Talk:Hilbert–Huang transform

The first citation referenced under Sesimology section [Huang et al 2001] seems incorrect.

It refers to this paper:

Huang, Q., Sobolev, G., Nagao, T., 2001. Characteristics of the seismic quiescence and activation phases before the M=7.2 Kobe earthquake, 17 January 1995, Tectonophysics 337, 99–116

which does of course involve seismology, but doesn't invlove Norden Huang nor the HHT

Was this the article that was intended:

Hilbert-Huang Transform Analysis of Dynamic and Earthquake Motion Recordings Ray Ruichong Zhang, M.ASCE1; Shuo Ma2; Erdal Safak, M.ASCE3; and Stephen Hartzell4

If so, "Huang et al" would be incorrect, and so would the date.

137.229.184.15 (talk) 23:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)Dane Ketner da28ne50ket495ner012@gm495ail.c34om (please strip numbers before e-mailing)[reply]

EMD is to break down a signal into components which are still in the time domain. Such breaking down of a signal can also be done by using: (1) a series of moving averages together with sieving at each step; or (2) a series of low-pass filters and again together with sieving at each step. What are the advantages of EMD over these two well-established methods? What are the physical meanings of Huang's IMF? 70.51.225.185 (talk) 21:34, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Original research?[edit]

This article appears to have serious bias and / or original research issues. A good amount of the top contributors (see Xtools, in particular users Shihyingwu, Imjanetycs, and Yongxianghuang) have very little other Wikipedia activity, and their contributions show very particular domain-specific knowledge; in particular, they pack the ‘Applications’ section full with specific papers, which reads more like an article bibliography than an excerpt from an encyclopaedia.

Some paragraphs are clearly unaccessible to anyone but a specialised researcher in the field, while others are essentially just lists of papers. The table at the end is particularly partisan and unsubstantiated, it reads like pseudo-comparative product advertising.

This article should undergo extensive revision to make it accessible and to match format of other articles (compare e.g. Hilbert Transform).

Maximilian Aigner (talk) 15:52, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, the cleanup tags {{Original research}}, {{Science review}}, {{Tone}} and perhaps {{Buzzword}} seem appropriate. Maximilian Aigner (talk) 15:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to be a copy of the corresponding scholarpedia entry. NeuroSopheR (talk) 23:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sifting process is not explained. What does "After the first round of sifting, a crest may become a local maximum." mean? DavidRideout (talk) 14:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And why the "1" in h_1k? It does not appear in the next section "Stoppage criteria of the sifting process". DavidRideout (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is the definition of the symbols used in "Hilbert spectral analysis"? DavidRideout (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hilbert–Huang transform. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060906154216/http://www.keck.ucsf.edu/~schenk/Huang_etal98.pdf to http://keck.ucsf.edu/~schenk/Huang_etal98.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]