Following this paper (see the Matlab example at the end), I am trying to make a least-squares algorithm in Octave, but for type II (I know about firls). For type I FIRs, it works flawlessly, but not type II. This is my attempt (in Octave):

M = floor(N/2);
oddN = 1 - mod(N, 2);
n = [1:2*M + (~oddN)] - 0.5*(~oddN);
m = [0:M];
    q = [wp+K*(1-ws), wp*sinc(wp.*n) - K*ws*sinc(ws.*n)];
    q = [wp*sinc(wp.*n) - K*ws*sinc(ws.*n)];
Q = (toeplitz(q(m+1)) + hankel(q(m+1), q(m+M+1)));
b = wp*sinc(wp.*(m+0.5*(~oddN)))';
a = Q\b;
    h = [a(M+1:-1:2); 2*a(1); a(2:M+1)];
    h = [a(M+1:-1:2); a(1); a(1); a(2:M+1)];

Could someone please point out the mistakes?

I found one of the mistakes: q derives from the integral whose second part is simplified as -K*ws*sinc(ws), but the 0.5 offset in sampling does not discard the K*sinc(k+0.5) term. That was just a bad omission from my part. So I added it:

n = [~oddN : 2*M] + (~oddN)/2;
q = wp*sinc(wp.*n) + K*(sinc(n) - ws*sinc(ws.*n));

The results changed, but they are still wrong. Even so, the a(1) terms in the middle seem to need multiplying by a constant. I used the hammer a bit and ~2.25 seems to be a reasonable value. It doesn't change the fact that the results are wrong (or that the hammer is not a solution).


1 Answer 1


I may have fond the answer. The $Q$ matrix, made from the sum of the Hankel and Toeplitz forms, stems from:

$$cos(k\omega)cos(n\omega) = \frac{1}{2}\left[cos((k-n)\omega)+cos((k+n)\omega)\right]$$

but with the additional $0.5$ for even orders, it comes out as:


and since the $k+n$ term makes the Hankel matrix, it needs an increment in its indices, and the $q$ vector longer by 1. The $b$ vector only needs the extra $0.5$. Now the relevant code lines look like this:

q = [wp + K*(1 - ws), wp*sinc(wp.*n) - K*ws*sinc(ws.*n)];
Q = (toeplitz(q(m + 1)) + hankel(q(m + 1 + oddN), q(m + M + 1 + oddN)));
b = wp*sinc(wp.*(m + 0.5*(~oddN)))';

and this is a comparison between a 30th and a 31st orders, with f=[0 0.3 0.4 1], A=[1 1 0 0], K=[1 10]:


What I don't understand now is why the $q$ vector is not made with the $0.5$ sampling offset.

  • $\begingroup$ (+1) Minor point on notation: you can use \cos command in latex $\endgroup$
    – msm
    May 8, 2017 at 10:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.