DSPRelated.com
Ignal Enhancement Using Time-Frequency Based Denoising

Ignal Enhancement Using Time-Frequency Based Denoising

John B. Hughes
Still RelevantIntermediate

This thesis investigates and compares time and wavelet-domain denoising techniques where received signals contain broadband noise. We consider how time and wavelet-domain denoising schemes and their combinations compare in the mean squared error sense. This work applies Wiener prediction and Median filtering as they do not require any prior signal knowledge. In the wavelet-domain we use soft or hard thresholding on the detail coefficients. In addition, we explore the effect of these wavelet-domain thresholding techniques on the coefficients associated with cycle-spinning and the newly proposed recursive cycle-spinning scheme. Finally, we note that thresholding does not make an attempt to de-noise coefficients that remain after thresholding; therefore we apply time domain techniques to the remaining detail coefficients from the first level of decomposition in an attempt to de-noise them further prior to reconstruction. This thesis applies and compares these techniques using a mean squared error criterion to identify the best performing in a robust test signal environment. We find that soft thresholding with Stein’s Unbiased Risk Estimate (SURE) thresholding produces the best mean squared error results in each test case and that the addition of Wiener prediction to the first level of decomposition coefficients leads to a slightly enhanced performance. Finally, we illustrate the effects of denoising algorithms on longer data segments.


Summary

This 2003 master’s thesis compares time-domain and wavelet-domain denoising techniques for signals corrupted by broadband noise, evaluating methods in the mean squared error sense. It explains the use of Wiener prediction and median filtering, soft/hard wavelet thresholding, cycle-spinning and a recursive cycle-spinning variant, and examines combinations that apply time-domain processing after wavelet thresholding.

Key Takeaways

  • Apply soft and hard wavelet thresholding to detail coefficients and assess their impact on residual noise and reconstruction error.
  • Use cycle-spinning and recursive cycle-spinning to reduce wavelet thresholding artifacts and stabilize denoising performance.
  • Combine wavelet-domain thresholding with time-domain techniques (Wiener prediction, median filtering) to lower MSE when coefficients remain noisy.
  • Measure denoising performance with mean squared error under broadband-noise models to compare algorithm variants objectively.
  • Select denoising strategies based on signal class (e.g., speech/audio vs. radar) and the trade-offs between bias, variance, and artifact suppression.

Who Should Read This

DSP engineers, graduate students, and researchers with some experience in signal denoising who want a comparative, MSE-focused study of time- and wavelet-domain techniques for audio, speech, and radar signals.

Still RelevantIntermediate

Topics

WaveletsStatistical Signal ProcessingAudio ProcessingRadar

Related Documents