Views
No views yet

1LONG_ARTICLE = """"for about 20 years the problem of properties of
2short - term changes of solar activity has been
3considered extensively . many investigators
4studied the short - term periodicities of the
5various indices of solar activity . several
6periodicities were detected , but the
7periodicities about 155 days and from the interval
8of @xmath3 $ ] days ( @xmath4 $ ] years ) are
9mentioned most often . first of them was
10discovered by @xcite in the occurence rate of
11gamma - ray flares detected by the gamma - ray
12spectrometer aboard the _ solar maximum mission (
13smm ) . this periodicity was confirmed for other
14solar flares data and for the same time period
15@xcite . it was also found in proton flares during
16solar cycles 19 and 20 @xcite , but it was not
17found in the solar flares data during solar cycles
1822 @xcite . _ several autors confirmed above
19results for the daily sunspot area data . @xcite
20studied the sunspot data from 18741984 . she found
21the 155-day periodicity in data records from 31
22years . this periodicity is always characteristic
23for one of the solar hemispheres ( the southern
24hemisphere for cycles 1215 and the northern
25hemisphere for cycles 1621 ) . moreover , it is
26only present during epochs of maximum activity (
27in episodes of 13 years ) .
28similarinvestigationswerecarriedoutby + @xcite .
29they applied the same power spectrum method as
30lean , but the daily sunspot area data ( cycles
311221 ) were divided into 10 shorter time series .
32the periodicities were searched for the frequency
33interval 57115 nhz ( 100200 days ) and for each of
3410 time series . the authors showed that the
35periodicity between 150160 days is statistically
36significant during all cycles from 16 to 21 . the
37considered peaks were remained unaltered after
38removing the 11-year cycle and applying the power
39spectrum analysis . @xcite used the wavelet
40technique for the daily sunspot areas between 1874
41and 1993 . they determined the epochs of
42appearance of this periodicity and concluded that
43it presents around the maximum activity period in
44cycles 16 to 21 . moreover , the power of this
45periodicity started growing at cycle 19 ,
46decreased in cycles 20 and 21 and disappered after
47cycle 21 . similaranalyseswerepresentedby + @xcite
48, but for sunspot number , solar wind plasma ,
49interplanetary magnetic field and geomagnetic
50activity index @xmath5 . during 1964 - 2000 the
51sunspot number wavelet power of periods less than
52one year shows a cyclic evolution with the phase
53of the solar cycle.the 154-day period is prominent
54and its strenth is stronger around the 1982 - 1984
55interval in almost all solar wind parameters . the
56existence of the 156-day periodicity in sunspot
57data were confirmed by @xcite . they considered
58the possible relation between the 475-day (
591.3-year ) and 156-day periodicities . the 475-day
60( 1.3-year ) periodicity was also detected in
61variations of the interplanetary magnetic field ,
62geomagnetic activity helioseismic data and in the
63solar wind speed @xcite . @xcite concluded that
64the region of larger wavelet power shifts from
65475-day ( 1.3-year ) period to 620-day ( 1.7-year
66) period and then back to 475-day ( 1.3-year ) .
67the periodicities from the interval @xmath6 $ ]
68days ( @xmath4 $ ] years ) have been considered
69from 1968 . @xcite mentioned a 16.3-month (
70490-day ) periodicity in the sunspot numbers and
71in the geomagnetic data . @xcite analysed the
72occurrence rate of major flares during solar
73cycles 19 . they found a 18-month ( 540-day )
74periodicity in flare rate of the norhern
75hemisphere . @xcite confirmed this result for the
76@xmath7 flare data for solar cycles 20 and 21 and
77found a peak in the power spectra near 510540 days
78. @xcite found a 17-month ( 510-day ) periodicity
79of sunspot groups and their areas from 1969 to
801986 . these authors concluded that the length of
81this period is variable and the reason of this
82periodicity is still not understood . @xcite and +
83@xcite obtained statistically significant peaks of
84power at around 158 days for daily sunspot data
85from 1923 - 1933 ( cycle 16 ) . in this paper the
86problem of the existence of this periodicity for
87sunspot data from cycle 16 is considered . the
88daily sunspot areas , the mean sunspot areas per
89carrington rotation , the monthly sunspot numbers
90and their fluctuations , which are obtained after
91removing the 11-year cycle are analysed . in
92section 2 the properties of the power spectrum
93methods are described . in section 3 a new
94approach to the problem of aliases in the power
95spectrum analysis is presented . in section 4
96numerical results of the new method of the
97diagnosis of an echo - effect for sunspot area
98data are discussed . in section 5 the problem of
99the existence of the periodicity of about 155 days
100during the maximum activity period for sunspot
101data from the whole solar disk and from each solar
102hemisphere separately is considered . to find
103periodicities in a given time series the power
104spectrum analysis is applied . in this paper two
105methods are used : the fast fourier transformation
106algorithm with the hamming window function ( fft )
107and the blackman - tukey ( bt ) power spectrum
108method @xcite . the bt method is used for the
109diagnosis of the reasons of the existence of peaks
110, which are obtained by the fft method . the bt
111method consists in the smoothing of a cosine
112transform of an autocorrelation function using a
1133-point weighting average . such an estimator is
114consistent and unbiased . moreover , the peaks are
115uncorrelated and their sum is a variance of a
116considered time series . the main disadvantage of
117this method is a weak resolution of the
118periodogram points , particularly for low
119frequences . for example , if the autocorrelation
120function is evaluated for @xmath8 , then the
121distribution points in the time domain are :
122@xmath9 thus , it is obvious that this method
123should not be used for detecting low frequency
124periodicities with a fairly good resolution .
125however , because of an application of the
126autocorrelation function , the bt method can be
127used to verify a reality of peaks which are
128computed using a method giving the better
129resolution ( for example the fft method ) . it is
130valuable to remember that the power spectrum
131methods should be applied very carefully . the
132difficulties in the interpretation of significant
133peaks could be caused by at least four effects : a
134sampling of a continuos function , an echo -
135effect , a contribution of long - term
136periodicities and a random noise . first effect
137exists because periodicities , which are shorter
138than the sampling interval , may mix with longer
139periodicities . in result , this effect can be
140reduced by an decrease of the sampling interval
141between observations . the echo - effect occurs
142when there is a latent harmonic of frequency
143@xmath10 in the time series , giving a spectral
144peak at @xmath10 , and also periodic terms of
145frequency @xmath11 etc . this may be detected by
146the autocorrelation function for time series with
147a large variance . time series often contain long
148- term periodicities , that influence short - term
149peaks . they could rise periodogram s peaks at
150lower frequencies . however , it is also easy to
151notice the influence of the long - term
152periodicities on short - term peaks in the graphs
153of the autocorrelation functions . this effect is
154observed for the time series of solar activity
155indexes which are limited by the 11-year cycle .
156to find statistically significant periodicities it
157is reasonable to use the autocorrelation function
158and the power spectrum method with a high
159resolution . in the case of a stationary time
160series they give similar results . moreover , for
161a stationary time series with the mean zero the
162fourier transform is equivalent to the cosine
163transform of an autocorrelation function @xcite .
164thus , after a comparison of a periodogram with an
165appropriate autocorrelation function one can
166detect peaks which are in the graph of the first
167function and do not exist in the graph of the
168second function . the reasons of their existence
169could be explained by the long - term
170periodicities and the echo - effect . below method
171enables one to detect these effects . ( solid line
172) and the 95% confidence level basing on thered
173noise ( dotted line ) . the periodogram values are
174presented on the left axis . the lower curve
175illustrates the autocorrelation function of the
176same time series ( solid line ) . the dotted lines
177represent two standard errors of the
178autocorrelation function . the dashed horizontal
179line shows the zero level . the autocorrelation
180values are shown in the right axis . ] because
181the statistical tests indicate that the time
182series is a white noise the confidence level is
183not marked . ] . ] the method of the diagnosis
184of an echo - effect in the power spectrum ( de )
185consists in an analysis of a periodogram of a
186given time series computed using the bt method .
187the bt method bases on the cosine transform of the
188autocorrelation function which creates peaks which
189are in the periodogram , but not in the
190autocorrelation function . the de method is used
191for peaks which are computed by the fft method (
192with high resolution ) and are statistically
193significant . the time series of sunspot activity
194indexes with the spacing interval one rotation or
195one month contain a markov - type persistence ,
196which means a tendency for the successive values
197of the time series to remember their antecendent
198values . thus , i use a confidence level basing on
199the red noise of markov @xcite for the choice of
200the significant peaks of the periodogram computed
201by the fft method . when a time series does not
202contain the markov - type persistence i apply the
203fisher test and the kolmogorov - smirnov test at
204the significance level @xmath12 @xcite to verify a
205statistically significance of periodograms peaks .
206the fisher test checks the null hypothesis that
207the time series is white noise agains the
208alternative hypothesis that the time series
209contains an added deterministic periodic component
210of unspecified frequency . because the fisher test
211tends to be severe in rejecting peaks as
212insignificant the kolmogorov - smirnov test is
213also used . the de method analyses raw estimators
214of the power spectrum . they are given as follows
215@xmath13 for @xmath14 + where @xmath15 for
216@xmath16 + @xmath17 is the length of the time
217series @xmath18 and @xmath19 is the mean value .
218the first term of the estimator @xmath20 is
219constant . the second term takes two values (
220depending on odd or even @xmath21 ) which are not
221significant because @xmath22 for large m. thus ,
222the third term of ( 1 ) should be analysed .
223looking for intervals of @xmath23 for which
224@xmath24 has the same sign and different signs one
225can find such parts of the function @xmath25 which
226create the value @xmath20 . let the set of values
227of the independent variable of the autocorrelation
228function be called @xmath26 and it can be divided
229into the sums of disjoint sets : @xmath27 where +
230@xmath28 + @xmath29 @xmath30 @xmath31 + @xmath32 +
231@xmath33 @xmath34 @xmath35 @xmath36 @xmath37
232@xmath38 @xmath39 @xmath40 well , the set
233@xmath41 contains all integer values of @xmath23
234from the interval of @xmath42 for which the
235autocorrelation function and the cosinus function
236with the period @xmath43 $ ] are positive . the
237index @xmath44 indicates successive parts of the
238cosinus function for which the cosinuses of
239successive values of @xmath23 have the same sign .
240however , sometimes the set @xmath41 can be empty
241. for example , for @xmath45 and @xmath46 the set
242@xmath47 should contain all @xmath48 $ ] for which
243@xmath49 and @xmath50 , but for such values of
244@xmath23 the values of @xmath51 are negative .
245thus , the set @xmath47 is empty . . the
246periodogram values are presented on the left axis
247. the lower curve illustrates the autocorrelation
248function of the same time series . the
249autocorrelation values are shown in the right axis
250. ] let us take into consideration all sets
251\{@xmath52 } , \{@xmath53 } and \{@xmath41 } which
252are not empty . because numberings and power of
253these sets depend on the form of the
254autocorrelation function of the given time series
255, it is impossible to establish them arbitrary .
256thus , the sets of appropriate indexes of the sets
257\{@xmath52 } , \{@xmath53 } and \{@xmath41 } are
258called @xmath54 , @xmath55 and @xmath56
259respectively . for example the set @xmath56
260contains all @xmath44 from the set @xmath57 for
261which the sets @xmath41 are not empty . to
262separate quantitatively in the estimator @xmath20
263the positive contributions which are originated by
264the cases described by the formula ( 5 ) from the
265cases which are described by the formula ( 3 ) the
266following indexes are introduced : @xmath58
267@xmath59 @xmath60 @xmath61 where @xmath62 @xmath63
268@xmath64 taking for the empty sets \{@xmath53 }
269and \{@xmath41 } the indices @xmath65 and @xmath66
270equal zero . the index @xmath65 describes a
271percentage of the contribution of the case when
272@xmath25 and @xmath51 are positive to the positive
273part of the third term of the sum ( 1 ) . the
274index @xmath66 describes a similar contribution ,
275but for the case when the both @xmath25 and
276@xmath51 are simultaneously negative . thanks to
277these one can decide which the positive or the
278negative values of the autocorrelation function
279have a larger contribution to the positive values
280of the estimator @xmath20 . when the difference
281@xmath67 is positive , the statement the
282@xmath21-th peak really exists can not be rejected
283. thus , the following formula should be satisfied
284: @xmath68 because the @xmath21-th peak could
285exist as a result of the echo - effect , it is
286necessary to verify the second condition :
287@xmath69\in c_m.\ ] ] . the periodogram values
288are presented on the left axis . the lower curve
289illustrates the autocorrelation function of the
290same time series ( solid line ) . the dotted lines
291represent two standard errors of the
292autocorrelation function . the dashed horizontal
293line shows the zero level . the autocorrelation
294values are shown in the right axis . ] to
295verify the implication ( 8) firstly it is
296necessary to evaluate the sets @xmath41 for
297@xmath70 of the values of @xmath23 for which the
298autocorrelation function and the cosine function
299with the period @xmath71 $ ] are positive and the
300sets @xmath72 of values of @xmath23 for which the
301autocorrelation function and the cosine function
302with the period @xmath43 $ ] are negative .
303secondly , a percentage of the contribution of the
304sum of products of positive values of @xmath25 and
305@xmath51 to the sum of positive products of the
306values of @xmath25 and @xmath51 should be
307evaluated . as a result the indexes @xmath65 for
308each set @xmath41 where @xmath44 is the index from
309the set @xmath56 are obtained . thirdly , from all
310sets @xmath41 such that @xmath70 the set @xmath73
311for which the index @xmath65 is the greatest
312should be chosen . the implication ( 8) is true
313when the set @xmath73 includes the considered
314period @xmath43 $ ] . this means that the greatest
315contribution of positive values of the
316autocorrelation function and positive cosines with
317the period @xmath43 $ ] to the periodogram value
318@xmath20 is caused by the sum of positive products
319of @xmath74 for each @xmath75-\frac{m}{2k},[\frac{
3202m}{k}]+\frac{m}{2k})$ ] . when the implication
321( 8) is false , the peak @xmath20 is mainly
322created by the sum of positive products of
323@xmath74 for each @xmath76-\frac{m}{2k},\big [
324\frac{2m}{n}\big ] + \frac{m}{2k } \big ) $ ] ,
325where @xmath77 is a multiple or a divisor of
326@xmath21 . it is necessary to add , that the de
327method should be applied to the periodograms peaks
328, which probably exist because of the echo -
329effect . it enables one to find such parts of the
330autocorrelation function , which have the
331significant contribution to the considered peak .
332the fact , that the conditions ( 7 ) and ( 8) are
333satisfied , can unambiguously decide about the
334existence of the considered periodicity in the
335given time series , but if at least one of them is
336not satisfied , one can doubt about the existence
337of the considered periodicity . thus , in such
338cases the sentence the peak can not be treated as
339true should be used . using the de method it is
340necessary to remember about the power of the set
341@xmath78 . if @xmath79 is too large , errors of an
342autocorrelation function estimation appear . they
343are caused by the finite length of the given time
344series and as a result additional peaks of the
345periodogram occur . if @xmath79 is too small ,
346there are less peaks because of a low resolution
347of the periodogram . in applications @xmath80 is
348used . in order to evaluate the value @xmath79 the
349fft method is used . the periodograms computed by
350the bt and the fft method are compared . the
351conformity of them enables one to obtain the value
352@xmath79 . . the fft periodogram values are
353presented on the left axis . the lower curve
354illustrates the bt periodogram of the same time
355series ( solid line and large black circles ) .
356the bt periodogram values are shown in the right
357axis . ] in this paper the sunspot activity data (
358august 1923 - october 1933 ) provided by the
359greenwich photoheliographic results ( gpr ) are
360analysed . firstly , i consider the monthly
361sunspot number data . to eliminate the 11-year
362trend from these data , the consecutively smoothed
363monthly sunspot number @xmath81 is subtracted from
364the monthly sunspot number @xmath82 where the
365consecutive mean @xmath83 is given by @xmath84 the
366values @xmath83 for @xmath85 and @xmath86 are
367calculated using additional data from last six
368months of cycle 15 and first six months of cycle
36917 . because of the north - south asymmetry of
370various solar indices @xcite , the sunspot
371activity is considered for each solar hemisphere
372separately . analogously to the monthly sunspot
373numbers , the time series of sunspot areas in the
374northern and southern hemispheres with the spacing
375interval @xmath87 rotation are denoted . in order
376to find periodicities , the following time series
377are used : + @xmath88 + @xmath89 + @xmath90
378+ in the lower part of figure [ f1 ] the
379autocorrelation function of the time series for
380the northern hemisphere @xmath88 is shown . it is
381easy to notice that the prominent peak falls at 17
382rotations interval ( 459 days ) and @xmath25 for
383@xmath91 $ ] rotations ( [ 81 , 162 ] days ) are
384significantly negative . the periodogram of the
385time series @xmath88 ( see the upper curve in
386figures [ f1 ] ) does not show the significant
387peaks at @xmath92 rotations ( 135 , 162 days ) ,
388but there is the significant peak at @xmath93 (
389243 days ) . the peaks at @xmath94 are close to
390the peaks of the autocorrelation function . thus ,
391the result obtained for the periodicity at about
392@xmath0 days are contradict to the results
393obtained for the time series of daily sunspot
394areas @xcite . for the southern hemisphere (
395the lower curve in figure [ f2 ] ) @xmath25 for
396@xmath95 $ ] rotations ( [ 54 , 189 ] days ) is
397not positive except @xmath96 ( 135 days ) for
398which @xmath97 is not statistically significant .
399the upper curve in figures [ f2 ] presents the
400periodogram of the time series @xmath89 . this
401time series does not contain a markov - type
402persistence . moreover , the kolmogorov - smirnov
403test and the fisher test do not reject a null
404hypothesis that the time series is a white noise
405only . this means that the time series do not
406contain an added deterministic periodic component
407of unspecified frequency . the autocorrelation
408function of the time series @xmath90 ( the lower
409curve in figure [ f3 ] ) has only one
410statistically significant peak for @xmath98 months
411( 480 days ) and negative values for @xmath99 $ ]
412months ( [ 90 , 390 ] days ) . however , the
413periodogram of this time series ( the upper curve
414in figure [ f3 ] ) has two significant peaks the
415first at 15.2 and the second at 5.3 months ( 456 ,
416159 days ) . thus , the periodogram contains the
417significant peak , although the autocorrelation
418function has the negative value at @xmath100
419months . to explain these problems two
420following time series of daily sunspot areas are
421considered : + @xmath101 + @xmath102 + where
422@xmath103 the values @xmath104 for @xmath105
423and @xmath106 are calculated using additional
424daily data from the solar cycles 15 and 17 .
425and the cosine function for @xmath45 ( the period
426at about 154 days ) . the horizontal line ( dotted
427line ) shows the zero level . the vertical dotted
428lines evaluate the intervals where the sets
429@xmath107 ( for @xmath108 ) are searched . the
430percentage values show the index @xmath65 for each
431@xmath41 for the time series @xmath102 ( in
432parentheses for the time series @xmath101 ) . in
433the right bottom corner the values of @xmath65 for
434the time series @xmath102 , for @xmath109 are
435written . ] ( the 500-day period ) ] the
436comparison of the functions @xmath25 of the time
437series @xmath101 ( the lower curve in figure [ f4
438] ) and @xmath102 ( the lower curve in figure [ f5
439] ) suggests that the positive values of the
440function @xmath110 of the time series @xmath101 in
441the interval of @xmath111 $ ] days could be caused
442by the 11-year cycle . this effect is not visible
443in the case of periodograms of the both time
444series computed using the fft method ( see the
445upper curves in figures [ f4 ] and [ f5 ] ) or the
446bt method ( see the lower curve in figure [ f6 ] )
447. moreover , the periodogram of the time series
448@xmath102 has the significant values at @xmath112
449days , but the autocorrelation function is
450negative at these points . @xcite showed that the
451lomb - scargle periodograms for the both time
452series ( see @xcite , figures 7 a - c ) have a
453peak at 158.8 days which stands over the fap level
454by a significant amount . using the de method the
455above discrepancies are obvious . to establish the
456@xmath79 value the periodograms computed by the
457fft and the bt methods are shown in figure [ f6 ]
458( the upper and the lower curve respectively ) .
459for @xmath46 and for periods less than 166 days
460there is a good comformity of the both
461periodograms ( but for periods greater than 166
462days the points of the bt periodogram are not
463linked because the bt periodogram has much worse
464resolution than the fft periodogram ( no one know
465how to do it ) ) . for @xmath46 and @xmath113 the
466value of @xmath21 is 13 ( @xmath71=153 $ ] ) . the
467inequality ( 7 ) is satisfied because @xmath114 .
468this means that the value of @xmath115 is mainly
469created by positive values of the autocorrelation
470function . the implication ( 8) needs an
471evaluation of the greatest value of the index
472@xmath65 where @xmath70 , but the solar data
473contain the most prominent period for @xmath116
474days because of the solar rotation . thus ,
475although @xmath117 for each @xmath118 , all sets
476@xmath41 ( see ( 5 ) and ( 6 ) ) without the set
477@xmath119 ( see ( 4 ) ) , which contains @xmath120
478$ ] , are considered . this situation is presented
479in figure [ f7 ] . in this figure two curves
480@xmath121 and @xmath122 are plotted . the vertical
481dotted lines evaluate the intervals where the sets
482@xmath107 ( for @xmath123 ) are searched . for
483such @xmath41 two numbers are written : in
484parentheses the value of @xmath65 for the time
485series @xmath101 and above it the value of
486@xmath65 for the time series @xmath102 . to make
487this figure clear the curves are plotted for the
488set @xmath124 only . ( in the right bottom corner
489information about the values of @xmath65 for the
490time series @xmath102 , for @xmath109 are written
491. ) the implication ( 8) is not true , because
492@xmath125 for @xmath126 . therefore ,
493@xmath43=153\notin c_6=[423,500]$ ] . moreover ,
494the autocorrelation function for @xmath127 $ ] is
495negative and the set @xmath128 is empty . thus ,
496@xmath129 . on the basis of these information one
497can state , that the periodogram peak at @xmath130
498days of the time series @xmath102 exists because
499of positive @xmath25 , but for @xmath23 from the
500intervals which do not contain this period .
501looking at the values of @xmath65 of the time
502series @xmath101 , one can notice that they
503decrease when @xmath23 increases until @xmath131 .
504this indicates , that when @xmath23 increases ,
505the contribution of the 11-year cycle to the peaks
506of the periodogram decreases . an increase of the
507value of @xmath65 is for @xmath132 for the both
508time series , although the contribution of the
50911-year cycle for the time series @xmath101 is
510insignificant . thus , this part of the
511autocorrelation function ( @xmath133 for the time
512series @xmath102 ) influences the @xmath21-th peak
513of the periodogram . this suggests that the
514periodicity at about 155 days is a harmonic of the
515periodicity from the interval of @xmath1 $ ] days
516. ( solid line ) and consecutively smoothed
517sunspot areas of the one rotation time interval
518@xmath134 ( dotted line ) . both indexes are
519presented on the left axis . the lower curve
520illustrates fluctuations of the sunspot areas
521@xmath135 . the dotted and dashed horizontal lines
522represent levels zero and @xmath136 respectively .
523the fluctuations are shown on the right axis . ]
524the described reasoning can be carried out for
525other values of the periodogram . for example ,
526the condition ( 8) is not satisfied for @xmath137
527( 250 , 222 , 200 days ) . moreover , the
528autocorrelation function at these points is
529negative . these suggest that there are not a true
530periodicity in the interval of [ 200 , 250 ] days
531. it is difficult to decide about the existence of
532the periodicities for @xmath138 ( 333 days ) and
533@xmath139 ( 286 days ) on the basis of above
534analysis . the implication ( 8) is not satisfied
535for @xmath139 and the condition ( 7 ) is not
536satisfied for @xmath138 , although the function
537@xmath25 of the time series @xmath102 is
538significantly positive for @xmath140 . the
539conditions ( 7 ) and ( 8) are satisfied for
540@xmath141 ( figure [ f8 ] ) and @xmath142 .
541therefore , it is possible to exist the
542periodicity from the interval of @xmath1 $ ] days
543. similar results were also obtained by @xcite for
544daily sunspot numbers and daily sunspot areas .
545she considered the means of three periodograms of
546these indexes for data from @xmath143 years and
547found statistically significant peaks from the
548interval of @xmath1 $ ] ( see @xcite , figure 2 )
549. @xcite studied sunspot areas from 1876 - 1999
550and sunspot numbers from 1749 - 2001 with the help
551of the wavelet transform . they pointed out that
552the 154 - 158-day period could be the third
553harmonic of the 1.3-year ( 475-day ) period .
554moreover , the both periods fluctuate considerably
555with time , being stronger during stronger sunspot
556cycles . therefore , the wavelet analysis suggests
557a common origin of the both periodicities . this
558conclusion confirms the de method result which
559indicates that the periodogram peak at @xmath144
560days is an alias of the periodicity from the
561interval of @xmath1 $ ] in order to verify the
562existence of the periodicity at about 155 days i
563consider the following time series : + @xmath145
564+ @xmath146 + @xmath147 + the value @xmath134
565is calculated analogously to @xmath83 ( see sect .
566the values @xmath148 and @xmath149 are evaluated
567from the formula ( 9 ) . in the upper part of
568figure [ f9 ] the time series of sunspot areas
569@xmath150 of the one rotation time interval from
570the whole solar disk and the time series of
571consecutively smoothed sunspot areas @xmath151 are
572showed . in the lower part of figure [ f9 ] the
573time series of sunspot area fluctuations @xmath145
574is presented . on the basis of these data the
575maximum activity period of cycle 16 is evaluated .
576it is an interval between two strongest
577fluctuations e.a . @xmath152 $ ] rotations . the
578length of the time interval @xmath153 is 54
579rotations . if the about @xmath0-day ( 6 solar
580rotations ) periodicity existed in this time
581interval and it was characteristic for strong
582fluctuations from this time interval , 10 local
583maxima in the set of @xmath154 would be seen .
584then it should be necessary to find such a value
585of p for which @xmath155 for @xmath156 and the
586number of the local maxima of these values is 10 .
587as it can be seen in the lower part of figure [ f9
588] this is for the case of @xmath157 ( in this
589figure the dashed horizontal line is the level of
590@xmath158 ) . figure [ f10 ] presents nine time
591distances among the successive fluctuation local
592maxima and the horizontal line represents the
5936-rotation periodicity . it is immediately
594apparent that the dispersion of these points is 10
595and it is difficult to find even few points which
596oscillate around the value of 6 . such an analysis
597was carried out for smaller and larger @xmath136
598and the results were similar . therefore , the
599fact , that the about @xmath0-day periodicity
600exists in the time series of sunspot area
601fluctuations during the maximum activity period is
602questionable . . the horizontal line represents
603the 6-rotation ( 162-day ) period . ] ] ]
604to verify again the existence of the about
605@xmath0-day periodicity during the maximum
606activity period in each solar hemisphere
607separately , the time series @xmath88 and @xmath89
608were also cut down to the maximum activity period
609( january 1925december 1930 ) . the comparison of
610the autocorrelation functions of these time series
611with the appriopriate autocorrelation functions of
612the time series @xmath88 and @xmath89 , which are
613computed for the whole 11-year cycle ( the lower
614curves of figures [ f1 ] and [ f2 ] ) , indicates
615that there are not significant differences between
616them especially for @xmath23=5 and 6 rotations (
617135 and 162 days ) ) . this conclusion is
618confirmed by the analysis of the time series
619@xmath146 for the maximum activity period . the
620autocorrelation function ( the lower curve of
621figure [ f11 ] ) is negative for the interval of [
62257 , 173 ] days , but the resolution of the
623periodogram is too low to find the significant
624peak at @xmath159 days . the autocorrelation
625function gives the same result as for daily
626sunspot area fluctuations from the whole solar
627disk ( @xmath160 ) ( see also the lower curve of
628figures [ f5 ] ) . in the case of the time series
629@xmath89 @xmath161 is zero for the fluctuations
630from the whole solar cycle and it is almost zero (
631@xmath162 ) for the fluctuations from the maximum
632activity period . the value @xmath163 is negative
633. similarly to the case of the northern hemisphere
634the autocorrelation function and the periodogram
635of southern hemisphere daily sunspot area
636fluctuations from the maximum activity period
637@xmath147 are computed ( see figure [ f12 ] ) .
638the autocorrelation function has the statistically
639significant positive peak in the interval of [ 155
640, 165 ] days , but the periodogram has too low
641resolution to decide about the possible
642periodicities . the correlative analysis indicates
643that there are positive fluctuations with time
644distances about @xmath0 days in the maximum
645activity period . the results of the analyses of
646the time series of sunspot area fluctuations from
647the maximum activity period are contradict with
648the conclusions of @xcite . she uses the power
649spectrum analysis only . the periodogram of daily
650sunspot fluctuations contains peaks , which could
651be harmonics or subharmonics of the true
652periodicities . they could be treated as real
653periodicities . this effect is not visible for
654sunspot data of the one rotation time interval ,
655but averaging could lose true periodicities . this
656is observed for data from the southern hemisphere
657. there is the about @xmath0-day peak in the
658autocorrelation function of daily fluctuations ,
659but the correlation for data of the one rotation
660interval is almost zero or negative at the points
661@xmath164 and 6 rotations . thus , it is
662reasonable to research both time series together
663using the correlative and the power spectrum
664analyses . the following results are obtained :
6651 . a new method of the detection of statistically
666significant peaks of the periodograms enables one
667to identify aliases in the periodogram . 2 . two
668effects cause the existence of the peak of the
669periodogram of the time series of sunspot area
670fluctuations at about @xmath0 days : the first is
671caused by the 27-day periodicity , which probably
672creates the 162-day periodicity ( it is a
673subharmonic frequency of the 27-day periodicity )
674and the second is caused by statistically
675significant positive values of the autocorrelation
676function from the intervals of @xmath165 $ ] and
677@xmath166 $ ] days . the existence of the
678periodicity of about @xmath0 days of the time
679series of sunspot area fluctuations and sunspot
680area fluctuations from the northern hemisphere
681during the maximum activity period is questionable
682. the autocorrelation analysis of the time series
683of sunspot area fluctuations from the southern
684hemisphere indicates that the periodicity of about
685155 days exists during the maximum activity period
686. i appreciate valuable comments from professor j.
687jakimiec ."""
688
689from transformers import LEDForConditionalGeneration, LEDTokenizer
690import torch
691
692tokenizer = LEDTokenizer.from_pretrained("allenai/led-large-16384-arxiv")
693
694input_ids = tokenizer(LONG_ARTICLE, return_tensors="pt").input_ids.to("cuda")
695global_attention_mask = torch.zeros_like(input_ids)
696# set global_attention_mask on first token
697global_attention_mask[:, 0] = 1
698
699model = LEDForConditionalGeneration.from_pretrained("allenai/led-large-16384-arxiv", return_dict_in_generate=True).to("cuda")
700
701sequences = model.generate(input_ids, global_attention_mask=global_attention_mask).sequences
702
703summary = tokenizer.batch_decode(sequences)