the dof for the global wavelet spectrum will change if scales are in days instead of years? #48
Replies: 2 comments
-
Hi Jeancarlo, Similar as with FFT, you need to keep in mind that Let's suppose you have daily samples of a given quantity for let's say 10-years, your timeseries will have about 3650 data points ( But, if you just want to change the unit of your sampling frequency, for example from months to days, and keep the number of data points |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Dear Sebastian, You are right, the wavelet analysis doesn't depend on the units of dt. In line (83) inside the function cwt of the file wavelet.py, scales is defined by Luckily, the above issue only affects the return parameter signif of the function significance (in wavelet.py) for the case of the global spectrum. Finally, I think that dof = na = N - scales might not be appropriated because at the limit of the larger scales, in which all the points average for the global wavelet are mostly inside the COI, na is still in the order of N. Thanks. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
According to the tutorial sample.py, for the global wavelet spectrum the input parameter "dof" for "wavelet.significance(...,dof=dof)" (lines 91-92) is calculated using dof = N - scales, where N is the size of the input data and the parameter scales has units of years, then this "dof" value is used as "na" in eq (23) of Torrence and Compo (1998). However, if I want to use scales in days for the same problem the dof will change and will be negative when scales > N (N=504 for Nino3 example), which is not consistent.
According to Torrence and Compo (1998) (page 73), they mention that for the global wavelet if the points going into the average of eq (22) are within the cone of influence, then the number of effective points "na" of eq (23) is reduced
by approximately one-half of the number within the COI to reflect the decreased amplitude (and information) within that region. So it means that the effective number of points "na" of eq (23) should be: N - the half of the points inside the COI at each scale? or it might be better to use N - all the points inside the COI at each scale? If so, when we are at the limit of the larger scales, in which all the points are almost inside the COI, na=N-N/2=N/2 for the former case and na=N-N=0 and for the latter one.
In conclusion, what approximation should we use to get the most realistic "na" for eq (23) that does not depend on the units of the parameter scales?
Thanks.
Jeancarlo Fajardo U.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions