Hi Attila,
On 10/29/18 2:59 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
> Moin,
>
> I'm bunching a few mails together, to not clutter the mailinglist too much
>
> On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 23:25:30 +0200
> Magnus Danielson wrote:
>
>> The integration is very important aspect, as a number of assumptions
>> becomes
Moin,
I'm bunching a few mails together, to not clutter the mailinglist too much
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 23:25:30 +0200
Magnus Danielson wrote:
> The integration is very important aspect, as a number of assumptions
> becomes embedded into it, such as the f_H frequency which is the Nyquist
>
Hej Anders!
On 10/28/18 1:14 PM, Anders Wallin wrote:
> I made a revised figure with a few improvements:
> - the PSDs now cross at 1Hz
> - the theoretical ADEV/MDEV pre-factors are now explicitly stated
> http://www.anderswallin.net/2018/10/noise-colours-again/
> source:
>
I made a revised figure with a few improvements:
- the PSDs now cross at 1Hz
- the theoretical ADEV/MDEV pre-factors are now explicitly stated
http://www.anderswallin.net/2018/10/noise-colours-again/
source:
https://github.com/aewallin/colorednoise/blob/master/example_noise_slopes2.py
I forget
Hej Ole!
On 10/28/18 9:19 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen wrote:
> Hi, Magnus!
>
> Thank you for this! I am of course nowhere near really comprehending it
> from reading it a couple of times, but I will still show my ignorance by
> asking a couple of questions with respect to the power law noise table.
In message
, Ole
Petter Ronningen writes:
>1. I notice the formulas for ADEV is different for W PM and F PM - ADEV
>does not distinguish between the two, as is pointed out in the article.
When we say ADEV does not distinguish those, we mean that the slope of
the ADEV with respect to
Hi, Magnus!
Thank you for this! I am of course nowhere near really comprehending it
from reading it a couple of times, but I will still show my ignorance by
asking a couple of questions with respect to the power law noise table.
Counting on your day being still non-grumpy.. :D
1. I notice the
Hi, Tom!
I have looked at the pages you link to many times, they really are very
good - my goal here was to get down to the nitty-gritty myself, just
understand the details better.
Regarding possible bias in the Excel RNG, this was my first hunch as well,
but when I repeated the experiment with
On 10/26/18 1:42 PM, Ole Petter Ronningen wrote:
> Hi, Attila
>
>> I see two issues here: If your random numbers are indeed between 0 and 1,
>> as you write, then they are uniformly distributed, and not normally
>> distributed. This will give you a slight bias when integrating.
>>
>
> You are
Hej Attila,
On 10/26/18 11:50 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
> Hej Ole,
>
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:34:41 +0200
> Ole Petter Ronningen wrote:
>
>> I'm simulating some noise to try to improve my somewhat sketchy
>> understanding of what goes on with the various noise types as shown on an
>> ADEV plot.
Hi Ole,
I saw this post and thread, but waited until I had the time to address
it sufficiently, as it is an important topic. As such, I really enjoy
you asking the question as I am sure it will be a relevant question for
many more on this list.
On 10/26/18 11:34 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen wrote:
>
> Is this some elemental effect of integration (sqrt(n) or some such), or am
> I seeing the effects of bandwidth and/or bias-functions or other esoterica?
>
FWIW the python "colorednoise" (aka. Kasdin-Walter) repo has a figure:
https://github.com/aewallin/colorednoise
and code that generates the
Ole,
> I'm simulating some noise to try to improve my somewhat sketchy
> understanding of what goes on with the various noise types as shown on an
> ADEV plot. Nothing fancy, ~3600 points of gaussian random numbers between 0
> and 1 in excel, imported into Timelab as phase data, scaled to ns.
I
> In case the screenshot does not make it though;
> W PM starts at 1.69e-9
For this you should expect 1.73 which is sqrt(3). For example:
C:\tvb> rand1 100 | adev4 /a 1
rand1 100(count) 1(sdev) 0(mean) 1540577979(seed)
** tau from 1 to 1 step 1
1 a 1.732671e+000 98
> W FM
Hi, Attila
> I see two issues here: If your random numbers are indeed between 0 and 1,
> as you write, then they are uniformly distributed, and not normally
> distributed. This will give you a slight bias when integrating.
>
You are correct, my statement was imprecise - I generate numbers
Hej Ole,
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:34:41 +0200
Ole Petter Ronningen wrote:
> I'm simulating some noise to try to improve my somewhat sketchy
> understanding of what goes on with the various noise types as shown on an
> ADEV plot. Nothing fancy, ~3600 points of gaussian random numbers between 0
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
