<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "archivearticle.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="methods-article">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Physiol.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Physiology</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Physiol.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">1664-042X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2017.00533</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Physiology</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Methods</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Decomposing Multifractal Crossovers</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Nagy</surname> <given-names>Zoltan</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/70739/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Mukli</surname> <given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/61133/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Herman</surname> <given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/12599/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>Andras</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="author-notes" rid="fn001"><sup>&#x0002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/23118/overview"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Institute of Clinical Experimental Research, Semmelweis University</institution> <country>Budapest, Hungary</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Department of Physiology, Semmelweis University</institution> <country>Budapest, Hungary</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale University</institution> <country>New Haven, CT, United States</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Edited by: Zbigniew R. Struzik, University of Tokyo, Japan</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Reviewed by: Stanislaw Drozdz, Institute of Nuclear Physics (PAN), Poland; Alain Arneodo, University of Bordeaux 1, France</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="corresp" id="fn001"><p>&#x0002A;Correspondence: Andras Eke <email>eke.andras&#x00040;med.semmelweis-univ.hu</email></p></fn>
<fn fn-type="other" id="fn002"><p>This article was submitted to Fractal Physiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology</p></fn></author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>26</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2017</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2017</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>8</volume>
<elocation-id>533</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>24</day>
<month>04</month>
<year>2017</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>10</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2017</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x000A9; 2017 Nagy, Mukli, Herman and Eke.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2017</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Nagy, Mukli, Herman and Eke</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p></license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p>Physiological processes&#x02014;such as, the brain&#x00027;s resting-state electrical activity or hemodynamic fluctuations&#x02014;exhibit scale-free temporal structuring. However, impacts common in biological systems such as, noise, multiple signal generators, or filtering by transport function, result in multimodal scaling that cannot be reliably assessed by standard analytical tools that assume unimodal scaling. Here, we present two methods to identify breakpoints or crossovers in multimodal multifractal scaling functions. These methods incorporate the robust iterative fitting approach of the focus-based multifractal formalism (FMF). The first approach (moment-wise scaling range adaptivity) allows for a breakpoint-based adaptive treatment that analyzes segregated scale-invariant ranges. The second method (scaling function decomposition method, SFD) is a crossover-based design aimed at decomposing signal constituents from multimodal scaling functions resulting from signal addition or co-sampling, such as, contamination by uncorrelated fractals. We demonstrated that these methods could handle multimodal, mono- or multifractal, and exact or empirical signals alike. Their precision was numerically characterized on ideal signals, and a robust performance was demonstrated on exemplary empirical signals capturing resting-state brain dynamics by near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), electroencephalography (EEG), and blood oxygen level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI-BOLD). The NIRS and fMRI-BOLD low-frequency fluctuations were dominated by a multifractal component over an underlying biologically relevant random noise, thus forming a bimodal signal. The crossover between the EEG signal components was found at the boundary between the &#x003B4; and &#x003B8; bands, suggesting an independent generator for the multifractal &#x003B4; rhythm. The robust implementation of the SFD method should be regarded as essential in the seamless processing of large volumes of bimodal fMRI-BOLD imaging data for the topology of multifractal metrics free of the masking effect of the underlying random noise.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>multifractality</kwd>
<kwd>focus-based multifractal analyses</kwd>
<kwd>multimodality</kwd>
<kwd>breakpoint</kwd>
<kwd>crossover</kwd>
<kwd>NIRS</kwd>
<kwd>EEG</kwd>
<kwd>fMRI-BOLD</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="12"/>
<table-count count="2"/>
<equation-count count="18"/>
<ref-count count="69"/>
<page-count count="19"/>
<word-count count="11991"/>
</counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec sec-type="intro" id="s1">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Fractal and multifractal concepts focus on characterizing scale-free properties in terms of scaling exponents&#x02014;such as, spectral index (&#x003B2;) or Hurst exponent (<italic>H</italic>; Mandelbrot, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">1982</xref>; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">2002</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>; Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>)&#x02014;of ideal or empirical signals. The scaling is a global behavior in the case of monofractals and a local property in the case of multifractals, which requires a set of exponents to be obtained for characterization. Specifically&#x02014;in addition to a range of methods operating in the frequency and time/frequency domains (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">2002</xref>)&#x02014;in the time domain, this is achieved by analyzing a range of statistical moments (&#x02212;&#x0221E; &#x0003C; <italic>q</italic> &#x0003C; &#x0002B; &#x0221E;) of the signal. In the monofractal case, a single <italic>q</italic>th order moment (i.e., the variance at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2) suffices for capturing the global roughness, <italic>H</italic>. However, for multifractals, a range of statistical moment orders are needed to obtain the generalized Hurst exponent, <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>). Submitting <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) to the multifractal formalism yields the H&#x000F6;lder exponent, <italic>h</italic>, reflecting the local roughness of the process, and then the multifractal spectrum, <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>), which is essentially analogous with a histogram of local fractality in the signal. Accordingly, <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) captures the moment-wise distribution of the singularity strength of local roughness or multifractal scaling in the temporal process (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2002</xref>; Ihlen, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">2012</xref>; Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>). We recently demonstrated that standard moment-based multifractal analyses were susceptible to signal inhomogeneity leading to spurious estimates of the multifractal spectrum. We resolved this issue by developing focus-based multifractal formalism (FMF), which replaced the standard&#x02014;essentially monofractal&#x02014;analysis for <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) by fitting an exact multifractal to the family of moment-wise scaling functions all at once by enforcing an expected value at signal length (termed <italic>focus</italic>) as a guiding reference in the fitting procedure (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>). FMF explicitly relied on a previous observation on the focus (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2002</xref>) and can be related to some earlier multifractal approaches (Struzik, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">1999</xref>; Struzik and Siebes, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">2002</xref>).</p>
<p>In the pure mathematical sense of the fractal concept, scaling should be present across an infinite range of scales; a property of ideal fractals with an exact generating algorithm (Mandelbrot, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">1982</xref>), such as, Cantor set and function (Cantor, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">1883</xref>). Fractality can be present in a statistical sense in sampled representations of temporal processes, as it is the case with fractional Gaussian noise (fGn) and Brownian motion (fBm; Mandelbrot and Van Ness, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">1968</xref>; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">2002</xref>). However, the estimation of fractality of even such exact fractal structures can become easily corrupted by the effect of sampling (see Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>), filters (Valencia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">2008</xref>), trends (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>), shuffling (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>), multiple fractal signal components (Thornton and Gilden, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">2005</xref>), or other scale-dependent influences, resulting in multimodal scaling functions.</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption><p>Scale-invariance cannot be revealed within inadequate scaling ranges. On synthesized monofractal signals of length <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 2<sup>14</sup>, the Hurst exponent as the measure of monofractality was estimated by the SSC method (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>) within a temporal window with a lower boundary, <italic>s</italic>&#x02032;, and an upper boundary set to <italic>N</italic>/2. The estimate of the generalized Hurst exponent at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2 [<italic>H</italic>(2)] was obtained on multifractal signals by the FMF-SSC method (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) within the same range of scales. DHM fractal: synthesized by the method of Davies and Harte (DHM; Davies and Harte, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">1987</xref>) at <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; 1.25; SSM fractal: synthesized by the SSM method (Saupe, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">1988</xref>); Cantor set and function generated at appropriate weight factors <italic>p</italic><sub>1</sub>, <italic>p</italic><sub>2</sub>, <italic>p</italic><sub>3</sub> (Cantor, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">1883</xref>; Mandelbrot, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">1982</xref>). Estimated Hurst and generalized Hurst exponents are displayed on an extended scale within the range of [0, 2]. Signal classes based on the extended <italic>H</italic> and <italic>H</italic>(2) are shown to the right for reference. Contracting scaling range&#x02014;by increasing <italic>s</italic>&#x02032;&#x02014;will render the information remaining in the signal for its analysis inadequate to demonstrate its scale-invariance (see the bias in reference of <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> progressively increasing with <italic>s</italic>&#x02032;). A standard treatment of scaling function multimodality typically results in contracted scaling ranges and thus results in a loss of valuable information on fractal scaling.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0001.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Many physical, natural, biological systems show multimodal, scale-invariant properties, for example, sunspot activities (Movahed et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">2006</xref>), river water levels (Rego et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">2013</xref>), human heartbeat time series (Peng et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">1995</xref>; Giera&#x00142;towski et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2012</xref>), neuronal discharge dynamics (Blesic et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">2003</xref>), human near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) signals (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>), local field potential (Bedard et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">2006</xref>), human electroencephalography (EEG) signals (Gifani et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">2007</xref>), rat blood oxygen level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI-BOLD) data (Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>), human gait trajectories (Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>), and neonate diffuse optical tomography data (White et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">2012</xref>). So far&#x02014;among the numerous possible scale-dependent influences&#x02014;only trends leading to artificial crossovers (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>) have been specifically assessed within such multimodal signals. Common among these examples is that multimodality emerges, e.g., by superposition of two or more coexisting multifractal processes. Thermodynamic analogies of multifractality (Stanley and Meakin, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">1988</xref>; Tel, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">1988</xref>; Arneodo et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">1995</xref>) have suggested that superpositioning could also lead to phase transition (Grassberger et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">1988</xref>; Muzy et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">1993</xref>; Arneodo et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">1995</xref>; Radons and Stoop, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">1996</xref>). Multimodality of the former case is seen in the initial step of multifractal formalism resulting in a <italic>scale-dependent</italic> impact on the scale-free pattern, while phase transition manifests itself at a later stage as a <italic>moment-dependent</italic> phenomenon captured as an inflected multiscale exponent, &#x003C4;(<italic>q</italic>), at a critical <italic>q</italic>. This latter case has been detailed in the literature due to its demonstrated physiological relevance (Roux et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">1999</xref>; Nicolay et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">2007</xref>; Kestener et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">2011</xref>); thus, our study focused on the former case of multimodality only.</p>
<p>As characterization of multifractality in the time domain requires assessing moment-wise scaling exponents (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>), multifractal multimodality should likewise also be described&#x02014;along with the respective scaling exponents&#x02014;in terms of moment-wise breakpoints or crossovers (Ludescher et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">2011</xref>; Schumann and Kantelhardt, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">2011</xref>; Giera&#x00142;towski et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2012</xref>; Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2B,C</xref>). In contrast, a mere presence of breakpoints or crossovers should by no means be taken as proof of multifractality (Matic et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">2015</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F2" position="float">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption><p>Different concepts for handling multifractal crossover. Exact scaling functions (solid lines) for a range of <italic>q</italic>s are shown in log-log plots. The components (multifractals <bold>A,B</bold>) separated by breakpoints&#x02014;at the scale <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub>&#x02014;and by crossovers&#x02014;at the scale <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub>&#x02014;are marked as gray circles. <bold>(A)</bold> Approaches in the literature for finding &#x0201C;crossovers&#x0201D; or &#x0201C;breakpoints&#x0201D; of bimodal multifractals along a single scaling function [i.e., log <italic>S</italic>(2)] should be regarded as vaguely defined (Schumann and Kantelhardt, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">2011</xref>). <bold>(B)</bold> Our concept of <italic>q</italic>-wise scaling range adaptive focus-based multifractal formalism. This approach employs iterative fitting for <italic>q</italic>-dependent crossover scales by enforcing the focus (black circle) of the scaling functions found at maximum signal length. Note that the point-like <italic>q</italic>-wise breakpoints separate two adjacent SRs occupied by distinct scale-invariant components of the multifractal scaling functions. <bold>(C)</bold> Scaling function decomposition with focus-based multifractal formalism utilizing an extended version of the iterative approach shown in <bold>(B)</bold>. It yields a complete decomposition of the overlapping scaling functions of the merging fractals/multifractals coexisting within the same SR.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0002.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Definition of &#x0201C;breakpoints&#x0201D; or &#x0201C;crossovers&#x0201D; appears inconsistent in the literature (Peng et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">1995</xref>; Iyengar et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">1996</xref>; Struzik et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62">1997</xref>; Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>; Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>; Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>; Rego et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">2013</xref>), and their extension to multifractal multimodality (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2A</xref>) is also lacking. In particular, recent works have either focused mostly on monofractal multimodality (Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>) or applied a monofractal approach to multimodal handling of multifractal signals (Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>; Rego et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">2013</xref>; Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2A</xref>).</p>
<p>Previously, &#x0201C;breakpoints&#x0201D; or &#x0201C;crossovers&#x0201D; were determined by &#x0201C;eyeballing&#x0201D; or by segmented line regression (Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>) through scaling ranges (SRs). The latter being a typical adaptive analysis that identifies adjacent SRs with different scaling separated by a point-like breakpoint. As breakpoint is not a point-like attribute of the scaling function, some approaches omitted the transient in its vicinity (Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>) or applied fitting with multi-parametric models (Struzik et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62">1997</xref>). Admittedly, the benefit of these approaches is that they allow an approximation of fractal descriptors without formulating any a priori concept on signal genesis. Nevertheless, empirical signals much too often result from co-sampled signal processes, whose scaling may overlap across their respective breakpoints (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2B</xref>); one such example is signal contamination by instrumental or biological noise. In these cases, the signal components obviously cross over around the apparent breakpoint (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2C</xref>). This perception of multimodal signal genesis calls for an adequate concept for handling crossovers based on a genuine multifractal approach.</p>
<p>Accordingly, our aims were (i) to decompose the moment-wise crossover of superimposed multifractal signals based on an additive model, (ii) to validate this method, (iii) to compare this approach with an enhanced&#x02014;moment-wise&#x02014;version of the segmented line regression method, and (iv) to demonstrate their applicability on exemplary empirical signals.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="materials and methods" id="s2">
<title>Materials and methods</title>
<p>Description of the methods of signal synthesis and empirical data acquisition are followed by introduction of two adaptive multifractal analyses of bi- or multimodal signals. The first approach is based on a <italic>q</italic>-wise identification of breakpoints along each and every scaling function as a step of signal pre-treatment, and hence is referred to as the <italic>q</italic>-wise scaling range adaptive (qSRA) method. The essence of the second method is to decompose the multifractal crossovers for all scaling functions of the analysis combined, thus achieving true scaling function decomposition (SFD) in a one-pass manner. As both apply to the regression scheme of our FMF (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>), these will be further referred to as the qSRA-FMF and SFD-FMF methods.</p>
<p>The multifractal algorithms, signal synthesis, and numerical tests were implemented in Matlab (The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA) with code written by the authors. The multifractal toolbox containing scripts described in this paper can be requested from the corresponding author.</p>
<sec>
<title>Investigated signal populations</title>
<sec>
<title>Synthesized monofractal time series</title>
<p>As described previously (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>), statistically self-affine time series of the fGn type with exact long-range-dependent structuring were generated by the Davies and Harte method (DHM; Davies and Harte, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">1987</xref>) at length, <italic>N</italic>, and pre-set Hurst exponent, <sup>fGn</sup><italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub>. fBm-type time series were produced by cumulatively summing (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>) their fGn counterparts, yielding a true extended Hurst exponent of <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; <sup>fBm</sup><italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; <sup>fGn</sup><italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0002B; 1. fBm-type time series were also produced directly at <italic>N</italic> and pre-set <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; <sup>fBm</sup><italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> by the spectral synthesis method (SSM; Saupe, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">1988</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Synthesized multifractal time series</title>
<p>Cantor sets and&#x02014;by their cumulative summation&#x02014;Cantor functions as examples of exact multifractal structuring were generated at pre-set weight factors. Statistical self-similar multifractals with known <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) were synthesized for testing purposes using the generalized binomial multifractal model (O&#x0015B;wi&#x00229;cimka et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">2006</xref>; Schumann and Kantelhardt, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">2011</xref>). The generating algorithm is an iterative process in which a stochastic binomial cascade is created at a given weight factor and at a given length. In the generalized method, the degree of correlation and the strength of multifractality can be separately tuned, the former being set with the Fourier Filtering Method; for further details see Schumann and Kantelhardt (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">2011</xref>) and Mukli et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Synthesized multimodal time series</title>
<p>After considering various numerical testing frameworks, we chose the DHM algorithm and Cantor functions as offering the best control over the cardinal parameters in our testing. The above-listed signals represent cases of unimodality with a single SR. Multimodal synthetic (or mock) signals with multiple SRs were created by adding these unimodal fractal time series of known attributes (<italic>N, H</italic><sub>true</sub>). Positioning of crossovers was controlled by setting the standard deviation (SD) ratios (i.e., focus ratio) of the signal components in addition to the differences in <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub>.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Sampled empirical time series</title>
<p>Human NIRS measurements using a NIRO 500 Cerebral Oxygen Monitor (Hamamatsu Photonics, Hersching, Germany) at a rate of 2 Hz were carried out to record the relative change in total hemoglobin concentration with a length of <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 16,384 data points (for details, see Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>). Human EEG signals were sampled with a length of <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 16,384 data points with eyes closed during random hand movements at 500 Hz using a Neurofax EEG System (see Acknowledgment; Pattnaik and Sarraf, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">in press</xref>). These empirical records were acquired from healthy volunteers above the pre-frontal area. Rat fMRI-BOLD data with a length of <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 4,096 data points were obtained by using a modified 11.7 T Bruker horizontal-bore spectrometer (Bruker AVANCE, Billerica, MA, USA) using a 1 H surface coil (1.4 cm diameter) with sequential sampling gradient echo planar imaging (EPI) sequence (Hyder et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">1995</xref>): field of view of 2.56 &#x000D7; 2.56 cm<sup>2</sup>; image matrix of 64 &#x000D7; 64; slice thickness of 2 mm; repetition time of 200 ms (i.e., 5 Hz of sampling frequency) and echo time of 13 ms; and voxel size of 400 &#x000D7; 400 &#x000D7; 2000 &#x003BC;m<sup>3</sup> (for further details see Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Multifractal analyses</title>
<p>According to its indirect concept, multifractal characterization of time series is performed by sequencing through the steps of scaling, regression, and singularity analyses of the multifractal formalism (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>). The output of the first step is the scaling function (<italic>S</italic>) obtained in the time domain [i.e., by DFA (detrended fluctuation analysis; Peng et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">1994</xref>), SSC (signal summation conversion; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>), or DMA (detrending moving average; Gu and Zhou, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">2010</xref>)] and in the time-frequency domain (i.e., by WTMM (wavelet transform modulus maxima; Muzy et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">1993</xref>) and WL (wavelet leader-based multifractal analysis methods; Jaffard, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">2004</xref>). <italic>S</italic> is calculated from the input signal (<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>) as a function of scale (<italic>s</italic>) and moment order (<italic>q</italic>) by obtaining the power mean of the measure (&#x003BC;) with <italic>q</italic> as the exponent.</p>
<disp-formula id="E1"><label>(1)</label><mml:math id="M1"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x003BC;</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where <italic>N</italic><sub><italic>s</italic></sub> stands for the number of non-overlapping windows, and <italic>v</italic> for different temporal positions within a particular signal segment of size <italic>s</italic>. For further details, see Kantelhardt et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2002</xref>) and Ihlen (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">2012</xref>).</p>
<p>Levels of moment order were selected from &#x02212;15 to 15 in increments of 1, based on (i) the findings of Grech and Pamu&#x00142;a (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">2012</xref>) and (ii) the scaling parameter (Clauset et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">2009</xref>) obtained from the thin-tailed distribution of our synthetic and empirical data. The scaling function of the signal was sampled in 100 logarithmically spaced scales, which is a much denser representation than dyadic sampling would be for a signal length <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 2<sup>14</sup>. Low and high temporal scales were excluded from our analyses (Cannon et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">1997</xref>; Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2002</xref>), resulting in a SR of 8 &#x02266; <italic>s</italic> &#x02266; <italic>N</italic>/2. The applied data were also tested by DFA with high-order detrending, effectively excluding an &#x0201C;artificial crossover&#x0201D; (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>). We did not use filtering, as it produces a breakpoint effectively splitting the SR (Valencia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">2008</xref>). Disregarding this scenario (Matic et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">2015</xref>) may well end up in the analysis of a filtering-ridden band for multifractality instead of the range of scale-invariance of the physiological signal.</p>
<sec>
<title>Focus-based multifractal method</title>
<p>The FMF (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) exploits the fact that the family of <italic>q</italic>-wise scaling functions yields a convergent structure merging at the coarsest scale, <italic>s</italic> &#x0003D; <italic>N</italic>. At this scale, the value defined in Equation (1) becomes <italic>q</italic>-independent yielding a &#x0201C;focus,&#x0201D; <italic>S</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>N</italic>). Enforcing <italic>S</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>N</italic>) as an analytical constraint improves the extraction of <italic>q</italic>-wise regression slopes for finite-length (by excluding inherently conflicting estimates due to the merely explicit emergence of this restriction) and thus offers a robust method for multifractal analysis of empirical data (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>; Ali et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">2016</xref>; Deligni&#x000E8;res et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2016</xref>), the very approach adopted in this work. Instead of independently performing repetitive monofractal analyses on a set of empirical scaling functions (Equation 2), FMF methods&#x02014;through minimizing the residual sum of squared errors, SSE&#x02014;iteratively find the best-fitting, true multifractal and assign it to the family of the evaluated scaling functions (Equation 3).</p>
<disp-formula id="E2"><label>(2)</label><mml:math id="M2"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E4"><label>(3)</label><mml:math id="M4"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>In Equation (2), <italic>x</italic> has two specific values (at <italic>x</italic> &#x0003D; 0 and in the case of the &#x0201C;focus&#x0201D; <italic>x</italic> &#x0003D; <italic>N</italic>); otherwise, it represents the scale, where the exact scale-dependent statistic is being evaluated. The case of <italic>x</italic> &#x0003D; <italic>N</italic> and represents the enforced constraint in Equation (3). Thus, according to FMF, a set of model (i.e., exact) scaling functions with iterated parameters&#x02014;&#x00124;[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q</italic>) and log &#x0015C;[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>N</italic>)&#x02014;are fitted all at once to the actual data set of the scaling functions. In order to obtain an overall measure of the goodness-of-fit of the FMF regression procedure, its mean squared error (MSE) was calculated according to Equation (21) of Mukli et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Moment-wise scaling range adaptivity method</title>
<p>The standard segmented line regression method is capable of finding breakpoints, <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub>, and also in the case of a superimposed signal (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>) approximating crossovers, <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub>. Equation (4) is an adaptation of the segmented line regression method for a bimodal scaling function, where <italic>s</italic>&#x02032; could be any particular temporal scale. To capture <italic>q</italic>-dependent breakpoints, we introduced a <italic>q</italic>-wise regression algorithm, broken down into three steps of Equations (4a&#x02013;c)</p>
<disp-formula id="E6"><label>(4a)</label><mml:math id="M6"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E8"><label>(4b)</label><mml:math id="M8"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E10"><label>(4c)</label><mml:math id="M10"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where indices <sup><italic>f</italic></sup> and <sup><italic>n</italic></sup> stand for different fractal processes: in our particular case uncorrelated (noise) and correlated (fractal) signals within a co-sampled arrangement, respectively. We chose noise and fractal signals as the constituents of a bimodal signal in describing our methods because this was the case for bimodal cerebral hemodynamic data reported earlier (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>) and is used in this study as an exemplary dataset. The breakpoint for a given moment is obtained at the minimum value of the SSE(<italic>q,s</italic>&#x02032;) function as the estimates, &#x00124;[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q</italic>) and log &#x0015C;[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q,x</italic>) for the fractal and noise components, respectively, are being refined during the iteration process. Further away from the breakpoint, in the low range of scales, the underlying noise with low <italic>H</italic> will dominate, while in the high range of scales, the fractal component with high <italic>H</italic> will dominate. However, in between the two, where the respective function values are commensurable, their fluctuations blend into a non-fractal segment, a so-called exclusion range (ER; Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>). Consequently, by excluding the ER from the analysis, the error in assessing the low and high <italic>H</italic>s will be smaller, while for the FMF analysis yielding <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>), the error will increase due to SR being contracted by the exclusion range. To find the ER, we used Equation (5) (a similar approach as Equation (20) of Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>) at a specific <italic>q</italic> and selected a range of scales with SSE(<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>&#x02032;) lower than SSE<sub><italic>tolerance</italic></sub> calculated at a preset level of tolerance (0 &#x02264; <italic>tolerance</italic> &#x02264; 1)</p>
<disp-formula id="E11"><label>(5)</label><mml:math id="M11"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>min</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>max</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>min</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02032;</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Any moment-to-moment inconsistencies in the regression analysis will upset the expected structural aspect of multifractal scaling functions known as the &#x0201C;<italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)-monotonicity&#x0201D; (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>), the monotonous drop of regression slopes of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) from <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; &#x02212;&#x0221E; to <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; &#x0002B;&#x0221E;, because in subsequent steps of multifractal formalism this automatically results in &#x0201C;inversed&#x0201D; or &#x0201C;corrupted&#x0201D; multifractal spectra. To eliminate this eventuality, the analytical constraints of <italic>H</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q</italic>) &#x0003E; <italic>H</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q</italic>-<italic>k</italic>) with <italic>k</italic> &#x0003E; 0 were enforced on the nested iterative processes of minimization. MSE was obtained from the sum of SSEs from respective FMF analyses see Equation (3) on the noise and fractal components separated by <italic>q</italic>-wise breakpoints.</p>
<fig id="F3" position="float">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption><p>Numerical demonstration of the moment-wise scaling range adaptivity method. A bimodal, multifractal structure&#x02013;function profile at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2 (solid black) was synthesized by DHM as the sum of fractal (<italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; 1.25) and noise (<italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; 0.5) signals with commensurable standard deviations. Regression slopes were determined by the DFA algorithm. The SSE(<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>&#x02032;) function (solid gray line) at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2 is derived from Equation (3). The qSRA method finds the breakpoint (<italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub>) at the minimum of this function. The exclusion range (ER, shown at a tolerance level of 20%) spans across scales where SSE(<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>&#x02032;) &#x0003C; SSE<sub><italic>tolerance</italic></sub> as calculated by Equation (5). In turn, the boundaries of the ER are set to the low and high edges of the adjacent scaling ranges for the underlying fractal and noise components, respectively. If <italic>tolerance</italic> &#x0003D; 0, then the ER is not excluded from the regression analysis (gray dashed regression lines). When <italic>tolerance</italic> &#x0003D; 0.2 (gray dotted regression lines), the estimated slopes better represent those of the underlying fractals. Other methods (such as, SSC) yielded isomorphic results (not shown).</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0003.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Scaling function decomposition method</title>
<p>As fluctuations from the two underlying signal components mutually contribute to each other&#x00027;s scaling functions near the breakpoint, they hold estimates deviating from the power-law relationship (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>). Taking the exemplary case of the SSC algorithm&#x02014;where the statistical measure is the standard deviation, SD&#x02014;this relationship is readily seen as a realization of the Bienaym&#x000E9; formula stating that in the case of uncorrelated variables, the variance (SD<sup>2</sup>) of their sum equals the sum of the respective variances (Bienaym&#x000E9;, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">1853</xref>). A generalization for the case of (anti)correlated signals is given in the Appendix (See <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary Material</xref>). Thus, the emerging scaling function (the power mean of SD) can be well estimated (Figure <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">A1</xref> in Supplementary Material) as the root sum square of the composing scaling functions as</p>
<disp-formula id="E13"><label>(6)</label><mml:math id="M13"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where the signal (<sup><italic>c</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>) used in the calculation of <italic>S</italic> is in square brackets with <italic>c</italic> being a positive integer referring to each and every of the <italic>N</italic><sub><italic>c</italic></sub> constituent signals.</p>
<fig id="F4" position="float">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption><p>Numerical demonstration of the scaling function decomposition method. The two signal components (fractal and noise) of the bimodal signal are the same as shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>. From these components, two bimodal signals were obtained: one by adding the raw signals (black) and the other their respective scaling functions (dashed gray). The three points represent exemplary values for this process at a given scale. The identical scaling functions demonstrate the validity of Equation (7) in the quantitative handling of bimodality&#x02014;or for that matter&#x02014;multimodality.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0004.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Earlier&#x02014;for the cases of resting-state cerebral hemodynamic fluctuations&#x02014;we showed that a fractally correlated signal is typically interwoven by uncorrelated noise (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>). In this simplest case of bimodality, the above derivation can be reduced to the following direct approximation</p>
<disp-formula id="E14"><label>(7)</label><mml:math id="M14"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mstyle mathsize='140%' displaystyle='true'><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mmultiscripts><mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02248;</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Accordingly, instead of fitting the two constituting fractally correlated components of a bimodal scaling function separately in two distinct processes, an exact bimodal model scaling function is reconstructed from two properly fitting power-law sets, based on the rule of addition Equation (7). Performing this one-pass regression on a log-log scale, the minimization of SSE&#x02014;with the generalized Hurst exponent and the focus of the scaling function being iterated&#x02014;results in the best fit of the exact bimodal model as follows</p>
<disp-formula id="E15"><label>(8a)</label><mml:math id="M15"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E17"><label>(8b)</label><mml:math id="M17"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E19"><label>(8c)</label><mml:math id="M19"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>A special application of this procedure is when one of the constituting components of the composite signal is known, which obviously reduces the number of tuning factors in the minimization process. Specifically, this component could be uncorrelated noise [i.e., instrument and/or biological noise (Peng et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">1995</xref>; Blesic et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">2003</xref>; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>)] with a fractal estimate of &#x00124; &#x02245; <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003D; 0.5 [as will be seen later in Section Performance of the SFD Method on an Empirical Bimodal Signal with Limited Definition (fMRI-BOLD)].</p>
<p>SFD is not at all limited to <italic>q</italic>-wise applications, but can also be performed along with FMF. In this case, the process of minimization of the FMF analysis needs to be modified by raising the number of tuning parameters Equation (9). Thus, both the two sets (<sup><italic>n</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub> and <sup><italic>f</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>) of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and their associated two foci, <italic>S</italic>(<italic>N</italic>), see Equations (9a and 9b) are being simultaneously adjusted in the same iterative process Equation (9c)</p>
<disp-formula id="E21"><label>(9a)</label><mml:math id="M21"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E23"><label>(9b)</label><mml:math id="M23"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E25"><label>(9c)</label><mml:math id="M25"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle='true'><mml:munderover><mml:mo>&#x02211;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>min</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mstyle></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Similarly to the qSRA method, <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)-monotonicity was granted by applying the same analytical constraints. The calculation of MSE from SSE Equation (9) was as explained in Section Focus-Based Multifractal Method.</p>
<p>The crossover scale, <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub>, of the decomposed scaling functions&#x02014;where the respective statistical values are in principle the same&#x02014;can be determined as the common value of the equations of the two underlying regression lines</p>
<disp-formula id="E27"><label>(10)</label><mml:math id="M27"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;&#x000A0;</mml:mtext><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Thus, the crossover scale can be calculated as</p>
<disp-formula id="E29"><label>(11)</label><mml:math id="M29"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>When enforcing the respective foci of the underlying components, the best value of the crossover scale is obtained as</p>
<disp-formula id="E30"><label>(12)</label><mml:math id="M30"><mml:mtable columnalign='left'><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi>log</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0005E;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>]</mml:mo><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Characterization of methods</title>
<p>To assess the precision of our novel approaches in analyzing multifractal bimodal signals, estimates were compared with multifractal endpoints derived from the singularity spectrum, <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>), (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>) and the results presented in the form of performance vignettes (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>). These endpoints are <italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub> [the H&#x000F6;lder exponent, <italic>h</italic>, at the peak of <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>)] and <italic>fwhm</italic> [the full width of <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) at half maximum] (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>). <italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub> captures the degree of correlation, and <italic>fwhm</italic> can be taken as the measure of the supporting base of the singularity spectrum (see Figure 3 of Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F5" position="float">
<label>Figure 5</label>
<caption><p>Impact of correlation and moment level on crossover scales. <bold>(A1)</bold> Twelve bimodal signals were generated by adding the scaling functions of 12 DHM-generated monofractal signals in length of 2<sup>12</sup>&#x02014;representing varying degrees of correlation&#x02014;and the same noise component of <italic>H</italic><sub>noise</sub> &#x0003D; 0.5. These signals were evaluated by scaling analysis for <italic>S</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)s. <bold>(B1)</bold> Scaling functions at seven moment levels of &#x0002B; 15 &#x02267; <italic>q</italic> &#x02267; &#x02212;15 in increments of five are shown for the two constituents for demonstrating the use of signal addition in a multifractal setting. As seen <bold>(A2)</bold>, the breakpoints (gray circles), the exclusion ranges (gray bars), and the true crossover scales (black circles) become shifted toward larger scales with an increasing degree of correlation with the only exception being when <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> is occupying the lower scales. In this case, the algorithm will settle with a pseudo breakpoint at much larger scales where, due to increasing fluctuations, the first large enough hump in <italic>S</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) will be accidentally taken for a breakpoint (<italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub>). When two multifractal components are merged, the analysis yields a similar distribution of breakpoints and crossover scales <bold>(B2)</bold> as determined by the actual span of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)s and the range of <italic>q</italic>s.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0005.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>For obtaining references for the estimates by subsequent SFD-FMF and qSRA-FMF methods, synthetic signal components were analyzed for their respective multifractal estimates with the FMF-DFA and FMF-SSC methods ((Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>); Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>). The characterization of our methods was completed by testing their performance on empirical NIRS, EEG, and fMRI-BOLD signals.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="s3">
<title>Results</title>
<sec>
<title>Impact of moment level on crossover scales</title>
<p>As seen in Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5A1,A2</xref>, the crossover between two components of markedly different correlation structuring is easy to detect. When <italic>H</italic> approaches <italic>H</italic><sub>noise</sub>&#x02014;as the true breakpoint becomes poorly defined&#x02014;the bimodal signal approaches unimodal. A similar scenario is seen with the impact of moment level (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5B1,B2</xref>), where the actual scale-wise distribution of crossovers will be determined by the dynamics of the <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) of the signal components.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Performance of qSRA and SFD methods on synthetic bimodal signals</title>
<p>In addition to the impact of correlation and moment level, the focus has a decisive impact on how markedly a signal component dominates the bi- or multimodality of a composite signal (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>). Accordingly, depending on the actual signal component, <italic>H</italic> and the component focus ratio (or <italic>SD</italic> ratio) together will impact the direction and magnitude of bias in the multifractal estimates (<italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub> and <italic>fwhm</italic>) for the two approaches alike. When the aim is to provide a characterization of multifractality for a bi- or multimodal multifractal signal (i.e., with <italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub> and <italic>fwhm</italic>, combined), the actual combination of <italic>H</italic> and the focus ratio should preferably be as close as possible to the diagonal band of low bias (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, combined).</p>
<fig id="F6" position="float">
<label>Figure 6</label>
<caption><p>Performance of the qSRA and SFD methods on synthesized signals. A set of DHM-generated multifractal signals of length <italic>N</italic> &#x0003D; 2<sup>12</sup> were created as a sum of fractal and noise components generated at <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub>[<sup><italic>f</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>] in steps of 0.1 and <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> [<sup><italic>n</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>] &#x0003D; 0.5 at pre-determined ratios of the respective foci. Values of correlation (<italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub>) and multifractality (<italic>fwhm</italic>) were estimated for the <italic>fractal</italic> and <italic>noise</italic> components by qSRA- and SFD-FMF-SSC methods. Their biases with respect to estimates by FMF-SSC alone were plotted in intensity coded performance vignettes (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>). The mean of the absolute biases for a <italic>combined</italic> evaluation of the fractal and noise components was also created and displayed in contour plots with the actual coordinates of the two empirical signals (EEG, NIRS) overlayed.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0006.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>An accurate multifractal output is at most partially qualified to assess performance. Determination of the proper method for a given signal is also a requirement. Lower MSE levels in the estimates of the SFD method when compared with those obtained by qSRA analysis suggests that the signals emerged as sums of two underlying scale-free processes, in which case the SFD method should be preferred. The performance of the SFD analysis was tested on the synthesized data pool used in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>. The crossover-model, eventually identified by comparing the MSEs of our two methods (qSRA and SFD), showed a sensitivity of 73%.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Performance of qSRA and SFD methods on high-definition empirical bimodal signals (EEG and NIRS)</title>
<p>High-definition empirical signals (EEG and NIRS in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>) were chosen for demonstrating the optimal performance of the qSRA and SFD methods on empirical data. Both of these data sets had a combination of <italic>H</italic> and focus ratio close to the low-bias band of these methods (as seen in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, combined). The SFD method proved superior on these signals over the qSRA approach, yielding lower MSE-values and values of a magnitude lower when compared with those of the unimodal analysis (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). Synthesizing the signal components based on the endpoint parameters of the SFD-FMF analysis (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>) yielded the same MSE when these components were added. This supports the notion that these bimodal signals could be treated as the sum of two concomitant processes, of which one could be fitted by an exact multifractal (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) and the other by an exact multifractal noise (Grech and Pamu&#x00142;a, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">2012</xref>). The multifractal analysis by the SFD FMF-SSC method for <italic>H</italic>(2) and <italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub> yielded a correlated level for the fractal and an uncorrelated level for the noise component. The multifractal measure (<italic>fwhm</italic>) was greater for the former than for the latter as shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>.</p>
<fig id="F7" position="float">
<label>Figure 7</label>
<caption><p>Performance of the qSRA and SFD approaches in handling multifractal bimodality on high-definition empirical signals (EEG and NIRS). EEG and NIRS signals recorded from the human brain were used as exemplary empirical signals in this demonstration. They were analyzed by qSRA- and SFD-FMF-SSC methods for <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) functions. Their synthetic equivalents (mocks) were created by adding fractal and noise components with foci, degree of correlations [<italic>H</italic>(2)], and multifractalities (&#x00394;<italic>H</italic><sub>15</sub>) matched to those of the empirical counterparts. As demonstrated by the closely matching true and estimated <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) functions for both the fractal and noise components of the mock signals, the SFD method proved clearly superior in handling the multifractal crossovers. Hence, the estimated <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) functions (A1, A2, C1, C2) should be regarded as realistic characterizations of the fractal and noise components of the bimodal empirical signals at the level of expectable bias shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0007.tif"/>
</fig>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption><p>The goodness-of-fit statistics (MSE) of the raw (FMF-SSC) and the two adaptive FMF-SSC methods (qSRA and SFD) for the empirical signals and their numerical equivalents shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead><tr>
<th valign="top" align="left"><bold>Method/Signal</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>EEG</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>mock EEG</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>NIRS</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>mock NIRS</bold></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">FMF-SSC</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.5226</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.5386</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.1388</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.2776</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">SRqA FMF-SSC</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0353</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0409</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0388</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0550</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">SFD FMF-SSC</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0311</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0320</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0237</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0260</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption><p>The endpoint parameters of SFD-FMF-SSC analysis of exemplary bimodal empirical signals shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead><tr>
<th valign="top" align="left"><bold>Method</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="left"><bold>Endpoint</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center" colspan="2" style="border-bottom: thin solid #000000;"><bold>EEG</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center" colspan="2" style="border-bottom: thin solid #000000;"><bold>NIRS</bold></th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th/>
<th/>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>Noise</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>Fractal</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>Noise</bold></th>
<th valign="top" align="center"><bold>Fractal</bold></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">SFD FMF-SSC</td>
<td valign="top" align="left"><italic>h<sub>max</sub></italic></td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.41</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1.83</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.55</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1.26</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td/>
<td valign="top" align="left"><italic>fwhm</italic></td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.18</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.66</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.24</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.54</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>The scaling functions for the EEG and NIRS data sets are shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref>. The estimated crossover scale of the human EEG is 257 ms at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2 and in case of NIRS records is 46 s at <italic>q</italic> &#x0003D; 2 (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref>). This demonstrates that the identified moment-wise crossover scales correspond well with characteristic boundaries between the theta and delta bands of the EEG and, in the case of NIRS signals, the transient is in-between the low- (Biswal et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2010</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>) and high-frequency fluctuations (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref>). In this particular case, our analyses confirmed that bimodality in the analyzed EEG and NIRS signals (recorded from the human brain cortex) should not be regarded as a scale-dependent imprint of a transfer function but as one resulting from the superposition of random noise and correlated multifractal processes (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref> and Tables <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>, <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F8" position="float">
<label>Figure 8</label>
<caption><p>Scaling function representation of empirical signals interpreted by our SFD-FMF approach. The EEG and NIRS scaling functions were used in the analysis shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>. For the properties of the EEG, NIRS, and fMRI signals see Section Methods. Shown are the respective scaling functions (solid lines), foci (black circles), and crossover scaling function values (gray circles). For further details, see the text.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0008.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Performance of the SFD method on an empirical bimodal signal with limited definition (fMRI-BOLD)</title>
<p>Rodent fMRI-BOLD imaging data of limited definition (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>) was chosen to demonstrate the performance of our SFD method on scans of bimodal BOLD time series data obtained across a section at the level of the bregma (Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>; Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9A</xref>). Criteria of 0.5 &#x0003C; <italic>H</italic>[<sup><italic>f</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](2) &#x0003C; 2, <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> within the full available SR, and 0.1 &#x0003C; <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub>/<italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> &#x0003C; 10 yielded valid estimates of crossovers with MSE:SFD-FMF &#x0003C; MSE:qSRA-FMF at a rate of 68%. Accordingly, this assessment led to frequent dropouts in the parametric images at locations with extreme <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> (data not shown). We could, however, make the performance of the SFD method robust on limited-resolution BOLD data by exploiting the fact that a ubiquitous uncorrelated component with minor variations was present in the scaling functions throughout the section (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9A</xref>) and thus could be used as a default in the analysis. Building on the maximal precision of the SFD method as demonstrated on synthetic signals (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>), this default component was determined in a voxel with a mid-scale <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9A,C</xref>, marked in red). A reliable assessment of <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub>(<italic>q</italic>) resulted in consistent estimates of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>fwhm</italic> as seen in the parametric maps in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9D</xref>. Note that, in our case, because of the impact of the uncorrelated component, lower crossover scales appeared to be associated with lower Hurst exponent values in cortical areas with the exception of the cingulate cortex, where the correlated component was very dominant. This yielded apparently inverse patterns in the <italic>H</italic>[<sup><italic>f</italic></sup><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](2) and <italic>H</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](2) maps (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9B,D</xref>). Furthermore, the crossover scale seen in the human NIRS signal (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref>) fell within the range of crossover scales found in the rodent fMRI-BOLD image data (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9D</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F9" position="float">
<label>Figure 9</label>
<caption><p>Performance of the SFD approach in handling multifractal bimodality on a limited-definition empirical signal (fMRI-BOLD). Results of voxel-wise analysis of rat fMRI-BOLD scan-based time series data (Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>) by the SFD-FMF method are shown along with those obtained by the FMF method for comparison. <bold>(A)</bold>: Representative scaling functions for cortical (C), subcortical (S), and basal (B) voxels are shown. The uncorrelated component determined from a voxel with mid-range <italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub> [marked in red in <bold>(A,C)</bold>] that fits very well as a ubiquitous noise component for all scaling functions. Standard, unimodal FMF-based analysis yielded the multifractal metric maps seen in <bold>(B)</bold>. The concept of the SFD-FMF-based adaptive, bimodal analysis is shown in <bold>(C)</bold>. The ubiquitous uncorrelated component (red) seen in <bold>(A)</bold> was used as default in decomposing the correlated (fractal) component for all scaling functions (see the representative black and blue functions with their associated foci). Parametric maps for the second moment crossover scale, Hurst exponent, and full-width-at-half-maximum of the multifractal singularity strength spectrum along with the focus of the generalized Hurst exponent function are seen in <bold>(D)</bold>. Note that only multimodal analysis can reveal the real topology of multifractality in the brain <bold>(D)</bold> that cannot possibly be captured by unimodal analysis <bold>(B)</bold>.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0009.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion" id="s4">
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>We reported here on the SFD-FMF method as a genuinely multifractal approach to decompose the scale-free constituents of empirical bimodal signals by combining our multifractal formalism (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) with the use of the Bienaym&#x000E9; formula (Bienaym&#x000E9;, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">1853</xref>). We also developed qSRA-FMF, a moment- and FMF-based variant of the segmented line regression method (Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>) in order to obtain an MSE-based reference for discerning (i) additive from (ii) non-additive forms of signal genesis (see Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2A,B</xref>, respectively). Goodness-of-fit statistics&#x02014;for given bimodal characteristics&#x02014;were used as a guide in choosing between estimates obtained by the SFD-FMF or qSRA-FMF methods, as respectively valid. Accordingly, based on low MSE values, when analyzing bimodal EEG, NIRS, and fMRI-BOLD data we could demonstrate that these signals resulted from superposition. When applied to high-definition empirical signals (EEG, NIRS) with high degrees of freedom, these methods performed in a robust manner. Sub-optimally sampled physiological processes&#x02014;such as, the exemplary fMRI-BOLD imaging data&#x02014;however, obviously imposed limitations to the extent to which these methods could reveal bimodality in the signals; a circumstance that we could overcome by reducing the degrees of freedom in the analysis, thus yielding a robust performance on limited-definition fMRI-BOLD signals too.</p>
<sec>
<title>Physiological significance</title>
<p>Complex dynamics in biological systems&#x02014;like that of the brain&#x02014;have recently become the focus of intensive research as they represent an essential attribute for normal functioning (Bullmore et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">2009</xref>). Staying with the example of the brain, multifractality is regarded as one of the main facets of complex, scale-free dynamics emerging from the underlying immense neuronal networks (Bullmore et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">2009</xref>; Bullmore and Sporns, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">2009</xref>). Multifractal characterization of scaling is inherently complex. It cannot be applied to empirical data without defining the application criteria in terms of the properties of the empirical signals in which resting-state brain dynamics are captured (i.e., EEG, MEG, NIRS, fMRI-BOLD; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>). One such important property is multi- or bimodality that was the subject of this study.</p>
<p>The standard moment-based analyses of multifractal behavior, operating on the basis of an assumed unimodal model, estimates the scaling exponents within a single SR. This approach, however, will lead to erroneous estimates if unimodality does not hold. Indeed, it has been shown that EEG, NIRS, and fMRI-BOLD signals (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>; Gifani et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">2007</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>) were in fact multimodal, a signal property that, therefore, must be taken into consideration in their multifractal characterization. To this end, our SFD method provides a means for decomposing the signal components of a bimodal signal with each part having its own set of single SRs needed to meet the aforementioned criteria for scale-invariance.</p>
<p>Beyond obtaining correct estimates for the scaling exponents, an understanding of the signal genesis in reference to the underlying physiological factors should be the subject of future research. Accordingly, in this work, we were motivated to develop the multifractal signal decomposition methods as needed and likely useful instruments to study multimodal signal genesis, in particular in the case of hemodynamic signals&#x02014;such as, NIRS or fMRI-BOLD&#x02014;that are widely used in brain connectivity research (Biswal et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2010</xref>; Mesquita et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">2010</xref>). Both could be modeled as the convoluted product of ongoing regional neuronal activity (EEG) and the regional hemodynamic response function (HRF; Liu et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">2011</xref>). As HRF is equivalent to low-pass filtering, it should render the hemodynamic signal multimodal with a breakpoint in its scaling function. Our qSRA and SFD methods can readily separate a breakpoint manifesting as signal convolution from a crossover resulting from signal superpositioning; we found the latter to be the case with the empirical signals studied. Despite its fundamental importance in signal genesis, this issue has not yet been addressed in the field of physiology or in particular in that of brain dynamics. Thus, our results on multifractal crossovers in the exemplary resting-state NIRS and fMRI-BOLD signals should be regarded as not only relevant but also promising in that our qSRA and SFD methods can reveal various facets of hemodynamic signal genesis in the brain.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Crossover scales</title>
<p>Our FMF formalism (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) as implemented in SFD-FMF offers an explicit framework to deal with the crossover of empirical multifractals. Incorporating the focus in the regression scheme of the SFD-FMF method allows for a robust estimation of crossovers in empirical signals. Omitting the use of the focus in guiding the regression process of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)&#x02014;as is the case with standard methods like MF-DFA (Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">2002</xref>; Ihlen, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">2012</xref>)&#x02014;would potentially upset the moment-wise order of their independently obtained regression slopes. Ensuring such order of regression slopes in <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) is essential in meeting the application criteria of the Legendre transformation incorporated in the multifractal formalism (Frisch and Parisi, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>; Halsey et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">1986</xref>; Bacry et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">1993</xref>) and thus preventing outcomes with inversed or corrupted singularity spectra (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>; Deligni&#x000E8;res et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2016</xref>). To this end, Giera&#x00142;towski et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2012</xref>) attempted to circumvent the use of the Legendre transformation, known to be an inherently critical step in the formalism, with the multiscale assessment of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) (termed multiscale multifractal analysis, MMA). Nevertheless, a &#x0201C;reversed&#x0201D; <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>)&#x02014;i.e., <italic>H</italic> increasing with <italic>q</italic>&#x02014;as shown in Figure 17 of Giera&#x00142;towski et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2012</xref>) does evidently fail in meeting the above-mentioned criterion for a monotonously declining <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>) with increasing <italic>q</italic>s. This also explains the artifacts in the singularity spectra seen in their Figure 6. While their interpretation of the change of the average slope of the scaling function profile at some scale, <italic>s</italic>, would not suffice for multifractal analysis complete with singularity spectrum, it can still approximate breakpoints and/or crossover scales, but without discerning these phenomena. Nevertheless, there are other effective approaches to circumvent the difficulties associated with the use of the Legendere in obtaining <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) (Jensen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">1987</xref>; Chhabra et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">1989</xref>).</p>
<sec>
<title>Impact of component focus ratio and temporal correlation</title>
<p>Additive random or correlated noise readily upsets multifractal analysis as demonstrated by Ludescher et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">2011</xref>). In particular, when random noise with increasing amplitudes is added to a multifractal signal, the <italic>q</italic>-wise scaling function obtained by standard tools such as, MF-DFA will exhibit crossovers gradually shifting to larger scales. Accordingly, <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) evaluated within the range of chosen scales becomes dominated by that of the added noise component. While the aim of these authors was not to provide a solution for handling noise contamination, they made an important contribution demonstrating that added noise propagates across scales ultimately leading to spurious results in multifractal analysis.</p>
<p>As for the impact of the component focus ratio (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>), from the above-mentioned geometrical properties of multifractal scaling functions and the relationships shown in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5A2</xref> it follows that the crossover scale is low when both <italic>H</italic> and the component focus ratio are low (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, vignettes in lower left corner). Conversely, it is high when both <italic>H</italic> and the component focus ratio are high (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, vignettes in upper right corner). In between these extremes, a diagonal band of low bias due to the impact of mid-range crossover scales in the data is seen (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, bottom row) where the presence of merging scale-free patterns can be statistically confirmed (Clauset et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">2009</xref>). When&#x02014;due to the actual representation of scaling in the empirical data&#x02014;the analysis is not performed within this optimized range, the signal definition should be improved: crossover scales that are much too low require an increased sampling rate, those that are much too high call for a longer signal to be collected (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">2002</xref>).</p>
<p>There are cases when the superposition of two fractal components yields a composite signal with a crossover falling outside the observed range of scales (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F10">10</xref>). The multifractal spectrum in this case is typically asymmetric (Dro&#x0017C;d&#x0017C; and O&#x0015B;wi&#x00119;cimka, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">2015</xref>). While under these conditions the crossover is not directly accessible to our SFD-based analysis, our additive model still allows for its characterization and offers an explanation for the asymmetry in <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>). This way, a composite process yielding asymmetric <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) can be modeled too. Asymmetric <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) can also be interpreted as a phase transition (Grassberger et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">1988</xref>; Muzy et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">1993</xref>; Arneodo et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">1995</xref>; Radons and Stoop, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">1996</xref>) based on the deep analogy that exists between the multifractal formalism and equilibrium statistical thermodynamics (Stanley and Meakin, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">1988</xref>; Tel, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">1988</xref>; Arneodo et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">1995</xref>). According to this model, the superimposed partition functions under and above a critical <italic>q</italic> and the signals mutually perturb each other to a slight extent (Arneodo et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">1995</xref>); thus, the partition function, &#x003C4;(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) are always dominated by a single component under which condition the Bienaym&#x000E9; formula yields similar results in describing the superposition (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31"><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x02248;</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>&#x0002B;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
<fig id="F10" position="float">
<label>Figure 10</label>
<caption><p>Representation of superimposed signal components in multifractal formalism. In <bold>(A)</bold>, scaling functions of a multifractal noise and a multifractal were generated by DHM (black) and Cantor function (red), respectively at moment levels of &#x0002B;15 and &#x02212;15 with crossover (i.e., the intercept of scaling functions at identical <italic>q</italic> levels) falling outside the observed range of scales (indicated by the arrow bar). Their corresponding <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) are shown in <bold>(C,D)</bold>. The superimposed functions are indicated in green. Note that under the condition when the crossover falls outside the range of scales used in the analysis, the resulting <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) becomes asymmetric in that the singularity strengths corresponding to multifractal noise and multifractal components end up being segregated in the negative and positive ranges of <italic>q</italic>, respectively. Hence, in this case the decomposition of the two signal components in <italic>S</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) for <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) across &#x02212;15 &#x02264; <italic>q</italic> &#x02264; &#x0002B; 15 is not possible. In <bold>(D&#x02013;G)</bold>, a collage is provided for component representation in <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) for some typical cases depending on which of the components dominates the scale- and moment-wise dynamics. <bold>(D)</bold> Case of no crossover within the observed range of scales due to comparable foci and overlapping <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) described in details in <bold>(A&#x02013;C)</bold> note that this is the case of <italic>q</italic>-dependent phase transition where the dominance is <italic>q</italic>-wise, only resulting in a composite <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) with no possibility of decomposition. <bold>(E)</bold> Case of no crossover and no composite <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) due to the dominance of the multifractal. <bold>(F)</bold> Case of crossover with no dominance yielding decomposable <italic>S</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and thus two separate <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>)s for the components. <bold>(G)</bold> Case of no crossover and no composite <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) due to the dominance of the multifractal noise. Note that signal decomposition of the composite <italic>S</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) by our SFD approach is possible only in the case of F when crossover is present across the range of observation across a wide range of moment levels yielding a complete description of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) and <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>) of the components.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0010.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Impact of moment level</title>
<p>In a scaling function representation of empirical temporal multifractality, the crossover scale for the chosen smallest negative moment is the largest and it becomes the smallest at the largest positive moment (see for example Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5B2</xref>). This moment-wise distribution of crossover scales emerges from the geometrical underpinnings of FMF (see Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2C</xref>) and the way <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)-dependence is formulated in Equation (12) yielding the crossover scale itself. As crossover scales and breakpoints are similar manifestations of scaling, breakpoints should also be captured in a moment-wise manner.</p>
<p>The significance of the breakpoint in the analysis of bi- or multimodal signals has already been recognized in the literature (Peng et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">1995</xref>; Kantelhardt et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">2001</xref>; Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>; Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>; Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>). However, disregarding their moment-wise nature (Ge and Leung, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">2013</xref>) distorts the acquired <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)s with breakpoints falling outside the proper SR. This generates uneven error propagation across the moments in the case of standard multifractal methods (Ludescher et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">2011</xref>), or introduces a slight but global error when FMF methods are applied. To the best of our knowledge, the qSRA- and SFD-FMF methods should be regarded as first attempts to carry out genuinely adaptive multifractal analyses on bi- or multimodal signals in a properly designed, moment-wise manner. They can readily be combined with various fractal and multifractal tools as their adaptive step, thus opening new possibilities for future applications.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Significance of the fGn-fBm framework</title>
<p>Mono- and multifractal analyses alike have been shown to benefit from the fGn-fBm fractal signal model of Mandelbrot and Van Ness (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">1968</xref>) as implemented by Eke et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>). Despite its simplicity, this model captures the most fundamental properties of scale-free signals as realizations of fGn and fBm processes. These two signal classes are mutually convertible via cumulative summation or differencing of their subsequent values leading to an increase or decrease in their extended <italic>H</italic> by 1, respectively. As seen in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F11">11</xref>, methods differ in the range in which they yield minimal-bias estimates of extended <italic>H</italic> across the fGn-fBm framework. A multimodal signal may well contain components with <italic>H</italic> falling above or below the minimal-bias range. Hence, signal classification by methods such as, SSC (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">2000</xref>) should be incorporated as a first step in the analysis. The actual implementation is by repetitive signal conversion until a difference in two successive <italic>H</italic> estimates is found of &#x0007E;1. All of our signals and signal components proved one or other of the two classes of the fGn-fBm dichotomy. This way of handling signal classes in fractal analyses should reconcile issues seen with other adaptive approaches (Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F11" position="float">
<label>Figure 11</label>
<caption><p>Performance of various fractal algorithms within the fGn-fBm framework on synthetic signals. Exact monofractal time series were generated by DHM for 0 &#x0003C; <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003C; 1. Using the conversion rule of the framework, signals for &#x02212;1&#x0003C; <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> &#x0003C; 4 were created by differencing (diff) and cumulative summation (cumsum) to obtain differenced fGn and summed fBm signals, respectively. Bias, as the absolute value of the difference of estimated and known <italic>H</italic>s, was trimmed to [0, 2]. Note that each of these methods has a range of <italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub> with minimal bias indicated by arrows and referred to as the <italic>H</italic>-window for the method. Above and below the <italic>H</italic>-window, estimates become increasingly biased due to saturation.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0011.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Comparing overall performances and limitations of qSRA and SFD methods</title>
<p>The precision of the qSRA method increases with the level of tolerance, which in turn results in contracted SRs. This tends to weaken the estimates of <italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>) due to falling short of securing wide enough scale-invariance (as seen in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>). This effect is altogether eliminated by the SFD method, which makes use of all the data of the merging signal components.</p>
<p>Our SFD method was validated against synthetic signals (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>, and Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). It outperformed the qSRA method for low-scale crossovers as the latter was shown to be susceptible to increased fluctuations typically seen in the large-scale region with limited number of available non-overlapping windows (Cannon et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">1997</xref>). Hence, qSRA tends to locate the breakpoint for spuriously high scales (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>). Multimodal scaling functions may deviate from the exact segmented line regression model near the breakpoint (Kuznetsov et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">2013</xref>). This phenomenon always appears in superimposed fractals or multifractals, and can be modeled by added scaling functions (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F12">12</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F12" position="float">
<label>Figure 12</label>
<caption><p>Breakpoints and crossover scales of superposition-type bimodality cannot possibly be identical. <bold>(A)</bold> Component scaling functions (fractal and noise) applied in Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref> were used (solid black) to demonstrate the discrepancy in the underlying fractal components estimated by qSRA-FMF (light gray) and SFD-FMF (gray) methods. <bold>(B)</bold> The vicinity around the true crossover is shown enlarged. Note the difference between the true crossover scale and its estimate by SFD-FMF and the breakpoint estimated by qSRA-FMF. The former is due to the limited precision of the estimation by SFD-FMF, which both in principle and practice can be decreased. The latter cannot be minimized by improving the precision of qSRA-FMF owing to conceptual limitations preventing minimization of the difference between the true crossover scale and its estimation by a breakpoint. <bold>(C)</bold> Composite scaling functions were obtained by superpositioning the component time series (black line) or by applying the best fitted scheme of SFD-FMF and qSRA-FMF methods, respectively.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-08-00533-g0012.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Significance of the design concept</title>
<p>The SFD approach is built around the notion that the multimodality emerges from the superposition of multiple and typically scale-free signal components. Multimodal multifractal scaling functions can also be produced by non-fractal generators like the infinitely divisible cascades (Chainais, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">2007</xref>), filters, etc. Only specific generator models can adequately treat scale-dependent dynamics in the multimodal processes. As such, causal models are typically unavailable; our qSRA method can offer a phenomenological solution. Thus, where a causal generator model is sought, analysis by SFD should be preferred over that by qSRA. As the number of modeling parameters are the same in both cases, a smaller level of goodness-of-fit statistics (i.e., MSE, SSE) can indicate which of the two seems a realistic model for a particular signal (for a demonstration see Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7">7</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9</xref>). Performance of our methods and their discriminating power evidently depend on empirical signal definition (length, sampling, non-fractal contamination, etc.) as seen in the cases of our exemplary applications to high-definition EEG and NIRS, and limited-definition fMRI-BOLD signals.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Performance of qSRA and SFD methods on empirical signals</title>
<sec>
<title>Human EEG and NIRS signals</title>
<p>The crossover between the EEG signal components was found at the boundary between the &#x003B4; and &#x003B8; bands (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8">8</xref>) of EEG classification. An independent &#x003B4; and &#x003B8; rhythm has already been proposed due to the significant interregional gap in synchrony (Mormann et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">2008</xref>; Fetterhoff et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">2015</xref>). Our current findings also prove the presence of an independent multifractal &#x003B4; rhythm. The NIRS signal was also found to be the sum of temporally correlated, scale-free fluctuations dominated by low frequencies (i.e., low-frequency fluctuations) and uncorrelated [but not instrumental (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>)] noise.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Rodent fMRI-BOLD imaging data</title>
<p>Resting-state brain dynamics as captured in fMRI-BOLD fluctuations is powered by ongoing neurodynamics spreading across the functional connections of a fractally organized anatomical network of an immense neuronal pool (Bullmore et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">2009</xref>; Werner, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">2010</xref>). Previously, we demonstrated that the resting-state fMRI-BOLD signal in an animal (Herman et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">2011</xref>) and the fNIRS signal in a human model (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">2006</xref>), alike, were bimodal temporal fractals. Thus, subject to future but likely advances in fMRI-BOLD technology, an improved signal definition may likely reveal bimodality in human fMRI-BOLD signals too. However, due to limitations inherent to the current fMRI-BOLD technology (Eke et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2012</xref>), their scale-free character&#x02014;especially in cases of bimodality&#x02014;is hard to capture (see Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F12">12</xref>). Accordingly, while the SFD analysis yielded valid estimates of crossovers in a sizable fraction of the scanned voxels, still&#x02014;depending on the correlation level and component focus ratio&#x02014;numerous crossover estimates&#x02014;due to sub-optimal data acquisition&#x02014;proved invalid at extreme scales. This severely upset the topology of the multifractal parametric maps and prompted us to look for justifiable grounds to reduce the degree of freedom in finding breakpoints and/or crossovers in an attempt to improve the performance of the analysis. We did indeed find that the uncorrelated components of the scaling functions could be taken as default throughout the voxels of the scan. This uncorrelated component was determined at a site (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9</xref>) where the precision of the method has been shown to be maximal in tests on synthetic signals (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6">6</xref>). This procedure effectively compensated for the limited definition in the BOLD signals as seen in the enhanced topology of the parametric maps (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F9">9D</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s5">
<title>Conclusions and future perspectives</title>
<p>The issue of bimodality presents a major challenge when it comes to multifractal analysis of complex biological signals. We reported a novel approach (SFD-FMF method) as a genuinely multifractal tool to decompose the scale-free components of empirical bimodal signals by combining our multifractal formalism (Mukli et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">2015</xref>) with the use of the Bienaym&#x000E9; formula (Bienaym&#x000E9;, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">1853</xref>). We also developed a moment- and FMF-based variant of the segmented line regression algorithm (qSRA-FMF method) to discern additive from non-additive forms of signal genesis based on respective goodness-of-fit statistics. When applied to high-definition empirical signals (EEG, NIRS), these methods performed in a robust manner. The performance on sub-optimally sampled physiological signals is expected to be weaker; a circumstance that we could overcome by reducing the degree of freedom of the analysis, thus restoring a robust performance of the SFD-FMF and qSRA-FMF methods on a limited-definition fMRI-BOLD imaging dataset too. These methods offer the means to identify signal generators in physiological processes. Most importantly, they open ways to characterize the topology of key multifractal metrics in the brain emerging from its complex network dynamics.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s6">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>ZN developed the method and wrote the manuscript. PM performed numerical tests and analyzed empirical datasets for demonstration purposes. PH provided fMRI BOLD scans for demonstrational purposes. AE helped developing and writing the manuscript and provided conceptual guidance in the study.</p>
<sec>
<title>Conflict of interest statement</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<ack><p>The authors acknowledge the use of the EEG data provided as a downloadable file last accessed on February 17, 2015, at <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://sites.google.com/site/projectbci">https://sites.google.com/site/projectbci</ext-link> by A. Yazin of National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan. The authors declare no conflict of interest.</p>
</ack>
<sec sec-type="supplementary-material" id="s7">
<title>Supplementary material</title>
<p>The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2017.00533/full#supplementary-material">http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2017.00533/full#supplementary-material</ext-link></p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Image1.pdf" id="SM1" mimetype="application/pdf" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ali</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kadum</surname> <given-names>H. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cal</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Focused-based multifractal analysis of the wake in a wind turbine array utilizing proper orthogonal decomposition</article-title>. <source>J. Renew. Sustain. Energy</source> <volume>8</volume>, <fpage>063301</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>063319</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1063/1.4968032</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Arneodo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bacry</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Muzy</surname> <given-names>J. F.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>The thermodynamics of fractals revisited with wavelets</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>213</volume>, <fpage>232</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>275</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0378-4371(94)00163-N</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bacry</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Muzy</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arn&#x000E9;odo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Singularity spectrum of fractal signals from wavelet analysis: exact results</article-title>. <source>J. Stat. Phys.</source> <volume>70</volume>, <fpage>635</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>674</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF01053588</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bedard</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kroger</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Destexhe</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Does the 1/f frequency scaling of brain signals reflect self-organized critical states?</article-title> <source>Phys. Rev. Lett.</source> <volume>97</volume>, <fpage>118101</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>118104</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.118102</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17025932</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bienaym&#x000E9;</surname> <given-names>I.-J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1853</year>). <article-title>Consid&#x000E9;rations &#x000E0; l&#x00027;appui de la d&#x000E9;couverte de Laplace sur la loi de probabilit&#x000E9; dans la m&#x000E9;thode des moindres carr&#x000E9;s</article-title>. <source>Crit. Rev. Acad. Sci.</source> <volume>37</volume>, <fpage>5</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>13</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Biswal</surname> <given-names>B. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mennes</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zuo</surname> <given-names>X. N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gohel</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kelly</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>S. M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Toward discovery science of human brain function</article-title>. <source>Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.</source> <volume>107</volume>, <fpage>4734</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4739</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.0911855107</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20176931</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Blesic</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Milosevic</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stratimirovic</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ljubisavljevic</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Detecting long-range correlations in time series of neuronal discharges</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>330</volume>, <fpage>391</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>399</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2003.09.002</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bullmore</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Barnes</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bassett</surname> <given-names>D. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fornito</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kitzbichler</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meunier</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Generic aspects of complexity in brain imaging data and other biological systems</article-title>. <source>Neuroimage</source> <volume>47</volume>, <fpage>1125</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1134</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.032</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19460447</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bullmore</surname> <given-names>E. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sporns</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems</article-title>. <source>Nat. Rev. Neurosci.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>186</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>198</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nrn2575</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19190637</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cannon</surname> <given-names>M. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Percival</surname> <given-names>D. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Caccia</surname> <given-names>D. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Raymond</surname> <given-names>G. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bassingthwaighte</surname> <given-names>J. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Evaluating scaled windowed variance methods for estimating the Hurst coefficient of time series</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>241</volume>, <fpage>606</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>626</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0378-4371(97)00252-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22049250</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cantor</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1883</year>). <article-title>Ueber unendliche, lineare Punktmannichfaltigkeiten</article-title>. <source>Mathematische Annalen</source> <volume>21</volume>, <fpage>545</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>591</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF01446819</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chainais</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Infinitely divisible cascades to model the statistics of natural images</article-title>. <source>IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.</source> <volume>29</volume>, <fpage>2105</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2119</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1109/TPAMI.2007.1113</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17934221</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chhabra</surname> <given-names>A. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meneveau</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jensen</surname> <given-names>R. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sreenivasan</surname> <given-names>K. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Direct determination of the f (alpha) singularity spectrum and its application to fully-developed turbulence</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. A</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>5284</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5294</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevA.40.5284</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9902794</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Clauset</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shalizi</surname> <given-names>C. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Newman</surname> <given-names>M. E. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Power-law distributions in empirical data</article-title>. <source>SIAM Rev.</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>661</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>703</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1137/070710111</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Davies</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Harte</surname> <given-names>D. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Test for Hurst effect</article-title>. <source>Biometrika</source> <volume>74</volume>, <fpage>95</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>101</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/biomet/74.1.95</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Deligni&#x000E8;res</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Almurad</surname> <given-names>Z. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Roume</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Marmelat</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Multifractal signatures of complexity matching</article-title>. <source>Exp. Brain Res.</source> <volume>234</volume>, <fpage>2773</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2785</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00221-016-4679-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27225255</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dro&#x0017C;d&#x0017C;</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>O&#x0015B;wi&#x00119;cimka</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Detecting and interpreting distortions in hierarchical organization of complex time series</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E</source> <volume>91</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevE.91.030902</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25871039</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Herm&#x000E1;n</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bassingthwaighte</surname> <given-names>J. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Raymond</surname> <given-names>G. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Percival</surname> <given-names>D. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cannon</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Physiological time series: distinguishing fractal noises from motions</article-title>. <source>Pflugers Arch.</source> <volume>439</volume>, <fpage>403</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>415</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s004249900135</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10678736</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Herm&#x000E1;n</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hajnal</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Fractal and noisy CBV dynamics in humans: influence of age and gender</article-title>. <source>J. Cerebr. Blood Flow Metab.</source> <volume>26</volume>, <fpage>891</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>898</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600243</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16292253</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Herman</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kocsis</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kozak</surname> <given-names>L. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Fractal characterization of complexity in temporal physiological signals</article-title>. <source>Physiol. Meas.</source> <volume>23</volume>, <fpage>R1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>R38</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/0967-3334/23/1/201</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11876246</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Herman</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sanganahalli</surname> <given-names>B. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hyder</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mukli</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nagy</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Pitfalls in fractal time series analysis: fMRI BOLD as an exemplary case</article-title>. <source>Front. Physiol.</source> <volume>3</volume>:<fpage>417</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2012.00417</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23227008</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fetterhoff</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kraft</surname> <given-names>R. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sandler</surname> <given-names>R. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Opris</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sexton</surname> <given-names>C. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Marmarelis</surname> <given-names>V. Z.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Distinguishing cognitive state with multifractal complexity of hippocampal interspike interval sequences</article-title>. <source>Front. Syst. Neurosci.</source> <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>130</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fnsys.2015.00130</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26441562</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Frisch</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Parisi</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Fully developed turbulence and intermittency</article-title>, in <source>Turbulence and Predictability in Geophysical Fluid Dynamics and Climate Dynamics</source>, eds <person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Ghil</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Benzi</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Parisi</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<publisher-loc>North-Holland</publisher-loc>; <publisher-name>Amsterdam</publisher-name>), <fpage>71</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>88</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ge</surname> <given-names>E. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Leung</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Detection of crossover time scales in multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis</article-title>. <source>J. Geogr. Syst.</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>115</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>147</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10109-012-0169-9</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Giera&#x00142;towski</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>&#x0017B;ebrowski</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baranowski</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Multiscale multifractal analysis of heart rate variability recordings with a large number of occurrences of arrhythmia</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E</source> <volume>85</volume>, <fpage>021911</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>021916</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/physreve.85.021915</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22463252</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gifani</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rabiee</surname> <given-names>H. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hashemi</surname> <given-names>M. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Taslimi</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ghanbari</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Optimal fractal-scaling analysis of human EEG dynamic for depth of anesthesia quantification</article-title>. <source>J. Franklin I</source> <volume>344</volume>, <fpage>212</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>229</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jfranklin.2006.08.004</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grassberger</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Badii</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Politi</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Scaling laws for invariant measures on hyperbolic and nonhyperbolic atractors</article-title>. <source>J. Stat. Phys.</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>135</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>178</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF01015324</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grech</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pamu&#x00142;a</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Multifractal background noise of monofractal signals</article-title>. <source>Acta Phys. Pol. A</source> <volume>121</volume>, <fpage>34</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>39</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.12693/APhysPolA.121.B-34</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B29">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gu</surname> <given-names>G.-F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>W.-X.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Detrending moving average algorithm for multifractals</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E</source> <volume>82</volume>, <fpage>011131</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>011138</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/physreve.82.011136</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20866594</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B30">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Halsey</surname> <given-names>T. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jensen</surname> <given-names>M. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kadanoff</surname> <given-names>L. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Procaccia</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shraiman</surname> <given-names>B. I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1986</year>). <article-title>Fractal measures and their singularities - the characterization of strange sets</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. A</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>1141</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1151</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevA.33.1141</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9896729</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herman</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sanganahalli</surname> <given-names>B. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hyder</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Fractal analysis of spontaneous fluctuations of the BOLD signal in rat brain</article-title>. <source>Neuroimage</source> <volume>58</volume>, <fpage>1060</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1069</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.082</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21777682</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B32">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hyder</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rothman</surname> <given-names>D. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blamire</surname> <given-names>A. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Image reconstruction of sequentially sampled echo-planar data</article-title>. <source>Magn. Reson. Imaging</source> <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>97</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>103</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0730-725X(94)00068-E</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">7898286</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B33">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ihlen</surname> <given-names>E. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Introduction to multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis in matlab</article-title>. <source>Front. Physiol.</source> <volume>3</volume>:<fpage>141</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2012.00141</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22675302</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B34">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Iyengar</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Peng</surname> <given-names>C. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morin</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Goldberger</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lipsitz</surname> <given-names>L. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1996</year>). <article-title>Age-related alterations in the fractal scaling of cardiac interbeat interval dynamics</article-title>. <source>Am. J. Physiol.</source> <volume>271</volume>, <fpage>R1078</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>R1084</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8898003</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B35">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jaffard</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Wavelet techniques in multifractal analysis</article-title>. <source>P. Symp. Pure. Math.</source> <volume>72</volume>, <fpage>91</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>151</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1090/pspum/072.2/2112122</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B36">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jensen</surname> <given-names>M. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kadanoff</surname> <given-names>L. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Procaccia</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Scaling structure and thermodynamics of strange sets</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. A</source> <volume>36</volume>, <fpage>1409</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1420</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevA.36.1409</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9899000</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B37">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kantelhardt</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Koscielny-Bunde</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rego</surname> <given-names>H. H. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Havlin</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bunde</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Detecting long-range correlations with detrended fluctuation analysis</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>295</volume>, <fpage>441</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>454</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0378-4371(01)00144-3</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B38">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kantelhardt</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zschiegner</surname> <given-names>S. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Koscielny-Bunde</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Havlin</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bunde</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stanley</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis of nonstationary time series</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>316</volume>, <fpage>87</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>114</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0378-4371(02)01383-3</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B39">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kestener</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lina</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saint-Jean</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arneodo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Wavelet-based multifractal formalism to assist in diagnosis in digitized mammograms</article-title>. <source>Image Anal. Stereol.</source> <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>169</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>174</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5566/ias.v20.p169-174</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B40">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kuznetsov</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bonnette</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gao</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Riley</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Adaptive fractal analysis reveals limits to fractal scaling in center of pressure trajectories</article-title>. <source>Ann. Biomed. Eng.</source> <volume>41</volume>, <fpage>1646</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1660</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10439-012-0646-9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22956160</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B41">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>X.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhu</surname> <given-names>X.-H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Neural origin of spontaneous hemodynamic fluctuations in rats under burst&#x02013;suppression anesthesia condition</article-title>. <source>Cereb. Cortex</source> <volume>21</volume>, <fpage>374</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>384</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/cercor/bhq105</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20530220</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B42">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ludescher</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bogachev</surname> <given-names>M. I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kantelhardt</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schumann</surname> <given-names>A. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bunde</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>On spurious and corrupted multifractality: the effects of additive noise, short-term memory and periodic trends</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>390</volume>, <fpage>2480</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2490</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2011.03.008</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B43">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mandelbrot</surname> <given-names>B. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1982</year>). <source>The Fractal Geometry of Nature</source>. <publisher-loc>San Francisco, CA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>WH Freemann and Co</publisher-name>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B44">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mandelbrot</surname> <given-names>B. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Van Ness</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1968</year>). <article-title>Fractional Brownian motions, fractional noises and applications</article-title>. <source>SIAM Rev.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>422</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>437</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1137/1010093</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B45">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Matic</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cherian</surname> <given-names>J. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Koolen</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ansari</surname> <given-names>A. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Naulaers</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Govaert</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Objective differentiation of neonatal EEG background grades using detrended fluctuation analysis</article-title>. <source>Front. Hum. Neurosci.</source> <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>189</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fnhum.2015.00189</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25954174</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B46">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mesquita</surname> <given-names>R. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Franceschini</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Boas</surname> <given-names>D. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Resting state functional connectivity of the whole head with near-infrared spectroscopy</article-title>. <source>Biomed. Opt. Expr.</source> <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>324</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>336</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1364/BOE.1.000324</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21258470</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B47">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mormann</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Osterhage</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Andrzejak</surname> <given-names>R. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Weber</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fern&#x000E1;ndez</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fell</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Independent delta/theta rhythms in the human hippocampus and entorhinal cortex</article-title>. <source>Front. Hum. Neurosci.</source> <volume>2</volume>:<fpage>3</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/neuro.09.003.2008</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18958204</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B48">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Movahed</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jafari</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ghasemi</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rahvar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tabar</surname> <given-names>M. R. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis of sunspot time series</article-title>. <source>J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp.</source> <volume>2006</volume>, <fpage>02001</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>02017</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/1742-5468/2006/02/p02003</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B49">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mukli</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nagy</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Eke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Multifractal formalism by enforcing the universal behavior of scaling functions</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>417</volume>, <fpage>150</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>167</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2014.09.002</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B50">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Muzy</surname> <given-names>J. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bacry</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arneodo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Multifractal formalism for fractal signals: the structure-function approach versus the wavelet-transform modulus-maxima method</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E Stat. Phys. Plasmas Fluids Relat. Interdiscipl. Top.</source> <volume>47</volume>, <fpage>875</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>884</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevE.47.875</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9960082</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B51">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nicolay</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Touchon</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Audit</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>D&#x00027;aubenton-Carafa</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thermes</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arn&#x000E9;odo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Bifractality of human DNA strand-asymmetry profiles results from transcription</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E</source> <volume>75</volume>, <fpage>032901</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>032904</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/physreve.75.032902</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17500744</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B52">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>O&#x0015B;wi&#x00229;cimka</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kwapie&#x00144;</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dro&#x0017C;d&#x0017C;</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Wavelet versus detrended fluctuation analysis of multifractal structures</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E</source> <volume>74</volume>, <fpage>016101</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>016137</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/physreve.74.016103</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16907147</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B53">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pattnaik</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sarraf</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>in press</year>). <article-title>Brain Computer Interface issues on hand movement</article-title>. <source>J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inform. Sci.</source> <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jksuci.2016.09.006</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B54">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peng</surname> <given-names>C. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Buldyrev</surname> <given-names>S. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Havlin</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Simons</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stanley</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Goldberger</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Mosaic organization of DNA nucleotides</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. E Stat. Phys. Plasmas Fluids Relat. Interdiscip. Top.</source> <volume>49</volume>, <fpage>1685</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1689</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevE.49.1685</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9961383</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B55">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peng</surname> <given-names>C. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Havlin</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stanley</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Goldberger</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Quantification of scaling exponents and crossover phenomena in nonstationary heartbeat time series</article-title>. <source>Chaos</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>82</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>87</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1063/1.166141</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11538314</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B56">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Radons</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stoop</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1996</year>). <article-title>Superpositions of multifractals: generators of phase transitions in the generalized thermodynamic formalism</article-title>. <source>J. Stat. Phys.</source> <volume>82</volume>, <fpage>1063</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1080</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF02179802</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B57">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rego</surname> <given-names>C. R. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Frota</surname> <given-names>H. O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gusm&#x000E3;o</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Multifractality of Brazilian rivers</article-title>. <source>J. Hydrol.</source> <volume>495</volume>, <fpage>208</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>215</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.04.046</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B58">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Roux</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Muzy</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arneodo</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Detecting vorticity filaments using wavelet analysis: about the statistical contribution of vorticity filaments to intermittency in swirling turbulent flows</article-title>. <source>Eur. Phys. J. B Condens. Matter Complex Syst.</source> <volume>8</volume>, <fpage>301</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>322</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s100510050694</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B59">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Saupe</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Algorithms for random fractals</article-title>, in <source>The Science of Fractal Images</source>, eds <person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Peitgen</surname> <given-names>H-O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saupe</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<publisher-loc>New York, NY</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer Verlag</publisher-name>), <fpage>71</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>136</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B60">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schumann</surname> <given-names>A. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kantelhardt</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Multifractal moving average analysis and test of multifractal model with tuned correlations</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>390</volume>, <fpage>2637</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2654</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.physa.2011.03.002</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B61">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Stanley</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meakin</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Multifractal phenomena in physics and chemistry</article-title>. <source>Nature</source> <volume>335</volume>, <fpage>405</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>409</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/335405a0</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B62">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Struzik</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dooijes</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Groen</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Fitting the generic multi-parameter cross-over model: towards realistic scaling estimates</article-title>. <source>Fractal Front. World Sci.</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>163</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>180</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B63">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Struzik</surname> <given-names>Z. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Local effective H&#x000F6;lder exponent estimation on the wavelet transform maxima tree</article-title>, in <source>Fractals: Theory and Applications in Engineering</source>, eds <person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Dekking</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>L&#x000E9;vy V&#x000E9;hel</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lutton</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tricot</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group> (<publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>), <fpage>93</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>112</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B64">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Struzik</surname> <given-names>Z. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Siebes</surname> <given-names>A. P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Wavelet transform based multifractal formalism in outlier detection and localisation for financial time series</article-title>. <source>Phys. A</source> <volume>309</volume>, <fpage>388</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>402</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0378-4371(02)00552-6</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B65">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tel</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Fractals, multifractals, and thermodynamics - an introductory review</article-title>. <source>Z. Naturforsch. A</source> <volume>43</volume>, <fpage>1154</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1174</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1515/zna-1988-1221</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B66">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thornton</surname> <given-names>T. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gilden</surname> <given-names>D. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Provenance of correlations in psychological data</article-title>. <source>Psychon. B. Rev.</source> <volume>12</volume>, <fpage>409</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>441</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3758/BF03193785</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16235626</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B67">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Valencia</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Artieda</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Alegre</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Maza</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Influence of filters in the detrended fluctuation analysis of digital electroencephalographic data</article-title>. <source>J. Neurosci. Methods</source> <volume>170</volume>, <fpage>310</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>316</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jneumeth.2008.01.010</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18295900</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B68">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Werner</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Fractals in the nervous system: conceptual implications for theoretical neuroscience</article-title>. <source>Front. Physiol.</source> <volume>1</volume>:<fpage>15</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2010.00015</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21423358</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B69">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>White</surname> <given-names>B. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liao</surname> <given-names>S. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ferradal</surname> <given-names>S. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Inder</surname> <given-names>T. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Culver</surname> <given-names>J. P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Bedside optical imaging of occipital resting-state functional connectivity in neonates</article-title>. <source>Neuroimage</source> <volume>59</volume>, <fpage>2529</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2538</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.094</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21925609</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
<glossary>
<def-list>
<title>Symbols and definitions</title>
<def-item><term>&#x02227;</term>
<def><p>estimated value</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>A</italic></term>
<def><p>amplitude</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>&#x003B2;</term>
<def><p>spectral index</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>&#x00394;<italic>H</italic><sub>15</sub></term>
<def><p>&#x02013; the difference between the <italic>H</italic>(&#x02212;15) and <italic>H</italic>(15) values</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>DFA</term>
<def><p>detrended fluctuation analysis</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>DHM</term>
<def><p>davies and harte method</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>DMA</term>
<def><p>detrending moving average</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>)</term>
<def><p>spectrum of singularity strength (or singularity spectrum for short)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>EEG</term>
<def><p>electroencephalography</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>ER</term>
<def><p>exclusion range</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>f</italic></term>
<def><p>frequency (Hz)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>fBm</term>
<def><p>fractional Brownian motion (non-stationary signal)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>fGn</term>
<def><p>fractional Gaussian noise (stationary signal)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>FMF</term>
<def><p>focus-based multifractal formalism (an approach using a focus-based regression scheme)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>fMRI</term>
<def><p>functional magnetic resonance imaging</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>fNIRS</term>
<def><p>functional near-infrared spectroscopy</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><sup><italic>f</italic></sup></term>
<def><p>measure describing the fractal signal component dominating over the higher scales</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>fwhm</italic></term>
<def><p>full width of the singularity spectrum, <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>), at half of its maximum</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>H</italic></term>
<def><p>extended Hurst exponent (fGn: 0&#x0003C;<italic>H</italic>&#x0003C;1; fBm: 1&#x0003C;<italic>H</italic>&#x0003C;2; summed fBm: 2&#x0003C;<italic>H</italic>&#x0003C;3)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>H</italic><sub>true</sub></term>
<def><p>known value of the Hurst exponent in numerical syntheses of time series</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>H</italic>(<italic>q</italic>)</term>
<def><p>generalized Hurst exponent</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>h</italic></term>
<def><p>H&#x000F6;lder exponent</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>h</italic><sub>max</sub></term>
<def><p>the value of <italic>h</italic> at the peak position of <italic>D</italic>(<italic>h</italic>)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>HRF</term>
<def><p>hemodynamic response function</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>m</italic></term>
<def><p>detrending order (in DFA)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>MF</term>
<def><p>multifractal (an approach using a standard regression scheme)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>MSE</term>
<def><p>mean squared error</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>&#x003BC;</term>
<def><p>measure</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>N</italic></term>
<def><p>the length of time series (in data points)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><sup><italic>n</italic></sup></term>
<def><p>measure describing the fractal (or noise) dominant over the lower scales</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>N</italic><sub>c</sub></term>
<def><p>number of constituent signals</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>NIRS</term>
<def><p>near-infrared spectroscopy</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>N</italic><sub>s</sub></term>
<def><p>number of non-overlapping segments</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>q</italic></term>
<def><p>statistical moment order used in multifractal analysis (moment for short)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>qSRA</term>
<def><p>moment-wise scaling range adaptivity (method)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>s</italic></term>
<def><p>temporal scale</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>s</italic>&#x02032;</term>
<def><p>scaling boundary (possible breakpoint)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>s</italic><sub><italic>b</italic></sub></term>
<def><p>breakpoint</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>s</italic><sub><italic>x</italic></sub></term>
<def><p>crossover scale</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SD</term>
<def><p>standard deviation</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>S</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>q</italic>,<italic>s</italic>)</term>
<def><p>scaling function value at a given <italic>q</italic> and <italic>s</italic> calculated from signal <italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub></p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>S</italic>[<italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub>](<italic>N</italic>)</term>
<def><p>the focus of the scaling function for signal <italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub></p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SR</term>
<def><p>scaling range</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SFD</term>
<def><p>scaling function decomposition (method)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SSC</term>
<def><p>signal summation conversion (method)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SSE</term>
<def><p>sum of squared error</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>SSM</term>
<def><p>spectral synthesis method</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>v</italic></term>
<def><p>the order of non-overlapping segments <italic>v</italic> &#x0003D; 1,&#x02026;,<italic>N</italic><sub>s</sub></p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>x</italic></term>
<def><p>the scale selected for obtaining an actual value of a scaling function</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term><italic>X</italic><sub><italic>i</italic></sub></term>
<def><p>time series (signal), where <italic>i</italic> &#x0003D; 1,&#x02026;,<italic>N</italic></p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>WL</term>
<def><p>wavelet leader (method)</p></def></def-item>
<def-item><term>WTMM</term>
<def><p>wavelet transfer modulus maxima (method)</p></def></def-item>
</def-list>
</glossary>
</back>
</article>