 √3 see in the following sections for the Michelson and Mon- itor/Beacon configurations. The b and c channels could be obtained from cyclical permutation of the spacecraft indexes in a channel. The optimal channels could be treated as the virtual C. Basic formulas for TDI response interferometry from the topology approach. Freise et al. [87] formulated the general expression of response for an The measurements of TDI involve multiple links of the interferometer with a rotated angle, triangular S/C formation. The eventual antenna pattern of a TDI channel to a GW signal is linearly combined h(κ) = sin ζ [(K1 sin 2κ + K2 cos2κ) h+ by the response in time shifted measurement links. The (3) + (K3 sin 2κ + K4 cos2κ) h×] response function of a single link Doppler measurement has been formulated by Estabrook and Wahlquist [88], where ζ is the opening angle of an interferometer, κ Wahlquist [89]. The specific formulas depending on the is the rotated angle of one interferometer with respect relative position, orientation, and frequency are following [73, 83]. to baseline, Kn are the functions depending on the re- maining parameters. Without loss of generality, the For a GW signal from the direction (λ, β) in the SSB three channels of Michelson configuration are labeled as coordinates, where λ and β is the ecliptic longitude and X = h(0◦), Y = h(240◦), Z = h(120◦). And then the latitude, the propagation vector will be equivalent interferometers of the optimal channels will be kˆ = (cos λ cos β, sin λ cos β, sin β). (7) − ◦ ◦ h(120 ) h(0 ) 3 ◦ The plus and cross polarization tensors of the GW signal AMichelson = − = h(105 ), (4) √2 r2 are ◦ ◦ ◦ h(0 ) 2h(240 )+ h(120 ) 3 ◦ 1 0 0 EMichelson = − = h(150 ), 1+cos2 ι √ 2 T 6 r e+ 1 0 1 0 1 , (5) ≡ O · 0− 0 0 · O × 2 h(0◦)+ h(240◦)+ h(120◦)   (8) T = =0. (6) 0 1 0 Michelson T √3 e× 1 1 0 0 1 i( cos ι), ≡ O · 0 0 0 · O × − The virtual interferometers indicate that the A and E   channels are equivalent to a regular channel enlarged by with

sin λ cos ψ cos λ sin β sin ψ sin λ sin ψ cos λ sin β cos ψ cos λ cos β − − − − 1 = cos λ cos ψ sin λ sin β sin ψ cos λ sin ψ sin λ sin β cos ψ sin λ cos β , (9) O − cos−β sin ψ cos−β cos ψ − sin β  −   where ψ is the polarization angle. The response to the GW in the link from S/Ci to j is

h nîj ep nîj ˆ ˆ yij (f)= · · exp(2πif(Lij + k pi)) exp(2πifk pj) , (10) 2(1 nîj kˆ) × · − · P − · h i

wheren îj is the unit vector from SCi to j, Lij is the D. Noise budgets arm length from SCi to j, pi is the position of the S/Ci in the SSB coordinates, and ι is the inclination angle of Laser frequency noise is dominant for LISA-like mis- the GW source from the line of sight. When the TDI sions and needs to be suppressed by TDI technology. The is implemented, the GW signal are only incorporated in laser frequency noise could be effectively suppressed by the measurements between two S/C y . ij the equivalent equal-arm for static unequal arm triangular formation [58–61, 64, and references therein]. How- 5 ever, for the dynamic case, the residual laser noise would sion sensitivity. The sensitivity of LISA was studied by be not sufficiently suppressed in the first-generation TDI assuming equal-arms or the Keplerian orbit in previous channels. The residual laser frequency noise and sec- works [58–60, 64, 65, 68, 72, 83, and references therein],. ondary (core) noise (acceleration noise and optical path In this section, we focus on the Michelson TDI configu- noise) will be incorporated in this investigation. ration, and examine its performance under the unequal By assuming the path mismatch of one TDI channels arm scenario. To understand the impacts of different fac- is δt, the residual laser frequency noise is expected to be, tors, we split the investigations into three steps, 1) the response of TDI channels to the GW signal, 2) the noises TDI = Cδt.˙ (11) laser (including laser frequency noise, optical noise, and accel- From the Fourier derivative theorem, the ASD (ampli- eration noise) levels in TDI measurements, and 3) the tude spectral density) of laser frequency noise in a TDI average sensitivities synthesized from the response and channel will be [82], noise levels. δC˜(f) 2πf C˜(f)δt , (12) | |≃ | | where C˜(f) is the one-sided square-root spectrum density A. GW Response of Michelson TDI of laser source stability. The laser frequency noise will be h treated as the white noise and has a one-sided (square- The instantaneous response function FX(λ,β,ψ,ι,f) root) spectral density of 30 Hz/√Hz corresponding to of the Michelson-X channels to a specify GW source (lo- the power spectrum density C˜(f) 1 10−13 Hz−1/2. cation λ and β, polarization ψ, inclination ι, and fre- The power spectral density (PSD)| |≃ of laser× noise is pro- quency f) could obtained by substituting Eq. (10) into portional to the square of time difference δt2 indicating Eqs. (A1) and (1). The most sensitive directions is ex- the impact of the path inequality from the TDI combi- pected to be around the normal direction of the plane nation. The residual laser noises in the optimal channels formed by three S/C as shown in the upper plot of Fig. are expected to be 3. In one orbital period, the sensitive regions will change with the constellation’s motion and rotation. And the ˜ 2 ˜ 2 2 δCc + δCa response will be modulated for a source from fixed eclip- δCÃ =| | | | , | | 2 tic latitude. By selecting four latitudes (0◦, 30◦, 60◦, and ˜ 2 ˜ 2 ˜ 2 ◦ 2 δCa +4 δCb + δCc 90 ) on a longitude, the sum of response in the A, E and δC˜E =| | | | | | , (13) 2 | | 6 T channels at 20 mHz, AET F (f = 20 mHz, ψ =0, ι = ˜ 2 ˜2 2 ˜ 2 0), are shown in the lower panel of Fig. 3. The responses 2 δCa + δCb + δCc P δC˜T =| | | | | | . at different latitudes are rather different and change with | | 3 the orbit motion periodically. For a monochromatic GW During the process of a TDI measurement, multiple signal in a TDI channel, the area between y = 0 axis and test masses and optical paths are involved. The re- a curve should be proportional to the square of SNR ρ2 quired upper limits of acceleration noise Sacc for LISA (since the sensitivity of T channel at 20 mHz is poor, and and TAIJI missions are proposed to be the same and are the A and E channels have the same noise PSD). [40, 50], To evaluate the detectability of a TDI channel, a widely used method is to calculate the averaged response m/s2 0.4mHz 2 f 4 S1/2 =3 10−15 1+ 1+ . over sky and polarization at each frequency acc √ f 8mHz × Hz s s π 2π 2 π (14) 2 1 h 2 TDI(f)= FTDI(f, ι = 0) cos βdψdβdλ. The optical path noise Sop requirements for LISA and R 4π2 π | | Z0 Z− 2 Z0 TAIJI missions are slightly different: (16) 4 The averaged responses at different frequencies for LISA m 2mHz S1/2 = 10 10−12 1+ , and TAIJI X, A, E and T channels are shown in Fig. 4. op,LISA × √Hzs f (15) The A and E channels curves are identical and higher 4 than X channel by a factor of 3/2 as it can be inferred m 2mHz S1/2 =8 10−12 1+ . from Eqs. (4) and (5). The averaged GW responses of op,TAIJI × √ f Hzs X, A and E channels could be approximated as [92] There is no correlation between the different test masses 3 16x2 sin2 x and optical benches for the PSD estimations. 2 (f) , (17) RX ≃10 1+0.6x2 2 2 2 2 9 16x sin x III. MICHELSON TDI CONFIGURATION AND A(f)= E(f) 2 , (18) ITS OPTIMAL CHANNELS R R ≃20 1+0.6x where x = 2πfL. In the low frequency band (f The Michelson TDI configuration is the fiducial case 1/2πL), the response of X/A/E channel should be pro-≪ for the LISA mission and employed to represent the mis- portional to L2, and the response variation with the 6

LISA TDI-X 75° T@1mHz 60° 3.0 [email protected] 45° [email protected]

30° 5.0 1.0 1.0 15° -150° -120° -90° -60° -30° 0° 30° 60° 90° 120° 150° 0°

3.0 1.0 1.0

-15°  5.0 -30° -45° -60° -X 1.0 LISA-A or E -75° 3.0 LISA-T (50%) LISA-T (90%) 1 1 1 1 11 0 50 100 00 ∑0 ∑0 ∑0 F ∑0 0 T@1mHz [email protected] [email protected]

 0

-X 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 TAIJI-A or E TAIJI-T (50%) TAIJI-T (90%) 1 1 1 1 11 0 50 100 FIG. 3. The instantaneous response of LISA X channels (upper panel) and the sum of responses in LISA’s A, E and T channels varying with yearly orbital motion at selected eclip- h 2 tic latitudes, PAET |FTDI(f = 20 mHz, ψ = 0, ι = 0)| (lower FIG. 4. The average responses of TDI X, A, E and T channels panel) to monochromatic 20 mHz signal. in frequency-domain (LISA results are shown in upper panel, and TAIJI results are shown in lower panel). The T channel is sensitive to the variances of arm lengths, and the dark grey unequal-arm is negligible since the arm length variations region shows the best 50% percentile in 400 days, and the dark are less than 1% as shown in Fig. 1. and light grey area together show the best 90% percentile. The T channel are rather different from others, the The right panel in each plots shows the histogram of the T channel’s response at frequencies 0.01 mHz, 0.1 mHz and 1 dark grey area shows the best 50% percentile of the re- mHz. sponse in the first 400 days of the mission orbit, and the dark with light grey area shows the best 90% percentile in 400 days. The right panel in each plots shows the his- tograms of the response in T channel at the frequency alytical approximation, we deduce that the response of T 2 2 4 0.01 mHz, 0.1 mHz and 1 mHz. From the low frequency channel, T, should be proportional to η and (2πfL) . limit approximation, our further investigations show that Then weR obtain the GW response of T channel approxi- the response of T channel is sensitive to the variance of mation from the fitting results at frequencies 0.01 mHz, the arm lengths and proportional to the root mean square 0.1 mHz and 1 mHz, differences of the arm lengths, i.e. to the inequality factor η, 2 4 2 T(f) 0.8(2πfL) η . (20) 2 2 2 R ≃ (L12 L23) + (L12 L13) + (L13 L23) η(t) − − − . ≡ L p (19) The inequality factor of the numerical orbits for full pe- The relation Eq. (20) would be universal for low riod and the first 400 days are shown in upper panel frequency limit (f < 5 mHz). The inequality of arm of Fig. 5, and its value are mainly in the range of lengths, η(t), is straightforward∼ to obtain from the nu- [0.001, 0.02]. As the response of T channel versus the in- merical orbit, and the response of T channel in the low equality shown in the lower panel of Fig. 5, we can notice frequency band could be inferred from the inequality fac- their linear relation in the log-log plot. Based on the an- tor. 7

1.0 method was initially developed for the TDI calculation LISA in ASTROD-GW concept which has the 1.73 AU arm 0.8 LISA (first 400 days) TAIJI length and surrounding the Sun [51, 74, 75, 77, 79]. And 0.6 TAIJI (first 400 days) it was applied to the LISA and TAIJI mission subse- 0.4 quently [76, 78, 80]. The numerical method can provide 0.2 high accuracy results especially for the mission orbit per- turbed by planets etc. The cumulative histogram of time Cumulative fraction 0.0 difference amplitude δt for X, A, E and T channels by -T@1mHz TAIJI-T@1mHz using numerical algorithm| | are shown in the upper panel 1 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] of Fig. 6, and the values for the A, E and T channels 1 are inferred from the Eq. (13). In 2200 days, the time differences are mostly less than 0.8 µs for LISA, and the 111 time differences are less than 1.0 µs for TAIJI mission. 11 The second approach is the approximate method which  can simplify the light propagation time calculation to the 11 arm length and its first derivative with respect to time as shown in Eq. (22). 11

11 δtX(t) =[L31(t)+ 31L13(t)+ 13 31L21(t) 11 D D D 1 1 + 21 13 31L12(t)] [L21(t)+ 21L12(t) η D D D − D + 12 21L31(t)+ 31 12 21L13(t)] D D D D D L31L˙ 13 (L13 + L31)L˙ 21 ≃− − FIG. 5. The histogram of inequality η in full period and first (L21 + L13 + L31)L˙ 12 + L21L˙ 12 400 days of the LISA and TAIJI mission orbits (upper panel), − ˙ ˙ and the relation between the inequality parameter η and the + (L12 + L21)L31 + (L31 + L12 + L21)L13 response of T channel at selected frequency (0.01 mHz, 0.1 4L12L˙ 13 4L13L˙ 12. mHz and 1 mHz). ≃ − (22) We have verified that this approach can achieve a good precision for the first-generation TDI calculation for B. Noises in TDI Channels LISA-like orbit since the 3L ( 25 s for LISA and 30 s for TAIJI) time delay is short≃ compared to the relative≃ 1. Laser frequency noise motions between S/C. As the figure shown in Fig. 6’s lower panel, the difference of results from two approaches As the Eqs. (1) and (A1)-(A3) shown, the laser fre- is within 8 ps for the X channel. There is a caveat that quency noise widely exist in the measurements of TDI. the precision of approximation could be declined with By substituting the laser frequency noise parts in Eqs. the increase of arm length and/or total propagation time, (A1)-(A3) into Eq. (1), we can obtain the laser frequency and it has been reflected in the plot comparing the longer noise level in the Michelson X channel arm length of TAIJI (3 106 km) and relatively short arm LISA (2.5 106 km). Also× for the second-generation TDI Xlaser C˙ 12δtX, (21) × ≃ configurations, with the increase of propagation time, the ˙ accuracy of the approximate algorithm could further de- where C12 is time derivative of laser frequency noise on generate. S/C1 optical bench pointing to S/C2, δtX is the time difference between the two path lengths of laser beams After the time differences have been obtained from ei- in the Michelson configuration shown in Fig. 2. The ther the numerical or approximate method, we can esti- PSD of residual laser noise on the Michelson X channel mate the laser frequency noise in each TDI channels. By is calculated by Eq. (12). We implement two approaches using Eq. (12) and considering the result shown in Fig. to calculate the path differences in the Michelson TDI 6 upper panel, we can expect that the PSD of the laser channels as follows. noise level in X, A, E and T channels should be com- The first approach is the numerical method which cal- parable. And T channel is selected to present the laser culates the light propagation time along each arm in time noise in the frequency spectrum as shown in Fig. 7. The sequential order in the TDI channel. The position of grey gradient is used to represent the percentiles of noise a receiver S/C is determined by iterative interpolation. level. The dark grey area shows the highest noise level The time delay from other effects, for instance, Shapiro in 50% of the first 400 days, and the dark and light grey time delay, could be incorporated in the calculation as we area shows the highest noise level in 90% of the first 400 have done in the previous works [74–80]. Our numerical days. 8

1.0 2. Secondary noise

0.8

0.6 LISA-X LISA-A The acceleration noise and optical path noise is consid- 0.4 LISA-E LISA-T ered as the secondary core noise in this work. And the TAIJI-X noise level could be estimated by substituting the cor- 0.2 TAIJI-A responding terms of Eqs. (A1)-(A3) into Eq. (1). The Cumulative fraction of days TAIJI-E PSD of the optimal channels A, E and T could be ob- TAIJI-T tained from the combinations of the X, Y and Z channels. 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 However, the optimal channels are generated by assum- |δ| (μs) ing the fully equal arm triangular conﬁguration and the same PSD of noise level in X, Y and Z channels in [72], as well as the current PSD functions for the TDI channels -X achieved for the equal arm conﬁguration [58–60, 73, 83]. TAIJI-X

t 0

In the realistic case, the arm lengths are unequal due to S/C orbital motion. The numerical orbit we achieved t

would has less than 1% length difference between arms as shown in Fig. 1. By using this unequal-arm-ness, we found that the noise PSD of X/A/E channel is insensi- 0 00 000 00 000 tive to the arm inequality and their noise levels are well approximated by the formulations for equal arm case. However, the noise PSD of the T channel diverges from the equal arm case and varies with the time (actually FIG. 6. The cumulative histogram of the time difference for with the inequality of the arm lengths) for the lower fre- X, A, E, and T channels interferometry paths in the 2200 days quency band. We generalize the PSD functions for a (upper panel), and the time difference between the numerical static unequal arm (Lij = Lji and L12 = L13 = L23) method and approximate method (lower panel). configuration TDI channels which are, 6 6

2 2 2 2 SX(f) =8Sop sin x12 + sin x13 + 32Sacc 1 cos x12 cos x13 , − 2 2 2 SA(f) =4Sop sin x12 + 2 sin x13 + sin x23 + 2 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) − 2 2 2 2 +16Sacc 2 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) cos x12 cos x13 cos x13 cos x23 +2 , − − − 4Sop 2 2 2 SE(f)= 5 sin x12 + 2 sin x13 + 5 sin x23 + 4 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 cos(x13 x23) 3 − 2 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) + 4 sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 cos(x12 x13)] − − − 16Sacc 2 2 2 2 2 2 + 6 cos x12 cos x13 4cos x12 cos x23 cos x13 cos x23 + 4 sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 cos(x12 x13) 3 − − − − 2 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) + 4 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 cos(x13 x23)] , − − − 16Sop 2 2 2 ST(f)= sin x12 + sin x13 + sin x23 sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 cos(x12 x13) 3 − − sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 cos(x13 x23)] − − − − 32Sacc 2 2 2 2 2 2 + 3 cos x12 cos x13 cos x12 cos x23 cos x13 cos x23 2 sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 cos(x12 x13) 3 − − − − − 2 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) 2 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 cos(x13 x23)] , − − − − (23) 9

1 1 f f

S S -X (SN) 1 -X (SN) LISA-A (SN) TAIJI-A (SN) LISA-T (SN 50%) TAIJI-T (SN 50%) LISA-T (SN 90%) 1 TAIJI-T (SN 90%) LISA-T (LFN 50%) TAIJI-T (LFN 50%) LISA-T (LFN 90%) TAIJI-T (LFN 90%) 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 11

FIG. 7. The laser frequency noise (LFN) and secondary noise (SN) in the frequency spectrum for LISA and TAIJI in the first 400 days. The dark grey shows the highest laser frequency noise in 50% of first 400 days, and dark grey together with light grey show the laser frequency noise 90% of 400 days in T channel. The dark blue shows the highest secondary noise in 50% time of the first 400 days in T channel, and the dark blue together with light blue show the secondary noise in 90% of time for T channel.

where xij =2πfLij (i, j =1, 2, 3), Sop is the PSD of the When only secondary noise is considered, the averaged optical path noise level, and Sacc is the PSD level from sensitivities of LISA and TAIJI in X, A, E, and T chan- the test mass acceleration noise. The formulations are nels are shown in Fig. 8. The sensitivity of TAIJI is retreated to the PSD functions in [58–60, 73, 83] when a slightly better than the LISA at the frequency around 10 equal arm (x12 = x13 = x23) is applied. mHz on account of lower optical path noise and longer The noise PSD of the X, A, E and T channels are arm length. The sensitivity of the X channel is usually obtained by applying the requirements into the Eq. (23), considered as the fiducial sensitivities for a mission. The and their PSD curves for LISA and TAIJI are shown A/E channel is slightly better than the X channel in the in Fig. 7. The dark blue area shows the highest 50% frequency band [10, 50] mHz. Due to the time-varying percentile of noise PSD of T channel in first 400 days, response and noise level, the T channel significantly di- and the dark blue together with the light blue areas show verges from other channels in the frequency range [0.2, the noise level in 90% of the 400 days. 50] mHz. Comparing to the sensitivity of the T chan- The PSD of these four channels for LISA and TAIJI nel in the equal-arm case (grey dashed line) [72, 73], the are shown in left and right panels in Fig. 7, respectively. T channel’s sensitivity from unequal-arm configuration As we can see that the secondary noises in the X, A and E is enhanced for the frequency lower than 10 mHz. And channels are higher than that in the T channel, and gen- its sensitivity becomes equivalent to other channels at erally higher than the laser frequency noise except at the the frequency lower than 0.2 mHz. The dark grey area n characteristic frequencies (f = 2L where n = 1, 2, 3 ...). shows the best sensitivity of the T channel in the 50% For TAIJI mission, the laser frequency noise is higher time of the first 400 days, and the dark and light grey than the secondary noise in X, A, and E channels at fre- areas show the best 90% percentile of the time. To illus- quency range [2, 10] mHz. These results will be reflected trate the impact of the T channel in the unequal arm, the in the sensitivity achieved in the next section. noise weighted antenna pattern of the joint AET channel at 10 mHz, 1 mHz and 0.1 mHz are shown in Fig. 13. If the laser frequency noise is incorporated together C. Sensitivities of Michelson configuration with the secondary noise, the averaged sensitivities of the channels are shown in Fig. 9. The dark and light Based on the average GW response and noise levels, colors show the 50% and 90% percentiles of the sensitiv- the average sensitivity of a TDI channel could be ob- ity in the first 400 days. The sensitivity of the T channel tained by weighting the noise PSD by the averaged re- deteriorates significantly because of the laser frequency 2 sponse, Savg = Sn/ . To understand the impacts of noise. However it still better than equal-arm sensitivity laser frequency noiseR and secondary noise, we examine most of the time. At the higher frequency band, all the the sensitivities with secondary noise only first, and the four channels subject to the laser frequency noise signif- n sensitivity from secondary noise together with laser fre- icantly at their characteristic frequency (f = 2L where quency noise thereafter. n = 1, 2, 3 ...). As we can expect in Fig. 7, the sen- 10

-X -X LISA-A or E TAIJI-A or E LISA-T (EqualArm) TAIJI-T (EqualArm) LISA-T (90%) TAIJI-T (90%) LISA-T (50%) TAIJI-T (50%)

f f S S

1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11

FIG. 8. The average sensitivities of TDI X, A, E, and T channels by considering the response shown in Fig. 4 and the secondary noise shown in Fig. 7. The dark grey area shows the best sensitivity of T channel in the 50% percentile of the ﬁrst 400 days, and the dark grey together with the light grey areas show the best sensitivity in 90% time of 400 days. The sensitivity curves of the T channel from equal arm conﬁguration are shown by curves LISA-T (EqualArm) and TAIJI-T (EqualArm) [72, 73].

sitivity of TAIJI also subject to the laser noise in the where the δtα is the mismatched time in the α channel. frequency band [2, 20] mHz. On the other side, Bayle Due to the Sagnac effect, for a LISA-like orbit with 60◦ et al. [68] have developed an on-board antialiasing fil- inclination, the time difference in a Saganc channel will ters to mitigate the residual laser noise especially at the be characteristic frequencies. 4 4 ◦ 2 Considering the LISA and TAIJI have the different arm δtα = ~ω A~ ωA cos60 = ωA, (26) lengths, two missions have the characteristic frequencies, c · ≃ c c and their combined sensitivities could complement each where A is the area of the triangle the three S/C formed, other at the targeting frequencies, also the joint two mis- ω is the angular velocity of the triangle rotation which sions will improve the observation sensitivities by a factor is 2π/yr. Therefore, the time mismatch for LISA orbital more than √2 compared to the single LISA mission as configuration is 12 µs as shown in Fig. 6, and time we studied in [44, 93]. mismatch for TAIJI∼ mission is 17.2 µs. Compared to the Michelson channels, the mismatch∼ in Sagnac channels will be one order higher. IV. OPTIMAL CHANNELS FROM OTHER The PSD of secondary noise in the α channel for the FIRST-GENERATION TDI CONFIGURATIONS unequal-arm case is described by Eq. (27), and the PSD of A, E, and T channel combined from three Sagnac chan- In this section, following the procedures in previous nels are described by Eqs. (28) and (29). The PSD for section for the Michelson configuration, we perform the α channel is expressed by distinguishing the three arm investigations for the optimal channels from other first lengths to be applicable for general case. The average generation TDI configurations in the unequal arm case. sensitivities of the corresponding channels are shown in lower panel of Fig. 10. Compared to the result of equalarm case in [72], the 1% inequality from the numerical A. Sagnac channels orbit has trivial impact∼ on the sensitivity curves.

The measurements expression of the α channel from Sagnac conﬁguration is [58, 59], Sα(f) =6Sop +4Sacc [sin x23 sin(x12 + x13)

sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 α =(η31 + 31η23 + 31 23η12) − D D D (24) 3cos x12 cos x13 cos x23 + 3] , (27) (η21 + 21η32 + 21 32η13). − 2 − D D D SA Sagnac SE Sagnac 4Sop sin x cos x +1 , ≃ , ≃ − By substituting the laser noise terms in ηij into the Eq. +4Sacc (4 3cos x cos3x) , (28) (24), the residual laser term will be − − ST Sagnac 2Sop (4 cos x +2cos2x + 3) , ≃ α C˙ 12δt (25) +4Sacc (1 cos3x) . (29) ≃ α − 11

-T (EqualArm) -T (EqualArm) LISA-X (90%) TAIJI-X (90%) LISA-X (50%) TAIJI-X (50%) LISA-A (90%) TAIJI-A (90%) LISA-A (50%) TAIJI-A (50%) LISA-T (90%) TAIJI-T (90%) LISA-T (50%) TAIJI-T (50%)

f f S S

1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11

FIG. 9. The average sensitivities of TDI X, A, E, and T channels by considering the response shown in Fig. 4 and the secondary noise and laser frequency noise shown in Fig. 7. The dark color areas show the best sensitivity in the 50% time of the ﬁrst 400 days for X, A, and T channels, and the dark color together with the light color areas show the best sensitivity in 90% of 400 days. The sensitivity curves of the T channel for fully equal arm conﬁguration are shown by curves LISA-T (EqualArm) and TAIJI-T (EqualArm) [72, 73].

B. Relay channels noise could be expressed as 2 SU(f) =4Sop 2 sin x23 cos x23 cos(x12 + x13)+1 − The expression of the U channel from Relay TDI ob- 2 +8Sacc sin x23 2cos x23 cos(x12 + x13)+2 , servables (U, V, W) is [58, 59], − (33) U =(η23 + 23η32 + 32 23η13 + 13 23 32η21) SA Relay SE Relay Sop (10 3cos x 6cos2x cos3x) D D D D D D , ≃ , ≃ − − − (η13 + 13η21 + 21 13η32 + 32 21 13η23). − D D D D D D +2Sacc (13 4cos x 4cos2x 4cos3x cos4x) , (30) − − − − (34) And its diagram on S/C layout-time delay is shown in ST Relay 4Sop(1 cos3x) the second plot of Fig. 2. The laser frequency noise in , ≃ − 4 2 the U channel could be approximated as +8Sacc(4 sin x 5 sin x cos x cos3x + 16). − − − (35) U C˙ 23δtD, (31) ≃ Considering any channel in Relay configuration involving where C23 is the laser frequency noise of the laser source the four links in three arms, we expect there will be not on the optical bench of S/C2 pointing to S/C3. And significant impact on the PSD of the secondary noise. We the time difference in the U channel could be roughly keep the PSD of U channels SU(f) described by using the obtained by unequal arm case, and optimal channels are expressed by assuming the equal arm. Their averaged sensitivities are δtD 2(L12 + L13)L˙ 23 2L23(L˙ 12 + L˙ 13). (32) ≃ − shown in lower panel of Fig. 11. The histogram of the path mismatch between the two beams are shown in Fig. 11 upper plot. C. Beacon and Monitor channels For the optimal channels combined by the Relay configuration, as explained in Vallisneri et al. [73], the optimal channels would be not real observables since their com- The expressions of Beacon-P and Monitor-D channel plex cross-spectra terms between the (U, V, W) terms are [58, 59] yield the eigenvectors with complex coefficients. How- P =( 13η32 + 13 32η23 + 13 32 23η12 + 12η13) ever, we still implement the optimal channels for Re- D D D D D D D ( 12η23 + 12 23η32 + 12 23 32η13 + 13η12), lay configuration in this work to compare with other − D D D D D D D D =(η21 + 21η32 + 21 32η23 + 23 32η31) TDI configurations and keep the integrity of all first- D D D D D generation TDI. And their time differences relating to (η31 + 31η23 + 31 23η32 + 23 32η21). the residual laser noise are shown in upper plots of Fig. − D D D D D (36) 11. Their S/C layout-time delay diagrams are shown in Fig. The secondary noise in the U and optimal channels 2. As we can see from the diagram, the Beacon-P chan- caused by the acceleration noise and the optical path nel could be treated as the inversed Monitor-D channel 12

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6 LISA-U LISA-A 0.4 0.4 LISA-E LISA-T LISA-μ TAIJI-U 0.2 LISA-A 0.2 TAIJI-A Cumulative fraction of days LISA-E Cumulative fraction of days TAIJI-E LISA-T TAIJI-T 0.0 0.0 11.6 11.8 12.0 12.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 |δ| (s) |δ| (μs)

11 11 -α -U Sagnac-A Relay-A 11 Sagnac-E 11 Relay-E Sagnac-T Relay-T

1 1 1 f 1 S S

11 11

1 1

1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11

FIG. 10. The histogram of time difference (upper panel) and FIG. 11. The histogram of time difference (upper panel) and median sensitivities (lower panel) of Sagnac α and the corre- median sensitivities (lower panel) of Relay U and the corresponding optimal channels for LISA mission at starting time. sponding optimal channels for LISA mission at starting time. in the time direction. From our previous investigation δt obtained in Eq. (37), and the Eq. (12) also applicable [44], the noise PSD and average sensitivity will be identi- for the Monitor/Beacon configuration. The histogram of cal. The Monitor-D channel is selected to represent their path mismatch in Monitor D and optimal channels are performances. plots in upper panel of Fig. 12. By assuming the static triangle formation, the mis- Another interesting result we realized is that the δt of match of the two group beams marked in Fig. 2 could a Monitor/Beacon channel is a half of the time difference be approximated as in Michelson channels. 1 δtD 2L23(L˙ 12 L˙ 13)+2(L13 L12)L˙ 23 . (37) δtD(t) δtX(t). (39) ≃ − − ≃−2 h i Due to the four beams involved in the D channels, its We deduce the reason from Fig. 2. As we can see the di- residual laser noise is more complicated than other chan- agram of Monitor-D, two beams (solid and dashed lines) nels and could be expressed as pass by the arms L23 and L32 (almost) at the same time, and the propagation time could be canceled out. Then Dlaser =2C˙ 12L23(L˙ 12 L˙ 13) + (C˙ 23 + C˙ 31)(L13 L12)L˙ 23 − − four effective links are left which are involving L21 and C˙ 2L23(L˙ 12 L˙ 13)+2(L13 L12)L˙ 23 L31. Compared to the diagram of the Michelson-X, the ≃ − − left links could be treated as the the half of links in the h i Cδt˙ D, X channels with the inverse signs (solid/dashed). And ≃ (38) the similar situation is also applicable for the Beacon-P where in the last two steps approximation, we assume channels compared to the X channels. the relavent lasers having similar frequency noise perfor- The underlying relation between Michelson and Mon- mances. Therefore, the laser noise is still proportional to itor/Beacon makes the two configurations to have some 13

1.0 common features. We may expect the impact of unequal arm on the optimal Michelson-T channel also happen on the Monitor-T/Beacon-T channel. As the lower plot of 0.8 Fig. 12 shows, the Monitor-T channel diverges from the equal arm case. The PSD of secondary noise for the 0.6 Monitor-D and the corresponding optimal channels are LISA-D described by LISA-A 0.4 LISA-E LISA-T TAIJI-D 0.2 TAIJI-A Cumulative fraction of days TAIJI-E TAIJI-T 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 |δ| (μs)

11 -D Monitor-A 11 Monitor-E Monitor-T

1 f 1 S

1 1 1 11

FIG. 12. The histogram of time diﬀerence (upper panel) and median sensitivities (lower panel) of Monitor (or Beacon) D and the corresponding optimal channels for LISA mission at starting time.

2 2 SD(f) =4Sop 2 sin x23 cos x23 cos(x12 x13)+1 +8Sacc sin x23 2cos x23 cos(x12 x13)+2 , − − − − 2 SA Monitor SE Monitor 4Sop(sin x cos x +1)+4Sacc(4 3cos x cos3x), , ≃ , ≃ − − − 4Sop 2 ST Monitor = 2 sin x12 + 2 sin x12 sin x13 + 2 sin x12 sin x23 + sin x12 sin(x12 x13) + sin x12 sin(x12 x23) , 3 − − 2 sinx12 sin(x13 + x23) + 2 sin x13 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 + 2 sin x13 sin x23 sin x13 sin(x12 x13) − − − − 2 + sin x13 sin(x13 x23) + 2 sin x23 sin x23 sin(x12 x23) sin x23 sin(x13 x23) − − − − − 3cos x12 cos x13 cos x23 + 3] − 4S + acc 2 sin2 x + 2 sin2 x + 2 sin2 x + 4 sin x sin x + 4 sin x sin x + 4 sin x sin x 3 12 13 23 12 13 12 23 13 23 +4 sinx12 sin(x12 x13) + 4 sin x12 sin(x12 x23) + 4 sin x13 sin(x13 x23) 4 sin x12 sin(x13 + x23) − − − − 4 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 4 sin x13 sin(x12 x13) 4 sin x23 sin(x12 x23) 4 sin x23 sin(x13 x23) − − − − − − − 8 sin x13 sin x23 cos x12 cos(x13 x23) 8 sin x12 sin x13 cos x23 cos(x12 x13) − − − − 8 sin x12 sin x23 cos x13 cos(x12 x23) 12 cos x12 cos x13 cos x23 + 12] , − − − (40) where we keep the expressions of Monitor-D and the corresponding optimal T channels as the unequal arm case, 14 the expressions of Monitor-A/E channel in the equal arm velocities. And it indicates that the laser frequency noise case. in the first-generation will decrease with the short of arm lengths based on a power-law with the index & 2. This is reflected by comparing the LISA and TAIJI in this 6 V. CONCLUSIONS work, the arm length of TAIJI (nominal 3 10 km) is longer than LISA (2.5 106 km) by 20%,× the relative × velocities between S/C of TAIJI ( L˙ 6 m/s) is also In this work, we examined the sensitivities of the op- | | ≤ larger than LISA’s ( L˙ 5 m/s) by 20%, as a result, the timal channels (A, E, and T) composited by the first- | |≤ generation TDI configurations for unequal arm LISA and PSD of laser frequency noise in TDI channel of TAIJI is higher than LISA’s by 40%. And the sensitivity of TAIJI missions. By using the numerical orbit evolved ∼ in the solar system dynamics, the time-varying unequal- TAIJI mission at [2, 20] mHz is affected by the laser arm configuration was constructed. Three kinds of noise noise more than that of LISA. For the shorter arm LISA- like mission concept–AMIGO (nominal arm length 104 are considered in the investigations which are laser fre- ∼ quency noise, acceleration noise, and optical path noise. km) [36], our preliminary results showed that the first- We found that the T channel from Michelson and Moni- generation TDI could be enough to suppress the laser tor/Beacon TDI configuration is sensitive to the inequal- frequency noise under the core secondary noise and detect ities of the three arms both in their response functions the GW in the middle frequency band. and the noise levels in the low frequency range. However, the T channel is susceptible to the laser frequency noise raised by the mismatch of the laser beams. Comparing to ACKNOWLEDGMENTS the equal-arm case, the unevenness between arm lengths promotes the detectability of the T channel. This work was supported by NSFC Nos. 12003059 On the other side, the first-generation TDI channels and 11773059, Key Research Program of Frontier Sci- are unsurprisingly subject to laser frequency noise espe- ences, Chinese Academy of Science, No. QYZDB-SSW- cially at the mission’s characteristic frequencies (f = n ). 2L SYS016 and the Strategic Priority Research Program The laser frequency could be more than one order higher of the Chinese Academy of Sciences under grant Nos. than the secondary noise at these frequencies. The on- XDA1502070102, XDA15020700 and XDB21010100. and et al. board antialiasing filters developed by Bayle [68] by the National Key Research and Development Pro- would mitigate residual laser noise especially at the char- gram of China under Grant Nos. 2016YFA0302002 and acteristic frequencies. Another approach is to improve 2017YFC0601602. This work made use of the High Per- the laser frequency stability by 1 2 orders to 0.3 3 formance Computing Resource in the Core Facility for √ − − Hz/ Hz to reduce the impact of laser frequency noise in Advanced Research Computing at Shanghai Astronomi- all frequency band [64]. cal Observatory. The second-generation TDI also could be employed to overcome the laser noise and achieve the sensitivity goal. However, the second-generation TDI configuration would require more than twice links combination than Appendix A: The notations of the η the first-generation, in other words, the travel time of laser beams will be at least twice of the first-generation cases. Groups of second-generation configurations have been proposed in previous works [62, 63, 66, 82, 91, and 1 ηji = sji + [τij εij + ji(2τji εji τjk)] references therein], as well as some new TDI combina- 2 − D − − tions recently found in [94]. And the residual laser fre- for (2 1), (3 2) and (1 3), → → → quency noises in these TDI configurations should be triv- 1 η = s + [τ ε + (τ ε )+ τ τ ] ial and not affecting the sensitivity significantly. This has ji ji 2 ij − ij Dji ji − ji ik − ij been verified in our previous studies [76, 78, 80], which for (1 2), (2 3) and (3 1). we numerically calculated the time difference for selected → → → (A1) second-generation TDI configurations, and the laser fre- The observables s , ε and τ for j =S/C2 i = S/C1, quency noise inferred by Eq. (12) is (mostly) negligible. ji ij ij S/C3 S/C2 and S/C1 S/C3 ) → In our recent work [81], we present the sensitivity investi- → → gation for the second-generation TDI by using a generic s =yh : h + C (t) C (t) algorithm. ji ji Dji ji − ij OB OB opt Based on our experiences in the orbits optimization + jiNji (t) Nij (t)+ nij (t), and TDI path mismatch calculation, we realized it would D − (A2) ε =C (t) C (t)+2nacc(t) 2N OB(t), be harder to minimize the relative velocities between the ij ik − ij ij − ij S/C for a LISA-like mission with longer arm length [80]. τij =Cik(t) Cij (t), − As the Eq. (22) shown, the mismatch of the TDI beams increases with the production of arm lengths and relative and observables s , ε and τ (for 1 2, 2 3 and ij ij ij → → 15

3 1 ) • nopt denotes the optical path noise on the S/Ci → ij pointing to the S/Cj. h sji =y : h + jiCji(t) Cij (t) ji D − • acc OB OB opt nij is the acceleration noise from test mass on the jiN (t)+ N (t)+ n (t), − D ji ij ij (A3) S/Ci pointing to S/Cj. acc OB εij =Cik(t) Cij (t) 2nij (t)+2Nij (t), • − − Lij is the arm length from S/Ci to j. In this work, τij =Cik(t) Cij (t). we assume the unequal-arm triangle conﬁguration − is static during a TDI laser beam propagation time The symbols are speciﬁed as follows. (Lij = Lji and L12 = L13 = L23) when we calculate the GW response6 and6 PSD of noises, and • h yji is the response function for the GW signal h. adopt the dynamical case when we calculate the mismatch of laser beam paths. • Cij is the laser frequency noise of the laser on the optical bench in S/Ci pointing to S/Cj.

• OB Appendix B: The noise weighted antenna pattern Nij denotes the eﬀect from displacement along Lji for the optical bench on S/Ci pointing to S/Cj.

[1] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collabo- ration and Virgo Collaboration), Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016), and references therein, arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]. [2] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Binary Black Hole Merg- ers in the first Advanced LIGO Observing Run, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041015 (2016), [erratum: Phys. Rev.X 8,no.3,039903(2018)], arXiv:1606.04856 [gr-qc]. [3] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collabora- tion and Virgo Collaboration), GW170817: Obser- vation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neu- tron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]. [4] B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GWTC-1: A Gravitational- Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031040 (2019), arXiv:1811.12907 [astro-ph.HE]. [5] A. H. Nitz, T. Dent, G. S. Davies, S. Kumar, C. D. Capano, I. Harry, S. Mozzon, L. Nuttall, A. Lundgren, and M. Tápai, 2-OGC: Open Gravitational-wave Cata- log of Binary Mergers from Analysis of Public Advanced FIG. 13. The noise weighted antenna pattern of the joint AET 891 LIGO and Virgo Data, Astrophys. J. , 123 (2020), channel at 10 mHz (left column), 1 mHz (middle column) and arXiv:1910.05331 [astro-ph.HE]. 0.1 mHz (right column) for plus polarization (upper panel) [6] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW190425: and cross polarization (lower panel). Observation of a Compact Binary Coalescence with To- tal Mass ∼ 3.4M⊙, Astrophys. J. Lett. 892, L3 (2020), arXiv:2001.01761 [astro-ph.HE]. [7] R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW190412: Observation of a Binary-Black-Hole [10] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo, 1M2H, Coalescence with Asymmetric Masses, (2020), Dark Energy Camera GW-E, DES, DLT40, Las arXiv:2004.08342 [astro-ph.HE]. Cumbres Observatory, VINROUGE, MASTER), [8] R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW190814: A gravitational-wave standard siren measurement Gravitational Waves from the Coalescence of a 23 of the Hubble constant, Nature 551, 85 (2017), Solar Mass Black Hole with a 2.6 Solar Mass arXiv:1710.05835 [astro-ph.CO]. Compact Object, Astrophys. J. 896, L44 (2020), [11] M. Soares-Santos et al. (DES, LIGO Scientific, Virgo), arXiv:2006.12611 [astro-ph.HE]. First Measurement of the Hubble Constant from a [9] https://gracedb.ligo.org/. Dark Standard Siren using the Dark Energy Sur- vey Galaxies and the LIGO/Virgo Binary–Black-hole 16

Merger GW170814, Astrophys. J. Lett. 876, L7 (2019), H. M. Lee, A. B. Nielsen, E. Majorana, and J. Harms, arXiv:1901.01540 [astro-ph.CO]. Low-frequency terrestrial tensor gravitational-wave de- [12] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), A tector, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 075003 (2016). gravitational-wave measurement of the Hubble constant [27] H. J. Paik, M. Vol Moody, and R. S. Norton, SOGRO — following the second observing run of Advanced LIGO Terrestrial full-tensor detector for mid-frequency gravita- and Virgo, (2019), arXiv:1908.06060 [astro-ph.CO]. tional waves, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940001 (2020). [13] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), [28] T. Shimoda, S. Takano, C. P. Ooi, N. Arit- Tests of general relativity with GW150914, omi, A. Shoda, Y. Michimura, and M. Ando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221101 (2016), [Erra- Torsion-bar antenna: a ground-based mid- tum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 129902 (2018)], frequency and low-frequency gravitational wave arXiv:1602.03841 [gr-qc]. detector, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940003 (2020), [14] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, arXiv:1812.01835 [physics.ins-det]. Virgo), Tests of General Relativity with [29] J. Crowder and N. J. Cornish, Beyond LISA: GW170817, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 011102 (2019), Exploring future gravitational wave missions, arXiv:1811.00364 [gr-qc]. Phys. Rev. D 72, 083005 (2005), arXiv:gr-qc/0506015. [15] B. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific, Virgo), [30] S. Kawamura et al., The Japanese space Tests of General Relativity with the Binary gravitational wave antenna DECIGO, Black Hole Signals from the LIGO-Virgo Cat- Class. Quant. Grav. 23, S125 (2006). alog GWTC-1, Phys. Rev. D 100, 104036 (2019), [31] S. Kawamura et al., Space gravitational- arXiv:1903.04467 [gr-qc]. wave antennas DECIGO and B-DECIGO, [16] T. Akutsu et al. (KAGRA), Overview of KAGRA: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1845001 (2019). Detector design and construction history, (2020), [32] Y. Abou El-Neaj, C. Alpigiani, S. Amairi-Pyka, arXiv:2005.05574 [physics.ins-det]. et al., AEDGE: Atomic Experiment for Dark Mat- [17] Y. Michimura et al., Prospects for improving the sensitiv- ter and Gravity Exploration in Space, arXiv e-prints , ity of the cryogenic gravitational wave detector KAGRA, arXiv:1908.00802 (2019), arXiv:1908.00802 [gr-qc]. (2020), arXiv:2006.08970 [gr-qc]. [33] D. Gao, J. Wang, and M. Zhan, Atomic Inter- [18] B. Abbott et al. (KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, VIRGO), ferometric Gravitational-wave Space Observatory Prospects for Observing and Localizing Gravitational- (AIGSO), Commun. Theor. Phys. 69, 37 (2018), Wave Transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced arXiv:1711.03690 [physics.atom-ph]. Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Rel. 21, 3 (2018), [34] G. Wang, D. Gao, W.-T. Ni, J. Wang, and arXiv:1304.0670 [gr-qc]. M. Zhan, Orbit design for space atom-interferometer [19] R. Geiger et al., Matter-wave laser Interferometric Grav- AIGSO, Int.J.Mod.Phys.D 29, 1940004 (2020), itation Antenna (MIGA): New perspectives for funda- arXiv:1905.00600 [gr-qc]. mental physics and geosciences, in 50th Rencontres de [35] W.-T. Ni, Gravitational Wave (GW) Classification, Moriond on Gravitation: 100 years after GR (2015) pp. Space GW Detection Sensitivities and AMIGO (As- 163–172, arXiv:1505.07137 [physics.atom-ph]. trodynamical Middle-frequency Interferometric GW [20] J. Junca et al. (MIGA consortium), Charac- Observatory), EPJ Web Conf. 168, 01004 (2018), terizing Earth gravity field fluctuations with arXiv:1709.05659 [gr-qc]. the MIGA antenna for future Gravitational [36] W.-T. Ni, G. Wang, and A.-M. Wu, Astrodynamical Wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 99, 104026 (2019), middle-frequency interferometric gravitational wave arXiv:1902.05337 [physics.atom-ph]. observatory AMIGO: Mission concept and orbit de- [21] J. Coleman, MAGIS-100 at Fermilab, sign, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940007-129 (2020), arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1812.00482 (2018), arXiv:1909.04995 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1812.00482 [physics.ins-det]. [37] M. A. Sedda et al., The Missing Link in Gravitational- [22] M.-S. Zhan, J. Wang, W.-T. Ni, D.-F. Gao, G. Wang, Wave Astronomy: Discoveries waiting in the decihertz L.-X. He, R.-B. Li, L. Zhou, X. Chen, J.-Q. Zhong, range, (2019), arXiv:1908.11375 [gr-qc]. B. Tang, Z.-W. Yao, L. Zhu, Z.-Y. Xiong, S.-B. [38] T. Ebisuzaki, H. Katori, J. Makino, A. Noda, Lu, G.-H. Yu, Q.-F. Cheng, M. Liu, Y.-R. Liang, H. Shinkai, and T. Tamagawa, INO: Inter- P. Xu, X.-D. He, M. Ke, Z. Tan, and J. Luo, ZAIGA: planetary network of optical lattice clocks, Zhaoshan long-baseline atom interferometer gravita- Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940002 (2020). tion antenna, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940005 (2020), [39] LISA Study Team, LISA (Laser Interferometer Space arXiv:1903.09288 [physics.atom-ph]. Antenna): A Cornerstone Mission for the Observation [23] B. Canuel et al., ELGAR - a European Laboratory for of Gravitational Waves, Tech. Rep. 11 (ESA-SCI, 2000) Gravitation and Atom-interferometric Research, (2019), system and Technology Study Report. arXiv:1911.03701 [physics.atom-ph]. [40] P. Amaro-Seoane, H. Audley, S. Babak, and et al (LISA [24] L. Badurina, E. Bentine, D. Blas, K. Bongs, et al., Team), Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, arXiv e- AION: An Atom Interferometer Observatory and Net- prints , arXiv:1702.00786 (2017). work, JCAP 05, 011, arXiv:1911.11755 [astro-ph.CO]. [41] W.-R. Hu and Y.-L. Wu, The Taiji Program in Space [25] J. Harms, B. J. J. Slagmolen, R. X. Adhikari, for gravitational wave physics and the nature of gravity, M. C. Miller, M. Evans, Y. Chen, H. Müller, and Natl. Sci. Rev. 4, 685 (2017). M. Ando, Low-frequency terrestrial gravitational- [42] J. Luo et al. (TianQin Team), TianQin: wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 88, 122003 (2013), a space-borne gravitational wave detec- arXiv:1308.2074 [gr-qc]. tor, Class. Quant. Grav. 33, 035010 (2016), [26] H. J. Paik, C. E. Griggs, M. Moody, K. Venkateswara, arXiv:1512.02076 [astro-ph.IM]. 17

[43] B. Wu, C.-G. Huang, and C.-F. Qiao, An- therein. alytical analysis on the orbits of Taiji [57] M. Armano, H. Audley, J. Baird, et al., Be- spacecrafts, Phys. Rev. D 100, 122001 (2019), yond the Required LISA Free-Fall Performance: arXiv:1907.06178 [gr-qc]. New LISA Pathfinder Results down to 20 µHz, [44] G. Wang, W.-T. Ni, W.-B. Han, S.-C. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 061101 (2018), and references and X.-Y. Zhong, Numerical simulation of sky therein. localization for LISA-TAIJI joint observation, [58] J. W. Armstrong, F. B. Estabrook, and M. Tinto, Phys. Rev. D 102, 024089 (2020), arXiv:2002.12628. Time-Delay Interferometry for Space-based Gravita- [45] L.-F. Wang, Z.-W. Zhao, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, tional Wave Searches, Astrophys. J. 527, 814 (1999). A preliminary forecast for cosmological parameter es- [59] F. B. Estabrook, M. Tinto, and J. W. Arm- timation with gravitational-wave standard sirens from strong, Time-delay analysis of LISA gravitational TianQin, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1907.01838 (2019), wave data: Elimination of spacecraft motion effects, arXiv:1907.01838 [astro-ph.CO]. Phys. Rev. D 62, 042002 (2000). [46] C. Zhang, Q. Gao, Y. Gong, D. Liang, A. J. [60] J. W. Armstrong, F. B. Estabrook, and M. Tinto, Weinstein, and C. Zhang, Frequency response of Sensitivities of alternate LISA configurations, time-delay interferometry for space-based gravita- Classical and Quantum Gravity 18, 4059 (2001). tional wave antenna, Phys. Rev. D 100, 064033 (2019), [61] M. Tinto, D. A. Shaddock, J. Sylvestre, and arXiv:1906.10901 [gr-qc]. J. W. Armstrong, Implementation of time-delay in- [47] J. Luo, Y. Bai, L. Cai, B. Cao, W.-M. Chen, Y. Chen, D.- terferometry for LISA, Phys. Rev. D 67, 122003 (2003), C. Chen, Y.-W. Ding, H. Duan, X. Gou, C.-Z. Gu, D.-F. arXiv:gr-qc/0303013 [gr-qc]. Gu, Z.-Q. He, S. Hu, Y. Hu, X.-Q. Huang, Q. Jiang, Y.-Z. [62] M. Tinto, F. B. Estabrook, and J. Armstrong, Time Jiang, H. Li, H.-Y. Li, J. Li, M. Li, Z. Li, Z.-X. Li, Y.-R. delay interferometry with moving spacecraft arrays, Liang, F.-J. Liao, Y.-C. Liu, L. Liu, P.-B. Liu, X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 69, 082001 (2004), arXiv:gr-qc/0310017. Y. Liu, X.-F. Lu, Y. Luo, J.-W. Mei, M. Ming, S.-B. Qu, [63] D. A. Shaddock, M. Tinto, F. B. Estabrook, and D.-Y. Tan, M. Tang, L. Tu, C.-R. Wang, F. Wang, G.- J. Armstrong, Data combinations accounting for LISA F. Wang, J. Wang, L. Wang, X. Wang, R. Wei, S. Wu, spacecraft motion, Phys. Rev. D 68, 061303 (2003), C.-Y. Xiao, M.-Z. Xie, X.-S. Xu, L. Yang, M.-L. Yang, arXiv:gr-qc/0307080. S.-Q. Yang, H.-C. Yeh, J.-B. Yu, L. Zhang, M.-H. Zhao, [64] M. Vallisneri, Synthetic LISA: Simulat- and Z. Zhou, The first round result from the tianqin-1 ing time delay interferometry in a model satellite, Classical and Quantum Gravity (2020). LISA, Phys.Rev.D 71, 022001 (2005), [48]Z. Luo, Y. Wang, Y. Wu, W. Hu, and arXiv:gr-qc/0407102 [gr-qc]. G. Jin, The Taiji program: A concise overview, [65] A. Petiteau, G. Auger, H. Halloin, O. Jean- Progress of Theoretical and Experimental nin, E. Plagnol, S. Pireaux, T. Regimbau, and Physics 10.1093/ptep/ptaa083 (2020), ptaa083, J.-Y. Vinet, LISACode: A scientific simula- https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article-pdf/doi/10.1093/ptep/ptaa083/33529434/ptaa083.pdf.tor of LISA, Phys.Rev.D 77, 023002 (2008), [49] B.-B. Ye, X. Zhang, M.-Y. Zhou, Y. Wang, H.- arXiv:0802.2023 [gr-qc]. M. Yuan, D. Gu, Y. Ding, J. Zhang, J. Mei, [66] S. Dhurandhar, K. Nayak, and J. Vinet, Time De- and J. Luo, Optimizing orbits for TianQin, lay Interferometry for LISA with one arm dys- Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1950121 (2019). functional, Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 135013 (2010), [50] Z. Luo, Z. Guo, G. Jin, Y. Wu, and W. Hu, arXiv:1001.4911 [gr-qc]. A brief analysis to Taiji: Science and technology, [67] M. Tinto and S. V. Dhurandhar, Time-Delay Interferom- Results in Physics 16, 102918 (2020). etry, Living Rev. Rel. 17, 6 (2014). [51] W.-T. Ni, ASTROD-GW: Overview and [68] J.-B. Bayle, M. Lilley, A. Petiteau, and H. Halloin, Ef- Progress, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 22, 1341004 (2013), fect of filters on the time-delay interferometry residual arXiv:1212.2816 [astro-ph.IM]. laser noise for LISA, Phys. Rev. D 99, 084023 (2019), [52] A. Sesana et al., Unveiling the Gravita- arXiv:1811.01575 [astro-ph.IM]. tional Universe at µ-Hz Frequencies, (2019), [69] N. J. Cornish and L. J. Rubbo, LISA response function, arXiv:1908.11391 [astro-ph.IM]. Phys. Rev. D 67, 022001 (2003). [53] J. Baker et al., Space Based Gravitational [70] L. J. Rubbo, N. J. Cornish, and O. Poujade, Wave Astronomy Beyond LISA, (2019), Forward modeling of space-borne gravitational arXiv:1907.11305 [astro-ph.IM]. wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 69, 082003 (2004), [54] W.-T. Ni, Super-ASTROD: Probing primordial arXiv:gr-qc/0311069 [gr-qc]. gravitational waves and mapping the outer so- [71] S. L. Larson, R. W. Hellings, and W. A. Hiscock, Un- lar system, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 075021 (2009), equal arm space borne gravitational wave detectors, arXiv:0812.0887 [astro-ph]. Phys. Rev. D 66, 062001 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0206081. [55] G. Wang, W.-T. Ni, and A.-M. Wu, Orbit design [72] T. A. Prince, M. Tinto, S. L. Larson, and thruster requirement for various constant-arm and J. W. Armstrong, The LISA optimal space mission concepts for gravitational-wave ob- sensitivity, Phys. Rev. D 66, 122002 (2002), servation, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940006 (2020), arXiv:gr-qc/0209039 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1908.05444 [gr-qc]. [73] M. Vallisneri, J. Crowder, and M. Tinto, Sensitivity [56] M. Armano, H. Audley, G. Auger, et al., Sub- and parameter-estimation precision for alternate LISA Femto-g Free Fall for Space-Based Gravitational configurations, Class. Quant. Grav. 25, 065005 (2008), Wave Observatories: LISA Pathfinder Results, arXiv:0710.4369 [gr-qc]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 231101 (2016), and references [74] G. Wang, Time-delay Interferometry for ASTROD-GW 18

(2011). noise removal for the split interferometry conﬁguration [75] G. Wang and W.-T. Ni, Time- of LISA, Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 205003 (2012). delay Interferometry for ASTROD-GW, [85] M. Otto, Time-Delay Interferometry Simulations for the Chin. Astron. Astrophys. 36, 211 (2012), and refer- Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (2015). ences therein. [86] M. Tinto and O. Hartwig, Time-Delay [76] G. Wang and W.-T. Ni, Numermcal sim- Interferometry and Clock-Noise Cali- ulation of time delay interferometry for bration, Phys. Rev. D 98, 042003 (2018), NGO/eLISA, Class. Quant. Grav. 30, 065011 (2013), arXiv:1807.02594 [gr-qc]. arXiv:1204.2125 [gr-qc]. [87] A. Freise, S. Chelkowski, S. Hild, W. Del Pozzo, [77] G. Wang and W.-T. Ni, Orbit optimization for ASTROD- A. Perreca, and A. Vecchio, Triple Michelson In- GW and its time delay interferometry with two arms terferometer for a Third-Generation Gravitational using CGC ephemeris, Chin. Phys. B22, 049501 (2013), Wave Detector, Class. Quant. Grav. 26, 085012 (2009), arXiv:1205.5175 [gr-qc]. arXiv:0804.1036 [gr-qc]. [78] S. V. Dhurandhar, W. T. Ni, and G. Wang, Nu- [88] F. B. Estabrook and H. D. Wahlquist, Response of merical simulation of time delay interferometry for a Doppler spacecraft tracking to gravitational radiation., LISA-like mission with the simpliﬁcation of having General Relativity and Gravitation 6, 439 (1975). only one interferometer, Adv. Space Res. 51, 198 (2013), [89] H. Wahlquist, The Doppler response to grav- arXiv:1102.4965 [gr-qc]. itational waves from a binary star source., [79] G. Wang and W.-T. Ni, Orbit optimiza- General Relativity and Gravitation 19, 1101 (1987). tion and time delay interferometry for in- [90] S. V. Dhurandhar, K. Rajesh Nayak, and J. Y. clined ASTROD-GW formation with half-year Vinet, Algebraic approach to time-delay data anal- precession-period, Chin. Phys. B24, 059501 (2015), ysis for LISA, Phys. Rev. D 65, 102002 (2002), arXiv:1409.4162 [gr-qc]. arXiv:gr-qc/0112059 [gr-qc]. [80] G. Wang and W.-T. Ni, Numerical simulation [91] N. J. Cornish and R. W. Hellings, The Ef- of time delay interferometry for TAIJI and new fects of orbital motion on LISA time delay in- LISA, Res. Astron. Astrophys. 19, 058 (2019), terferometry, Class. Quant. Grav. 20, 4851 (2003), arXiv:1707.09127 [astro-ph.IM]. arXiv:gr-qc/0306096 [gr-qc]. [81] G. Wang, W.-T. Ni, W.-B. Han, and C.-F. Qiao, Algo- [92] T. Robson, N. J. Cornish, and C. Liu, The rithm for TDI numerical simulation and sensitivity inves- construction and use of LISA sensitivity tigation, (2020), arXiv:2010.15544 [gr-qc]. curves, Class. Quant. Grav. 36, 105011 (2019), [82] M. Vallisneri, Geometric time delay interferometry, arXiv:1803.01944 [astro-ph.HE]. Phys. Rev. D 72, 042003 (2005), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. [93] G. Wang and W.-B. Han, Observing gravitational D 76, 109903(2007)], arXiv:gr-qc/0504145 [gr-qc]. wave polarizations with LISA-TAIJI network, (2021), [83] M. Vallisneri and C. R. Galley, Non-sky-averaged arXiv:2101.01991 [gr-qc]. sensitivity curves for space-based gravitational-wave [94] M. Muratore, D. Vetrugno, and S. Vitale, Revisitation observatories, Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 124015 (2012), of time delay interferometry combinations that suppress arXiv:1201.3684 [gr-qc]. laser noise in LISA, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2001.11221 [84] M. Otto, G. Heinzel, and K. Danzmann, TDI and clock (2020), arXiv:2001.11221 [astro-ph.IM].