Hi Achilleas
No problem. Would you like me to update the documentation and submit a patch?
Good luck getting back up and running.
Tim
On 2/28/07, Achilleas Anastasopoulos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tim,
thanks for the contribution.
At this point I am gnuradio-less since my hard disk
failed
Tim,
thanks for the contribution.
At this point I am gnuradio-less since my hard disk
failed a couple of days ago...
but I'll test all the uploaded code as soon as I am
up and running.
Thanks again,
Achilleas
Tim Meehan wrote:
Achilleas and Eric,
I have attached a patch to trellis_viterbi_X
Achilleas and Eric,
I have attached a patch to trellis_viterbi_X.cc.t,
trellis_viterbi_X.i.t and trellis_viterbi_X.h.t
This patch allows for multiple initial and/or final states by calling
viterbi with a vector for S0 and/or SK. The call is overloaded so
that viterbi can still be called with a
Achilleas and Eric,
Thanks for the reply. . I agree performance should not be an issue.
I understand the steps you describe below, and that is the approach I
am taking.
I have overloaded the viterbi_X for using (int S0) or (vector S0)
and the calls through Python seem to work. I think I will
Tim Meehan wrote:
There are
public methods to return d_S0 and d_SK, and I don't want to break
these either. I will consult some friends who are better C++
programmers then I am.
BTW, I wouldn't worry about these accessors...
they are pretty much useless and can be either eliminated
or made m
Eric,
Don't see any problem with either of your concerns.
Mapping to python is straightforward as you know
better than I.
Also, performancewise there is absolutely no additional overhead,
since the initialization of the metrics is done anyway; Tim will only
change some values from INF to 0; tha
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 08:02:45PM -0800, Tim Meehan wrote:
> Hi Achilleas,
>
> Yes, I will overload the method so that I don't break any existing
> code. I am going to have to think about the return values. There are
> public methods to return d_S0 and d_SK, and I don't want to break
> these ei
Hi Achilleas,
Yes, I will overload the method so that I don't break any existing
code. I am going to have to think about the return values. There are
public methods to return d_S0 and d_SK, and I don't want to break
these either. I will consult some friends who are better C++
programmers then
Tim,
sounds like a good idea.
I guess you are planning to overload this additional method
to the existing one, so we can still intantiate the block
the usual way, right?
Achilleas
PS: I wonder what is the application you are interested in...
___
Di
Hello All,
I would like to modify the Viterbi algorithm to support multiple
initial and final states.
For example if I have a FSM with 5 states {0,1,2,3,4} I would like to
pass a subset of the states as the initial and/or final states, for
example S0 = {0,2,3} and SK = {3,4}.
I think the logica
10 matches
Mail list logo
