MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930650313 · doi:10.3390/app9071345

Wavelet Transform Application for/in Non-Stationary Time-Series Analysis: A Review

2019· review· en· W2930650313 on OpenAlexaff
Manel Rhif, Ali Ben Abbes, Imed Riadh Farah, Beatriz Martínez, Yan‐Fang Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersYouth Innovation Promotion AssociationNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaYouth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWavelet transformWaveletSeries (stratigraphy)Discrete wavelet transformComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Interpretation (philosophy)Explosive materialMathematicsAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGeologyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-stationary time series (TS) analysis has gained an explosive interest over the recent decades in different applied sciences. In fact, several decomposition methods were developed in order to extract various components (e.g., seasonal, trend and abrupt components) from the non-stationary TS, which allows for an improved interpretation of the temporal variability. The wavelet transform (WT) has been successfully applied over an extraordinary range of fields in order to decompose the non-stationary TS into time-frequency domain. For this reason, the WT method is briefly introduced and reviewed in this paper. In addition, this latter includes different research and applications of the WT to non-stationary TS in seven different applied sciences fields, namely the geo-sciences and geophysics, remote sensing in vegetation analysis, engineering, hydrology, finance, medicine, and other fields, such as ecology, renewable energy, chemistry and history. Finally, five challenges and future works, such as the selection of the type of wavelet, selection of the adequate mother wavelet, selection of the scale, the combination between wavelet transform and machine learning algorithm and the interpretation of the obtained components, are also discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations586
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207