1. Problem Statement
Symmetry is a fundamental property of the laws of nature, which is present in numerous dynamic systems, and it is often identified through observables such as signals [
1,
2,
3]. To better understand these systems, researchers have sought to characterize them by evaluating the level of symmetry in their associated signals, as demonstrated in studies like [
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11]. This approach has been particularly relevant in the biomedical field, where signal symmetry is used to characterize the cardiovascular system [
4,
5,
7]. For complex non-equilibrium biomedical systems, their temporal evolution is marked by the arrow of time, which annihilates any global symmetry in the signal, making it asymmetric. However, in specific pathologies like Cheyne–Stokes [
12], an increase in symmetry has been observed [
4,
5], raising the question of how to quantify this gain in symmetry.
To address this issue, most researchers have focused on time irreversibility, studying invariance under time reversal [
3,
4,
5,
6,
7]. Numerous metrics, each with varying degrees of effectiveness and based on statistical properties of signals, have been proposed. A recent review [
8] reports nearly a dozen such metrics.
In fields such as telecommunications [
13,
14], audio electronics [
15,
16], electrical engineering [
17,
18], and ultrasonic medical imaging [
19,
20], there are currently no metrics available to quantify system performance based on symmetry properties. The only existing indicators measure harmonic distortion, including Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) [
13,
14] and the
coefficient in ultrasonic medical imaging [
19,
20]. In telecommunications, distortion of radio emissions helps evaluate interference effects during transmission. Similarly, Class C and D power amplifiers in audio electronics, though more efficient than traditional Class A, AB, and B amplifiers, introduce high harmonic content due to their non-linearity. However, these harmonic-based metrics are not explicitly linked to symmetry measurement.
Today, there is no mathematical framework that clearly and exhaustively describes all signal symmetries. For periodic signals,
-classification (see
Appendix A.1) is the first framework. This classification uses the nullity of specific Fourier series coefficients to simplify calculations and classify signals based on symmetry properties. While this classification is valuable for periodic signals, it does not extend to non-periodic symmetric signals. For stochastic signals, symmetry is evaluated exclusively in terms of temporal irreversibility, and it is the invariance of statistical properties that is sought. Generally speaking, two approaches are envisaged for the study of stochastic signals. The first is to identify how time reversal modifies the statistical properties of the stochastic signal. The resulting tools seek to quantify which information is naturally oriented in the positive direction of time and which is in the opposite direction. The second approach links the intrinsic properties of the system to the symmetry of the time reversal. Breaking this symmetry leads to blatant asymmetry, resulting in significant dissipation quantifiable by a measure of entropy. For more details, see the article [
8]. A complete classification of symmetric signals and a measure of symmetry levels is still needed.
In this article, we aim to build on previous approaches while introducing a new perspective on symmetric signal analysis. From a “signal” point of view, we propose an original mathematical framework, and based on this, we present new indicators that perform the following: (i) Account for symmetries beyond time reversal; (ii) Quantify the level of symmetry in non-stochastic signals. These new metrics are inspired by recent works [
2,
10].
To clarify these concepts, let us examine two examples of symmetric signals. First, consider a finite-energy signal with unbounded support,
. As shown in
Figure 1a, there is a notable position at
, around which two equidistant points are opposed (marked by red points in
Figure 1a). This is a center of inversion with an infinite range of symmetry (see
Appendix A.2 for the definition of symmetry range). Thus, the signal exhibits odd symmetry, which can be confirmed by the following expression:
.
But if the signal’s mathematical form is unknown, how can we verify its odd symmetry? Furthermore, how can we measure the level of symmetry in the signal?
Next, let us consider a signal with finite average power,
with a period of
s. Observing
Figure 1b, we notice that at
, two equidistant points are equal, which indicates a mirror reflection axis with infinite symmetry range. This signal has even symmetry,
, as verified by the expression
. Additionally, this mirror symmetry holds for all reflection axes at intervals of
(see
Figure 1b). Over a time horizon of 4 s, we observe four patterns with a period of
s and eight mirror axes.
How can we account for all these mirror symmetries simultaneously and simply?
At this stage, and to complement the previous inquiries, further questions are raised:
How can we verify the completeness of the symmetries present in a signal?
What mathematical tools allow us to characterize a symmetric signal?
Is there a framework that perfectly describes signal symmetry?
Is there a more general classification of symmetrical signals that could encompass the -classification?
How many distinct types of periodic and non-periodic signals exist?
Periodic signals have global symmetry with infinite range; what about signals with partial symmetry and limited local range?
Are there metrics to measure the gain or loss of symmetry in a signal?
In this article, we will address each of these questions, starting with the presentation of the chosen mathematical framework. We will then introduce various measures of symmetry levels and apply them to multiple examples. Finally, we conclude with a discussion and potential future directions.
2. Mathematical Framework
With the goal of providing clear answers to each of the previous questions, several concepts such as isometries, symmetry groups, generators, and classification will be addressed.
Let us begin by defining what a symmetric signal is. From a mathematical perspective, a signal is said to be symmetric if it is invariant under a transformation . This transformation , which is an isometry, is detailed in the following section.
2.1. Isometries in Signal Analysis
An isometry is a geometric transformation that preserves the distances between two points; it does not distort either time or amplitude. An isometry is linear and satisfies the property , where is the signal under study. For the study of signals, isometries can be summarized as translation, vertical reflection, inversion, and glide reflection. We will explore later why, among the set of possible isometries, only these four are considered. Additionally, these transformations can be composed, for example, as .
Let us detail the four isometries:
The translation operation is defined by
, where
is a delay. The signal
is invariant under translation if it satisfies the following:
. For
, it follows that
where
is the identity operation. The composition of translations results in
and
. The other compositions are reported in the Cayley table (see
Table 1); for more details, see
Appendix A.4.
The vertical reflection operation is defined as follows:
, where
is a delay. The signal
is invariant under vertical reflection if it satisfies the following:
. Note that
and
. The other compositions are indicated in the Cayley table (see
Table 1); for more details, see
Appendix A.4.
The inversion operation is defined as follows:
, where
is a delay. The signal
is invariant under inversion if it satisfies the following:
. Note that
and
. The other compositions are indicated in the Cayley table (see
Table 1); for more details, see
Appendix A.4.
The glide reflection operation is defined as follows:
, where
is a delay. The signal
is invariant under glide reflection if it satisfies the following:
. Note that
and
. The other compositions are indicated in the Cayley table (see
Table 1); for more details, see
Appendix A.4.
The set of compositions of signal isometries, which can be assembled in the Cayley table (see
Table 1), forms the group of isometries (or symmetry group).
2.2. Symmetry Group
The symmetry group of a signal is the group of all isometries under which the signal is invariant. A signal with no symmetry will be invariant only in the identity operation. The group is not merely a set of operations; it possesses an algebraic structure and is equipped with an internal composition law. The group is defined by the following axioms:
- (i)
If the set contains the elements and , then it contains the products and ;
- (ii)
The composition law is associative: ;
- (iii)
The set contains the identity or neutral element such that ;
- (iv)
If the set contains the element , then it contains the inverse element that satisfies .
There are several families of groups; here, only the cyclic group, the dihedral group, and the frieze group are introduced:
The simplest family of groups is the family of cyclic groups. This is the group that uses a single generating operation
(also called the generator). A cyclic group of order
n is a group of the form
with a specific operation
, where
is repeated
n times (
is not an inner product. This is a representation from group theory where the term at the left of the bar corresponds to the generator and where the term at the right of the bar corresponds to operations see [
21,
22].). The infinite cyclic group is obtained with a single generating operation with no particular relations,
, and the elements of the group are
;
The second simplest family of groups is the family of dihedral groups. This is the group that uses two generating operations: and . The dihedral group of order is of the form with two specific operations and . The infinite dihedral group is ;
The third group presented is the symmetry group of friezes (A frieze is an infinitely long strip of finite height on which periodic patterns are printed). Examples of friezes are shown in
Figure 2. This group includes cyclic and dihedral groups, which are said to be subgroups of the frieze group. As we will see later, the symmetry group of friezes encompasses the symmetry group of periodic signals, which is a subgroup of the frieze symmetry group. As indicated in
Table A2 in
Appendix A.3, the symmetry group of friezes is based on five isometries (translation, vertical reflection, glide reflection, inversion, and horizontal reflection). The group of periodic signals, on the other hand, is based on only four isometries (translation, vertical reflection, glide reflection, and inversion), with horizontal reflection
being forbidden. Indeed, the use of this last isometry leads to a frieze with two values for the same position on the horizontal axis (see friezes 6 and 7 with blue patterns in
Figure 2), which is equivalent to a “surjection” for signals, whereas signals are by definition bijective functions. A direct consequence of the prohibition on using horizontal reflection alone is that the total number of types of periodic signals is five, compared to seven for friezes. It is easy to see that the sixth and seventh friezes (see the blue patterns in
Figure 2) cannot have equivalent periodic signals.
Here are a few examples of subgroups of the symmetry group of periodic signals :
- (a)
The translation group uses a single generator: the translation . It is a subgroup of the symmetry group of periodic signals : where is the translation to the right by the delay ;
- (b)
The reflection group uses two generators: the translation and the vertical reflection . It is a subgroup of the symmetry group of periodic signals : where is the identity operation, is the vertical reflection;
- (c)
The inversion group uses two generators: the translation and the inversion . It is a subgroup of the symmetry group of periodic signals : where is the inversion;
- (d)
The glide reflection group uses a single generator: the glide reflection . It is a subgroup of the symmetry group of periodic signals : where is the glide reflection to the right by the delay ;
- (e)
The glide reflection and inversion group (or the glide reflection and vertical reflection group ) uses two generators: the glide reflection and the inversion . It is a subgroup of the symmetry group of periodic signals : .
2.3. Generation of Signals
The generation of friezes or signals can be achieved using an iterative process (see Equation (
1)). By utilizing compositions of isometries of type
and a generator pattern (Do not confuse the group generator, which is an isometry
, with the generator pattern
, which is the signal serving as the basic building block to construct a more complex signal)
, it is possible to construct symmetric signals with as many steps
n as desired, using the following generating equation:
where
is a delay.
The choices of the generator pattern
, the number of iterations
n and the considered isometries
, will determine the properties of the generated signal. We can already assert that if the number of iterations
n is infinite, then the signal will be periodic regardless of the type of isometry considered among the four previously mentioned. However, not all signals generated by Equation (
1) will necessarily be symmetric; a judicious choice of the generator pattern, the number of iterations, and the considered isometries will be required to achieve symmetry.
To complete the description of the generator pattern, consider the left endpoint
and the right endpoint
of the generator pattern
. In the most general case, the two endpoints are different, i.e.,
. For these conditions, if the generator pattern
is continuous, then the signal
at step
is continuous, i.e.,
if and only if
, where
is chosen to ensure equality. Additionally, if the derivatives are equal, i.e.,
then the inversion operation
can also be used. If
, continuity is ensured for all four isometries. Finally, if the generator pattern already possesses symmetry properties, the corresponding Cayley table simplifies as indicated in the
Appendix A.3 in
Table A3 when the generator pattern ∩ is even and in
Table A4 when the generator pattern
is odd.
Example 1. Consider the generator signal with a duration of . Several symmetric signals (illustrated in Figure 3) can be generated depending on the number of steps chosen: - 1.
The signal at step is given by the following: where . Substituting the expression for , we obtain ;
- 2.
The signal at step is given by the following: . Substituting the expressions for , we obtain . Finally, expressing in terms of the generator pattern , we obtain .
2.4. Classification
Taking into account all the previously presented information, it is possible to propose alternative classifications
and
to the
-classification. These classifications for signals with global symmetry are reported in
Table 2. The
-classification is dedicated to periodic signals, while the
-classification is dedicated to non-periodic signals. To simplify these two classifications, we propose a binary coding scheme for the different classes as indicated in
Table 3.
For periodic signals of
-classification, we have seen that there are five types, and they correspond to a subgroup of the symmetry group of friezes. For class
, signals are invariant under a single isometry: translation (
). For classes
,
, and
, signals are invariant under two isometries (see
Table 2). For class
, signals are invariant under all four isometries.
For non-periodic symmetric signals of -classification, the number of classes is limited to two: and . Only improper isometries (vertical reflection and inversion ) are used to verify invariance. These signals are associated with the dihedral group , as invariance by translation and glide reflection are no longer possible. While non-periodic symmetric signals belong to specific classes ( or ), they may possess local symmetries. This point will be detailed further.
Example 2. Let us consider the generator pattern defined by the following: . We aim to generate a periodic signal of class , which is invariant under translation only. The resulting periodic signal is represented in Figure 4a. The periodic signal is calculated using the generator equation (see Equation (1)) when :withThe previous generating equation is reported thereafter for the first three iterations: Once the signal of type is obtained, we easily verify its invariance under translation , . The other four types of periodic signals are shown in Figure 4b–e. Example 3. Let us take the case where the generating pattern is defined by (pattern colored in blue in Figure 3a), with a duration of s, and create a non-periodic signal of type that is invariant under mirror reflection with a duration of 1 s. This signal , shown in Figure 3a, is calculated from the generating equation for :Its invariance under mirror reflection is easily verified at the position of the reflection axis at s. 5. Discussion and Conclusions
In our article, we adopted the mathematical framework of group theory (specifically the frieze group) to study both periodic and non-periodic signals. Using this framework, we proposed two new classifications, the -classification and the -classification, as complements to the -classification. After adjusting the phase at the origin of the signals, the -classification encompasses seven classes, while the -classification includes only five. By comparing these classifications, we found that -classification is more general and bijective, meaning each signal type uniquely corresponds to one class, unlike -classification.
Additionally, we introduced the symtaxis indicator
, which allows for the direct estimation of a signal’s classification based solely on its data without requiring knowledge of its expression. Notably,
is invariant to changes in the signal’s phase, unlike the estimation of classes
(see Equation (
A3)) derived from Fourier series coefficients.
In the -classification for symmetric non-periodic signals, only improper isometry invariances were found, which reduced global symmetry descriptions to just two classes. It is important to remember that the , , and classifications address global symmetries, i.e., symmetries tied to global invariances. By introducing new indicators such as the maxima of typed symmetrometries , we were able to highlight local symmetries within limited domains.
For example, the analysis of a periodic square wave signal (with
), illustrated in
Figure 7a, showed that the maxima of the typed symmetrometries were identical, with
, indicating global symmetry. With
, the maxima of the typed symmetrometries were
(global symmetry) and
(local symmetry), where the extent of the inversion centers was
of the period, while the reflection axes extended infinitely. A similar analysis applies to non-periodic signals, such as the one depicted in
Figure 9, which exhibits both global even symmetry and local odd symmetry. In this case, the inversion center’s extent was 1 s, with the maxima of typed symmetrometries being
and
. Therefore, the maxima of typed symmetrometries serve as valuable indicators for determining whether the symmetry is global (
) or local (
).
Building on this mathematical framework, we also proposed an iterative algorithm (see Equation (
1)) to generate symmetric signals from an initial generating pattern
, a chosen number of iterations
n, and isometries selected from the four available options. In telecommunications applications, knowing the sequence of isometries in advance could provide an opportunity to encode this sequence securely, enhancing message detection.
To quantify and qualify the level of symmetry present in periodic signals, we introduced the concepts of typed symmetrometries
, global symmetrometries
, symmetrometries
, distorsymmetry
, and symmentropy
, applying them to the study of various signals. Among these indicators, the symtaxis indicator
and the isorithm
are better suited for classifying periodic signals. For assessing symmetry levels, the symmetrometry indicators
,
, and symmentropy
are more appropriate as their values increase with richer symmetry. For instance, among five signal types classified under
-classification (see
Table 4), the signal with only one invariance (class
) had the lowest indicators, while the signal with the most invariances (class
) had the highest. This result supports the conclusion that class
signals, which are invariant under all four isometries, exhibit the highest global symmetrometry and symmentropy.
Even though all periodic signals in class share the same number and positions of inversion centers and reflection axes, the square wave signal has the highest indicators compared to others, reaching their maximum value. This can be attributed to the fact that, unlike sinusoidal and triangular signals, the square wave’s generating pattern is already symmetric.
Finally, when studying signals with varying duty cycles or shock wave coefficients , we found that certain symmetries could be disrupted to create global dissymmetry or even asymmetry. To illustrate this, we showed that the infinite extent of symmetry in some signals (around an inversion center or reflection axis) could be limited depending on the duty cycle. We demonstrated that the distortion caused by duty cycles and was better measured using our new distortion indicator rather than Total Harmonic Distortion (THD). Unlike THD, which is undefined for extreme values, distortion symmetry is well-defined for these cases. Additionally, we showed that THD evolves too quickly for small values and too slowly for . In our study of shock waves, we found that distortion symmetry closely matches the harmonic indicator . For this application, both distortion indicators yielded similar results, with distortion symmetry offering the advantage of being independent of signal power, as it only responds to shape changes involving dissymmetry.
Looking ahead, many possibilities for future work exist, though we will mention only a few here. Our study was deliberately limited to deterministic signals; clearly, if the signals were corrupted by noise, the indicators would be affected. However, using a metric based on the correlation coefficient, as discussed in
Section 3.5, should yield results less sensitive to noise.
For research on asymmetry in stochastic signals through time irreversibility, the statistical tools proposed in our work were limited to one isometry (vertical reflection). It would be interesting to extend these tools to account for other isometries.
Additionally, while this work focused on isometry-based symmetries, other types of symmetry, such as conformal symmetries (invariance under scaling), deserve further investigation, particularly for the study of fractal signals.
Lastly, since symmetry-based distortion indicators outperform traditional measures like THD for certain signals, applying these indicators to other fields would be a wise direction for future research.