For the PRBS signal with N bit random sequences (Figure (a)), which represents a generalization of the pulse signal , the FFT approach achieved a slightly improved DRT recovery compared to the time-domain method (Figure (a) for the 2×ZARC model), and both methods led to comparable impedance recoveries (Figure (c)). This finding was confirmed using 100 synthetic voltage signals (see Table and the violin plots in Figure ). The PRBS input proved especially effective at recovering continuous DRTs in both ZARC models. Moreover, the time-domain approach was approximately 27 times more time-consuming, primarily due to calculating N bit matrices B time (see and Section S1). Importantly, the computational time for the FFT approach includes both the construction of the M × (N + 1) matrix B FFT with M = 54 and N = 5.00 × 10 5 (Section 2.1.1), and the subsequent DRT deconvolution via .