Jump to content
Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

4.1 Signal and Noise: Difference between revisions

From Sense & Sensibility & Science
// via Wikitext Extension for VSCode
 
(21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Navbox}}
{{Cover|4.1 Signal and Noise}}
 
To make sense of this complex world, how do we confidently identify a meaningful pattern amongst a myriad of distractions? Scientists call the pattern "signal" and the distractions "noise." We clarify this subtle distinction and introduce techniques to make the signal stand out from the noise, such as with the use of filters.
== Useful Links ==
== The Lesson in Context ==
 
<!-- Always begin section with a description of this lesson in relation to the course as a whole. -->
* [[:File:Guess the Message Game - Complete.pdf|Guess the Message Game Handout]]
We introduce the concept of signal and noise in "detection problems" and teach students how to identify the signal and various sources of noise in diverse scenarios. This foreshadows the  [[5.1 False Positives and Negatives|ethical considerations in deciding how strong a signal must be to be counted as a "positive"]].
* [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1afjmqlZJFqnB-CK1VeJNnUH2tbmalWcj4OW2OgEiKJ8/edit?usp=sharing Three Column Overview of the Week]
<!-- Expandable section relating this lesson to other lessons. -->
* [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xwdRq6FVkyz4dgdygAitSZLx-kZt54njGHrWF4lc2mg/edit?usp=drivesdk Lesson Slides (2023 Master)]
{{Expand|Relation to Other Lessons|
* [https://sensesensibilityscience.berkeley.edu/topic/9 Website Page]
'''Earlier Lessons'''
 
{{ContextLesson|2.2 Systematic and Statistical Uncertainty}}
=== Readings and Assignments ===
{{ContextRelation|Both systematic and statistical uncertainties introduce noise to every measurement.}}
 
{{ContextLesson|3.1 Probabilistic Reasoning}}
==== Lecture Video ====
{{ContextRelation|The presence of noise, which sometimes disguises as a signal, is inevitable in any measurement. The identification of a signal always comes with a roughly quantifiable level of confidence.}}
 
{{Line}}
<youtube>https://youtu.be/S2AIAv_sTq8</youtube>
'''Later Lessons'''
 
{{ContextLesson|4.2 Finding Patterns in Random Noise}}
== Learning Goals ==
{{ContextRelation|In addition to the signal-to-noise ratio, there are other statistical tools (e.g. <math>p</math>-value) to quantify the strength of the signal amidst all the noise.}}
 
{{ContextLesson|5.1 False Positives and Negatives}}
{{ContextRelation|"Positive" and "negative" refer to whether we identify what we detect as a signal or not. The decision of any "threshold" of strength for a signal to be counted as positive inevitably involves human values judgment in a trade-off between the rates of false positives and false negatives.}}
{{ContextLesson|5.2 Scientific Optimism}}
{{ContextRelation|Some signals in nature seem hopelessly too weak to detect, such as the tiny fluctuations in the distance between two mirrors as a result of the gravitational waves from faraway black holes, but scientists spend decades to develop new instruments to increase the strength of the signal, as well as new analysis techniques to filter out the noise.}}
{{ContextLesson|6.1 Correlation and Causation}}
{{ContextRelation|The detection of a "statistically significant" difference between conditions in an RCT is the identification of a signal. The random variations that exist between experimental subjects are a source of noise.}}
}}
== Takeaways ==
<tabber>
|-|Learning Goals=
After this lesson, students should
After this lesson, students should
<!-- Learning goals are written as a numbered list. -->
# Be able to explain what scientists mean by "signal," "noise," and "signal-to-noise ratio."
# Be able to explain what scientists mean by "signal," "noise," and "signal-to-noise ratio."
# Be able to identify examples of "signal" and "noise," recognizing that these examples are context-dependent.
# Be able to identify examples of "signal" and "noise," recognizing that these examples are context-dependent.
# Be able to roughly compare measurement techniques in terms of their resultant signal-to-noise ratios.
# Be able to roughly compare measurement techniques in terms of their resultant signal-to-noise ratios.
# Be able to describe examples of techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal.
# Be able to describe examples of techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal.
 
|-|Definitions=
=== Definitions ===
<!-- Definitions must be written with the Definition and Subdefinition templates. The first Definition should have the "first=yes" flag at the end. -->
 
{{Definition|Signal|Aspects of observations or stimuli that provide useful information about the target of interest, as opposed to noise.|first=yes}}
* '''Signal'''
{{BoxCaution|Please hold off on introducing the concept of false positive/negative or thresholds in detections, as students have previously been overwhelmed and confused. We will properly discuss them in [[5.1 False Positives and Negatives]].}}
*: Aspects of observations or stimuli that provide useful information about the target of interest, as opposed to noise. {{Caution|Please hold off on introducing the concept of false positive/negative or thresholds in detections, as students have previously been overwhelmed and confused. We will properly discuss them in [[5.1 False Positives and Negatives]].}}
{{Definition|Noise|The aspects of observations that get confused with signal but do not provide the same useful information about the target of interest. Noise is frequently, but not always, the result of random measurement fluctuations.}}
* '''Noise'''
{{BoxCaution|Some students falsely think that noise is anything that prevents you from detecting the signal, for instance, a law banning the use of ultrasound to detect the sex of the foetus. In fact, noise is something that is detected by an instrument the same way a signal would be, except that it is not caused by the source of the signal and could be confused with the signal.}}
*: The aspects of observations that get confused with signal but do not provide the same useful information about the target of interest. Noise is frequently, but not always, the result of random measurement fluctuations. {{Caution|Some students falsely think that noise is anything that prevents you from detecting the signal, for instance, a law banning the use of ultrasound to detect the sex of the foetus. In fact, noise is something that is detected by an instrument the same way a signal would be, except that it is not caused by the source of the signal and could be confused with the signal.}} {{Caution|There is always random background noise. But, noise doesn't have to be random.|small=right}} {{Caution|Noise does not have to be sound.|small=right}}
{{BoxCaution|There is always random background noise. But, noise doesn't have to be random.}}
* '''Signal-to-noise Ratio'''
{{BoxCaution|Noise does not have to be sound.}}
*: The relative strength of signal compared to the relative strength of noise in a given context. Obtaining meaningful information from the world requires distinguishing signal from noise. Therefore, human cognition (both scientific and otherwise) relies on techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase signal-to-noise ratio). It is possible to design filters to increase the signal-to-noise ratio, if you know where the noise is going to appear.
{{Definition|Signal-to-noise Ratio|The relative strength of signal compared to the relative strength of noise in a given context. Obtaining meaningful information from the world requires distinguishing signal from noise. Therefore, human cognition (both scientific and otherwise) relies on techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase signal-to-noise ratio). It is possible to design filters to increase the signal-to-noise ratio, if you know where the noise is going to appear.}}
 
<br />
=== Examples ===
|-|Examples=
 
{{Example
* As a member of the Bajau people of Southeast Asia, you are diving to collect shellfish for food. While the shellfish themselves are the signal, there are several sources of noise: rocks and other creatures resembling shellfish, waving sunlight patterns on the seafloor. The signal-to-noise ratio may be low if the water is murky (higher noise), the shellfish are camouflaged (lower signal), or if the light is dim (lower signal). [https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43823885 BBC article]
|Bajau People
* Detecting fish jumps (signal) on a lake on a day when the wind is causing waves (noise). Some splashing waves may be misidentified as fish jumps.
|As a member of the Bajau people of Southeast Asia, you are diving to collect shellfish for food. While the shellfish themselves are the signal, there are several sources of noise: rocks and other creatures resembling shellfish, waving sunlight patterns on the seafloor. The signal-to-noise ratio may be low if the water is murky (higher noise), the shellfish are camouflaged (lower signal), or if the light is dim (lower signal).
* Getting the words of a radio personality through static.
|links={{LinkCard
* Hearing your conversational partner at a party where lots of conversations are happening.
|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43823885
* Figuring out if there's a meaningful difference between the control condition and experimental condition in an RCT. Random fluctuations in the chosen experimental sample may cause a spurious difference between the two groups; this is a source of noise.
|title=The 'sea nomads' who free-dive for a living
* Finding the facts on a topic where there's a lot of disinformation floating around.
|description=BBC article on the Bajau people and diving.}}
* Saul's story of an exoplanet around a pulsar, when it was not really there.
}}
* Palette cleansing with water or crackers between tasting different wines. The subtle differences between wines are the signal, while lingering flavours and scents from the previous wine are the noise.
{{Example
* Covid symptom screening, where the signal is the actual Covid infection, and the noise is all the other illnesses/allergies/etc causing similar symptoms.
|Identifying Fish
* Smoke detectors detect the presence of smoke from a fire (signal) by measuring the opacity of air. Steam is a possible source of noise.
|Detecting fish jumps (signal) on a lake on a day when the wind is causing waves (noise). Some splashing waves may be misidentified as fish jumps.}}
 
{{Example
== Context ==
|Radio Static
 
|Getting the words of a radio personality through static.}}
We introduce the concept of signal and noise in "detection problems" and teach students how to identify the signal and various sources of noise in diverse scenarios. This foreshadows the ethical considerations in deciding how strong a signal must be to be counted as a "positive" ([[5.1 False Positives and Negatives]]).
{{Example
 
|Loud Party
=== Before ===
|Hearing your conversational partner at a party where lots of conversations are happening.}}
 
{{Example
: '''[[2.2 Systematic and Statistical Uncertainty]]'''
|Randomized Controlled Trials
:: Both systematic and statistical uncertainties introduce noise to every measurement.
|Figuring out if there's a meaningful difference between the control condition and experimental condition in an RCT. Random fluctuations in the chosen experimental sample may cause a spurious difference between the two groups; this is a source of noise.
: '''[[3.1 Probabilistic Reasoning]]'''
|comments=
:: The presence of noise, which sometimes disguises as a signal, is inevitable in any measurement. The identification of a signal always comes with a roughly quantifiable level of confidence.
{{BoxCaution|We will cover RCTs in detail in [[6.1 Correlation and Causation]].}}
 
}}
=== After ===
{{Example
 
|Online Researching
: '''[[4.2 Finding Patterns in Random Noise]]'''
|Finding the facts on a topic where there's a lot of disinformation floating around.}}
:: In addition to the signal-to-noise ratio, there are other statistical tools (e.g. p-value) to quantify the strength of the signal amidst all the noise.
{{Example
: '''[[5.1 False Positives and Negatives]]'''
|Palate Cleansing
:: "Positive" and "negative" refer to whether we identify what we detect as a signal or not. The decision of any "threshold" of strength for a signal to be counted as positive inevitably involves human values judgment in a trade-off between the rates of false positives and false negatives.
|Palate cleansing with water or crackers between tasting different wines. The subtle differences between wines are the signal, while lingering flavours and scents from the previous wine are the noise.}}
: '''[[5.2 Scientific Optimism]]'''
{{Example
:: Some signals in nature seem hopelessly too weak to detect, such as the tiny fluctuations in the distance between two mirrors as a result of the gravitational waves from faraway black holes, but scientists spend decades to develop new instruments to increase the strength of the signal, as well as new analysis techniques to filter out the noise.
|COVID Symptom Screening
: '''[[6.1 Correlation and Causation]]'''
|The signal is the actual COVID infection, and the noise is all the other illnesses/allergies/etc causing similar symptoms.}}
:: The detection of a "statistically significant" difference between conditions in an RCT is the identification of a signal. The random variations that exist between experimental subjects are a source of noise.
{{Example
 
|Smoke Detectors
== Recommended Outline ==
|Smoke detectors detect the presence of smoke from a fire (signal) by measuring the opacity of air. Steam is a possible source of noise.}}
 
{{Exemplary
=== Before Class ===
|{{Blockquote|It's hard to see the effect since there are so many other issues going on that act as noise, but there really appears to be a remarkable correlation between a young child's ability to defer gratification and later successes in life.}}
 
{{Blockquote|The problem is that nowadays we are inundated with stories about every scary crime that happens anywhere in the world, so this "noise" confuses us and we can't see the striking "signal" that crime in our country has gone down dramatically in the past three decades.}}
* Review PlayPosit and discussion questions and ask faculty, Gabriel, or Emlen any questions you have.
{{Blockquote|Any signal can count as noise, just like any noise can be considered as signal; it depends on what you're trying to see.}}
* Print the handouts for [[#Guess the Message Game|Guess the Message Game]].
{{Blockquote|An example from my landscape ecology course: for raster data, a bigger cell size/grain reduces the accuracy of the representation and makes it harder to determine the original landscape form.|[http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/manage-data/raster-and-images/cell-size-of-raster-data.htm Source]}}
 
{{Blockquote|On September 26, 1983, Lieutenant Stanislav Petrov of the Soviet Air Defense Forces was alerted to the launching of 5 American nuclear ICBMs. Instead of following protocol and recommending full-scale nuclear retaliation to his commanders, Petrov correctly realized the alert was a false alarm. The reflection of the sun off the tops of clouds had confused the Soviet satellite that triggered the alarm.|[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/13/us/false-alarm-missile-alerts.html Source]}}
=== During Class ===
{{Blockquote|The signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth.|[https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/19175796-the-signal-and-the-noise-why-so-many-predictions-fail---but-some-don-t Nate Silver, ''The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail—But Some Don't'']}}
 
{{Blockquote|Most of you will have heard the maxim "correlation does not imply causation." Just because two variables have a statistical relationship with each other does not mean that one is responsible for the other. For instance, ice cream sales and forest fires are correlated because both occur more often in the summer heat. But there is no causation; you don't light a patch of the Montana brush on fire when you buy a pint of Haagen-Dazs.|[https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/19175796-the-signal-and-the-noise-why-so-many-predictions-fail---but-some-don-t Nate Silver, ''The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail—But Some Don't'']}}
* (5 min) Come up with some fun way to assign the roles of spokesperson and notetaker (e.g. earliest birthday in the year, lives furthest from campus). Remind them of the responsibilities of these roles.
{{Blockquote|We compare USDA nutrient content data published in 1950 and 1999 for 13 nutrients and water in 43 garden crops, mostly vegetables. After adjusting for differences in moisture content, we calculate ratios of nutrient contents, R (1999/1950), for each food and nutrient. To evaluate the foods as a group, we calculate median and geometric mean <math>R</math>-values for the 13 nutrients and water. To evaluate <math>R</math>-values for individual foods and nutrients, with hypothetical confidence intervals, we use USDA's standard errors (SEs) of the 1999 values, from which we generate 2 estimates for the SEs of the 1950 values. As a group, the 43 foods show apparent, statistically reliable declines (<math>R < 1</math>) for 6 nutrients (protein, Ca, P, Fe, riboflavin and ascorbic acid), but no statistically reliable changes for 7 other nutrients. Declines in the medians range from 6% for protein to 38% for riboflavin. When evaluated for individual foods and nutrients, <math>R</math>-values are usually not distinguishable from 1 with current data. Depending on whether we use low or high estimates of the 1950 SEs, respectively 33% or 20% of the apparent <math>R</math>-values differ reliably from 1. Significantly, about 28% of these <math>R</math>-values exceed 1.|[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07315724.2004.10719409 Source]}}
* (5 min) Opening [[#Clicker Question|clicker question]].
{{Blockquote|<math>p</math>-values and related analyses should not be reported selectively. Conducting multiple analyses of the data and reporting only those with certain <math>p</math>-values (typically those passing a significance threshold) renders the reported <math>p</math>-values essentially uninterpretable. Cherry-picking promising findings, also known by such terms as data dredging, significance chasing, significance questing, selective inference, and "<math>p</math>-hacking," leads to a spurious excess of statistically significant results in the published literature and should be vigorously avoided. One need not formally carry out multiple statistical tests for this problem to arise: Whenever a researcher chooses what to present based on statistical results, valid interpretation of those results is severely compromised if the reader is not informed of the choice and its basis. Researchers should disclose the number of hypotheses explored during the study, all data collection decisions, all statistical analyses conducted, and all <math>p</math>-values computed. Valid scientific conclusions based on <math>p</math>-values and related statistics cannot be drawn without at least knowing how many and which analyses were conducted, and how those analyses (including <math>p</math>-values) were selected for reporting.|[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108 Source]}}
* (20 min) Go through several scenarios in the [[#Scenario Analysis|scenario analysis]] activity.
{{Blockquote|When visiting with family friends for their daughter's birthday, my mom's friend's husband, who is an accountant for a large company that was being bought out and had to do an audit of company value (worth about 500mil), was discussing how discrepancies (noise) below 150k do not need to be followed up on because they don't significantly impact the value of the company (signal) and would not affect the sale price of the company or the buyer's decision to purchase (the purpose of the audit).}}
* (30 min) Play the [[#Guess the Message Game|guess the message game]].
{{Blockquote|While looking at EKGs taken by the EKG reader/device attached to my mom's phone, sometimes her device would stop recording and say that the signal is "unreadable" (usually due to electrical interference). In EKGs, small discrepancies are treated as noise and can be disregarded, but once there are too many of them the signal cannot be determined.}}
* (5 min) Teach a little about signal-to-noise ratio.
{{Blockquote|no seremos Los mismos, dejamos de serlo el día que el prImero partió. Buscando lo quE aquí nos arRebataron, esas Tonadas de alegría, paz. no seremos los mismos, tAmpoco quiero serlo. porque el recuerDo olvidado está. no somos los mismos. seremos mejores. #microcuento #24Ago — It was written mostly in all lower case. It would have been easy to miss the random letters he capitalized throughout the tweet: L-I-B-E-R-T-A-D.|[https://www.npr.org/2018/09/11/643722787/for-many-in-venezuela-social-media-is-a-matter-of-life-and-death Source]}}
* (5 min) Collect questions for plenary.
}}
 
|-|Expanded Learning Goals=
=== After Class ===
After this lesson, students should
 
# Concept Acquisition
* [Any essential logistical things that need to be done as followup for this class]
## '''Signal:''' Aspects of observations or stimuli that provide useful information about the target of interest, as opposed to noise.
* Collect answers from notetakers for the forum / plenary.
## '''Noise:''' The aspects of observations or stimuli that distract from, dilute, or get confused with signal, and are not signal (i.e., do not provide useful information about the target of interest).
 
### Noise is frequently, but not always, the result of random measurement fluctuations.
== Lesson Content ==
## Observations/stimuli subject to confusion between signal and noise include communication, measurements, descriptions, etc.
 
## '''Signal-to-Noise Ratio:''' The relative strength of signal compared to the relative strength of noise in a given context. Obtaining meaningful information from the world requires distinguishing signal from noise. Therefore, human cognition (both scientific and otherwise) relies on techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase the signal-to-noise ratio).
=== Warmup Poll ===
# Concept Application
 
## Identify examples of "signal" and "noise," recognizing that these examples are context-dependent.
# How can we definitely tell if a ''single'' stimulus is signal or noise?
## Roughly compare measurement techniques in terms of their resultant signal-to-noise ratios.
## By improving the sensitivity of the instrument.
## Describe examples of techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase the signal-to-noise ratio).
## The stimulus is definitely a signal if it is stronger than most of the previous stimuli.
</tabber>
## It is impossible to tell for sure if a single stimulus is a signal or noise. {{Answer|c. Noise can masquerade itself as signal, and random fluctuations can sometimes produce a single strong stimulus. For a given stimulus, we can only come up with a likelihood for whether it is signal or noise. We then have to determine the confidence level we need in order to classify stimuli appropriately.}}
{{#restricted:{{Private:4.1 Signal and Noise}}}}
# Any ''single'' supposed signal might be a rare (or not-so-rare) spike in noise.
{{NavCard|chapter=Lesson plans|text=All lesson plans|prev=3.2 Calibration of Credence Levels|next=4.2 Finding Patterns in Random Noise}}
 
=== Scenario Analysis ===
 
For each of the following scenarios, answer the following questions about signal and noise.
# What is the sense/instrument that you are using?
# What does the sense/instrument actually measure?
# What is the signal from the sense/instrument you are expecting?
# What sources of noise do you anticipate in this measurement? List two or more if you can.
# (Optional) How would you reduce these sources of noise?
 
==== Example: Bajau Divers ====
 
Members of the Bajau people of Southeast Asia collecting shellfish for food.
# What is the sense/instrument that you are using? {{Answer|Their eyes.}}
# What does the sense/instrument actually measure? {{Answer|Visual light reflecting off nearby surfaces.}}
# What is the signal from the sense/instrument you are expecting? {{Answer|A shell shape/pattern.}}
# What sources of noise do you anticipate in this measurement? List two or more if you can. {{Answer|Murky water, low light, creatures and rocks that look like shellfish.}}
# (Optional) How would you reduce these sources of noise? {{Answer|Clean the water, dive during the day, etc.}}
 
==== Scenarios ====
 
* Catching gossip about you from across the room at a party. What about understanding what the person you're talking to is saying?
* Detecting a metal knife in the luggage of someone boarding an airplane.
* Detecting an ongoing earthquake in Berkeley.
* Determining if your arch nemesis put cyanide in your almond milk.
* Determining whether there are birds around you on your weekly birding expedition, then determining whether owls are in the mix.
* Is that a creepy crawly on your neck right now?
* Identifying a budding new wave of COVID in the US. (Suppose you're a health official provided with daily updates of the following data from hospitals across the country: rates of people coming into the ER with fever, coughs, broken bones, wounds, diarrhea, and cardiac arrest...)
 
=== Signal and Noise Game ===
 
{{Caution|The 140 page handout for this game is designed to work with up to 35 students (each student gets four pages). The last of the four pages has a different randomized pair of letter and number grids for each student. Hence, the handout is ''slightly'' different for each student. If you have more than 35 students, you'll have to print more copies.}}
In this game the students will write a message and corrupt it to varying degrees. Each student will have a partner with whom they shared the corrupted messages. Each student will try and decode the messages from the other student from most to least corrupted. Full instructions are available [[:File:Guess the Message Game - Complete.pdf|here]]. {{Caution|They should not share the messages nor the decoding process until the game is done.|small=right}}
 
==== Instructions ====
 
# Hand out the students a copy of the [[:File:Guess the Message Game - Complete.pdf|worksheet]]. It has the full instructions in it.
# (2 min) Explain the game as per the instructions linked above. Make sure the students know not to share their uncorrupted messages with each other until the game is complete.
# (10 min) Have students pair up and play the game.
# (3 min) Ask the discussion questions below.
 
==== Discussion Questions ====
 
# What was the highest corruption level at which you could understand the message?
# What are the factors affecting the signal-to-noise ratio?
{{Answer|The quantity of letters corrupted increases the noise to affect the ratio. The strength of the original message is also important. If the original message is short, then this also lowers the signal-to-noise ratio. Furthermore, if you have a very obscure message (that another student might not be likely to recognize) to begin with, then the signal would also be less clear.}}
 
==== Takeaway ====
 
* The ratio of signal to noise determines how easy it is to distinguish between true signal and the noise that "pretends" to be signal.
* We could have a poor ratio because the signal is very low or because the noise is very high.
* Example: Why is it hard to have a conversation at a cocktail party?
** Signal: Increase the sound of your voice.
** Noise: Go outside to get away from the background conversations.
 
== Overflow ==
 
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="overflow:auto;">
<div style="font-weight:bold;line-height:1.6;">Extra content that's not currently part of the official lesson plan.</div>
<div class="mw-collapsible-content">
 
=== Changemaker ===
 
# {{Changemaker|Session 7 discusses the research by Julia Rozovsky at Google to learn what makes the perfect team. The authors note that, "the only thing worse than not finding a pattern is finding too many of them". In Rozovsky's work, what was the signal they were looking for and what created noise? }}
 
</div></div>
 
[[Category:Lesson plans]]
[[Category:Lesson plans]]

Latest revision as of 22:33, 11 June 2026

To make sense of this complex world, how do we confidently identify a meaningful pattern amongst a myriad of distractions? Scientists call the pattern "signal" and the distractions "noise." We clarify this subtle distinction and introduce techniques to make the signal stand out from the noise, such as with the use of filters.

The Lesson in Context

We introduce the concept of signal and noise in "detection problems" and teach students how to identify the signal and various sources of noise in diverse scenarios. This foreshadows the ethical considerations in deciding how strong a signal must be to be counted as a "positive".

Earlier Lessons

2.2 Systematic and Statistical Uncertainty
  • Both systematic and statistical uncertainties introduce noise to every measurement.
3.1 Probabilistic Reasoning
  • The presence of noise, which sometimes disguises as a signal, is inevitable in any measurement. The identification of a signal always comes with a roughly quantifiable level of confidence.

Later Lessons

4.2 Finding Patterns in Random Noise
  • In addition to the signal-to-noise ratio, there are other statistical tools (e.g. [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-value) to quantify the strength of the signal amidst all the noise.
5.1 False Positives and Negatives
  • "Positive" and "negative" refer to whether we identify what we detect as a signal or not. The decision of any "threshold" of strength for a signal to be counted as positive inevitably involves human values judgment in a trade-off between the rates of false positives and false negatives.
5.2 Scientific Optimism
  • Some signals in nature seem hopelessly too weak to detect, such as the tiny fluctuations in the distance between two mirrors as a result of the gravitational waves from faraway black holes, but scientists spend decades to develop new instruments to increase the strength of the signal, as well as new analysis techniques to filter out the noise.
6.1 Correlation and Causation
  • The detection of a "statistically significant" difference between conditions in an RCT is the identification of a signal. The random variations that exist between experimental subjects are a source of noise.

Takeaways

After this lesson, students should

  1. Be able to explain what scientists mean by "signal," "noise," and "signal-to-noise ratio."
  2. Be able to identify examples of "signal" and "noise," recognizing that these examples are context-dependent.
  3. Be able to roughly compare measurement techniques in terms of their resultant signal-to-noise ratios.
  4. Be able to describe examples of techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal.

Signal

Aspects of observations or stimuli that provide useful information about the target of interest, as opposed to noise.

Please hold off on introducing the concept of false positive/negative or thresholds in detections, as students have previously been overwhelmed and confused. We will properly discuss them in 5.1 False Positives and Negatives.

Noise

The aspects of observations that get confused with signal but do not provide the same useful information about the target of interest. Noise is frequently, but not always, the result of random measurement fluctuations.

Some students falsely think that noise is anything that prevents you from detecting the signal, for instance, a law banning the use of ultrasound to detect the sex of the foetus. In fact, noise is something that is detected by an instrument the same way a signal would be, except that it is not caused by the source of the signal and could be confused with the signal.

There is always random background noise. But, noise doesn't have to be random.

Noise does not have to be sound.

Signal-to-noise Ratio

The relative strength of signal compared to the relative strength of noise in a given context. Obtaining meaningful information from the world requires distinguishing signal from noise. Therefore, human cognition (both scientific and otherwise) relies on techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase signal-to-noise ratio). It is possible to design filters to increase the signal-to-noise ratio, if you know where the noise is going to appear.


Bajau People

As a member of the Bajau people of Southeast Asia, you are diving to collect shellfish for food. While the shellfish themselves are the signal, there are several sources of noise: rocks and other creatures resembling shellfish, waving sunlight patterns on the seafloor. The signal-to-noise ratio may be low if the water is murky (higher noise), the shellfish are camouflaged (lower signal), or if the light is dim (lower signal).

Identifying Fish

Detecting fish jumps (signal) on a lake on a day when the wind is causing waves (noise). Some splashing waves may be misidentified as fish jumps.

Radio Static

Getting the words of a radio personality through static.

Loud Party

Hearing your conversational partner at a party where lots of conversations are happening.

Randomized Controlled Trials

Figuring out if there's a meaningful difference between the control condition and experimental condition in an RCT. Random fluctuations in the chosen experimental sample may cause a spurious difference between the two groups; this is a source of noise.

We will cover RCTs in detail in 6.1 Correlation and Causation.

Online Researching

Finding the facts on a topic where there's a lot of disinformation floating around.

Palate Cleansing

Palate cleansing with water or crackers between tasting different wines. The subtle differences between wines are the signal, while lingering flavours and scents from the previous wine are the noise.

COVID Symptom Screening

The signal is the actual COVID infection, and the noise is all the other illnesses/allergies/etc causing similar symptoms.

Smoke Detectors

Smoke detectors detect the presence of smoke from a fire (signal) by measuring the opacity of air. Steam is a possible source of noise.

Exemplary Quotes

It's hard to see the effect since there are so many other issues going on that act as noise, but there really appears to be a remarkable correlation between a young child's ability to defer gratification and later successes in life.

The problem is that nowadays we are inundated with stories about every scary crime that happens anywhere in the world, so this "noise" confuses us and we can't see the striking "signal" that crime in our country has gone down dramatically in the past three decades.

Any signal can count as noise, just like any noise can be considered as signal; it depends on what you're trying to see.

An example from my landscape ecology course: for raster data, a bigger cell size/grain reduces the accuracy of the representation and makes it harder to determine the original landscape form.

On September 26, 1983, Lieutenant Stanislav Petrov of the Soviet Air Defense Forces was alerted to the launching of 5 American nuclear ICBMs. Instead of following protocol and recommending full-scale nuclear retaliation to his commanders, Petrov correctly realized the alert was a false alarm. The reflection of the sun off the tops of clouds had confused the Soviet satellite that triggered the alarm.

The signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth.

Most of you will have heard the maxim "correlation does not imply causation." Just because two variables have a statistical relationship with each other does not mean that one is responsible for the other. For instance, ice cream sales and forest fires are correlated because both occur more often in the summer heat. But there is no causation; you don't light a patch of the Montana brush on fire when you buy a pint of Haagen-Dazs.

We compare USDA nutrient content data published in 1950 and 1999 for 13 nutrients and water in 43 garden crops, mostly vegetables. After adjusting for differences in moisture content, we calculate ratios of nutrient contents, R (1999/1950), for each food and nutrient. To evaluate the foods as a group, we calculate median and geometric mean [math]\displaystyle{ R }[/math]-values for the 13 nutrients and water. To evaluate [math]\displaystyle{ R }[/math]-values for individual foods and nutrients, with hypothetical confidence intervals, we use USDA's standard errors (SEs) of the 1999 values, from which we generate 2 estimates for the SEs of the 1950 values. As a group, the 43 foods show apparent, statistically reliable declines ([math]\displaystyle{ R < 1 }[/math]) for 6 nutrients (protein, Ca, P, Fe, riboflavin and ascorbic acid), but no statistically reliable changes for 7 other nutrients. Declines in the medians range from 6% for protein to 38% for riboflavin. When evaluated for individual foods and nutrients, [math]\displaystyle{ R }[/math]-values are usually not distinguishable from 1 with current data. Depending on whether we use low or high estimates of the 1950 SEs, respectively 33% or 20% of the apparent [math]\displaystyle{ R }[/math]-values differ reliably from 1. Significantly, about 28% of these [math]\displaystyle{ R }[/math]-values exceed 1.

[math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values and related analyses should not be reported selectively. Conducting multiple analyses of the data and reporting only those with certain [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values (typically those passing a significance threshold) renders the reported [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values essentially uninterpretable. Cherry-picking promising findings, also known by such terms as data dredging, significance chasing, significance questing, selective inference, and "[math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-hacking," leads to a spurious excess of statistically significant results in the published literature and should be vigorously avoided. One need not formally carry out multiple statistical tests for this problem to arise: Whenever a researcher chooses what to present based on statistical results, valid interpretation of those results is severely compromised if the reader is not informed of the choice and its basis. Researchers should disclose the number of hypotheses explored during the study, all data collection decisions, all statistical analyses conducted, and all [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values computed. Valid scientific conclusions based on [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values and related statistics cannot be drawn without at least knowing how many and which analyses were conducted, and how those analyses (including [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values) were selected for reporting.

When visiting with family friends for their daughter's birthday, my mom's friend's husband, who is an accountant for a large company that was being bought out and had to do an audit of company value (worth about 500mil), was discussing how discrepancies (noise) below 150k do not need to be followed up on because they don't significantly impact the value of the company (signal) and would not affect the sale price of the company or the buyer's decision to purchase (the purpose of the audit).

While looking at EKGs taken by the EKG reader/device attached to my mom's phone, sometimes her device would stop recording and say that the signal is "unreadable" (usually due to electrical interference). In EKGs, small discrepancies are treated as noise and can be disregarded, but once there are too many of them the signal cannot be determined.

no seremos Los mismos, dejamos de serlo el día que el prImero partió. Buscando lo quE aquí nos arRebataron, esas Tonadas de alegría, paz. no seremos los mismos, tAmpoco quiero serlo. porque el recuerDo olvidado está. no somos los mismos. seremos mejores. #microcuento #24Ago — It was written mostly in all lower case. It would have been easy to miss the random letters he capitalized throughout the tweet: L-I-B-E-R-T-A-D.

After this lesson, students should

  1. Concept Acquisition
    1. Signal: Aspects of observations or stimuli that provide useful information about the target of interest, as opposed to noise.
    2. Noise: The aspects of observations or stimuli that distract from, dilute, or get confused with signal, and are not signal (i.e., do not provide useful information about the target of interest).
      1. Noise is frequently, but not always, the result of random measurement fluctuations.
    3. Observations/stimuli subject to confusion between signal and noise include communication, measurements, descriptions, etc.
    4. Signal-to-Noise Ratio: The relative strength of signal compared to the relative strength of noise in a given context. Obtaining meaningful information from the world requires distinguishing signal from noise. Therefore, human cognition (both scientific and otherwise) relies on techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase the signal-to-noise ratio).
  2. Concept Application
    1. Identify examples of "signal" and "noise," recognizing that these examples are context-dependent.
    2. Roughly compare measurement techniques in terms of their resultant signal-to-noise ratios.
    3. Describe examples of techniques and tools to suppress noise and/or amplify signal (i.e., increase the signal-to-noise ratio).

Additional Content

You must be logged in to see this content.