Jones [mailto:glenn.calt...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 1 September 2009 9:28 AM
To: Cheng, Wan (ATNF, Marsfield)
Cc: d...@ssl.berkeley.edu; Beresford, Ron (ATNF, Marsfield);
casper@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [casper] ROACH progress.
I found this to be the case as well. I believe that the
rthimer [mailto:d...@ssl.berkeley.edu]
> Sent: Friday, 28 August 2009 10:51 AM
> To: G Jones
> Cc: Beresford, Ron (ATNF, Marsfield); casper@lists.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [casper] ROACH progress.
>
>
>
> thanks glenn,
>
> the trick of using a small number of coefficients
?
Wan
-Original Message-
From: Dan Werthimer [mailto:d...@ssl.berkeley.edu]
Sent: Friday, 28 August 2009 10:51 AM
To: G Jones
Cc: Beresford, Ron (ATNF, Marsfield); casper@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [casper] ROACH progress.
thanks glenn,
the trick of using a small number of
thanks glenn,
the trick of using a small number of coefficients
for a large transform should work. we've done
million point transforms using only 1024 integer
coefficients; the results come out very close to a floating point
full coefficient computation. perhaps something is
broken in the des
Dan,
This sounds to me like the behavior I see with long transforms with the
maximum coefficient depth setting, where the block tries to use the trick of
storing only rounded roots of unity for the last stages. I can't look into
it in detail right now, but I recommend looking under the masks to fin
dear casper collaborators,
can anybody please advise ron on his question
appended below about problems with 32K point
wideband real transforms??
ron - does your 32K wideband real FFT work
correctly in simulation?
we've build instruments doing 32K complex transforms,
but these FFT's are complex
6 matches
Mail list logo
