B. P. Abbott, California Institute of TechnologyFollow
R. Abbott, California Institute of TechnologyFollow
T. D. Abbott, Louisiana State UniversityFollow
S. Abraham, Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics IndiaFollow
F. Acernese, Università degli Studi di SalernoFollow
K. Ackley, Monash UniversityFollow
C. Adams, LIGO LivingstonFollow
R. X. Adhikari, California Institute of TechnologyFollow
V. B. Adya, Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute)Follow
C. Affeldt, Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute)Follow
M. Agathos, University of CambridgeFollow
K. Agatsuma, University of BirminghamFollow
N. Aggarwal, LIGO, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyFollow
O. D. Aguiar, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas EspaciaisFollow
L. Aiello, Gran Sasso Science InstituteFollow
A. Ain, Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics IndiaFollow
P. Ajith, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, MumbaiFollow
G. Allen, University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignFollow
A. Allocca, Università di PisaFollow
M. A. Aloy, Universitat de València
P. A. Altin, The Australian National UniversityFollow
A. Amato, IN2P3 Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des ParticulesFollow
A. Ananyeva, California Institute of TechnologyFollow
S. B. Anderson, California Institute of TechnologyFollow
W. G. Anderson, University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeFollow
S. V. Angelova, University of Strathclyde
S. Antier, Laboratoire de l'Accélérateur Linéaire
S. Appert, California Institute of Technology
K. Arai, California Institute of Technology
M. C. Araya, California Institute of Technology
J. S. Areeda, California State University, Fullerton
M. Arène, APC - AstroParticule et Cosmologie
N. Arnaud, Laboratoire de l'Accélérateur Linéaire

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

9-1-2019

Abstract

Due to an error at the publisher, in the published article the number of pulsars presented in the paper is incorrect in multiple places throughout the text. Specifically, “222” pulsars should be “221.” Additionally, the number of pulsars for which we have EM observations that fully overlap with O1 and O2 changes from “168” to “167.” Elsewhere, in the machine-readable table of Table 1 and in Table 2, the row corresponding to pulsar J0952-0607 should be excised as well. Finally, in the caption for Table 2 the number of pulsars changes from “188” to “187.” IOP Publishing sincerely regrets this error.

Publication Source (Journal or Book title)

Astrophysical Journal

Download

Share

COinS