Talk:Signal processing

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 14 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Wintersfire.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

idem per idem
Signal processing -- is processing (...) of signals

Article too narrow in scope
What goes on between light entering the eye and an image being perceived by the brain ... that is also 'signal processing'. Grassynoel (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for that? Textbooks on signal processings (or signals and systems) do not cover psychological aspects. Mange01 (talk) 19:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe not psychology, but certainly physiology. Not eyes but ears: [ http://www.amazon.com/Auditory-Signal-Processing-Physiology-Psychoacoustics/dp/0387219153 Auditory Signal Processing: Physiology, Psychoacoustics, and Models ] (on Amazon). Here's something visual: Characterisation of columnar neurons and visual signal processing in the medulla of the locust optic lobe by system identification techniques. Bioinformatics is also relevant - applying signal processing to DNA sequences, and suchlike. I think Grassynoel has a point - signal processing is one of those beautifully broad topics, applicable to just about anything. I'm less sure how to write this into the article though. Any ideas? GyroMagician (talk) 23:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I see your point. These article sections discuss celebral/neural signal processing models: Mange01 (talk) 22:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Models of Neural Computation
 * Neural signal processing in sound localization

Here is a synopsis of a recent paper on vision processing in the retina and ganglia: Original source: --(Groovamos (talk) 04:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC))

Stub text
Please remove stub text. This article is good! as it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.92.9.58 (talk) 12:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

formal science?
"A formal science is a theoretical study that is concerned with theoretical formal systems, for instance, logic, mathematics, systems theory and the theoretical branches of computer science, information theory, and statistics." (from Formal science). I can't see how signal processing, an applied field of engineering, fits in this category. I have therefore removed Category:Formal sciences. --Zvika (talk) 05:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Signals are a mathematical entity, though sometimes realised in physical media designed by engineers. Analysis of signals is by Fourier analysis and other such purely mathematical techniques. Thus signal processing is a central example of the formal sciences. - James Franklin, http://www.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim Jimmaths (talk) 08:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Can you cite a source saying that signal processing is a formal science? Signal processing textbooks I looked at (e.g., Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing) treat it as a branch of electrical engineering. The mere fact that mathematical techniques are used in signal processing is not very convincing, since by that measure, just about any field of science and engineering is a branch of mathematics: quantum mechanics, for example, uses purely mathematical techniques to solve a certain differential equation. The difference is that there is a concrete physical meaning associated with such solutions. There is an identical distinction between signal processing (an engineering field) and stochastic processes (a mathematical field). --Zvika (talk) 12:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Sources such as requested are 'The formal sciences discover the philosopher's stone', http://www.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/philosophersstone.pdf, which explains the relation of engineering to the formal sciences, and a book on signal processing such as Quinn and Hannan, The Estimation and Tracking of Frequency http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521804462. Quantum mechanics is not a formal science, since it just applies mathematics to studying a physical phenomenon, nor is the analysis of stress in buildings, for example. But signal processing studies signals, which are a certain kind of time series. They may be realised in some physical things, such as what submarines emit, but that is true of any mathematical entity: for example symmetries may be realised in wooden dice but that doesn't make group theory a division of carpentry. So I've re-added the category of formal science for signal processing. Please read the relevant part of at least one of the references before deleting it. Jimmaths (talk) 05:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I still find it strange. I would like to see a better source. Signal processing is not really about finding and interpreting structures in large amount of data, as your pdf file claims. I have never seen Formal sciences mentioned in a book on signal processing, so I don't think this is the place to mention the connection. Mange01 (talk) 12:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, looking through the preview of the book you mentioned, I can't any discussion of formal sciences; it looks like a technical discussion of frequency estimation. Can you point to a specific page/chapter mentioning this? --Zvika (talk) 08:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Jimmaths, as you have not responded to either of us, I am removing the category from the article until better sources can be found. Please reach consensus by discussing the issue on this talk page before adding it again. With respect, --Zvika (talk) 04:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Good day like Wikipedia to also got short clip pertaining to a subject of research something like youtube. Thank you Kingdave 001 (talk) 21:51, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

This article is terrible as it is
Complete rewrite is not a bad option imho

88.112.85.50 (talk) 02:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC) Lemkin


 * Get writing then.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  03:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Exactly. Or please be more specific. Mange01 (talk) 19:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Wrong redirect for Signal Theory
I searched for Signal Theory and ended up on this page, when what I was looking for was Signalling (economics). It would be nice to have a link pointing to that page for people like me.
 * A disambiguation link has been added. Isheden (talk) 22:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Better definition needed
For an aricle (about patent law) I needed a definition of "signal processing", so I consulted Wikipedia, but I was disappointed. In my view, signal processing is the process of handling information that is represented imperfectly: "signal" is a twin concept to "noise" (e.g. in "signal to noise ratio). Digital information has no noise, but the channels used to transport digital inforation do distort the signals that represent the information. The famous Shannon theorem refers to the signal to noise ration explicitly.   Please comment. Rbakels (talk) 13:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Did you look in any of the linked articles in for your definition. ~Kvng (talk) 14:01, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Reordering and restructuring
Right now the Categories section contains a mix of several different concepts, I think this ordering would be more true to the domains and applications of signal processing:


 * Domains (mainly focusing on linear systems)
 * Continuous
 * Discrete
 * Implementations
 * Analog
 * Digital
 * Other
 * Nonlinear signal processing

--Henrikenggaard (talk) 07:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, I think this would also allow for the `Mathematical methods applied` section to be in-paragraph links rather than just a list.

--97.102.143.178 (talk) 06:10, 12 March 2021 (UTC)