A coincidence method of detecting signal in the presence of noise is compared to the statistically optimum Neyman-Pearson procedure utilizing signal integration and threshold detection. In this coincidence procedure a specified number of the fixed group of successive pulses are required to exceed a voltage threshold level. The analysis is carried out for the case of constant-amplitude signals only and the results indicate that the best possible coincidence method requires about 1.4dbmore power than the Neyman-Pearson method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
M. Schwartz (1956) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: