4 added 70 characters in body
source | link

Reportedly, coherence-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al report that coherence is also:

... very sensitive to fluctuations of linearity in phase, relatively less so to nonlinear fluctuations of amplitude and completely insensitive to linear fluctuations in amplitude. How much both types of linearity contribute to the final measure, however, remains somewhat unclear and, therefore, some authors have argued that amplitude should not contribute to the final measure at all, using a "phase locking value"[9] instead,which is essentially the square root of (4) with all the moduli set to 1

without citing any papers on itthat prove the sensitivity of coherence with non-linear amplitude fluctuations.

Does this stand and if yes, what would the meaning of that beare there any papers supporting it?

Reportedly, coherence-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al report that coherence is also:

... very sensitive to fluctuations of linearity in phase, relatively less so to nonlinear fluctuations of amplitude and completely insensitive to linear fluctuations in amplitude. How much both types of linearity contribute to the final measure, however, remains somewhat unclear and, therefore, some authors have argued that amplitude should not contribute to the final measure at all, using a "phase locking value"[9] instead,which is essentially the square root of (4) with all the moduli set to 1

without citing any papers on it.

Does this stand and if yes, what would the meaning of that be?

Reportedly, coherence-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al report that coherence is also:

... very sensitive to fluctuations of linearity in phase, relatively less so to nonlinear fluctuations of amplitude and completely insensitive to linear fluctuations in amplitude. How much both types of linearity contribute to the final measure, however, remains somewhat unclear and, therefore, some authors have argued that amplitude should not contribute to the final measure at all, using a "phase locking value"[9] instead,which is essentially the square root of (4) with all the moduli set to 1

without citing papers that prove the sensitivity of coherence with non-linear amplitude fluctuations.

Does this stand and if yes, are there any papers supporting it?

3 edited title
| link

Coherency Coherence and non-linear interactions

2 Some edits to introduce some clarity.
source | link

Reportedly, coherencycoherence-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al.1Klein et al report that coherencycoherence is also:

sensitive... very sensitive to fluctuations of linearity in phase, relatively less so to non-linearnonlinear fluctuations inof amplitude and completely insensitive to linear linear fluctuations in amplitude. How much both types of linearity contribute to the final measure, however, remains somewhat unclear and, therefore, some authors have argued that amplitude should not contribute to the final measure at all, using a "phase locking value"[9] instead,which is essentially the square root of (4) with all the moduli set to 1

without citing any papers on it.

Does this stand and if yes, what would the meaning of that be?

Reportedly, coherency-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al.1 report that coherency is also

sensitive to non-linear fluctuations in amplitude and insensitive to linear fluctuations in amplitude.

without citing any papers on it.

Does this stand and if yes, what would the meaning of that be?

Reportedly, coherence-based metrics are primarily influenced by linearity in phase. However, Klein et al report that coherence is also:

... very sensitive to fluctuations of linearity in phase, relatively less so to nonlinear fluctuations of amplitude and completely insensitive to linear fluctuations in amplitude. How much both types of linearity contribute to the final measure, however, remains somewhat unclear and, therefore, some authors have argued that amplitude should not contribute to the final measure at all, using a "phase locking value"[9] instead,which is essentially the square root of (4) with all the moduli set to 1

without citing any papers on it.

Does this stand and if yes, what would the meaning of that be?

1
source | link