On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Carnë Draug <carandraug+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 August 2012 22:19, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Carnë Draug wrote:
>>> On 14 August 2012 21:33, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Carnë Draug wrote:
>>>>> On 14 August 2012 20:02, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Carnë Draug wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9 August 2012 03:11, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Finally got back to this, it's now closer to what you showed here.
>>>>>>>> It's clear that Matlab is forcing the 4th argument to always be a
>>>>>>>> power of 2, even though that's not in the help text. I implemented
>>>>>>>> that, added an error message for the case of the argument being too
>>>>>>>> small (after conversion to a power of 2), and added a test case based
>>>>>>>> on your examples above. Thanks for those!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Mike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have just noticed that this introduced another bug (which I think
>>>>>>> was already there before, this just made it more apparent. For
>>>>>>> example, if the minimum value for 4th argument is more than the
>>>>>>> default, it also automatically (and silently) increases though I'm not
>>>>>>> sure for how much. For example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for checking, I'll take a look at this again today when I get
>>>>>> back to my dev box.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> f = [0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 1]; m = [0 0 1 1 0 0];
>>>>>>>>> bdef = fir2(1024, f, m);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> should make the 4th argument default to 512 which would be too low and
>>>>>>> return an error (current behaviour with Octave). However, this does
>>>>>>> not happen in Matlab. But if the default value is specified, then it
>>>>>>> gives an error. And it doesn't default to the next possible value
>>>>>>> (1024) as I first expected, it defaults to 2048.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me know if you need more tests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, can you repeat your tests using 1023 and 2047 instead? The limit
>>>>>> is calculated based on the length of the filter which is order+1, I
>>>>>> think that's why you're seeing it go up to the next power of two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bdef = fir2(1023, f, m);
>>>>>> b512 = fir2(1023, f, m, 512); % should not error now
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it doesn't give an error.
>>>>>
>>>>>> b1024 = fir2(1023, f, m, 1024);
>>>>>> isequal(bdef, b512) % should be true
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's false
>>>>>
>>>>>> bdef = fir2(2047, f, m);
>>>>>> b1024 = fir2(2047, f, m, 1024);
>>>>>> isequal(bdef, b1024) % should be true
>>>>>
>>>>> No. Also false.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, ok, so it allows it to be as low as 1/2 but defaults to a larger
>>>> value, how about these, let's try and find the cutoff:
>>>
>>> isequal (fir2 (511, f, m), fir2 (511, f, m, 512)) # true
>>> isequal (fir2 (512, f, m), fir2 (512, f, m, 512)) # true
>>> isequal (fir2 (513, f, m), fir2 (513, f, m, 512)) # true
>>> isequal (fir2 (512, f, m), fir2 (512, f, m, 1024)) # false
>>> isequal (fir2 (513, f, m), fir2 (513, f, m, 1024)) #false
>>> isequal (fir2 (1022, f, m), fir2 (1022, f, m, 512)) #true
>>> isequal (fir2 (1022, f, m), fir2 (1022, f, m, 1024)) # false
>>> isequal (fir2 (1023, f, m), fir2 (1023, f, m, 1024)) #true
>>> isequal (fir2 (2046, f, m), fir2 (2046, f, m, 2048)) #true
>>> isequal (fir2 (2046, f, m), fir2 (2046, f, m, 2048)) #true
>>> isequal (fir2 (2047, f, m), fir2 (2047, f, m, 2048)) #true
>>
>> Great, I think I have enough to fix that one now.
>>
>>>>>> If you have patience for any more, I can come up with some tests to
>>>>>> verify the 5th argument too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, no problem. Give me whatever tests you need and I'll run them.
>>>>> Same for other functions of the package or if you want to take a
>>>>> closer look at differences between results.
>>>>
>>>> Based on how our fir2 is working now, the 5th arg defaults to the 4th
>>>> arg / 20 (and ML's help says the defaults are 512 and 25), so:
>>>> isequal (fir2 (63, f, m, 512), fir2 (63, f, m, 512, 25))
>>>> isequal (fir2 (63, f, m, 1024), fir2 (63, f, m, 1024, 51))
>>>> isequal (fir2 (63, f, m, 2048), fir2 (63, f, m, 2048, 102))
>>>>
>>>> I don't like my chances that these are right out of the box :)
>>>
>>> You are right to not make any bets. All 3 are false in Matlab 2011b.
>>
>> Ok, the docs are wrong yet again, brute force it:
>>
>> for i = [512, 1024, 2048, 4096]
>> for j = 1:fix(i/10)
>> if isequal (fir2 (63, f, m, i), fir2 (63, f, m, i, j))
>> sprintf('default for %d is %d\n', i, j)
>> end
>> end
>> end
>
> There you go:
>
> default for 512 is 20
> default for 1024 is 40
> default for 2048 is 81
> default for 4096 is 163
>
> From this, it seems to me that the default of j is "floor (i/25)".
Agreed.
> Where on documentation did you saw that it was /20?
Only piecing together these bits:
* Matlab help [1] for fir2 says "By default, lap is 25."
* Our fir2 had ramp_n = grid_n/20 since before I looked at it
So I'll fix that and fix the help while I'm at it. Thanks for all the test runs.
[1] http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/signal/ref/fir2.html
--
mike
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
