Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721010›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Data-driven nonstationary signal decomposition approaches: a comparative analysis.

Thomas Eriksen, Naveed Ur Rehman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Thomas EriksenDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Aarhus University, Finlandsgade 22, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark.
Naveed Ur RehmanDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Aarhus University, Finlandsgade 22, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. naveed.rehman@ece.au.dk.

Funding

Aarhus Universitet Starting Grant 35906
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Signal decomposition (SD) approaches aim to decompose non-stationary signals into their constituent amplitude- and frequency-modulated components. This represents an important preprocessing step in many practical signal processing pipelines, providing useful knowledge and insight into the data and relevant underlying system(s) while also facilitating tasks such as noise or artefact removal and feature extraction. The popular SD methods are mostly data-driven, striving to obtain inherent well-behaved signal components without making many prior assumptions on input data. Among those methods include empirical mode decomposition and variants, variational mode decomposition and variants, synchrosqueezed transform and variants and sliding singular spectrum analysis. With the increasing popularity and utility of these methods in wide-ranging applications, it is imperative to gain a better understanding and insight into the operation of these algorithms, evaluate their accuracy with and without noise in input data and gauge their sensitivity against algorithmic parameter changes. In this work, we achieve those tasks through extensive experiments involving carefully designed synthetic and real-life signals. Based on our experimental observations, we comment on the pros and cons of the considered SD algorithms as well as highlighting the best practices, in terms of parameter selection, for the their successful operation. The SD algorithms for both single- and multi-channel (multivariate) data fall within the scope of our work. For multivariate signals, we evaluate the performance of the popular algorithms in terms of fulfilling the mode-alignment property, especially in the presence of noise.

Identifiers

PMID36721010
PMCPMC9889333

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.