4.7 Article

A recursive least M-estimate algorithm for robust adaptive filtering in impulsive noise: Fast algorithm and convergence performance analysis

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING
Volume 52, Issue 4, Pages 975-991

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TSP.2004.823496

Keywords

adaptive filter; contaminated Gaussian distribution; impulsive noise suppression; lattice structure; Prior Error Feedback-Least Square Lattice Algorithm; recursive least M-estimate algorithm; robust statistics; system identification

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper studies the problem of robust adaptive filtering in impulsive noise environment using a recursive least M-estimate algorithm (RLM). The RLM algorithm minimizes a robust M-estimator-based cost function instead of the conventional me an square error function (MSE). Previous work has showed that the RLM algorithm offers improved robustness to impulses over conventional recursive least squares (RLS) algorithm. In this paper, the mean and mean square convergence behaviors of the RLM algorithm under the contaminated Gaussian impulsive noise model is analyzed. A lattice structure-based fast RLM algorithm, called the Huber Prior Error Feedback-Least Squares Lattice (H-PEF-LSL) algorithm(1) is derived. It has an order O(N) arithmetic complexity, where N is the length of the adaptive filter, and can be. viewed as a fast implementation of the RLM algorithm based on the modified Huber M-estimate function and the conventional PEF-LSL adaptive filtering algorithm. Simulation results show that the transversal RLM and the H-PEF-LSL algorithms have better performance than the conventional RLS and other RLS-like robust adaptive algorithms tested when the desired and input signals are corrupted by impulsive noise. Furthermore, the theoretical and simulation results on the convergence behaviors agree very well with each other.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available