![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() In other words: The localization in frequency is precisely determined by the “locality” of, that is, how well is concentrated around zero. The better is concentrated around, the more “localized around ” is the information of, the windowed Fourier transform uses.įor the localization in frequency one obtains (by Plancherel’s formula and integral substitution) that In other words: The localization in time is precisely determined by the “locality” of, that is, how well is concentrated around zero. Of course we can write the windowed Fourier transform in term of the usual Fourier transform as Is called windowed Fourier transform, short-time Fourier transform or (in the case of ) Gabor transform. A natural idea (which is usually attributed to Gabor) is, to introduce a window function which is supposed to be a bump function, centered at zero, then translate this function and “localize” by multiplying it with. a change of in a small interval results a change of all of. One drawback of the Fourier transform, when used to analyze signals, is its “global” nature in that the value depends on every value of, i.e. In the context of signal processing one often speaks of the “time representation” and the “frequency representation”. the (complex) number says “how much the frequency (i.e. However, the details here are a little bit more involved, but I will not go into detail here is defined for -functions, for functions and even for tempered distributions…) Roughly speaking, the Fourier transform decomposes a signal into its frequency components, which can be seen from the Fourier inversion formula: (I was tempted to say “whenever the integral is defined”. Let’s start with an important tool from signal processing you all know: The Fourier transform. The Fourier transform and the windowed Fourier transform However, it takes some space to introduce notation and to explain what it’s all about and hence, I decided to write a short series of posts, I try to explain, what new insights I got from the thesis. I recently supervised a Master’s thesis on this topic and the results clarified a few things for me which I used to find obscure and I’d like to illustrate this here on my blog. I got to know them via signal processing and not via physics, although, from a mathematical point of view they are the same. The last point prohibits the extension of results of this type to discrete theory.Some years ago I became fascinated by uncertainty principles. The proof of this statement, as well as the proof of its wavelet counterpart, relies heavily on the well known fact that the ranges of the continuous transforms are reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces, showing some kind of shift-invariance. Among else, the following will be shown: if ψ \psi ψ is a window function, f ∈ L 2 ( R ) ∖ ^2 R 2 cannot possess finite Lebesgue measure. Results of this type are the subject of the following article. However, there exist strict limits to the maximal time-frequency resolution of these both transforms, similar to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in Fourier analysis. Gabor and wavelet methods are preferred to classical Fourier methods, whenever the time dependence of the analyzed signal is of the same importance as its frequency dependence. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |