2
$\begingroup$

I am reading Oppenheim & Schafer's (O&S) Discrete Time Signal Processing (2nd or 3rd edition, does not matter) and I find hard to understand a technicality behind the Time-Dependent Fourier Transform (TDFT from now on). Specifically, I have a question regarding the invertibility of the TDFT.

According to the textbook, the TDFT is given by $$X[n, \lambda) = \sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty}x[n+m]w[m]e^{-j\lambda m}$$ which can be thought as the DTFT of a windowed signal portion around sample $n$. So, by moving one sample at a time, we have "a collection" of DTFTs of windowed signal portions around sample $n$, and the TDFT is a 3D-function (consider magnitude only) with axis $n$ vs axis $\lambda$.

Then, O&S mentions that the TDFT is invertible iff $w[m]$ has at least one nonzero sample.

If we take the Fourier synthesis equation, we get: $$x[n+m]w[m]=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi} X[n,\lambda)e^{j\lambda m}d\lambda, \: \: \: -\infty < m < +\infty$$ which makes perfect sense as it reconstructs the windowed signal around sample $n$ from complex exponentials weighted by the DTFT $X[n, \lambda)$. Dividing by the window: $$x[n+m] = \frac{1}{2\pi w[m]}\int_0^{2\pi} X[n, \lambda)d\lambda$$ if $w[m] \neq 0$.

Here's my question: where did the $e^{j\lambda m}$ term go??

Isn't this equation supposed to recover the full windowed signal $x[n+m]$? The integral looks as a number to me (summing $X[n,\lambda)$ values for all $\lambda$ at index $n$ of the TDFT).

The same equation is in all O&S versions, so I guess it's not a typo and I am missing something very fundamental here :D

Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I have the 2nd edition, and there the case $m=0$ is considered, so the equation reads (Eq. $(10.21)$ on p. 716)

$$x[n] = \frac{1}{2\pi w[0]}\int_0^{2\pi} X[n, \lambda)d\lambda$$

(which of course assumes $w[0]\neq 0$). This makes sense because $e^{j\lambda m}$ equals $1$ for $m=0$.

|improve this answer|||||
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Indeed, and that is different from 3rd Ed. that I read from. So, actually $$x[n] = \frac{1}{2\pi w[0]}\int_0^{2\pi} X[n, \lambda) d\lambda$$ is the sample value $x[n]$, the signal's value at the center of the analysis window, and not the signal itself. Keeping the $m$ variable, would that: $$x[n+m] = \frac{1}{2\pi w[m]}\int_0^{2\pi} X[n, \lambda) e^{j\lambda m}d\lambda$$ be correct? $\endgroup$ – GKH Dec 11 '19 at 19:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @GKH: Yes, for general $m$ that last equation is correct. $\endgroup$ – Matt L. Dec 11 '19 at 20:05
1
$\begingroup$

The same equation is in all O&S versions, so I guess it's not a typo and I am missing something very fundamental here :D

It's a very persistent typo. There's no way you can drop the $e^{j\lambda m}$ term just by dividing by $\omega[m]$ (except for the trivial case where $\lambda m = 2\pi k, k \in \mathbb{I}$, such as when $m = 0$).

|improve this answer|||||
$\endgroup$

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.