Error in summation of spectral components

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on estimating the error in the power/variance of spectral components derived from a Gaussian signal using FFT algorithms. It establishes that the error associated with a spectral component follows a Chi-squared distribution with ν=2 degrees of freedom. The participants debate whether the total error in the summation of N spectral components also follows a Chi-squared distribution with ν=2N degrees of freedom or if it should be calculated by summing the independent errors. The importance of using multiple trials and a more accurate Fourier transform code for error estimation is emphasized.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of FFT algorithms for power spectral density (PSD) estimation
  • Knowledge of Chi-squared distribution and its application in error analysis
  • Familiarity with Gaussian signals and their properties
  • Experience with statistical methods for error estimation, including standard error of the mean
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the application of Chi-squared distribution in spectral analysis
  • Learn about advanced FFT algorithms for improved accuracy in frequency analysis
  • Explore methods for integrating errors in frequency domain analysis
  • Investigate the EI method for error estimation in spectral components
USEFUL FOR

Signal processing engineers, researchers in spectral analysis, and anyone involved in estimating errors in frequency domain data analysis will benefit from this discussion.

SpecGuest
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
HI everyone,

Imagine we are sampling of a gaussian signal along time and need to know the power/variance associated with the first N spectral components. So we take our favorite fft algorithm to get the PSD.

The error associated with a given estimated spectral component f(w) (w is the frequency) of a Gaussian signal follows a Chi-squared distribution with ν=2 degrees of freedom (we just have a single spectrum, no averaging, no overlapping). For instance the 95% confidence interval is given by:

.[νχ2(ν,α/2), ν/χ2(ν,1−α/2)] with ν=2 and α=0.05.

That is, we have 95% of chance to find the true F(w) in the range
[νχ2(ν,α/2)f(w), νχ2(ν,1−α/2)f(w)].

NB: f(w) is the estimated frequency component, F(w) is the true frequency component.

My question is the following: what is the error in the power/variance estimate which equals to the sum of f(w) over the N spectral components (N positive frequencies) of the spectra?

  1. Is it given by a χ2 law with ν=2N degrees of freedom?
  2. Is it given by the summation of the error in each independent frequency ?
  3. Something else?
Thanks for your help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Independent errors would add in quadrature.

But if you are summing to find the area under the curve (integrating over a frequency range), then the errors are not independent.

I'd figure out a way to take multiple trials and use the standard error of the mean for my error estimate for random errors. Then I'd add that in quadrature with estimates for instrumental and other possible systematic errors. I'd also use our more accurate Fourier transform code (see below) which allows greater accuracy and precision at every step.

As a double check, one can always start your analysis method with a known perfect signal (sum of sine waves of known frequency, amplitude, and phase) and then add random errors of known mean and distribution to them and see how they impact the errors that result from your Fourier transform methods. This is a powerful double check that your methods for estimating errors in your frequency analysis process are reasonable.
 
Thank you for this answer. Actually, I did the double check, that was my first step and also the reason why I'm asking here since I was told that the uncertainty was option 1 in my previous post. But it turns out, unless I did a mistake somewhere in my test program, that option 1 is not the right answer! It is not clear to me whether the uncertainty in each of the spectral components are independent or not. There are some good reasons to think they are not but I guess this also depends on how you evaluate your PSD.
Anyway, thank you for the reference about the EI method. I'll check that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K