value lies in the range $72 \leq 2\mathcal{F} \leq 80$ with 90% confidence. The $2\mathcal{F}$ values associated with the two remaining candidates, outliers 79 and 131, were joint-detector $2\mathcal{F} = 61.3$ and joint-detector $2\mathcal{F} = 61.9$, respectively. The outliers’ failure to pass the June tests and their marginal $2\mathcal{F}$ values led us to dismiss them as noise fluctuations.

Thus no credible gravitational wave signals were detected by our search. In the absence of a detection, we can set upper limits on the possible strength of gravitational waves in our data.

Upper limits {#s:uls}
============

Methods
-------

The method of setting upper limits was a variation on that used in [@S5CasA]and [@S6CasAFriends]. This upper limit determination is based only of the $\mathcal{F}$-statistic and does not include additional criteria involved in candidate followup. We split the frequency band into 0.1-Hz subbands, and for each of these used a semi-analytic Monte Carlo method to estimate a 95% upper limit, defined as the strain $h_0$ at which our detection criterion would successfully detect 95% of signals. Due to the high computational cost of individually verifying all 5800 such subbands, these 0.1-Hz upper limit bands were consolidated into 1-Hz subbands. For each such 1-Hz band, 