2406.05073
Reconstruction of phase-amplitude dynamics from electrophysiological signals
Azamat Yeldesbay, Gemma Huguet, Silvia Daun
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Strong Field
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proves that the Laplace average of g(t)=r(t)−γ(r)(θ(t)) recovers the inverse amplitude Σ up to a constant q^{(r)}_{1,0} by (i) expanding r via the forward Fourier–Taylor map K(r)(ϕ,σ), (ii) cancelling the n=0 block with K(r)(ϕ,0), (iii) evaluating along ϕ(t)=ωt+ϕ0, σ(t)=σ0 e^{λ t}, and (iv) showing only (n,k)=(1,0) survives the time-average, yielding g^*_{λ}(x0)=q^{(r)}_{1,0}σ0=q^{(r)}_{1,0}Σ(x0) (their Eq. (26)). This follows immediately from their definition of the Laplace average (Eq. (23)), the series representation (Eq. (20)), and the reduced flow (Eqs. (24)–(25) in the text), with the large-T limits made explicit in the derivation leading to Eq. (26) . The candidate solution reproduces the same steps (explicitly computing the per-term factor (1/T)∫ e^{[(n−1)λ+ikω]t}dt and invoking λ<0), adds a brief justification for termwise integration via uniform convergence, and reaches the identical conclusion and normalization comment. Hence, both are correct and essentially the same argument.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field \textbf{Justification:} The central Laplace-average identity is correct and aligns with established Koopman/operator and parameterization-method theory. The derivation is clear and fits well within the paper’s broader workflow for reconstructing phase–amplitude dynamics from data. A small number of analytic assumptions (convergence/termwise integration) are used implicitly; making them explicit would strengthen rigor without affecting the main conclusions.