<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NPG</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NPG</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nonlin. Processes Geophys.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1607-7946</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/npg-11-505-2004</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title>Cross wavelet analysis: significance testing and pitfalls</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Maraun</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kurths</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
</contrib>
</contrib-group><aff id="aff1">
<label>1</label>
<addr-line>Department of Physics, Potsdam University, D-14415 Potsdam, Germany</addr-line>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>11</day>
<month>11</month>
<year>2004</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>11</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<fpage>505</fpage>
<lpage>514</lpage>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright: &#x000a9; 2004 D. Maraun</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2004</copyright-year>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Generic License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"  xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://npg.copernicus.org/articles/11/505/2004/npg-11-505-2004.html">This article is available from https://npg.copernicus.org/articles/11/505/2004/npg-11-505-2004.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://npg.copernicus.org/articles/11/505/2004/npg-11-505-2004.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://npg.copernicus.org/articles/11/505/2004/npg-11-505-2004.pdf</self-uri>
<abstract>
<p>In this paper, we present a detailed evaluation of cross wavelet
  analysis of bivariate time series.  We develop a statistical test
  for zero wavelet coherency based on Monte Carlo simulations. If at
  least one of the two processes considered is Gaussian white noise,
  an approximative formula for the critical value can be utilized.  In
  a second part, typical pitfalls of wavelet cross spectra and wavelet
  coherency are discussed. The wavelet cross spectrum appears to be
  not suitable for significance testing the interrelation between two
  processes. Instead, one should rather apply wavelet coherency.
  Furthermore we investigate problems due to multiple testing.  Based
  on these results, we show that coherency between ENSO and NAO is an
  artefact for most of the time from 1900 to 1995. However, during a
  distinct period from around 1920 to 1940, significant coherency
  between the two phenomena occurs.</p>
</abstract>
<counts><page-count count="10"/></counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body/>
<back>
</back>
</article>