Difference between revisions of "Theory of Stochastic Signals/Power-Spectral Density"
(Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „ {{Header |Untermenü=Zufallsgrößen mit statistischen Bindungen |Vorherige Seite=Autokorrelationsfunktion (AKF) |Nächste Seite=Kreuzkorrelationsfunktion un…“) |
|||
(68 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Header | {{Header | ||
− | |Untermenü= | + | |Untermenü=Random Variables with Statistical Dependence |
− | |Vorherige Seite= | + | |Vorherige Seite=Auto-Correlation Function |
− | |Nächste Seite= | + | |Nächste Seite=Cross-Correlation Function and Cross Power Density |
}} | }} | ||
− | == | + | ==Wiener-Khintchine Theorem== |
− | + | <br> | |
− | * | + | In the remainder of this paper we restrict ourselves to ergodic processes. As was shown in the [[Theory_of_Stochastic_Signals/Auto-Correlation_Function#Ergodic_random_processes|"last chapter"]] the following statements then hold: |
− | * | + | *Each individual pattern function xi(t) is representative of the entire random process $\{x_i(t)\}$. |
− | φx(t1,t2)=E[x(t1)⋅x(t2)]=φx(τ)=∫+∞−∞x(t)⋅x(t+τ)dt. | + | *All time means are thus identical to the corresponding coulter means. |
+ | *The auto-correlation function, which is generally affected by the two time parameters t1 and t2, now depends only on the time difference $τ = t_2 - t_1$: | ||
+ | :$$\varphi_x(t_1,t_2)={\rm E}\big[x(t_{\rm 1})\cdot x(t_{\rm 2})\big] = \varphi_x(\tau)= \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}x(t)\cdot x(t+\tau)\,{\rm d}t.$$ | ||
+ | The auto-correlation function provides quantitative information about the (linear) statistical bindings within the ergodic process {xi(t)} in the time domain. The equivalent descriptor in the frequency domain is the "power-spectral density", often also referred to as the "power-spectral density". | ||
− | + | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | |
+ | Definition: The »'''power-spectral density'''« $\rm (PSD) of an ergodic random process \{x_i(t)\}$ is the Fourier transform of the auto-correlation function (ACF): | ||
+ | :$${\it \Phi}_x(f)=\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}\varphi_x(\tau) \cdot {\rm e}^{- {\rm j\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} \pi}\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} f \hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm}\tau} {\rm d} \tau. $$ | ||
+ | This functional relationship is called the "Theorem of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Wiener Wiener] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Khinchin Khinchin]". }} | ||
− | + | Similarly, the auto-correlation function can be computed as the inverse Fourier transform of the power-spectral density (see section [[Signal_Representation/Fourier_Transform_and_its_Inverse#The_second_Fourier_integral|"Inverse Fourier transform"]] in the book "Signal Representation"): | |
− | + | :$$ \varphi_x(\tau)=\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} {\it \Phi}_x \cdot {\rm e}^{- {\rm j\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} \pi}\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} f \hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm}\tau} {\rm d} f.$$ | |
− | $$ | + | *The two equations are directly applicable only if the random process contains neither a DC component nor periodic components. |
− | + | *Otherwise, one must proceed according to the specifications given in section [[Theory_of_Stochastic_Signals/Power-Spectral_Density#Power-spectral_density_with_DC_component|"Power-spectral density with DC component"]]. | |
− | |||
+ | ==Physical interpretation and measurement== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | The lower chart shows an arrangement for (approximate) metrological determination of the power-spectral density Φx(f). The following should be noted in this regard: | ||
+ | *The random signal x(t) is applied to a (preferably) rectangular and (preferably) narrowband filter with center frequency f and bandwidth Δf where Δf must be chosen sufficiently small according to the desired frequency resolution. | ||
+ | *The corresponding output signal x_f(t) is squared and then the mean value is formed over a sufficiently long measurement period T_{\rm M}. This gives the "power of x_f(t)" or the "power components of x(t) in the spectral range from f - Δf/2 to f + Δf/2": | ||
+ | [[File: P_ID387__Sto_T_4_5_S2_neu.png |right|frame| To measure the power-spectral density]] | ||
+ | :P_{x_f} =\overline{x_f(t)^2}=\frac{1}{T_{\rm M}}\cdot\int^{T_{\rm M}}_{0}x_f^2(t) \hspace{0.1cm}\rm d \it t. | ||
+ | *Division by Δf leads to the power-spectral density \rm (PSD): | ||
+ | :{{\it \Phi}_{x \rm +}}(f) =\frac{P_{x_f}}{{\rm \Delta} f} \hspace {0.5cm} \Rightarrow \hspace {0.5cm} {\it \Phi}_{x}(f) = \frac{P_{x_f}}{{\rm 2 \cdot \Delta} f}. | ||
+ | *{\it \Phi}_{x+}(f) = 2 \cdot {\it \Phi}_x(f) denotes the one-sided PSD defined only for positive frequencies. For f<0 ⇒ {\it \Phi}_{x+}(f) = 0. In contrast, for the commonly used two-sided power-spectral density: | ||
+ | :{\it \Phi}_x(-f) = {\it \Phi}_x(f). | ||
+ | *While the power P_{x_f} tends to zero as the bandwidth Δf becomes smaller, the power-spectral density remains nearly constant above a sufficiently small value of Δf. For the exact determination of {\it \Phi}_x(f) two boundary crossings are necessary: | ||
+ | :{{\it \Phi}_x(f)} = \lim_{{\rm \Delta}f\to 0} \hspace{0.2cm} \lim_{T_{\rm M}\to\infty}\hspace{0.2cm} \frac{1}{{\rm 2 \cdot \Delta}f\cdot T_{\rm M}}\cdot\int^{T_{\rm M}}_{0}x_f^2(t) \hspace{0.1cm} \rm d \it t. | ||
− | + | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | |
− | $$ | + | \text{Conclusion:} |
− | + | *From this physical interpretation it further follows that the power-spectral density is always real and can never become negative. | |
+ | *The total power of the random signal $x(t)$ is then obtained by integration over all spectral components: | ||
+ | :$$P_x = \int^{\infty}_{0}{\it \Phi}_{x \rm +}(f) \hspace{0.1cm}{\rm d} f = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\it \Phi}_x(f)\hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f .$$}} | ||
+ | ==Reciprocity law of ACF duration and PSD bandwidth== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | All the [[Signal_Representation/Fourier_Transform_Laws|\text{Fourier transform theorems}]] derived in the book "Signal Representation" for deterministic signals can also be applied to | ||
+ | [[File:P_ID390__Sto_T_4_5_S3_Ganz_neu.png |frame| On the "Reciprocity Theorem" of ACF and PSD]] | ||
+ | *the auto-correlation function \rm (ACF), and | ||
+ | *the power-spectral density \rm (PSD). | ||
+ | <br>However, not all laws yield meaningful results due to the specific properties | ||
+ | *of auto-correlation function (always real and even) | ||
+ | *and power-spectral density (always real, even, and non–negative). | ||
+ | |||
+ | We now consider as in the section [[Theory_of_Stochastic_Signals/Auto-Correlation_Function#Interpretation_of_the_auto-correlation_function|"Interpretation of the auto-correlation function"]] two different ergodic random processes \{x_i(t)\} and \{y_i(t)\} based on | ||
+ | #two pattern signals x(t) and y(t) ⇒ upper sketch, | ||
+ | #two auto-correlation functions φ_x(τ) and φ_y(τ) ⇒ middle sketch, | ||
+ | #two power-spectral densities {\it \Phi}_x(f) and {\it \Phi}_y(f) ⇒ bottom sketch. | ||
+ | Based on these exemplary graphs, the following statements can be made: | ||
+ | *The areas under the PSD curves are equal ⇒ the processes \{x_i(t)\} and \{y_i(t)\} have the same power: | ||
+ | :{\varphi_x({\rm 0})}\hspace{0.05cm} =\hspace{0.05cm} \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f \hspace{0.2cm} = \hspace{0.2cm}{\varphi_y({\rm 0})} = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_y(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f . | ||
+ | *The from classical (deterministic) system theory well known [[Signal_Representation/Fourier_Transform_Theorems#Reciprocity_Theorem_of_time_duration_and_bandwidth|\text{Reciprocity Theorem of time duration and bandwidth}]] also applies here: '''A narrow ACF corresponds to a broad PSD and vice versa'''. | ||
+ | *As a descriptive quantity, we use here the »'''equivalent PSD bandwidth'''« ∇f (one speaks "Nabla-f"), <br>similarly defined as the equivalent ACF duration ∇τ in chapter [[Theory_of_Stochastic_Signals/Auto-Correlation_Function#Interpretation_of_the_auto-correlation_function|"Interpretation of the auto-correlation function"]]: | ||
+ | :{{\rm \nabla} f_x} = \frac {1}{{\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm 0})} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f, | ||
+ | :{ {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} = \frac {\rm 1}{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\varphi_x(\tau )} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} \tau. | ||
+ | *With these definitions, the following basic relationship holds: | ||
+ | :$${{\rm \nabla} \tau_x} \cdot {{\rm \nabla} f_x} = 1\hspace{1cm}{\rm resp.}\hspace{1cm} | ||
+ | {{\rm \nabla} \tau_y} \cdot {{\rm \nabla} f_y} = 1.$$ | ||
+ | {{GraueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Example 1:} We start from the graph at the top of this section: | ||
+ | *The characteristics of the higher frequency signal x(t) are ∇τ_x = 0.33\hspace{0.08cm} \rm µs and ∇f_x = 3 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm MHz. | ||
+ | *The equivalent ACF duration of the signal y(t) is three times: ∇τ_y = 1 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm µs. | ||
+ | *The equivalent PSD bandwidth of the signal y(t) is thus only ∇f_y = ∇f_x/3 = 1 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm MHz. }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{General:} | ||
+ | '''The product of equivalent ACF duration { {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} and equivalent PSD bandwidth { {\rm \nabla} f_x} is always "one"''': | ||
+ | :{ {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} \cdot { {\rm \nabla} f_x} = 1.}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Proof:} According to the above definitions: | ||
+ | :{ {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} = \frac {\rm 1}{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{ \varphi_x(\tau )} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} \tau = \frac { {\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm 0)} }{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)}, | ||
+ | :{ {\rm \nabla} f_x} = \frac {1}{ {\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm0})} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{ {\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f = \frac {\varphi_x(\tau = {\rm 0)} }{ {\it \Phi}_x(f = \rm 0)}. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thus, the product is equal to 1. | ||
+ | <div align="right">'''q.e.d.'''</div> }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{GraueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Example 2:} | ||
+ | A limiting case of the reciprocity theorem represents the so-called "White Noise": | ||
+ | *This includes all spectral components (up to infinity). | ||
+ | *The equivalent PSD bandwidth ∇f is infinite. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | The theorem given here states that for the equivalent ACF duration ∇τ = 0 must hold ⇒ »'''white noise has a Dirac-shaped ACF'''«. | ||
+ | |||
+ | For more on this topic, see the three-part (German language) learning video [[Der_AWGN-Kanal_(Lernvideo)|"The AWGN channel"]], especially the second part.}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==Power-spectral density with DC component== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | We assume a DC–free random process \{x_i(t)\}. Further, we assume that the process also contains no periodic components. Then holds: | ||
+ | *The auto-correlation function φ_x(τ) vanishes for τ → ∞. | ||
+ | *The power-spectral density {\it \Phi}_x(f) – computable as the Fourier transform of φ_x(τ) – is both continuous in value and continuous in time, i.e., without discrete components. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | We now consider a second random process \{y_i(t)\}, which differs from the process \{x_i(t)\} only by an additional DC component m_y: | ||
+ | :\left\{ y_i (t) \right\} = \left\{ x_i (t) + m_y \right\}. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The statistical descriptors of the mean-valued random process \{y_i(t)\} then have the following properties: | ||
+ | *The limit of the ACF for τ → ∞ is now no longer zero, but m_y^2. Throughout the τ–range from -∞ to +∞ the ACF φ_y(τ) is larger than φ_x(τ) by m_y^2: | ||
+ | :{\varphi_y ( \tau)} = {\varphi_x ( \tau)} + m_y^2 . | ||
+ | *According to the elementary laws of the Fourier transform, the constant ACF contribution in the PSD leads to a Dirac delta function δ(f) with weight m_y^2: | ||
+ | :{{\it \Phi}_y ( f)} = {\Phi_x ( f)} + m_y^2 \cdot \delta (f). | ||
+ | |||
+ | *More information about the \delta–function can be found in the chapter [[Signal_Representation/Direct_Current_Signal_-_Limit_Case_of_a_Periodic_Signal|"Direct current signal - Limit case of a periodic signal"]] of the book "Signal Representation". Furthermore, we would like to refer you here to the (German language) learning video [[Herleitung_und_Visualisierung_der_Diracfunktion_(Lernvideo)|"Herleitung und Visualisierung der Diracfunktion"]] ⇒ "Derivation and visualization of the Dirac delta function". | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Numerical PSD determination== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | Auto-correlation function and power-spectral density are strictly related via the [[Signal_Representation/Fourier_Transform_and_its_Inverse#Fourier_transform|\text{Fourier transform}]]. This relationship also holds for discrete-time ACF representation with the sampling operator {\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} , thus for | ||
+ | :{\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} = \varphi_x ( \tau ) \cdot \sum_{k= - \infty}^{\infty} T_{\rm A} \cdot \delta ( \tau - k \cdot T_{\rm A}). | ||
+ | |||
+ | The transition from the time domain to the spectral domain can be derived with the following steps: | ||
+ | *The distance T_{\rm A} of two samples is determined by the absolute bandwidth B_x (maximum occurring frequency within the process) via the sampling theorem: | ||
+ | :T_{\rm A}\le\frac{1}{2B_x}. | ||
+ | *The Fourier transform of the discrete-time (sampled) auto-correlation function yields an with {\rm 1}/T_{\rm A} periodic power-spectral density: | ||
+ | :{\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} \hspace{0.3cm} \circ\!\!-\!\!\!-\!\!\!-\!\!\bullet\, \hspace{0.3cm} {\rm P} \{{{\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = \sum_{\mu = - \infty}^{\infty} {{\it \Phi}_x} ( f - \frac {\mu}{T_{\rm A}}). | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Conclusion:} Since both φ_x(τ) and {\it \Phi}_x(f) are even and real functions, the following relation holds: | ||
+ | :{\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = T_{\rm A} \cdot \varphi_x ( k = 0) +2 T_{\rm A} \cdot \sum_{k = 1}^{\infty} \varphi_x ( k T_{\rm A}) \cdot {\rm cos}(2{\rm \pi} f k T_{\rm A}). | ||
+ | *The power-spectral density \rm (PSD) of the continuous-time process is obtained from {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} by bandlimiting to the range \vert f \vert ≤ 1/(2T_{\rm A}). | ||
+ | *In the time domain, this operation means interpolating the individual ACF samples with the {\rm sinc} function, where {\rm sinc}(x) stands for \sin(\pi x)/(\pi x).}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{GraueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Example 3:} A Gaussian ACF φ_x(τ) is sampled at distance T_{\rm A} where the sampling theorem is satisfied: | ||
+ | [[File:EN_Sto_T_4_5_S5.png |right|frame| Discrete-time auto-correlation function, periodically continued power-spectral density]] | ||
+ | *The Fourier transform of the discrete-time ACF ⇒ {\rm A} \{φ_x(τ) \} be the periodically continued PSD ⇒ {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \}. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | *This with {\rm 1}/T_{\rm A} periodic function {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} is accordingly infinitely extended (red curve). | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | *The PSD {\it \Phi}_x(f) of the continuous-time process \{x_i(t)\} is obtained by band-limiting to the frequency range \vert f \cdot T_{\rm A} \vert ≤ 0.5, highlighted in blue in the figure. }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Accuracy of the numerical PSD calculation== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | For the following analysis, we make the following assumptions: | ||
+ | #The discrete-time ACF φ_x(k \cdot T_{\rm A}) was determined numerically from N samples. | ||
+ | #As already shown in section [[Theory_of_Stochastic_Signals/Auto-Correlation_Function#Accuracy_of_the_numerical_ACF_calculation|"Accuracy of the numerical ACF calculation"]], these values are in error and the errors are correlated if N was chosen too small. | ||
+ | #To calculate the periodic power-spectral density \rm (PSD), we use only the ACF values φ_x(0), ... , φ_x(K \cdot T_{\rm A}): | ||
+ | ::{\rm P} \{{{\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = T_{\rm A} \cdot \varphi_x ( k = 0) +2 T_{\rm A} \cdot \sum_{k = 1}^{K} \varphi_x ( k T_{\rm A})\cdot {\rm cos}(2{\rm \pi} f k T_{\rm A}). | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{BlaueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Conclusion:} | ||
+ | The accuracy of the power-spectral density calculation is determined to a strong extent by the parameter K: | ||
+ | *If K is chosen too small, the ACF values actually present φ_x(k - T_{\rm A}) with k > K will not be taken into account. | ||
+ | *If K is too large, also such ACF values are considered, which should actually be zero and are finite only because of the numerical ACF calculation. | ||
+ | *These values are only errors (due to a small N in the ACF calculation) and impair the PSD calculation more than they provide a useful contribution to the result. }} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{GraueBox|TEXT= | ||
+ | \text{Example 4:} We consider here a zero mean process with statistically independent samples. Thus, only the ACF value φ_x(0) = σ_x^2 should be different from zero. | ||
+ | [[File:EN_Sto_T_4_5_S5_b_neu_v2.png |450px|right|frame| Accuracy of numerical PSD calculation ]] | ||
+ | *But if one determines the ACF numerically from only N = 1000 samples, one obtains finite ACF values even for k ≠ 0. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *The upper figure shows that these erroneous ACF values can be up to 6\% of the maximum value. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *The numerically determined PSD is shown below. The theoretical (yellow) curve should be constant for \vert f \cdot T_{\rm A} \vert ≤ 0.5. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *The green and purple curves illustrate how by K = 3 resp. K = 10, the result is distorted compared to K = 0. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *In this case (statistically independent random variables) the error grows monotonically with increasing K. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | In contrast, for a random variable with statistical bindings, there is an optimal value for K in each case. | ||
+ | #If this is chosen too small, significant bindings are not considered. | ||
+ | #In contrast, a too large value leads to oscillations that can only be attributed to erroneous ACF values.}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Exercises for the chapter== | ||
+ | <br> | ||
+ | [[Aufgaben:Exercise_4.12:_Power-Spectral_Density_of_a_Binary_Signal|Exercise 4.12: Power-Spectral Density of a Binary Signal]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Aufgaben:Exercise_4.12Z:_White_Gaussian_Noise|Exercise 4.12Z: White Gaussian Noise]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Aufgaben:Exercise_4.13:_Gaussian_ACF_and_PSD|Exercise 4.13: Gaussian ACF and PSD]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Aufgaben:Exercise_4.13Z:_AMI_Code|Exercise 4.13Z: AMI Code]] | ||
{{Display}} | {{Display}} |
Latest revision as of 17:13, 22 December 2022
Contents
Wiener-Khintchine Theorem
In the remainder of this paper we restrict ourselves to ergodic processes. As was shown in the "last chapter" the following statements then hold:
- Each individual pattern function x_i(t) is representative of the entire random process \{x_i(t)\}.
- All time means are thus identical to the corresponding coulter means.
- The auto-correlation function, which is generally affected by the two time parameters t_1 and t_2, now depends only on the time difference τ = t_2 - t_1:
- \varphi_x(t_1,t_2)={\rm E}\big[x(t_{\rm 1})\cdot x(t_{\rm 2})\big] = \varphi_x(\tau)= \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}x(t)\cdot x(t+\tau)\,{\rm d}t.
The auto-correlation function provides quantitative information about the (linear) statistical bindings within the ergodic process \{x_i(t)\} in the time domain. The equivalent descriptor in the frequency domain is the "power-spectral density", often also referred to as the "power-spectral density".
\text{Definition:} The »power-spectral density« \rm (PSD) of an ergodic random process \{x_i(t)\} is the Fourier transform of the auto-correlation function \rm (ACF):
- {\it \Phi}_x(f)=\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}\varphi_x(\tau) \cdot {\rm e}^{- {\rm j\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} \pi}\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} f \hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm}\tau} {\rm d} \tau.
This functional relationship is called the "Theorem of \text{Wiener} and \text{Khinchin}".
Similarly, the auto-correlation function can be computed as the inverse Fourier transform of the power-spectral density (see section "Inverse Fourier transform" in the book "Signal Representation"):
- \varphi_x(\tau)=\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} {\it \Phi}_x \cdot {\rm e}^{- {\rm j\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} \pi}\hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm} f \hspace{0.05cm}\cdot \hspace{0.05cm}\tau} {\rm d} f.
- The two equations are directly applicable only if the random process contains neither a DC component nor periodic components.
- Otherwise, one must proceed according to the specifications given in section "Power-spectral density with DC component".
Physical interpretation and measurement
The lower chart shows an arrangement for (approximate) metrological determination of the power-spectral density {\it \Phi}_x(f). The following should be noted in this regard:
- The random signal x(t) is applied to a (preferably) rectangular and (preferably) narrowband filter with center frequency f and bandwidth Δf where Δf must be chosen sufficiently small according to the desired frequency resolution.
- The corresponding output signal x_f(t) is squared and then the mean value is formed over a sufficiently long measurement period T_{\rm M}. This gives the "power of x_f(t)" or the "power components of x(t) in the spectral range from f - Δf/2 to f + Δf/2":
- P_{x_f} =\overline{x_f(t)^2}=\frac{1}{T_{\rm M}}\cdot\int^{T_{\rm M}}_{0}x_f^2(t) \hspace{0.1cm}\rm d \it t.
- Division by Δf leads to the power-spectral density \rm (PSD):
- {{\it \Phi}_{x \rm +}}(f) =\frac{P_{x_f}}{{\rm \Delta} f} \hspace {0.5cm} \Rightarrow \hspace {0.5cm} {\it \Phi}_{x}(f) = \frac{P_{x_f}}{{\rm 2 \cdot \Delta} f}.
- {\it \Phi}_{x+}(f) = 2 \cdot {\it \Phi}_x(f) denotes the one-sided PSD defined only for positive frequencies. For f<0 ⇒ {\it \Phi}_{x+}(f) = 0. In contrast, for the commonly used two-sided power-spectral density:
- {\it \Phi}_x(-f) = {\it \Phi}_x(f).
- While the power P_{x_f} tends to zero as the bandwidth Δf becomes smaller, the power-spectral density remains nearly constant above a sufficiently small value of Δf. For the exact determination of {\it \Phi}_x(f) two boundary crossings are necessary:
- {{\it \Phi}_x(f)} = \lim_{{\rm \Delta}f\to 0} \hspace{0.2cm} \lim_{T_{\rm M}\to\infty}\hspace{0.2cm} \frac{1}{{\rm 2 \cdot \Delta}f\cdot T_{\rm M}}\cdot\int^{T_{\rm M}}_{0}x_f^2(t) \hspace{0.1cm} \rm d \it t.
\text{Conclusion:}
- From this physical interpretation it further follows that the power-spectral density is always real and can never become negative.
- The total power of the random signal x(t) is then obtained by integration over all spectral components:
- P_x = \int^{\infty}_{0}{\it \Phi}_{x \rm +}(f) \hspace{0.1cm}{\rm d} f = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\it \Phi}_x(f)\hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f .
Reciprocity law of ACF duration and PSD bandwidth
All the \text{Fourier transform theorems} derived in the book "Signal Representation" for deterministic signals can also be applied to
- the auto-correlation function \rm (ACF), and
- the power-spectral density \rm (PSD).
However, not all laws yield meaningful results due to the specific properties
- of auto-correlation function (always real and even)
- and power-spectral density (always real, even, and non–negative).
We now consider as in the section "Interpretation of the auto-correlation function" two different ergodic random processes \{x_i(t)\} and \{y_i(t)\} based on
- two pattern signals x(t) and y(t) ⇒ upper sketch,
- two auto-correlation functions φ_x(τ) and φ_y(τ) ⇒ middle sketch,
- two power-spectral densities {\it \Phi}_x(f) and {\it \Phi}_y(f) ⇒ bottom sketch.
Based on these exemplary graphs, the following statements can be made:
- The areas under the PSD curves are equal ⇒ the processes \{x_i(t)\} and \{y_i(t)\} have the same power:
- {\varphi_x({\rm 0})}\hspace{0.05cm} =\hspace{0.05cm} \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f \hspace{0.2cm} = \hspace{0.2cm}{\varphi_y({\rm 0})} = \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_y(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f .
- The from classical (deterministic) system theory well known \text{Reciprocity Theorem of time duration and bandwidth} also applies here: A narrow ACF corresponds to a broad PSD and vice versa.
- As a descriptive quantity, we use here the »equivalent PSD bandwidth« ∇f (one speaks "Nabla-f"),
similarly defined as the equivalent ACF duration ∇τ in chapter "Interpretation of the auto-correlation function":
- {{\rm \nabla} f_x} = \frac {1}{{\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm 0})} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{{\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f,
- { {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} = \frac {\rm 1}{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\varphi_x(\tau )} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} \tau.
- With these definitions, the following basic relationship holds:
- {{\rm \nabla} \tau_x} \cdot {{\rm \nabla} f_x} = 1\hspace{1cm}{\rm resp.}\hspace{1cm} {{\rm \nabla} \tau_y} \cdot {{\rm \nabla} f_y} = 1.
\text{Example 1:} We start from the graph at the top of this section:
- The characteristics of the higher frequency signal x(t) are ∇τ_x = 0.33\hspace{0.08cm} \rm µs and ∇f_x = 3 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm MHz.
- The equivalent ACF duration of the signal y(t) is three times: ∇τ_y = 1 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm µs.
- The equivalent PSD bandwidth of the signal y(t) is thus only ∇f_y = ∇f_x/3 = 1 \hspace{0.08cm} \rm MHz.
\text{General:} The product of equivalent ACF duration { {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} and equivalent PSD bandwidth { {\rm \nabla} f_x} is always "one":
- { {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} \cdot { {\rm \nabla} f_x} = 1.
\text{Proof:} According to the above definitions:
- { {\rm \nabla} \tau_x} = \frac {\rm 1}{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{ \varphi_x(\tau )} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} \tau = \frac { {\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm 0)} }{ \varphi_x(\tau = \rm 0)},
- { {\rm \nabla} f_x} = \frac {1}{ {\it \Phi}_x(f = {\rm0})} \cdot \int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{ {\it \Phi}_x(f)} \hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d} f = \frac {\varphi_x(\tau = {\rm 0)} }{ {\it \Phi}_x(f = \rm 0)}.
Thus, the product is equal to 1.
\text{Example 2:} A limiting case of the reciprocity theorem represents the so-called "White Noise":
- This includes all spectral components (up to infinity).
- The equivalent PSD bandwidth ∇f is infinite.
The theorem given here states that for the equivalent ACF duration ∇τ = 0 must hold ⇒ »white noise has a Dirac-shaped ACF«.
For more on this topic, see the three-part (German language) learning video "The AWGN channel", especially the second part.
Power-spectral density with DC component
We assume a DC–free random process \{x_i(t)\}. Further, we assume that the process also contains no periodic components. Then holds:
- The auto-correlation function φ_x(τ) vanishes for τ → ∞.
- The power-spectral density {\it \Phi}_x(f) – computable as the Fourier transform of φ_x(τ) – is both continuous in value and continuous in time, i.e., without discrete components.
We now consider a second random process \{y_i(t)\}, which differs from the process \{x_i(t)\} only by an additional DC component m_y:
- \left\{ y_i (t) \right\} = \left\{ x_i (t) + m_y \right\}.
The statistical descriptors of the mean-valued random process \{y_i(t)\} then have the following properties:
- The limit of the ACF for τ → ∞ is now no longer zero, but m_y^2. Throughout the τ–range from -∞ to +∞ the ACF φ_y(τ) is larger than φ_x(τ) by m_y^2:
- {\varphi_y ( \tau)} = {\varphi_x ( \tau)} + m_y^2 .
- According to the elementary laws of the Fourier transform, the constant ACF contribution in the PSD leads to a Dirac delta function δ(f) with weight m_y^2:
- {{\it \Phi}_y ( f)} = {\Phi_x ( f)} + m_y^2 \cdot \delta (f).
- More information about the \delta–function can be found in the chapter "Direct current signal - Limit case of a periodic signal" of the book "Signal Representation". Furthermore, we would like to refer you here to the (German language) learning video "Herleitung und Visualisierung der Diracfunktion" ⇒ "Derivation and visualization of the Dirac delta function".
Numerical PSD determination
Auto-correlation function and power-spectral density are strictly related via the \text{Fourier transform}. This relationship also holds for discrete-time ACF representation with the sampling operator {\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} , thus for
- {\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} = \varphi_x ( \tau ) \cdot \sum_{k= - \infty}^{\infty} T_{\rm A} \cdot \delta ( \tau - k \cdot T_{\rm A}).
The transition from the time domain to the spectral domain can be derived with the following steps:
- The distance T_{\rm A} of two samples is determined by the absolute bandwidth B_x (maximum occurring frequency within the process) via the sampling theorem:
- T_{\rm A}\le\frac{1}{2B_x}.
- The Fourier transform of the discrete-time (sampled) auto-correlation function yields an with {\rm 1}/T_{\rm A} periodic power-spectral density:
- {\rm A} \{ \varphi_x ( \tau ) \} \hspace{0.3cm} \circ\!\!-\!\!\!-\!\!\!-\!\!\bullet\, \hspace{0.3cm} {\rm P} \{{{\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = \sum_{\mu = - \infty}^{\infty} {{\it \Phi}_x} ( f - \frac {\mu}{T_{\rm A}}).
\text{Conclusion:} Since both φ_x(τ) and {\it \Phi}_x(f) are even and real functions, the following relation holds:
- {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = T_{\rm A} \cdot \varphi_x ( k = 0) +2 T_{\rm A} \cdot \sum_{k = 1}^{\infty} \varphi_x ( k T_{\rm A}) \cdot {\rm cos}(2{\rm \pi} f k T_{\rm A}).
- The power-spectral density \rm (PSD) of the continuous-time process is obtained from {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} by bandlimiting to the range \vert f \vert ≤ 1/(2T_{\rm A}).
- In the time domain, this operation means interpolating the individual ACF samples with the {\rm sinc} function, where {\rm sinc}(x) stands for \sin(\pi x)/(\pi x).
\text{Example 3:} A Gaussian ACF φ_x(τ) is sampled at distance T_{\rm A} where the sampling theorem is satisfied:
- The Fourier transform of the discrete-time ACF ⇒ {\rm A} \{φ_x(τ) \} be the periodically continued PSD ⇒ {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \}.
- This with {\rm 1}/T_{\rm A} periodic function {\rm P} \{ { {\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} is accordingly infinitely extended (red curve).
- The PSD {\it \Phi}_x(f) of the continuous-time process \{x_i(t)\} is obtained by band-limiting to the frequency range \vert f \cdot T_{\rm A} \vert ≤ 0.5, highlighted in blue in the figure.
Accuracy of the numerical PSD calculation
For the following analysis, we make the following assumptions:
- The discrete-time ACF φ_x(k \cdot T_{\rm A}) was determined numerically from N samples.
- As already shown in section "Accuracy of the numerical ACF calculation", these values are in error and the errors are correlated if N was chosen too small.
- To calculate the periodic power-spectral density \rm (PSD), we use only the ACF values φ_x(0), ... , φ_x(K \cdot T_{\rm A}):
- {\rm P} \{{{\it \Phi}_x} ( f) \} = T_{\rm A} \cdot \varphi_x ( k = 0) +2 T_{\rm A} \cdot \sum_{k = 1}^{K} \varphi_x ( k T_{\rm A})\cdot {\rm cos}(2{\rm \pi} f k T_{\rm A}).
\text{Conclusion:} The accuracy of the power-spectral density calculation is determined to a strong extent by the parameter K:
- If K is chosen too small, the ACF values actually present φ_x(k - T_{\rm A}) with k > K will not be taken into account.
- If K is too large, also such ACF values are considered, which should actually be zero and are finite only because of the numerical ACF calculation.
- These values are only errors (due to a small N in the ACF calculation) and impair the PSD calculation more than they provide a useful contribution to the result.
\text{Example 4:} We consider here a zero mean process with statistically independent samples. Thus, only the ACF value φ_x(0) = σ_x^2 should be different from zero.
- But if one determines the ACF numerically from only N = 1000 samples, one obtains finite ACF values even for k ≠ 0.
- The upper figure shows that these erroneous ACF values can be up to 6\% of the maximum value.
- The numerically determined PSD is shown below. The theoretical (yellow) curve should be constant for \vert f \cdot T_{\rm A} \vert ≤ 0.5.
- The green and purple curves illustrate how by K = 3 resp. K = 10, the result is distorted compared to K = 0.
- In this case (statistically independent random variables) the error grows monotonically with increasing K.
In contrast, for a random variable with statistical bindings, there is an optimal value for K in each case.
- If this is chosen too small, significant bindings are not considered.
- In contrast, a too large value leads to oscillations that can only be attributed to erroneous ACF values.
Exercises for the chapter
Exercise 4.12: Power-Spectral Density of a Binary Signal
Exercise 4.12Z: White Gaussian Noise
Exercise 4.13: Gaussian ACF and PSD