Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.stat.math > #10882
| From | "David Jones" <dajhawk18xx@@nowhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.stat.math |
| Subject | Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format |
| Date | 2023-03-23 23:59 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <tvip4a$1bv21$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (14 earlier) <20230320010854.d766debddd20812faa887c04@gmail.moc> <tv8504$37218$1@dont-email.me> <20230320115849.90c21c2892f5496d42646f0f@g{oogle}mail.com> <tva4r9$3kbgn$1@dont-email.me> <20230324001150.64c7c581d2acf5b317f9d994@gmail.moc> |
Anton Shepelev wrote: > Thank you for the answer, David Jones: > > > > > But, if you really wanted to do a spectral analysis > > combining all groups without joining them together, this > > is certainly possible ... you just have to understand the > > meaning of the quantities produced in the analysis of a > > single series. > > So, you propose to amend my analysis by performing 20 > separate spectral analyses? > ____________________ No, I suggest you do a single combined spoectral analysis, or that you do a sine-curve regression, by not pretending you have a single time-series. You have to understand that an ordinary spectral analysis is just a special case of regression. A usual time-series analysis would proceed on the basis that the relevant "times" are equally spaced and that the position/index within a single array can be used as a time, instead of having the time specified explicitly. Then when the time is needed, for example to use in a sine or cosine function, it is immediately available, rather than deriving it from the position in the array, So, as a starting position you would have a dataset that closely corresponds to the actual results of the experiment. Thus, in instances where the "joining" approach would replace two values with one, the two original values would be kept separately, and there would be no related adjustments. Additionally where there were actually gaps in the original observations, this can be included. Similarly for incomplete sequences. Of course this means that the usual time-series packages would not be useable and, specifically, not the FFT. BUt the series for your problem are not very long, so no strong need for the FFT. If you take the view that one of your objectives is to leave a set of data that are available for others to re-analyse, then it would be good to include as much explicit information as possible, without pre-judging what analysis might be done. To analyse the data, you need to have a statstical model for the original observations. Such a model explicitly represents what the modeller thinks explains the variation in the observations. Possibly this would be represented as an ordinary regression model, but a mixed fixed- and random-effects model might be considered. THere are reasonably standard procedures linked to regression that allow checks to be made on the various assumptions and to look-out for unexplained effects. To turn this into a "spectral analysis", YOu would just need to do a sequence of regression analyses, where each one would have a sine- and cosine-pair of a single frequency, and where the corresponding value in the "spectrogram" would be the sum of the square of the regression coefficients of the sine and cosine terms. It may be possible to justify reducing the compuations here, by first do a single regression with no sinusoid at all, and then doing the spectral analysis on the residuals. I Suggest you find an experienced statistician to undertake much of this. At the very least you need someone with the time and ability to think, and someone who will not try to force the analysis to fit within the compass of some existing computer package.
Back to sci.stat.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2023-02-27 16:00 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format davidd02@tpg.com.au (David Duffy) - 2023-02-28 07:47 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format davidd02@tpg.com.au (David Duffy) - 2023-02-28 09:12 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format davidd02@tpg.com.au (David Duffy) - 2023-03-13 01:23 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-13 10:32 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-13 10:58 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format davidd02@tpg.com.au (David Duffy) - 2023-03-14 04:13 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-02-28 12:42 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-28 14:22 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-02-28 14:01 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-28 15:12 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-02-28 14:57 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-28 21:36 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-04 00:46 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-03 23:40 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-09 17:07 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-19 00:41 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-19 00:08 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-20 01:08 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-19 23:14 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-19 23:48 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-20 11:58 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-20 17:23 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-24 00:11 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format "David Jones" <dajhawk18xx@@nowhere.com> - 2023-03-23 23:59 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-19 14:22 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-20 14:07 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-20 14:35 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-20 17:01 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-20 16:20 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-20 14:35 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-20 17:33 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts. Was: RAW vs. raw image format Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-03 23:33 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-05 12:48 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-05 21:47 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-08 21:26 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2023-03-06 23:08 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-08 21:40 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-08 15:33 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-08 23:11 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-10 01:04 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-11 12:54 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-12 14:25 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-17 13:27 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-19 00:32 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-19 14:45 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-20 16:06 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-21 13:00 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-08 19:11 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-09 11:48 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-09 11:57 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-08 21:09 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-09 17:13 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-09 23:26 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-10 01:37 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-10 11:25 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-11 00:13 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-10 15:42 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-11 01:32 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller - Data Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-11 12:18 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller - Data Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-12 00:13 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller - Data Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-20 00:38 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-10 15:25 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-12 00:01 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-10 15:10 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-11 01:14 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-11 13:08 -0600
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-03-12 01:51 +0300
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-15 17:10 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-15 22:36 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller "David Jones" <dajhawk18xx@@nowhere.com> - 2023-03-15 22:18 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-15 23:28 +0100
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-19 13:46 -0500
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller "David Jones" <dajhawkxx@nowherel.com> - 2023-03-19 22:57 +0000
Re: statistics in Roberts' paper on Miller Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-03-20 12:05 +0300
csiph-web