but my mind has gone blank! The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone..
A daft question
Started by ●August 13, 2012
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
> but my mind has gone blank!Maybe think about the problem a little longer. Then calculate the scalar product again, and the answer should be obvious. PS: How long is "a little bit longer"? Say, one sample duration :-)
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
On 8/13/2012 1:03 AM, gyansorova@gmail.com wrote:> but my mind has gone blank! > > The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) > > where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. > > However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone.. >It's all in "k" and/or how you handle / express that. Fred
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:32:01 AM UTC+12, Fred Marshall wrote:> On 8/13/2012 1:03 AM, gyansorova@gmail.com wrote: > > > but my mind has gone blank! > > > > > > The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) > > > > > > where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. > > > > > > However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone.. > > > > > > > It's all in "k" and/or how you handle / express that. > > > > FredYes, of course, it's for k=0,1,2 etc so the same thing
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
On 8/13/2012 12:03 PM, gyansorova@gmail.com wrote:> On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 4:32:01 AM UTC+12, Fred Marshall wrote: >> On 8/13/2012 1:03 AM, gyansorova@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> but my mind has gone blank! >> >>> >> >>> The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) >> >>> >> >>> where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. >> >>> >> >>> However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone.. >> >>> >> >> >> >> It's all in "k" and/or how you handle / express that. >> >> >> >> Fred > > Yes, of course, it's for k=0,1,2 etc so the same thingI'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "so the same thing". Does that mean you now have an answer to your question or you think the question is clear on this point and there has been no answer? Fred
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
On Monday, August 13, 2012 8:03:57 PM UTC+12, gyans...@gmail.com wrote:> but my mind has gone blank! > > > > The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) > > > > where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. > > > > However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone..I assumed you were saying that I need to take k=0,1,2,3 and hence have a vector solution and not just a scalar.
Reply by ●August 13, 20122012-08-13
gyansorova@gmail.com writes:> but my mind has gone blank! > > The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k)You're really being quite sloppy here right at the start. Hint: rethink where you are putting your time index k. Also, strictly speaking, that is a dot product, or inner product, not an FIR output.> However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another > one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials > and is of dimension n+m-1We do? Write the definition and think carefully about boundary conditions. -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●August 14, 20122012-08-14
On Aug 13, 4:03�am, gyansor...@gmail.com wrote:> but my mind has gone blank! > > The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) > > where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. > > However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone..k goes from 0 to n+m-2, or from 1 to n+m-1 So to get the convolution you need to think about how the content of the vector W(k) changes at each value of k i.e. you actually have n +m-1 different W vectors. Cheers, Dave
Reply by ●August 14, 20122012-08-14
On 8/13/2012 6:27 PM, gyansorova@gmail.com wrote:> On Monday, August 13, 2012 8:03:57 PM UTC+12, gyans...@gmail.com wrote: >> but my mind has gone blank! >> >> >> >> The output of an FIR filter is say s(k) = X'W(k) >> >> >> >> where X is the input vector and W(k) the weight vector. This is convolving the two vectors X and W to give a scalar s(k) ie the dot product of two vectors. >> >> >> >> However, we know that convolving a vector of dimension n with another one of dimension m gives an output like multiplying two polynomials and is of dimension n+m-1 so where has the other terms gone.. > > I assumed you were saying that I need to take k=0,1,2,3 and hence have a vector solution and not just a scalar. >If you're responding to me then that *is* what I was suggesting. Yes. There's really no other choice is there? Fred
Reply by ●August 14, 20122012-08-14
Dave <dspguy2@netscape.net> writes:> So to get the convolution you need to think about how the content of > the vector W(k) changes at each value of k i.e. you actually have n > +m-1 different W vectors.Why would the weight vector change at all? -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com






