Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research Article
  • Open Access

Efficient Fast Stereo Acoustic Echo Cancellation Based on Pairwise Optimal Weight Realization Technique

EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing20062006:084797

https://doi.org/10.1155/ASP/2006/84797

  • Received: 1 February 2005
  • Accepted: 4 October 2005
  • Published:

Abstract

In stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation (SAEC) problem, fast and accurate tracking of echo path is strongly required for stable echo cancellation. In this paper, we propose a class of efficient fast SAEC schemes with linear computational complexity (with respect to filter length). The proposed schemes are based on pairwise optimal weight realization (POWER) technique, thus realizing a "best" strategy (in the sense of pairwise and worst-case optimization) to use multiple-state information obtained by preprocessing. Numerical examples demonstrate that the proposed schemes significantly improve the convergence behavior compared with conventional methods in terms of system mismatch as well as echo return loss enhancement (ERLE).

Keywords

  • Information Technology
  • Computational Complexity
  • Conventional Method
  • Quantum Information
  • Optimal Weight

[1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162]

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Communications and Integrated Systems, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-Ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan

References

  1. Fujii T, Shimada S: A note on multi-channel echo cancellers. CS84-178, IEICE, January 1985, in JapaneseGoogle Scholar
  2. Sondhi MM, Morgan DR: Acoustic echo cancellation for stereophonic teleconferencing. Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics (ASSP '91), October 1991 141-142.Google Scholar
  3. Sondhi MM, Morgan DR, Hall JL: Stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation—an overview of the fundamental problem. IEEE Signal Processing Letters 1995, 2(8):148-151. 10.1109/97.404129View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Benesty J, Amand F, Gilloire A, Grenier Y: Adaptive filtering algorithms for stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '95), May 1995, Detroit, Mich, USA 5: 3099-3102.Google Scholar
  5. Benesty J, Morgan DR, Sondhi MM: A better understanding and an improved solution to the specific problems of stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 1998, 6(2):156-165. 10.1109/89.661474View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Gänsler T, Benesty J: Stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation and two-channel adaptive filtering: an overview. International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing 2000, 14(6):565-586. 10.1002/1099-1115(200009)14:6<565::AID-ACS604>3.0.CO;2-2View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Gay SL, Benesty J (Eds): Acoustic Signal Processing for Telecommunication. Kluwer Academic, Boston, Mass, USA; 2000.Google Scholar
  8. Eneroth P, Gay SL, Gänsler T, Benesty J: A real-time implementation of a stereophonic acoustic echo canceler. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 2001, 9(5):513-523. 10.1109/89.928916View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Gänsler T, Benesty J: Multichannel acoustic echo cancellation: what's new? Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control (IWAENC '01), September 2001, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  10. Ikeda K, Sakamoto R: Convergence analyses of stereo acoustic echo cancelers with preprocessing. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2003, 51(5):1324-1334. 10.1109/TSP.2003.810301MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Benesty J, Huang Y (Eds): Adaptive Signal Processing: Applications to Real-World Problems. Springer, Berlin, Germany; 2003.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Sugiyama A, Hirano A, Nakayama K: Acoustic echo cancellation for conference systems. Proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO '04), September 2004, Vienna, Austria 17-20.Google Scholar
  13. Buchner H, Benesty J, Kellermann W: Generalized multichannel frequency-domain adaptive filtering: efficient realization and application to hands-free speech communication. Signal Processing 2005, 85(3):549-570. 10.1016/j.sigpro.2004.07.029View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Joncour Y, Sugiyama A: A stereo echo canceler with pre-processing for correct echo-path identification. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3677-3680.Google Scholar
  15. Sugiyama A, Joncour Y, Hirano A: A stereo echo canceler with correct echo-path identification based on an input-sliding technique. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2001, 49(11):2577-2587. 10.1109/78.960405View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Ali M: Stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation system using time-varying all-pass filtering for signal decorrelation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3689-3692.Google Scholar
  17. Benesty J, Morgan DR, Hall JL, Sondhi MM: Stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation using nonlinear transformations and comb filtering. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3673-3676.Google Scholar
  18. Gänsler T, Eneroth P: Influence of audio coding on stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3649-3652.Google Scholar
  19. Gilloire A, Turbin V: Using auditory properties to improve the behaviour of stereophonic acoustic echo cancellers. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3681-3684.Google Scholar
  20. Shimauchi S, Haneda Y, Makino S, Kaneda Y: New configuration for a stereo echo canceller with nonlinear pre-processing. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '98), May 1998, Seattle, Wash, USA 6: 3685-3688.Google Scholar
  21. Hirano A, Nakayama K, Watanabe K: Convergence analysis of stereophonic echo canceller with pre-processing—relation between pre-processing and convergence. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '99), March 1999, Phoenix, Ariz, USA 2: 861-864.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Gänsler T, Benesty J: New insights into the stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation problem and an adaptive nonlinearity solution. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 2002, 10(5):257-267. 10.1109/TSA.2002.800554View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Yukawa M, Yamada I: Efficient adaptive stereo echo canceling schemes based on simultaneous use of multiple state data. IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences 2004, E87-A(8):1949-1957.Google Scholar
  24. Yamada I: Adaptive projected subgradient method: unified view for projection based adaptive algorithms. Journal of IEICE 2003, 86(8):654-658.Google Scholar
  25. Yamada I, Ogura N: Adaptive projected subgradient method for asymptotic minimization of sequence of nonnegative convex functions. Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization 2004, 25(7&8):593-617.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Cavalcante RLG, Yamada I, Sakaniwa K: A fast blind MAI reduction based on adaptive projected subgradient method. IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences 2004, E87-A(8):1973-1980.Google Scholar
  27. Yukawa M, Cavalcante RLG, Yamada I: Efficient blind MAI suppression in DS/CDMA systems by embedded constraint parallel projection techniques. IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences 2005, E88-A(8):2062-2071. 10.1093/ietfec/e88-a.8.2062View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Yamada I, Slavakis K, Yamada K: An efficient robust adaptive filtering algorithm based on parallel subgradient projection techniques. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2002, 50(5):1091-1101. 10.1109/78.995065View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Deutsch FR: Best Approximation in Inner Product Spaces. Springer, Berlin, Germany; 2001.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Censor Y, Zenios SA: Parallel Optimization: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA; 1997.MATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Yukawa M, Yamada I: Acceleration of adaptive parallel projection algorithms by pairwise optimal weight realization. Proceedings of the 12th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO '04), September 2004, Vienna, Austria 713-716.Google Scholar
  32. Yukawa M, Yamada I: Pairwise optimal weight realization—acceleration technique for set-theoretic adaptive parallel subgradient projection algorithm. 2005.http://www.comm.ss.titech.ac.jp/~masahiro/publications.html) IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, accepted (For its preliminary version, see: Masahiro Yukawa and Isao Yamada, "On optimality of POWER weighting technique for adaptive filtering," Technical Report of IEICE, SIP2005-7, vol. 105, no. 29, pp.37–42, April 2005,Google Scholar
  33. Hinamoto T, Maekawa S: Extended theory of learning identification. Transactions of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan 1975, 95(10):227-234.Google Scholar
  34. Ozeki K, Omeda T: An adaptive filtering algorithm using an orthogonal projection to an affine subspace and its properties. Transactions of IEICE 1984, 67-A(5):126-132.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. Haykin S: Adaptive Filter Theory. 3rd edition. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA; 1996.MATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Sayed AH: Fundamentals of Adaptive Filtering. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NJ, USA; 2003.Google Scholar
  37. Combettes PL: The foundations of set theoretic estimation. Proceedings of the IEEE 1993, 81(2):182-208.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Combettes PL: Convex set theoretic image recovery by extrapolated iterations of parallel subgradient projections. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 1997, 6(4):493-506. 10.1109/83.563316View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Gollamudi S, Nagaraj S, Kapoor S, Huang YH: Set-membership filtering and a set-membership normalized LMS algorithm with an adaptive step size. IEEE Signal Processing Letters 1998, 5(5):111-114. 10.1109/97.668945View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Guo L, Ekpenyong A, Huang YH: Frequency-domain adaptive filtering—a set-membership approach. Proceedings of the 37th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, November 2003, Pacific Grove, Calif, USA 2073-2077.Google Scholar
  41. Bauschke HH, Borwein JM: On projection algorithms for solving convex feasibility problems. SIAM Review 1996, 38(3):367-426. 10.1137/S0036144593251710MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Ogura N, Yamada I: A deep outer approximating half space of the level set of certain quadratic functions. Journal of Nonlinear and Convex Analysis 2005, 6(1):187-201.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Nagumo J, Noda A: A learning method for system identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1967, 12(3):282-287.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Hassibi B, Sayed AH, Kailath T: optimality of the LMS algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 1996, 44(2):267-280. 10.1109/78.485923View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Yukawa M, Yamada I: Adaptive parallel subgradient projection techniques with input sliding technique for stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation. in Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control (IWAENC '01), September 2003, Kyoto, Japan 55-58.Google Scholar
  46. Gay SL: Dynamically regularized fast RLS with application to echo cancellation. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '96), May 1996, Atlanta, Ga, USA 2: 957-960.Google Scholar
  47. Gay SL, Tavathia S: The fast affine projection algorithm. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '95), May 1995, Detroit, Mich, USA 5: 3023-3026.Google Scholar
  48. Rupp M: A family of adaptive filter algorithms with decorrelating properties. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 1998, 46(3):771-775. 10.1109/78.661344View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  49. Tanaka M, Makino S, Kojima J: A block exact fast affine projection algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 1999, 7(1):79-86. 10.1109/89.736333View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Breining C, Dreiseitel P, Hänsler E, et al.: Acoustic echo control. An application of very-high-order adaptive filters. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine 1999, 16(4):42-69. 10.1109/79.774933View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. Sankaran SG, Beex AA(Louis): Convergence behavior of affine projection algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2000, 48(4):1086-1096. 10.1109/78.827542MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Botto J-L, Moustakides GV: Stabilizing the fast Kalman algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing 1989, 37(9):1342-1348. 10.1109/29.31289View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Moustakides GV: Correcting the instability due to finite precision of the fast Kalman identification algorithms. Signal Processing 1989, 18: 33-42. 10.1016/0165-1684(89)90060-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  54. Slock DTM, Kailath T: Numerically stable fast transversal filters for recursive least squares adaptive filtering. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 1991, 39(1):92-114. 10.1109/78.80769View ArticleMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. Glentis G-O, Berberidis K, Theodoridis S: A unified view—efficient least squares adaptive algorithms for FIR transversal filtering. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine 1999, 16(4):13-41. 10.1109/79.774932View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  56. Haykin S, Sayed AH, Zeidler JR, Yee P, Wei PC: Adaptive tracking of linear time-variant systems by extended RLS algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 1997, 45(5):1118-1128. 10.1109/78.575687View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Leung S-H, So CF: Gradient-based variable forgetting factor RLS algorithm in time-varying environments. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2005, 53(8):3141-3150.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  58. Sankaran SG, Beex AA(Louis): Stereophonic echo cancellation using NLMS with orthogonal correction factors. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control (IWAENC '99), September 1999, Pocono Manor, Pa, USA 40-43.Google Scholar
  59. Lai J-T, Wu A-Y, Yeh C-C: A novel multipath matrix algorithm for exact room response identification in stereo echo cancellation. Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems (SIPS '03), August 2003, Seoul, Korea 236-240.Google Scholar
  60. Hirano A, Nakayama K, Someda D, Tanaka M: Stereophonic acoustic echo canceller without pre-processing. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '04), May 2004, Montreal, Canada 4: 145-148.Google Scholar
  61. Khong AWH, Naylor PA: Reducing inter-channel coherence in stereophonic acoustic echo cancellation using partial update adaptive filters. Proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO '04), September 2004, Vienna, Austria 405-408.Google Scholar
  62. Morgan DR, Hall JL, Benesty J: Investigation of several types of nonlinearities for use in stereo acoustic echo cancellation. IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing 2001, 9(6):686-696. 10.1109/89.943346View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement