|
|
Re: Iterative Match Filterings
Posted:
Apr 4, 2012 5:44 PM
|
|
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 20:42:16 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:
>> > Instead of just taking the convolution of a signal with the reference
>> > or kernel once and then taking the square root in the frequency
>> > domain, why not match filter with the reference again and again to
>> > recover the original clean signal?
>>
>> Perhaps you might consider:
>> "What is the purpose of applying a matched filter?"
>
> To get the magnitudes of the clean signals.
Yes, we already established that _you_ want the filter to do that. What
_Fred_ is saying (and, for that matter, I also) is
>>> What does the MATH say that a matched filter is designed for <<<
Because if you ain't applying a filter to the purpose for which it is
designed, and hoping that a high concentration of buzz-words will make
things operate well, then you ain't doing engineering -- you're doing
magic, and the next step is to go buy some live chickens to sacrifice.
--
My liberal friends think I'm a conservative kook.
My conservative friends think I'm a liberal kook.
Why am I not happy that they have found common ground?
Tim Wescott, Communications, Control, Circuits & Software
http://www.wescottdesign.com
|
|
