I have a periodic signal $x[m], m \in [0;M-N+1]$ made of modulated templates $s[n],~ n \in [0;N-1],~ N \ll M = NK$ of finite energy and support (i.e. zero outside of its defined interval, which does not extend to infinity). For simplicity, we write thus

$$ x[m] = \sum_{k=1}^{K}A_{k}s[m-n_{k}] + w[m] $$

with $n_{k}$ the $k$-th repetition of the template modulated by $A_{k}$. The noise term $w[m] \sim \mathcal{N}(\mathbb{0},\sigma^2_{w})$ sums over the whole signal (not just one template) and can be considered i.i.d for each realization.

Is it possible to estimate the variance $\sigma^2_{w}$ of the noise, given this setup? For one, I have seen methods that try to obtain some portion of the signal $x$ where the template $s$ is absent, but in my practical case, that is impossible to obtain. What DSP tricks can be applied in order to obtain this information?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ what is the type / dimension of $A_k$? $\endgroup$ Aug 9 '18 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ $A_{k}$ is a scalar. $\endgroup$
    – KaiserHaz
    Aug 10 '18 at 7:34
  • $\begingroup$ do you know your $s$? $\endgroup$ Aug 10 '18 at 10:59
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, $s$ is known. $\endgroup$
    – KaiserHaz
    Aug 10 '18 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ so, is the period equal to $$ P = n_{k+1}-n_k \qquad \forall \quad1 \le k < K $$ ? and do the $A_k$ vary as a function of $k$? because if the latter is the case, your $x[m]$ is not periodic. $\endgroup$ Aug 10 '18 at 19:05

Do a cross correlation with your known $s$; you will get peaks of height $\|s\|A_k$ at the positions of your shifts.

You just sum up these peaks, call that sum $P$, calculate the overall energy in your signal (i.e. $\|x\|$), and calculate $\text{SNR}=\frac P{\|x\|-P}$ if you need the SNR. If you just need the noise: $\|x\|-P$ (quite directly). Done!

  • $\begingroup$ How does $SNR$ estimate the variance $\sigma^{2}_{w}$? $\endgroup$
    – KaiserHaz
    Aug 10 '18 at 13:12
  • $\begingroup$ for zero-mean signals, variance == power. $\endgroup$ Aug 10 '18 at 13:29
  • $\begingroup$ This assumes that $x$ is zero-mean, am I correct? $\endgroup$
    – KaiserHaz
    Aug 10 '18 at 13:49
  • $\begingroup$ no. That's not the case. $\endgroup$ Aug 10 '18 at 13:50
  • $\begingroup$ I think I phrased it wrongly. What I understand is that if the signal $x$ is zero-mean, then definitely variance == power. But in saying that, this assumes that the signal $x$ is indeed zero-mean. I'm not entirely sure of this in practice. $\endgroup$
    – KaiserHaz
    Aug 10 '18 at 13:55

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.