At 03:28 PM 3/3/2008, Ann wrote: > >Sounds familiar. If you have a good signal-to-noise ratio, you can get > >subpixel accuracy by oversampling the irfft, or better but slower, by > >using numerical optimization to refine the peak you found with argmax.
the S/N here is poor, and high data rates work against me too... > I would be inclined to use convolve (or scipy.ndimage.convolve, which > uses a Fourier-domain method), since it is somewhat better specified. I'll give it a try as well. I'm guessing scipy.ndimage.correlate1d is a Fourier method too? > From: "Timothy Hochberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I'm going to guess that you are using some flavor of Unix, since I also > downloaded using Firefox and the data ends up corrupted. My hypothesis is > that Firefox doesn't recognize the mime type and treats it as a text file, > corrupting it on Windows, but not on Unix. Then again, maybe you're not > using Unix and my installation of Firefox is just broken. I think that is the case, I have Win2K on this box > With the CSV version I do get a peak at the (un)expected location (7489//2). > The peak is pretty flat and only twice the size of the surrounding gunk, but > it looks more or less legit. I don't see that in my pylab plot! There's actually a dip, and the whole plot is symmetric about 3744 http://rjs.org/Python/corr_array.jpg, self xcorr of http://rjs.org/Python/data.jpg I'll be upgrading my install here shortly though to py2.5 and associated libs. My compiler/distutils environment is broken. Thanks, Ray -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1310 - Release Date: 3/4/2008 8:35 AM _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion