FFT vs Terez frequency estimation method.
in [DSP]
|
Prev: TDM with PCM question
Next: From today's junk mail
From: robert bristow-johnson on 22 Jun 2010 05:08 On Jun 22, 12:31 am, "steveu" <steveu(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote: > >On Jun 21, 11:00 am, fatalist <simfid...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 21, 8:53 am, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > > >> > Hello Dmitry Teres's friend, > > >how do you know it's his friend? it's more likely Dmitry himself > >posted this. > > >> > tmtlib wrote: > >> > > I have implemented simple modification of Dmitry Terez frequency > estimation > >> > > method and get awesome results: > > >> > How much is awesome? > > >something a little past objective. > > >... > > >> > > Incredible program. > > >sounds objective. > > >> > What it does is called AMDF, and this method is old as a world. > > >well, AMDF with selective terms in the sum run through a non-linear > >function (the step function). > > >> You DO realize that you are making a fool out of yourself, Vlad ? > > >not to always come to Vlad's defense, but this is what i've been > >saying about Dmitry's alg since 2004 or something. it used to be that > >Google Groups could help me find these old posts, but it doesn't work > >so well anymore. in fact, today Google Groups works so shitty that i > >am not sure i can even post anymore. > > >> Here is your textbook AMDF definition: > > >> AMDF(k) = Sum |s(i)-s(i+k)| > > >> Here is periodicity histogram (in it's simplest one-dimensional form): > > >> hist(k)=sum H(r-|s(i)-s(i+k)|) (where H is Heaviside, or unit step, > >> function) > > >> Are you telling us that these two are the same ??? > > >> YES or NO ??? > > >H(r-x) is a strictly decreasing function of x (r is a fixed > >parameter). it is nothing other than running the difference terms > >into a non-invertible non-linear function. since it's decreasing, > >instead of looking for a minimum as you would for AMDF, Dmitry is > >looking for a maximum after the sum. there are lot's of non-linear > >functions, why is H(r-x) the best one for this purpose? > > >they are not the same, and since H(|x|-r) is not the same as |x| nor > >|x|^2, we cannot say they are equivalent. but it *is* a subset of > >A[??]DF where [??] is a function of the magnitude of the difference. > > Don't you means [??]MDF? Its using the magnitude difference, but its using > a kind of twisted modal mean rather than an average. > well, it's still a mean; he *is* summing. summing is a scaled version of averaging. i replaced M with [??] because is applying a different function to the difference than just the magnitude. that step function is applied before summing or averaging. it turns out that using this step function destroys information because it is not invertible, which means i can come up with a periodic function that will fool the alg and force it to make an octave error. at least, Steve, that's how i look at it. r b-j
From: fatalist on 22 Jun 2010 09:50 On Jun 22, 5:08 am, robert bristow-johnson <r...(a)audioimagination.com> wrote: > On Jun 22, 12:31 am, "steveu" <steveu(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >On Jun 21, 11:00 am, fatalist <simfid...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Jun 21, 8:53 am, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > > > >> > Hello Dmitry Teres's friend, > > > >how do you know it's his friend? it's more likely Dmitry himself > > >posted this. > > > >> > tmtlib wrote: > > >> > > I have implemented simple modification of Dmitry Terez frequency > > estimation > > >> > > method and get awesome results: > > > >> > How much is awesome? > > > >something a little past objective. > > > >... > > > >> > > Incredible program. > > > >sounds objective. > > > >> > What it does is called AMDF, and this method is old as a world. > > > >well, AMDF with selective terms in the sum run through a non-linear > > >function (the step function). > > > >> You DO realize that you are making a fool out of yourself, Vlad ? > > > >not to always come to Vlad's defense, but this is what i've been > > >saying about Dmitry's alg since 2004 or something. it used to be that > > >Google Groups could help me find these old posts, but it doesn't work > > >so well anymore. in fact, today Google Groups works so shitty that i > > >am not sure i can even post anymore. > > > >> Here is your textbook AMDF definition: > > > >> AMDF(k) = Sum |s(i)-s(i+k)| > > > >> Here is periodicity histogram (in it's simplest one-dimensional form): > > > >> hist(k)=sum H(r-|s(i)-s(i+k)|) (where H is Heaviside, or unit step, > > >> function) > > > >> Are you telling us that these two are the same ??? > > > >> YES or NO ??? > > > >H(r-x) is a strictly decreasing function of x (r is a fixed > > >parameter). it is nothing other than running the difference terms > > >into a non-invertible non-linear function. since it's decreasing, > > >instead of looking for a minimum as you would for AMDF, Dmitry is > > >looking for a maximum after the sum. there are lot's of non-linear > > >functions, why is H(r-x) the best one for this purpose? > > > >they are not the same, and since H(|x|-r) is not the same as |x| nor > > >|x|^2, we cannot say they are equivalent. but it *is* a subset of > > >A[??]DF where [??] is a function of the magnitude of the difference. > > > Don't you means [??]MDF? Its using the magnitude difference, but its using > > a kind of twisted modal mean rather than an average. > > well, it's still a mean; he *is* summing. summing is a scaled version > of averaging. i replaced M with [??] because is applying a different > function to the difference than just the magnitude. that step > function is applied before summing or averaging. it turns out that > using this step function destroys information because it is not > invertible, which means i can come up with a periodic function that > will fool the alg and force it to make an octave error. > > at least, Steve, that's how i look at it. > > r b-j- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Your lack of general education shows up, Robert You discard the whole body of knowledge coming from dynamical systems and chaos theory and focus instead on how this particular simplest one- dimensional form of periodicity histogram is different from well-known AMDF (And the original motivation for the development of new method came from chaos theory and there are a bunch of ways to embed a signal as described in the patent) If you continue to call it AMDF then you should also start calling autocorrelation AMDF and vice versa - after all, the only difference between AMDF and autocorrelation is that the absolute difference of samlpes is replaced with their products Heck, call it whatever you want, I don't care, but if VLV substitutes periodicity histogram for AMDF in one of his shitty commercial projects and his customer gets sued for patent infringement, I wish him good luck making these stupid arguments to the judge and juries. In fact he (or you or anybody else) is more than welcome to submit patent re-exam request to USPTO if he truly believes this is another reincarnation of the old AMDF method and not something new (at least for you, practicing DSP dudes) and deserving a patent. Good luck with that.... And good luck finding periodic waveform to fool the method - the method is completely general in nature: this is as good as it gets - there will be no other better method for fundamental frequency (period) detection It DOES NOT replace FFT for other purposes like general spectral analysis because the primary purpose of Fourier Transform is signal decomposition into a sum of sines and cosines. Now, if you excuse me, I have more important things to do like worrying about safety of national air traffic and can't waste my time anymore talking to comp.dsp trolls
From: Vladimir Vassilevsky on 22 Jun 2010 10:25 fatalist wrote: > Your lack of general education shows up, Robert > > You discard the whole body of knowledge coming from dynamical systems > and chaos theory ... dark energy, nanoparticles, surge, gradual improvement, long term evolution, innovation, hyperstrings, other c00l buzzwords. Isn't it enough of bullshit, Dmitry? > and focus instead on how this particular simplest one- > dimensional form of periodicity histogram is different from well-known > AMDF [...] Excuses, excuses. Skipping all lyrics, I take this as your method don't work. Right? > Heck, call it whatever you want, I don't care, but if VLV substitutes > periodicity histogram for AMDF in one of his shitty commercial > projects and his customer gets sued for patent infringement, I wish > him good luck making these stupid arguments to the judge and juries. "Íî åñòü, åñòü Áîæèé ñóä, íàïåðñòíèêè ðàçâðàòà, Åñòü ãðîçíûé ñóäèÿ, îí æäåò! Îí íå ïîäâëàñòåí çâîíó çëàòà È ìûñëè è äåëà îí çíàåò íàïåðåä!" You are a poet, Dmitry. But don't get carried away by your wishes. > In fact he (or you or anybody else) is more than welcome to submit > patent re-exam request to USPTO if he truly believes this is another > reincarnation of the old AMDF method and not something new (at least > for you, practicing DSP dudes) and deserving a patent. > Good luck with that.... Even the very best patent is only worth money that is going to be spent defending it. > And good luck finding periodic waveform to fool the method - the > method is completely general in nature: this is as good as it gets - > there will be no other better method for fundamental frequency > (period) detection Where is this miraculous method? > It DOES NOT replace FFT for other purposes like general spectral > analysis because the primary purpose of Fourier Transform is signal > decomposition into a sum of sines and cosines. Well, at least there is admittedly one thing that your miraculous method can't do. > Now, if you excuse me, I have more important things to do like > worrying about safety of national air traffic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Stop_Worrying_and_Start_Living No need to worry. National air traffic will survive. > and can't waste my time anymore talking to comp.dsp trolls Yes, you should get back to your slave work. Othervise a manager will give you a notice. VLV
From: fatalist on 22 Jun 2010 14:37 On Jun 22, 10:25 am, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > fatalist wrote: > > Your lack of general education shows up, Robert > > > You discard the whole body of knowledge coming from dynamical systems > > and chaos theory > > ... dark energy, nanoparticles, surge, gradual improvement, long term > evolution, innovation, hyperstrings, other c00l buzzwords. > Isn't it enough of bullshit, Dmitry? > > > and focus instead on how this particular simplest one- > > dimensional form of periodicity histogram is different from well-known > > AMDF > > [...] > > Excuses, excuses. Skipping all lyrics, I take this as your method don't > work. Right? > > > Heck, call it whatever you want, I don't care, but if VLV substitutes > > periodicity histogram for AMDF in one of his shitty commercial > > projects and his customer gets sued for patent infringement, I wish > > him good luck making these stupid arguments to the judge and juries. > > "Íî åñòü, åñòü Áîæèé ñóä, íàïåðñòíèêè ðàçâðàòà, > Åñòü ãðîçíûé ñóäèÿ, îí æäåò! > Îí íå ïîäâëàñòåí çâîíó çëàòà > È ìûñëè è äåëà îí çíàåò íàïåðåä!" > > You are a poet, Dmitry. But don't get carried away by your wishes. > > > In fact he (or you or anybody else) is more than welcome to submit > > patent re-exam request to USPTO if he truly believes this is another > > reincarnation of the old AMDF method and not something new (at least > > for you, practicing DSP dudes) and deserving a patent. > > Good luck with that.... > > Even the very best patent is only worth money that is going to be spent > defending it. > > > And good luck finding periodic waveform to fool the method - the > > method is completely general in nature: this is as good as it gets - > > there will be no other better method for fundamental frequency > > (period) detection > > Where is this miraculous method? > > > It DOES NOT replace FFT for other purposes like general spectral > > analysis because the primary purpose of Fourier Transform is signal > > decomposition into a sum of sines and cosines. > > Well, at least there is admittedly one thing that your miraculous method > can't do. > > > Now, if you excuse me, I have more important things to do like > > worrying about safety of national air traffic > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Stop_Worrying_and_Start_Living > > No need to worry. National air traffic will survive. > > > and can't waste my time anymore talking to comp.dsp trolls > > Yes, you should get back to your slave work. Othervise a manager will > give you a notice. > > VLV /"\ |\./| | | | | |>~<| | | /'\| |/'\.. /~\| | | | \ | =[@]= | | \ | | | | | \ | ~ ~ ~ ~ |` ) | / \ / \ / \ _____ / |--//''`\--| | (( +==)) | |--\_|_//--|
From: robert bristow-johnson on 22 Jun 2010 14:45
On Jun 22, 2:37 pm, fatalist <simfid...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 22, 10:25 am, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > > > > > fatalist wrote: > > > Your lack of general education shows up, Robert > > > > You discard the whole body of knowledge coming from dynamical systems > > > and chaos theory > > > ... dark energy, nanoparticles, surge, gradual improvement, long term > > evolution, innovation, hyperstrings, other c00l buzzwords. > > Isn't it enough of bullshit, Dmitry? > > > > and focus instead on how this particular simplest one- > > > dimensional form of periodicity histogram is different from well-known > > > AMDF > > > [...] > > > Excuses, excuses. Skipping all lyrics, I take this as your method don't > > work. Right? > > > > Heck, call it whatever you want, I don't care, but if VLV substitutes > > > periodicity histogram for AMDF in one of his shitty commercial > > > projects and his customer gets sued for patent infringement, I wish > > > him good luck making these stupid arguments to the judge and juries. > > > "Íî åñòü, åñòü Áîæèé ñóä, íàïåðñòíèêè ðàçâðàòà, > > Åñòü ãðîçíûé ñóäèÿ, îí æäåò! > > Îí íå ïîäâëàñòåí çâîíó çëàòà > > È ìûñëè è äåëà îí çíàåò íàïåðåä!" > > > You are a poet, Dmitry. But don't get carried away by your wishes. > > > > In fact he (or you or anybody else) is more than welcome to submit > > > patent re-exam request to USPTO if he truly believes this is another > > > reincarnation of the old AMDF method and not something new (at least > > > for you, practicing DSP dudes) and deserving a patent. > > > Good luck with that.... > > > Even the very best patent is only worth money that is going to be spent > > defending it. > > > > And good luck finding periodic waveform to fool the method - the > > > method is completely general in nature: this is as good as it gets - > > > there will be no other better method for fundamental frequency > > > (period) detection > > > Where is this miraculous method? > > > > It DOES NOT replace FFT for other purposes like general spectral > > > analysis because the primary purpose of Fourier Transform is signal > > > decomposition into a sum of sines and cosines. > > > Well, at least there is admittedly one thing that your miraculous method > > can't do. > > > > Now, if you excuse me, I have more important things to do like > > > worrying about safety of national air traffic > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Stop_Worrying_and_Start_Living > > > No need to worry. National air traffic will survive. > > > > and can't waste my time anymore talking to comp.dsp trolls > > > Yes, you should get back to your slave work. Othervise a manager will > > give you a notice. > > > VLV > > /"\ > |\./| > | | > | | > |>~<| > | | > /'\| |/'\.. > /~\| | | | \ > | =[@]= | | \ > | | | | | \ > | ~ ~ ~ ~ |` ) > | / > \ / > \ / > \ _____ / > |--//''`\--| > | (( +==)) | > |--\_|_//--| you need a mono-spaced font for this to be apparent. r b-j |