data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d7a86/d7a86ab8e7fb8423b56c702bb852f247ea86fe0d" alt=""
Question for CWT operation
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/15cde/15cdeed7b875902a2a203a47bb9174db5daf8323" alt=""
peeda85
I would like to analyze some time series with the continuous wavelet transform. As reference I use the journal article from Torrence and Compo (A Practical Guide to Wavelet Analysis).
The problem is that the results from CWT operation in Igor dose not match the results from the article and the provided software. Using the formulas I was unable to reproduce the results form Igor too.
Hence it would be helpful to know what the CWT operation exactly did and which formulas are used.
Thank you.
You might also want to consult the relevant demo which you can find under File Menu->Example Experiments->Analysis->CWT Demo and the Time-Frequency tools (http://www.igorexchange.com/project/TFPlot), although the latter requires a simple change in one procedure file.
A.G.
WaveMetrics, Inc.
October 5, 2015 at 01:05 pm - Permalink
I've posted following article.
http://www.igorexchange.com/node/5404
October 5, 2015 at 07:26 pm - Permalink
I have created the following time series:
Wave1
-0.282106
0.932004
1.02987
-0.0784919
-1.37405
-1.66569
-0.685259
0.665821
1.14539
0.312517
All four tables are calculated with the same parameters. Here I present only the first column (constant scaling and varying translation parameter) of the transformation.
The first table shows the transformation with the CWT operation only. The setting was: CWT/ENDM=0/OUT=1/Q/R2={2,0.01,300}/SMP2=4/WBI1=MorletC/WPR1=6 Wave1
The second table shows the results from Time-Frequency Toolkit.
The third shows the results from Torrence and Compo (Matlab) software.
In the fourth table I calculated the transformation manually with the formulas from the (Torrence and Compo) article.
October 6, 2015 at 02:46 am - Permalink
I've posted following article.
http://www.igorexchange.com/node/5404[/quote]
Our support database does not indicate that you followed up on that thread. Feel free to do so now.
A.G.
WaveMetrics, Inc.
October 6, 2015 at 12:51 pm - Permalink
Please send a copy of this experiment to support@wavemetrics.com. It is difficult to investigate what is going on here without having access to the exact data and commands used.
A.G.
WaveMetrics, Inc.
October 6, 2015 at 12:54 pm - Permalink
Dear, A.G.
I want to say twice that problems is your matter.
At 1st, I have wanted to tell that CWT operation command includes defection. And I indicated ideas of correction method that will help to investigate what is wrong.
Next, your e-mail receiving server is so confused that he rejects your customers e-mail as judging UCE (Spam). You should tell your unskillful postmaster that he tarnishes companies brand. It is miserable as computer engineer company.
Dear, peeda85
Your data of Wave1 is too short to get meaningful CWT result.
You should better to acquire more precise or/and longer wave.
October 9, 2015 at 12:54 am - Permalink
Hallo kanekaka,
thank you for your experiment. Good to see what other people did.
I know that the time series is too short to make sense. Because I computed it also manually it was enough for a comparison.
October 8, 2015 at 04:27 am - Permalink
"Not make sense" means that any algorithm can not calculate 'true' answer but far approximation solution. So it is natural that different algorithm gave different result.
I modified my macro code in order to answer complex format.
MTCwtMorlet("Wave1", 2, 1, 6, 4, 2, .01, 300, 1, "") will give same result with your manual transformation.
October 9, 2015 at 12:57 am - Permalink