Loading…

Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains

ABSTRACT In this paper three different despiking methods for surface‐NMR data are investigated and compared. Two of these are applied in the time domain: a threshold is determined that identifies and marks a spiky event. Afterward, the marked time sequence is substituted with zeros or with the mean...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Near surface geophysics (Online) 2014-04, Vol.12 (2), p.185-198
Main Authors: Costabel, Stephan, Müller‐Petke, Mike
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3
container_end_page 198
container_issue 2
container_start_page 185
container_title Near surface geophysics (Online)
container_volume 12
creator Costabel, Stephan
Müller‐Petke, Mike
description ABSTRACT In this paper three different despiking methods for surface‐NMR data are investigated and compared. Two of these are applied in the time domain: a threshold is determined that identifies and marks a spiky event. Afterward, the marked time sequence is substituted with zeros or with the mean value of the signal amplitude of the measurement repetitions for the same passage on the time axis. The third despiking approach takes advantage of the wavelet‐like nature of spiky events. It isolates and eliminates spiky signals in the wavelet domain, i.e., after transforming a single record with the help of the discrete wavelet transform. The latter is able to reconstruct the original signal content in the (spike‐caused) distorted time sequence to some extent. If the spiky noise in surface‐NMR measurements consists mainly of single spiky events, the three despiking methods show very similar results and are able to remove spiky noise from data very effectively, as we can show with two real data examples. However, a synthetic study shows that, if a series of spikes within a relatively short period of time occurs, the wavelet‐based despiking approach shows significant shortcomings. Because the NMR signal content cannot be restored completely in a single record, the fitting of the signal after stacking leads to underestimation of the initial amplitude up to approximately 10%. Nevertheless, we can show that, in principle, the processing of surface‐NMR data in the wavelet domain works and can lead to the same results as straight‐forward applications. Moreover, wavelet‐based strategies have some interesting properties and thus have some potential for further development regarding surface‐NMR processing, which is discussed in detail.
doi_str_mv 10.3997/1873-0604.2013027
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_3997_1873_0604_2013027</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>NSG2013027</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1OwzAQhC0EElXpA3DzC6T4Z2MnRxSgIFVwAM6W46wji8Sp4oiqb0-qFq6cdrXabzQzhNxytpZlqe94oWXGFIO1YFwyoS_I4u92Oe-5KjMAyK_JKqVQMwDFGRR6QaoHTLvwFWJLB09720acgqMjpiHa6JCm0EbbJRoinUKP1MaG7u03djjRZuhtiOmGXPn5BVfnuSSfT48f1XO2fdu8VPfbzMrZTSaFdJpJmwsQWmnwhRZY1OA5sLzxXHDFtXYNFNAoqEtkwnkmpa5rrEvl5JLwk64bh5RG9GY3ht6OB8OZORZhjqHNMbQ5FzEz5YnZhw4P_wPm9X3zy_4AbplfsQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Costabel, Stephan ; Müller‐Petke, Mike</creator><creatorcontrib>Costabel, Stephan ; Müller‐Petke, Mike</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT In this paper three different despiking methods for surface‐NMR data are investigated and compared. Two of these are applied in the time domain: a threshold is determined that identifies and marks a spiky event. Afterward, the marked time sequence is substituted with zeros or with the mean value of the signal amplitude of the measurement repetitions for the same passage on the time axis. The third despiking approach takes advantage of the wavelet‐like nature of spiky events. It isolates and eliminates spiky signals in the wavelet domain, i.e., after transforming a single record with the help of the discrete wavelet transform. The latter is able to reconstruct the original signal content in the (spike‐caused) distorted time sequence to some extent. If the spiky noise in surface‐NMR measurements consists mainly of single spiky events, the three despiking methods show very similar results and are able to remove spiky noise from data very effectively, as we can show with two real data examples. However, a synthetic study shows that, if a series of spikes within a relatively short period of time occurs, the wavelet‐based despiking approach shows significant shortcomings. Because the NMR signal content cannot be restored completely in a single record, the fitting of the signal after stacking leads to underestimation of the initial amplitude up to approximately 10%. Nevertheless, we can show that, in principle, the processing of surface‐NMR data in the wavelet domain works and can lead to the same results as straight‐forward applications. Moreover, wavelet‐based strategies have some interesting properties and thus have some potential for further development regarding surface‐NMR processing, which is discussed in detail.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1569-4445</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-0604</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3997/1873-0604.2013027</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Near surface geophysics (Online), 2014-04, Vol.12 (2), p.185-198</ispartof><rights>2014 European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Costabel, Stephan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Müller‐Petke, Mike</creatorcontrib><title>Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains</title><title>Near surface geophysics (Online)</title><description>ABSTRACT In this paper three different despiking methods for surface‐NMR data are investigated and compared. Two of these are applied in the time domain: a threshold is determined that identifies and marks a spiky event. Afterward, the marked time sequence is substituted with zeros or with the mean value of the signal amplitude of the measurement repetitions for the same passage on the time axis. The third despiking approach takes advantage of the wavelet‐like nature of spiky events. It isolates and eliminates spiky signals in the wavelet domain, i.e., after transforming a single record with the help of the discrete wavelet transform. The latter is able to reconstruct the original signal content in the (spike‐caused) distorted time sequence to some extent. If the spiky noise in surface‐NMR measurements consists mainly of single spiky events, the three despiking methods show very similar results and are able to remove spiky noise from data very effectively, as we can show with two real data examples. However, a synthetic study shows that, if a series of spikes within a relatively short period of time occurs, the wavelet‐based despiking approach shows significant shortcomings. Because the NMR signal content cannot be restored completely in a single record, the fitting of the signal after stacking leads to underestimation of the initial amplitude up to approximately 10%. Nevertheless, we can show that, in principle, the processing of surface‐NMR data in the wavelet domain works and can lead to the same results as straight‐forward applications. Moreover, wavelet‐based strategies have some interesting properties and thus have some potential for further development regarding surface‐NMR processing, which is discussed in detail.</description><issn>1569-4445</issn><issn>1873-0604</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkM1OwzAQhC0EElXpA3DzC6T4Z2MnRxSgIFVwAM6W46wji8Sp4oiqb0-qFq6cdrXabzQzhNxytpZlqe94oWXGFIO1YFwyoS_I4u92Oe-5KjMAyK_JKqVQMwDFGRR6QaoHTLvwFWJLB09720acgqMjpiHa6JCm0EbbJRoinUKP1MaG7u03djjRZuhtiOmGXPn5BVfnuSSfT48f1XO2fdu8VPfbzMrZTSaFdJpJmwsQWmnwhRZY1OA5sLzxXHDFtXYNFNAoqEtkwnkmpa5rrEvl5JLwk64bh5RG9GY3ht6OB8OZORZhjqHNMbQ5FzEz5YnZhw4P_wPm9X3zy_4AbplfsQ</recordid><startdate>201404</startdate><enddate>201404</enddate><creator>Costabel, Stephan</creator><creator>Müller‐Petke, Mike</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201404</creationdate><title>Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains</title><author>Costabel, Stephan ; Müller‐Petke, Mike</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Costabel, Stephan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Müller‐Petke, Mike</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Near surface geophysics (Online)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Costabel, Stephan</au><au>Müller‐Petke, Mike</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains</atitle><jtitle>Near surface geophysics (Online)</jtitle><date>2014-04</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>185</spage><epage>198</epage><pages>185-198</pages><issn>1569-4445</issn><eissn>1873-0604</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT In this paper three different despiking methods for surface‐NMR data are investigated and compared. Two of these are applied in the time domain: a threshold is determined that identifies and marks a spiky event. Afterward, the marked time sequence is substituted with zeros or with the mean value of the signal amplitude of the measurement repetitions for the same passage on the time axis. The third despiking approach takes advantage of the wavelet‐like nature of spiky events. It isolates and eliminates spiky signals in the wavelet domain, i.e., after transforming a single record with the help of the discrete wavelet transform. The latter is able to reconstruct the original signal content in the (spike‐caused) distorted time sequence to some extent. If the spiky noise in surface‐NMR measurements consists mainly of single spiky events, the three despiking methods show very similar results and are able to remove spiky noise from data very effectively, as we can show with two real data examples. However, a synthetic study shows that, if a series of spikes within a relatively short period of time occurs, the wavelet‐based despiking approach shows significant shortcomings. Because the NMR signal content cannot be restored completely in a single record, the fitting of the signal after stacking leads to underestimation of the initial amplitude up to approximately 10%. Nevertheless, we can show that, in principle, the processing of surface‐NMR data in the wavelet domain works and can lead to the same results as straight‐forward applications. Moreover, wavelet‐based strategies have some interesting properties and thus have some potential for further development regarding surface‐NMR processing, which is discussed in detail.</abstract><doi>10.3997/1873-0604.2013027</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1569-4445
ispartof Near surface geophysics (Online), 2014-04, Vol.12 (2), p.185-198
issn 1569-4445
1873-0604
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_3997_1873_0604_2013027
source Wiley
title Despiking of magnetic resonance signals in time and wavelet domains
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T18%3A53%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Despiking%20of%20magnetic%20resonance%20signals%20in%20time%20and%20wavelet%20domains&rft.jtitle=Near%20surface%20geophysics%20(Online)&rft.au=Costabel,%20Stephan&rft.date=2014-04&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=185&rft.epage=198&rft.pages=185-198&rft.issn=1569-4445&rft.eissn=1873-0604&rft_id=info:doi/10.3997/1873-0604.2013027&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_cross%3ENSG2013027%3C/wiley_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3187-323c703a52427674f872e8b4f1405df1216177cd484d64b9e02cf0337bbeb96c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true