Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35052099›Full record

ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2021

On Quantization Errors in Approximate and Sample Entropy.

Dragana Bajić, Nina Japundžić-Žigon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Dragana BajićFaculty of Technical Sciences, Department of Communications and Signal Processing, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 6, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia.ORCID 0000-0002-4662-7939
Nina Japundžić-ŽigonFaculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, dr Subotića 8, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.

Funding

Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia 451-03-68/2021-14/200110Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia 451-03-68/2021-14/200156Science Fund of Republic of Serbia COVANSA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximate and sample entropies are acclaimed tools for quantifying the regularity and unpredictability of time series. This paper analyses the causes of their inconsistencies. It is shown that the major problem is a coarse quantization of matching probabilities, causing a large error between their estimated and true values. Error distribution is symmetric, so in sample entropy, where matching probabilities are directly summed, errors cancel each other. In approximate entropy, errors are accumulating, as sums involve logarithms of matching probabilities. Increasing the time series length increases the number of quantization levels, and errors in entropy disappear both in approximate and in sample entropies. The distribution of time series also affects the errors. If it is asymmetric, the matching probabilities are asymmetric as well, so the matching probability errors cease to be mutually canceled and cause a persistent entropy error. Despite the accepted opinion, the influence of self-matching is marginal as it just shifts the error distribution along the error axis by the matching probability quant. Artificial lengthening the time series by interpolation, on the other hand, induces large error as interpolated samples are statistically dependent and destroy the level of unpredictability that is inherent to the original signal.

Indexed as

approximate entropyinterpolationmatching probabilitiesquantization errorsample entropy

Identifiers

PMID35052099
PMCPMC8774860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.