Gaussian noise, computer-simulated

This assumes knowledge of the even derivatives of the DFCA which are obviously difficult to determine from the finite set of experimental points, without amplifying the experimental noise. Computer simulations, done for the bi-gaussian theoretical distributions, show that DFRJ provides a good approximation of the theoretical distribution, even for temperatures over the room temperature [32]. 

Simulate an integrating process for 2,000 samples and compare it with an AR (1) process with i = —0.98. Compute the sample autocorrelation and partial autocorrelation functions. Compare and suggest ways to distinguish the two cases. The simulation results are shown in Fig. 5.6. The Gaussian noise for both processes is the same (Fig. 5.8). 

Ve is the simulated potential at the electrodes, and y is the vector with the measurements. Note that (1) is equivalent to the maximum likelihood estimator assuming uncorrelated white Gaussian noise [4]. We used the Newton s method to estimate Osk and Osc from (1). This method requires the first and second order derivatives of Vg with respect to Ojk and (Tgc. The computation of these derivatives for the pointwise and volumetric models is detailed in [4], The formulation of the derivatives for the CEM model were derived specifically for this work in an analogous way. 

Two computer-generated chromatograms are shown In Figure 1. Both are simulations of the random distribution of 160 Gaussian components, each of which has a standard deviation a of eight seconds, over a total separation space of 175 minutes. The amplitude range Is 100 1800 and Is scaled In terms of ADC units as described above. The total baseline peak capacity In both simulations Is 219 (a = 0.731). The noise In the second simulation Is Gaussian with a standard deviation of thirty ADC units. 

Finally, there is the possibility to simulate an experimental curve (spectrum) by a mathematical algorithm, e.g., by a polynomial, a Fourier transform expression, or the superposition of Gaussian or other suitable distribution curves (cf. Sec. 2.3.4, Eq. (2-41) (2-47)). In this case, one must keep in mind that for simulation of real spectra it is also necessary to add a noise function, produced by a random generator, to the PC-computed curve. Otherwise, it is not possible to transfer the results of the investigations to real signals produced by any apparatus. Of course, it is much easier to get useful derivatives from undisturbed curves than from real spectra containing noise. 

---