Linearity of power spectral density calculations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the linearity of power spectral density (PSD) calculations using Welch's method. It establishes that PSD computed from concatenated epochs of a time series does not equal the PSD computed from averaged epochs of the same time series. The discrepancy arises because averaging a non-zero signal can yield a zero result, which affects the PSD calculation. The participants conclude that time does not influence the PSD results when using the same set of data points, but the method of averaging alters the outcome.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of power spectral density (PSD) calculations
  • Familiarity with Welch's method for PSD estimation
  • Knowledge of time series analysis and epoch segmentation
  • Basic principles of signal averaging and its effects on signal properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical foundations of Welch's method for PSD estimation
  • Explore the implications of averaging signals on spectral analysis
  • Learn about the effects of windowing techniques on PSD calculations
  • Investigate alternative methods for PSD estimation and their comparative advantages
USEFUL FOR

Data scientists, signal processing engineers, and researchers in time series analysis who are looking to deepen their understanding of power spectral density calculations and their nuances.

Schwann
Messages
7
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
Does PSD computed from concatenated epochs of time series differ from PSD computed from averaged epochs of the same time series?
I have a question related to linearity of power spectral density calculation.

Suppose I have a time series, divided into some epochs. If I compute PSD by Welch's method with a time window equal to the length of an epoch and without any overlap, I obtain this result:

1594982808504.png


If I calculate the average of my time series over the epochs, obtain the averaged signal, the length of which is equal to the length of one epoch (obviously), and then compute PSD by the same method using this averaged signal, I get a slightly different result:

1594982921650.png


I thought that these two scenarios could not be different, as PSD from the concatenated epochs is presumably equal to PSD from averaged epochs (in my opinion). However, the results are different.

I am looking for analytical explanation of these discrepancies.

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Schwann said:
Summary:: Does PSD computed from concatenated epochs of time series differ from PSD computed from averaged epochs of the same time series?
No. PSD of the same set of particles is calculated. Time doesn't play a role and you do the same calculation in both cases.
analytical explanation of these discrepancies
You must have a mistake somewhere. Hard to say what without having all the details.
 
Thank you for your answer. What I meant is not computing PSD based on the same set of time points with different order.
BvU said:
No. PSD of the same set of particles is calculated. Time doesn't play a role and you do the same calculation in both cases.

Whan I meant is the following.

Scenario 1. I have a long time series made of concatenated epochs. Then I compute PSD.
1594998152344.png


Scenario 2. From the same epochs I compute the average and then compute PSD.

1594998270007.png


In Scenario 1 we have averaged PSDs from each epoch, because the time window in Welch's method I set as the length of the epoch. In Scenario 2 we have PSD from the averaged signal. It seems that they are not equal, as evident from the plots in my initial question. But I don't understand why...
 
Oops, professional brainwashing over an extended period made me read "particle size distribution" for PSD o:)

To add insult to injury I didn't understand the scenario: I figured PSD versus average of epoch PSDs instead of PSD of epoch average.

An averaged signal ruins a power spectral density: the average of a nonzero signal can be zero in a worst case
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Schwann

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
26K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K