What are the ranges of spectral frequency and cycle frequency that we need to consider in a discrete-time/discrete-frequency setting for CSP?
Let’s talk about that diamond-shaped region in the 
Spectral correlation surfaces for real-valued and complex-valued versions of the same signal look quite different.
In the real world, the electromagnetic field is a multi-dimensional time-varying real-valued function (volts/meter or newtons/coulomb). But in mathematical physics and signal processing, we often use complex-valued representations of the field, or of quantities derived from it, to facilitate our mathematics or make the signal processing more compact and efficient.
So throughout the CSP Blog I’ve focused almost exclusively on complex-valued signals and data. However, there is a considerable older literature that uses real-valued signals, such as The Literature [R1, R151]. You can use either real-valued or complex-valued signal representations and data, as you prefer, but there are advantages and disadvantages to each choice. Moreover, an author might not be perfectly clear about which one is used, especially when presenting a spectral correlation surface (as opposed to a sequence of equations, where things are often more clear).
Continue reading “Spectral Correlation and Cyclic Correlation Plots for Real-Valued Signals”What happens when a cyclostationary time-series is treated as if it were stationary?
In this post let’s consider the difference between modeling a communication signal as stationary or as cyclostationary.
There are two contexts for this kind of issue. The first is when someone recognizes that a particular signal model is cyclostationary, and then takes some action to render it stationary (sometimes called ‘stationarizing the signal’). They then proceed with their analysis or algorithm development using the stationary signal model. The second context is when someone applies stationary-signal processing to a cyclostationary signal model, either without knowing that the signal is cyclostationary, or perhaps knowing but not caring.
At the center of this topic is the difference between the mathematical object known as a random process (or stochastic process) and the mathematical object that is a single infinite-time function (or signal or time-series).
A related paper is The Literature [R68], which discusses the pitfalls of applying tools meant for stationary signals to the samples of cyclostationary signals.
Continue reading “Stationary Signal Models Versus Cyclostationary Signal Models”
Do we need to consider all cycle frequencies, both positive and negative? Do we need to consider all delays and frequencies in our second-order CSP parameters?
As you progress through the various stages of learning CSP (intimidation, frustration, elucidation, puzzlement, and finally smooth operation), the symmetries of the various functions come up over and over again. Exploiting symmetries can result in lower computational costs, quicker debugging, and easier mathematical development.
What exactly do we mean by ‘symmetries of parameters?’ I’m talking primarily about the evenness or oddness of the time-domain functions in the delay 
You can use this post as a resource for mathematical development because I present the symmetry equations. But also each symmetry result is illustrated using estimated parameters via the frequency smoothing method (FSM) of spectral correlation function estimation. The time-domain parameters are obtained from the inverse transforms of the FSM parameters. So you can also use this post as an extension of the second-order verification guide to ensure that your estimator works for a wide variety of input parameters.
Continue reading “Symmetries of Second-Order Probabilistic Parameters in CSP”
To-may-to, to-mah-to?
Let’s talk about ambiguity and correlation. The ambiguity function is a core component of radar signal processing practice and theory. The autocorrelation function and the cyclic autocorrelation function, are key elements of generic signal processing and cyclostationary signal processing, respectively. Ambiguity and correlation both apply a quadratic functional to the data or signal of interest, and they both weight that quadratic functional by a complex exponential (sine wave) prior to integration or summation.
Are they the same thing? Well, my answer is both yes and no.
Here is a list of links to CSP Blog posts that I think are suitable for a beginner: read them in the order given.
How to Obtain Help from the CSP Blog
How to Create a Simple Cyclostationary Signal: Rectangular-Pulse BPSK
The Cyclic Autocorrelation Function
The Spectral Correlation Function
For your delectation.
There are some situations in which the spectral correlation function is not the preferred measure of (second-order) cyclostationarity. In these situations, the cyclic autocorrelation (non-conjugate and conjugate versions) may be much simpler to estimate and work with in terms of detector, classifier, and estimator structures. So in this post, I’m going to provide surface plots of the cyclic autocorrelation for each of the signals in the spectral correlation gallery post. The exceptions are those signals I called feature-rich in the spectral correlation gallery post, such as DSSS, LTE, and radar. Recall that such signals possess a large number of cycle frequencies, and plotting their three-dimensional spectral correlation surface is not helpful as it is difficult to interpret with the human eye. So for the cycle-frequency patterns of feature-rich signals, we’ll rely on the stem-style (cyclic-domain profile) plots that I used in the spectral correlation gallery post.
Using CSP to find the exact values of symbol rate, carrier frequency offset, symbol-clock phase, and carrier phase for PSK/QAM signals.
In this post I discuss the use of cyclostationary signal processing applied to communication-signal synchronization problems. First, just what are synchronization problems? Synchronize and synchronization have multiple meanings, but the meaning of synchronize that is relevant here is something like:
syn·chro·nize: To cause to occur or operate with exact coincidence in time or rate
If we have an analog amplitude-modulated (AM) signal (such as voice AM used in the AM broadcast bands) at a receiver we want to remove the effects of the carrier sine wave, resulting in an output that is only the original voice or music message. If we have a digital signal such as binary phase-shift keying (BPSK), we want to remove the effects of the carrier but also sample the message signal at the correct instants to optimally recover the transmitted bit sequence.
Unlike conventional spectrum analysis for stationary signals, CSP has three kinds of resolutions that must be considered in all CSP applications, not just two.
In this post, we look at the ability of various CSP estimators to distinguish cycle frequencies, temporal changes in cyclostationarity, and spectral features. These abilities are quantified by the resolution properties of CSP estimators.
Consider performing some CSP estimation task, such as using the frequency-smoothing method, time-smoothing method, or strip spectral correlation analyzer method of estimating the spectral correlation function. The estimate employs 
Then the temporal resolution 
Continue reading “Resolution in Time, Frequency, and Cycle Frequency for CSP Estimators”
Let’s look at a specific example of the cyclic autocorrelation function: the textbook rectangular-pulse BPSK signal with IID symbols.
The cyclic autocorrelation function (CAF) for rectangular-pulse BPSK can be derived as a relatively simple closed-form expression (see My Papers [6] for example or The Literature [R1]). It can be estimated in a variety of ways, which we will discuss in future posts. The non-conjugate cycle frequencies for the signal are harmonics of the bit rate, 
Recall that our simulated rectangular-pulse BPSK signal has 
Continue reading “The Cyclic Autocorrelation for Rectangular-Pulse BPSK”
The cyclic autocorrelation function is the amplitude of a Fourier-series component of the time-varying autocorrelation for a cyclostationary signal.
In this post, I introduce the cyclic autocorrelation function (CAF). The easiest way to do this is to first review the conventional autocorrelation function. Suppose we have a complex-valued signal 
For stationary signals, and many cyclostationary signals, this mean value is independent of the lag parameter
The autocorrelation function is the correlation between the random variables corresponding to two time instants of the random signal, or
![M_x(t, \tau) = E[x(t + \tau)]. \hfill (1)](https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_x%28t%2C+%5Ctau%29+%3D+E%5Bx%28t+%2B+%5Ctau%29%5D.+%5Chfill+%281%29&bg=ffffff&fg=1a1a1a&s=0&c=20201002)
![\displaystyle R_x(t_1, t_2) = E[x(t_1)x^*(t_2)]. \hfill (3)](https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cdisplaystyle+R_x%28t_1%2C+t_2%29+%3D+E%5Bx%28t_1%29x%5E%2A%28t_2%29%5D.+%5Chfill+%283%29&bg=ffffff&fg=1a1a1a&s=0&c=20201002)