The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Surrogate data for hypothesis testing of physical systems
Open accessAbstract
The availability of time series of the evolution of the properties of physical systems is increasing, stimulating the development of many novel methods for the extraction of information about their behaviour over time, including whether or not they arise from deterministic or stochastic dynamical systems. Surrogate data testing is an essential part of many of these methods, as it enables robust statistical evaluations to ensure that the results observed are not obtained by chance, but are a true characteristic of the underlying system. The surrogate data technique is based on the comparison of a particular property of the data (a discriminating statistic) with the distribution of the same property calculated in a set of constructed signals (surrogates) which match the original data set but do not possess the property that is being tested. Fourier transform based surrogates remain the most popular, yet many more options have since been developed to test increasingly varied null hypotheses while characterizing the dynamics of complex systems, including uncorrelated and correlated noise, coupling between systems, and synchronization. Here, we provide a detailed overview of a wide range of surrogate types, discuss their practical applications and demonstrate their use in both numerically simulated and real experimental systems. We also compare the performance of various surrogate types for the detection of nonlinearity, synchronization and coherence, coupling strength between systems, and the nature of coupling. A MatLab toolbox for many of the surrogate methods is provided.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Detecting strange attractors in turbulence
Takens, F. (1981) · Lecture Notes in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/bfb0091924 · Cited by 10,459 · cited 4×
“Alternatively, Taken’s best estimate (9) [127,129] can be rewritten in the form ν ≈ −1/η, η ≡ ⟨log(rij/ϵmax)⟩rij>ϵmax = 1 Nrij<ϵmax ∑ i,j,i>j:rij ϵmax log(rij/ϵmax), (10) which is more convenient for numerical implementation.”
MethodInfluentialNeuronal Oscillations in Cortical Networks
Buzsáki, G., & Draguhn, A. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1099745 · Cited by 6,576
Application of the cross wavelet transform and wavelet coherence to geophysical time series
Grinsted, A., Moore, J. C., & Jevrejeva, S. (2004) · Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics · doi:10.5194/npg-11-561-2004 · Cited by 6,285
Buzsáki, G. (2006) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301069.001.0001 · Cited by 4,873
Cited by
Fast response times signal social connection in conversation
Templeton, E. M., Chang, L. J., Reynolds, E. A., Cone LeBeaumont, M. D., & Wheatley, T. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2116915119 · Cited by 128
Synchronized affect in shared experiences strengthens social connection
Cheong, J. H., Molani, Z., Sadhukha, S., & Chang, L. J. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-05461-2 · Cited by 75
Dynamic cortical connectivity during general anesthesia in healthy volunteers
Li, D., Vlisides, P. E., Kelz, M. B., Avidan, M. S., Mashour, G. A., & for the ReCCognition Study Group (2019) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000002656 · Cited by 69
Dynamic Cortical Connectivity during General Anesthesia in Surgical Patients
Vlisides, P. E., Li, D., Zierau, M., Lapointe, A. P., Ip, K. I., McKinney, A. M., & Mashour, G. A. (2019) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000002677 · Cited by 66
Modes of information flow in collective cohesion
Sattari, S., Basak, U. S., James, R. G., Perrin, L. W., Crutchfield, J. P., & Komatsuzaki, T. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abj1720 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Lancaster, G., Iatsenko, D., Pidde, A., Ticcinelli, V., & Stefanovska, A.
- Venue
- Physics Reports
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-07
- Volume
- 748
- Pages
- 1-60
- ISSN
- 0370-1573 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2808553959
- Cited by
- 422
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 20.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.