ebook img

Jacob Benesty Arden (Yiteng) Huang Adaptive Signal Processing PDF

39 Pages·2012·0.42 MB·English
by  
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Jacob Benesty Arden (Yiteng) Huang Adaptive Signal Processing

Jacob Benesty Arden (Yiteng) Huang Adaptive Signal Processing: Application to Real-World Problems SPIN Springer’s internal project number, if known Springer Berlin Heidelberg NewYork Barcelona Budapest HongKong London Milan Paris SantaClara Singapore Tokyo Contents 4 Multichannel Frequency-Domain Adaptive Filtering with Application to Acoustic Echo Cancellation :::::::::::::: 95 Herbert Buchner, Jacob Benesty, Walter Kellermann 4.1Introduction................................................. 95 4.2General Derivation of Multichannel Frequency-Domain Algorithms . 98 4.2.1Optimization Criterion................................... 99 4.2.2Normal Equation........................................ 102 4.2.3Adaptation Algorithm ................................... 103 4.3ConvergenceAnalysis......................................... 106 4.3.1Analysis Model ......................................... 107 4.3.2Convergencein the Mean................................. 107 4.3.3Convergenceof the Mean-Squared Error.................... 108 4.4Generalized Frequency-Domain Adaptive MIMO Filtering......... 110 4.5Approximation and Special Cases .............................. 113 4.5.1Approximation of the Frequency-Domain Kalman Gain ...... 113 4.5.2Special Cases ........................................... 114 4.6A Dynamical Regularization Strategy........................... 116 4.7E(cid:14)cient Multichannel Realization.............................. 117 4.7.1E(cid:14)cient Calculation of the Frequency-Domain Kalman Gain.. 117 4.7.2DynamicalRegularizationfor ProposedKalmanGainApproach119 4.7.3E(cid:14)cient DFT calculation of overlapping data blocks ......... 120 4.8Simulations and Real-World Applications ....................... 122 4.8.1Multichannel Acoustic Echo Cancellation................... 123 4.8.2Adaptive MIMO Filtering for Hands-Free Speech Communi- cation.................................................. 125 4.9Conclusions ................................................. 127 References ..................................................... 127 4 Multichannel Frequency-Domain Adaptive Filtering with Application to Acoustic Echo Cancellation Herbert Buchner1, Jacob Benesty2, and Walter Kellermann1 1 Univerityof Erlangen-Nuremberg, Telecommunications Laboratory, Cauerstr. 7, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany E-mail: fbuchner,[email protected] 2 Bell Laboratories, LucentTechnologies, Murray Hill, NJ 07974, USA E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. In unknown environments where we need to identify, model, or track unknown and time-varying channels, adaptive (cid:12)ltering has been proven to be an e(cid:11)ectivetool.Inthischapter,wefocusonmultichannelalgorithmsinthefrequency domain that are especially well suited for input signals which are not only auto- correlatedbutalsohighlycross-correlatedamongthechannels.Thesepropertiesare particularlyimportantforapplicationslikemultichannelacousticechocancellation. Mostfrequency-domainalgorithms,astheyarewellknownfromthesingle-channel case, are derived from existing time-domain algorithms and are based on di(cid:11)erent heuristic strategies. Here, we present a new rigorous derivation of a whole class of multichannel adaptive (cid:12)ltering algorithms in the frequency domain based on a recursive least-squares criterion. Then, from the so-called normal equation, we de- rive a generic adaptive algorithm in the frequency domain that we formulate in di(cid:11)erent ways. An analysis of this multichannel algorithm shows that the mean- squared error convergence is independent of the input signal statistics. A useful approximation provides interesting links between some well-known algorithms for the single-channel case and the general framework. We also give design rules for important parameters to optimize the performance in practice. Due to the rigor- ous approach, the proposed framework inherently takes the coherence between all inputsignalchannelsintoaccount,whilethecomputationalcomplexityiskeptlow by introducing several new techniques, such as a robust recursive Kalman gain computation in the frequency domain and e(cid:14)cient fast Fourier transform (FFT) computation tailored to overlapping data blocks. Simulation results and real-time performanceformultichannelacousticechocancellationshowthehighe(cid:14)ciencyof the approach. 4.1 Introduction Theabilityofadaptive(cid:12)lterstooperatesatisfactorilyinanunknownenviron- ment and to track time variations of input statistics make it a powerful tool in such diverse (cid:12)elds as communications,acoustics,radar,sonar,seismology, 96 Herbert Buchneret al. and biomedical engineering.Despite of the largevariety of applications,four basic classes of adaptive (cid:12)ltering applications may be distinguished [1]: sys- tem identi(cid:12)cation, inverse modeling, prediction, and interference cancelling. In speech and acoustics, where all those basic types of adaptive (cid:12)ltering can be found, weoften havetodeal with verylong(cid:12)lters (sometimes several thousand taps), unpredictably time-variant environments, and highly non- stationary and auto-correlated signals. In addition, the simultaneous processing of multiple input streams, i.e., multichannel adaptive (cid:12)ltering (MC-ADF) is becoming more and more de- sirable for future products. Typical examples are multichannel acoustic echo cancellation(systemidenti(cid:12)cation) oradaptivebeamformingmicrophonear- rays (interference cancelling). Inthischapter,weinvestigateadaptiveMIMO(multipleinputandmulti- pleoutput)systemsthatareupdatedinthefrequencydomain.Theresulting generalizedmultichannelfrequency-domainadaptive(cid:12)lteringhasalreadyled toe(cid:14)cientreal-timeimplementationsofmultichannelacousticechocancellers on standard personal computers [2,3]. Generally, we distinguish two classes of adaptive algorithms. One class includes (cid:12)lters that are updated in the time domain, usually on a sample- by-sample basis,like the classicalleast-mean-square(LMS) [4] and recursive least-squares (RLS) [5] algorithms. The other class may be de(cid:12)ned as (cid:12)lters thatareupdatedinthediscreteFouriertransform(DFT)domain(‘frequency domain’), block-by-block in general, using the fast Fourier transform (FFT) as a powerful vehicle. As a result of this block processing, the arithmetic complexity of the latter category is signi(cid:12)cantly reduced compared to time- domain adaptive algorithms. The possibility to exploit the e(cid:14)ciency of FFT algorithms is due to the Toeplitz structure of the matrices involved, which results from the transversal structure of the adaptive (cid:12)lters. The Toeplitz matrices can be expressed by circulant matrices which are diagonalizableby the DFT. Consequently, the key for deriving the frequency-domain adaptive algorithms is to formulate the time-domain error criterion so that Toeplitz and circulant matrices are explicitly shown. In addition to the low complexity, another advantage resulting from this diagonalization in frequency-domain adaptive (cid:12)ltering is that the adapta- tion stepsize can be normalized independently for each frequency bin, which results in a more uniform convergence overthe entire frequency range. Single-channelfrequency-domainadaptive(cid:12)lteringwas(cid:12)rstintroducedby Dentinoetal.,basedontheleast-mean-squares(LMS)algorithminthetime- domain [6]. Ferrara[7] wasthe (cid:12)rst to present an e(cid:14)cient frequency-domain adaptive (cid:12)lter algorithm (FLMS) that converges to the optimum (Wiener) solution.MansourandGray[8]derivedanevenmoree(cid:14)cientalgorithm,the unconstrained FLMS (UFLMS), using only three FFT operations per block instead of (cid:12)ve for the FLMS, with comparable performance [9]. However, in some applications, a major handicap with these structures is the delay in- 4 Multichannel AdaptiveFiltering, Acoustic Echo Cancellation 97 troduced between input and output. Indeed, for e(cid:14)cient implementations, this delay is equal to the length L of the adaptive (cid:12)lter, which is consider- able for applications like acoustic echo cancellation. A new structure called multi-delay (cid:12)lter(MDF), usingthe classicaloverlap-save(OLS)method,was proposed in [10,11] and generalized in [12] where the new block size N was made independent of the (cid:12)lter length L; N can be chosen as small as de- sired, with a delay equal to N. Although from a complexity point of view, the optimum choice is N = L, using smaller block sizes (N < L) in order to reduce the delay is still more e(cid:14)cient than time-domain algorithms. A more general scheme based on weighted overlapand add (WOLA) methods, the generalized multidelay (cid:12)lter (GMDF(cid:11)) was proposed in [13,14], where (cid:11) is the overlap factor. The settings (cid:11) > 1 appear to be very useful in the contextof adaptive(cid:12)ltering,sincethe (cid:12)lter coe(cid:14)cientscanbe adaptedmore frequently (every N=(cid:11) samples instead of every N samples in the conven- tional OLS scheme) and the delay can be (further) reduced as well. Thus, this structure introduces one more degree of freedom, but the complexity is increasedroughlybyafactor(cid:11).TakingtheblocksizeintheMDFaslargeas the delay permits will increase the convergence rate of the algorithm, while choosing the overlapfactor greaterthan 1 will increase the tracking abilities of the algorithm. The case of multichannel adaptive (cid:12)ltering, as shown in Fig. 4.1, has been found to be structurally more di(cid:14)cult in general. In typical scenarios, the input signals x (n), p = 1;:::;P, to the adaptive (cid:12)lter are not only p auto-correlated but also highly cross-correlated which often results in very slow convergence of the LP (cid:12)lter coe(cid:14)cients h^ (n), where (cid:20) = 0;:::;L(cid:0) p;(cid:20) 1. This problem becomes particularly severe in multichannel acoustic echo cancellation [15{17], where the signals x (n) represent loudspeaker signals p that may originate from common sources. Signal y(n) represents an echo received by a microphone. y(n) x(n) 1 ^ h(n) . 1 y^(n) e(n) .. ... ... + - + x(n) P h^ (n) P Fig.4.1. Multichannel adaptive(cid:12)ltering. Direct application of commonly used low-complexity algorithms, such as the LMS algorithm or conventional frequency-domain adaptive (cid:12)ltering, to the multichannel case usually leads to disappointing results as the cross- 98 Herbert Buchneret al. correlations between the input channels are not taken into account [18]. In contrast to this, high-ordera(cid:14)ne projection algorithms and RLS algorithms do take the cross-correlations into account. Indeed, it can be shown that the RLS providesoptimum convergencespeed even in the multichannel case [18], but its complexity is prohibitively high and, e.g., will not allow real- time implementation of multichannel acoustic echo cancellation on standard hardware any time soon. Two-channel frequency-domain adaptive (cid:12)ltering was (cid:12)rst introduced in [19]inthecontextofstereophonicacousticechocancellationandderivedfrom the extended least-mean-squares(ELMS) algorithm [20] in the time domain using similar considerations as for the single-channel case outlined above. The rigorousderivation of frequency-domain adaptive (cid:12)ltering presented in the next section leads to a generic algorithm with RLS-like properties. We will also see that there is an e(cid:14)cient approximation of this algorithm taking the cross-correlationsinto account. The single-channel version of this algorithm provides a direct link to existing frequency-domain algorithms. Theorganizationofthischapterisasfollows.InSection4.2,weintroduce afrequency-domainrecursiveleast-squarescriterionfromwhichtheso-called normal equation is derived. Then, from the normal equation, we deduce a generic multichannel adaptive algorithm that we can formulate in di(cid:11)erent ways,andweintroducethe so-calledfrequency-domainKalmangain.InSec- tion4.3,westudythe convergenceofthismultichannelalgorithm.InSection 4.4, we consider the general MIMO case and, in Section 4.5, we give a very useful approximation, deduce some well-known single-channel algorithms as special cases, and explicitly show how the cross-correlations are taken into account in the multichannel case. We also give design rules for some impor- tantparameterssuchastheexponentialwindow,regularization,andadapta- tion stepsize. A useful dynamical regularizationmethod is discussed in more detail in Section 4.6. Section 4.7 introduces several methods for increasing computationale(cid:14)ciencyinthemulti-inputandMIMOcases,suchasarobust recursiveKalmangaincomputation and FFT computation tailoredfor over- lapping datablocks. Section 4.8presentssome simulationsand multichannel real-world implementations for hands-free speech communications. Finally, our results are summarized in Section 4.9. 4.2 General Derivation of Multichannel Frequency-Domain Algorithms In the (cid:12)rst part of this section we formulate a block recursive least-squares criterion in the frequency domain. Once the criterion is rigorously de(cid:12)ned, the adaptive multichannel algorithm follows immediately. 4 Multichannel AdaptiveFiltering, Acoustic Echo Cancellation 99 4.2.1 Optimization Criterion To obtain an optimization criterion for block adaptation, we assume the (generally time-variant) adaptive (cid:12)lter coe(cid:14)cients h^p;0;:::;^hp;L(cid:0)1 for the input channels 1;:::;P to be (cid:12)xed within the block intervals of length N. Forconvenienceofnotation,thisallowsustoomitthetimeindexofthe(cid:12)lter coe(cid:14)cients during the following derivation of the block error signal. From Fig. 4.1, it can be seen that the errorsignal at time n between the output of the multichanneladaptive(cid:12)ltery^(n) andthe desiredoutput signal y(n) is given by e(n)=y(n)(cid:0)y^(n); (4.1) with P L(cid:0)1 y^(n)= x (n(cid:0)(cid:20))h^ : (4.2) p p;(cid:20) p=1(cid:20)=0 XX Bypartitioningthe impulse responses h^ into segmentsof length N asin p [10,11], (4.2) can be written as P K(cid:0)1N(cid:0)1 y^(n)= x (n(cid:0)Nk(cid:0)(cid:20))h^ ; (4.3) p p;Nk+(cid:20) p=1 k=0 (cid:20)=0 X X X where we assume that the total (cid:12)lter length L is an integer multiple of N (N (cid:20)L), so that L=KN. For convenient notation of the multichannel algorithms, we rewrite (4.3) in vectorized form P K(cid:0)1 P y^(n)= xT (n)h^ = xT(n)h^ =xT(n)h^; (4.4) p;k p;k p p p=1 k=0 p=1 X X X where x (n) =[x (n(cid:0)Nk);x (n(cid:0)Nk(cid:0)1);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);x (n(cid:0)Nk(cid:0)N +1)]T;(4.5) p;k p p p h^p;k =[h^p;Nk;^hp;Nk+1;(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);^hp;Nk+N(cid:0)1]T; (4.6) x (n) =[xT (n);xT (n);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);xT (n)]T; (4.7) p p;0 p;1 p;K(cid:0)1 h^ =[h^T ;h^T ;(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);h^T ]T; (4.8) p p;0 p;1 p;K(cid:0)1 x(n) =[xT(n);xT(n);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);xT(n)]T; (4.9) 1 2 P h^ =[h^T;h^T;(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);h^T]T: (4.10) 1 2 P Superscript T denotes transposition of a vector or a matrix. The length-N vectors h^ , k = 0;:::;K (cid:0)1, represent sub-(cid:12)lters of the partitioned tap- p;k weight vector h^ of channel p. p 100 Herbert Buchneret al. Wenowde(cid:12)netheblockerrorsignaloflengthN.Basedon(4.1) and (4.4) we write e(m)=y(m)(cid:0)y^(m); (4.11) with m being the block time index, and P K(cid:0)1 P y^(m)= UT (m)h^ = UT(m)h^ =UT(m)h^; (4.12) p;k p;k p p p=1 k=0 p=1 X X X where e(m)=[e(mN);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);e(mN +N (cid:0)1)]T; (4.13) y(m)=[y(mN);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);y(mN +N (cid:0)1)]T; (4.14) y^(m)=[y^(mN);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);y^(mN +N (cid:0)1)]T; (4.15) U (m)=[x (mN);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);x (mN +N (cid:0)1)]; (4.16) p;k p;k p;k U (m)=[UT (m);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);UT (m)]T; (4.17) p p;0 p;K(cid:0)1 U(m)=[UT(m);(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1);UT(m)]T: (4.18) 1 P Itcaneasilybeveri(cid:12)edthatU ,p=1;:::;P,k =0;:::;K(cid:0)1areToeplitz p;k matrices of size (N (cid:2)N): x (mN (cid:0)Nk) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) x (mN (cid:0)Nk(cid:0)N +1) p p UT (m)=2 xp(mN (cid:0)Nk+1) ... ... 3 p;k .. .. .. .. 6 . . . . 7 6 7 6x (mN (cid:0)Nk+N (cid:0)1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) x (mN (cid:0)Nk) 7 6 p p 7 4 5 These Toeplitz matrices are now diagonalized in two steps: Step 1: Transformation of Toeplitz matrices into circulant matrices. Any Toeplitz matrix U can be transformed, by doubling its size, to a p;k circulant matrix U0T (m)UT (m) Cp;k(m)= UpT;k(m)Up0T;k(m) ; (4.19) (cid:20) p;k p;k (cid:21) where the U0 are also Toeplitz matrices and can be expressed in terms of p;k the elements of UT (m), except for an arbitrary diagonal, e.g., p;k x (mN (cid:0)Nk(cid:0)N) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) x (mN (cid:0)Nk+1) p p U0T (m)=2xp(mN (cid:0)Nk(cid:0)N +1) ... ... 3: p;k 6 ... ... ... ... 7 6 7 6 x (mN (cid:0)Nk(cid:0)1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) x (mN (cid:0)Nk(cid:0)N)7 6 p p 7 4 5

Description:
adaptive lter algorithm (FLMS) that converges to the optimum (Wiener) solution. Mansour and Gray [8] derived an even more e cient algorithm, the
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.