FIR, Allpass, and IIR Variable Fractional Delay Digital Filter Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents two-step design methodologies and performance analyses of finite-impulse response (FIR), allpass, and infinite-impulse response (IIR) variable fractional delay (VFD) digital filters. In the first step, a set of fractional delay (FD) filters are designed. In the second step, these FD filter coefficients are approximated by polynomial functions of FD. The FIR FD filter design problem is formulated in the peak-constrained weighted least-squares (PCWLS) sense and solved by the projected least-squares (PLS) algorithm. For the allpass and IIR FD filters, the design problem is nonconvex and a global solution is difficult to obtain. The allpass FD filters are directly designed as a linearly constrained quadratic programming problem and solved using the PLS algorithm. For IIR FD filters, the fixed denominator is obtained by model reduction of a time-domain average FIR filter. The remaining numerators of the IIR FD filters are designed by solving linear equations derived from the orthogonality principle. Analyses on the relative performances indicate that the IIR VFD filter with a low-order fixed denominator offers a combination of the following desirable properties including small number of denominator coefficients, lowest group delay, easily achievable stable design, avoidance of transients due to nonvariable denominator coefficients, and good overall magnitude and group delay performances especially for high passband cutoff frequency ( ges 0.9pi) . Filter examples covering three adjacent ranges of wideband cutoff frequencies [0.95, 0.925, 0.9], [0.875, 0.85, 0.825], and [0.8, 0.775, 0.75] are given to illustrate the design methodologies and the relative performances of the proposed methods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".