[SciPy-Dev] scikit-signal or Similar

Sean Arms sarms@unidata.ucar....
Fri Feb 3 10:22:44 CST 2012


Greetings!
> Hello,
>
>
> > There is http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/ticket/922 which the author has
> > kept on developing despite the unfortunate lack of feedback. It 
> looks quite
> > far along and may be useful for you:
> > https://github.com/lesserwhirls/scipy-cwt
> >
> > There is also a cwt function in signal.wavelets, but it's very limited.
> >
>
> Whoa ... nice one, that's much neater code than my attempt. It's an
> interesting way it has been implemented though. I wonder if someone can
> explain the logic of having a class that needs the mother wavelet fed 
> in as
> an argument rather than subclassing?
>
Sorry - I've been off the list for awhile as I was transitioning to my 
first 'real world' job. Now that I'm back - hello! This was my first 
attempt at object oriented programming - I'll need to take a look at the 
code again to see what I was (or was not) thinking at the time :-)

> I shall work on improving that code, I can implement more and more general
> Mother wavelets and also write some examples and update the plotting
> routine to use mpl's make_axes_locatable if people think that is a better
> way to go.
>

I'd be happy to start working on this again. I'm still finishing up my 
PhD, but I am now working as a developer at UCAR / Unidata and have some 
time I can officially spend on 'guerrilla projects' like this 
(especially since it can/will benefit the atmospheric science community)!

Let me know how you'd like to proceed :-)

Cheers!

Sean

> I shall send the original author an email, to talk to him about it.
>
>  The DWT is exactly the kind of tool SciPy needs.   The goal would not be
> >> to re-invent DWT with SciPy, but simply integrate pywavelets into 
> SciPy if
> >> that is at all possible.    Having so many packages is good for 
> developers,
> >> but not very good for consumers as people have to collect a lot of
> >> different packages together to get what they want.   Some of this 
> pressure
> >> is being alleviated by "distributions" of Python, and I expect that 
> trend
> >> will continue.   But, it is still useful for SciPy to grow 
> "fundamental"
> >> libraries like a DWT.
> >>
> >> I'll send the pywavelets author an email, would be great to get his 
> input
> > on this.
> >
>
> I agree that wavelet transforms, both DWT and CWT, are well within SciPy's
> scope, if we could integrate pyWavelets into SciPy that would be great. It
> does beg the question though, if that is the path we are going down would
> it be better to implement a CWT in the same style as pyWavelets to have
> uniformity in use if they are both integrated in SciPy.
>
>
> Stuart


More information about the SciPy-Dev mailing list