Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Figure 4 shows the Gaussian smoothed, baseline corrected and normal-
ized data by the GG procedure for the mass/charge range from 4000 Da
to 25000 Da. Figure 5 displays the wavelet smoothed, baseline corrected
and normalized data by WW and WPSB methods within the mass/charge
range 4000 Da to 25000 Da. The results for WW and WPSB method are
the same until this step.
Fig. 5. Results of WW or WG procedure for 20 MS data sets after denoising, baseline
correction, and normalization.
From these two plots, we may agree that the wavelet method did a
better job in terms of denoising since it ltered out more noise than that of
the Gaussian smoothing method. It clearly demonstrated that the wavelet
is much more powerful in removing the noise components.
This application, at this stage, showed that WPSB (WW) procedure is
better than the GG procedure.
Figure 6, 7, and 8 show the nal bin range of the selected peaks for
the mass/charge range from 4000 Da to 25000 Da by the GG, WW and
WPSB procedures respectively. In these plots, we use a pair of parentheses
to represent a bin and a \?" to stand for the peaks detected. The peaks
within a ( ) will be treated to represent the identical biological substance.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search