The present subject matter relates generally to adaptive filters and in particular to method and apparatus to reduce entrainment-related artifacts for adaptive filters.
Digital hearing aids with an adaptive feedback canceller usually suffer from artifacts when the input audio signal to the microphone is periodic. The feedback canceller may use an adaptive technique, such as a N-LMS algorithm, that exploits the correlation between the microphone signal and the delayed receiver signal to update a feedback canceller filter to model the external acoustic feedback. A periodic input signal results in an additional correlation between the receiver and the microphone signals. The adaptive feedback canceller cannot differentiate this undesired correlation from that due to the external acoustic feedback and borrows characteristics of the periodic signal in trying to trace this undesired correlation. This results in artifacts, called entrainment artifacts, due to non-optimal feedback cancellation. The entrainment-causing periodic input signal and the affected feedback canceller filter are called the entraining signal and the entrained filter, respectively.
Entrainment artifacts in audio systems include whistle-like sounds that contain harmonics of the periodic input audio signal and can be very bothersome and occurring with day-to-day sounds such as telephone rings, dial tones, microwave beeps, instrumental music to name a few. These artifacts, in addition to being annoying, can result in reduced output signal quality. Thus, there is a need in the art for method and apparatus to reduce the occurrence of these artifacts and hence provide improved quality and performance.
This application addresses the foregoing needs in the art and other needs not discussed herein. Method and apparatus embodiments are provided for a system to avoid entrainment of feedback cancellation filters in hearing assistance devices. Various embodiments include using a gradient adaptive lattice filter to measure an acoustic feedback path and monitoring the gradient adaptive lattice filter for indications of entrainment. Various embodiments include comparing a time adjusted forward error across stages of the gradient adaptive lattice filter to a threshold for the indication of entrainment of the gradient adaptive lattice filter. Various embodiments include suspending adaptation of the gradient adaptive lattice filter upon indication of entrainment.
Embodiments are provided that include a microphone, a receiver and a signal processor to process signals received from the microphone, the signal processor including an adaptive feedback cancellation filter, the adaptive feedback cancellation filter adapted to provide an estimate of an acoustic feedback path for feedback cancellation. Various embodiments include a gradient adaptive filter with one or more reflection coefficients and a signal processor programmed to compare at least one of the one or more reflection coefficients to a threshold for indication of entrainment of the gradient adaptive lattice filter. Various embodiments provided include a signal processor programmed to suspend the adaptation of the gradient adaptive filter upon an indication of entrainment of the gradient adaptive filter.
This Summary is an overview of some of the teachings of the present application and is not intended to be an exclusive or exhaustive treatment of the present subject matter. Further details about the present subject matter are found in the detailed description and the appended claims. The scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents.
The following detailed description of the present invention refers to subject matter in the accompanying drawings which show, by way of illustration, specific aspects and embodiments in which the present subject matter may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the present subject matter. References to “an”, “one”, or “various” embodiments in this disclosure are not necessarily to the same embodiment, and such references contemplate more than one embodiment. The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope is defined only by the appended claims, along with the full scope of legal equivalents to which such claims are entitled.
In some embodiments, order recursive structures may be used in FPGA and VLSI implementation of feedback cancellers due to their modularity and lattice like structure, which may be key features for ease of implementation. In addition, they are immune to finite word length instabilities. Gradient adaptive lattice (GAL) filters are a type of order recursive lattice structures used for predicting and noise cancellation. GAL algorithms have a built in de-correlative property and, therefore, perform well in the presence of correlated input signals. In various embodiments, this de-correlative property is exploited to avoid entrainment in systems by modifying the gradient adaptive lattice filter. Entrainment avoidance is accomplished using a GAL to determine magnitude of the reflection coefficients, which is an indication of entraining behavior. Evaluating the coefficient magnitudes against a threshold or threshold formula allows a signal processor to change the adaptation rate to avoid entrainment. From a computational view point, using GAL structures for non-entraining feedback cancellers is attractive. These algorithms have superior convergence behavior compared to traditional LMS algorithms.
The basic principle of GAL algorithms is to select an estimate for the reflection coefficient that minimizes the sum of the mean-square forward and backward residuals at the output of the mth stage. The optimum reflection coefficient of the mth stage of lattice predictor is obtained by minimizing the cost function,
Jm=E{ƒn|m|2+|bn|m|2}
where ƒn|m 330 is the forward predictor error at time n and bn|m 331 is the backward predictor error, both at the output of the mth stage as shown in
ƒn|m=ƒ(n|m−1)+κn|mb(n|m−1),
and
bn|m=b(n|m−1)+κn|m∫(n|m−1)
where κn|m 332 is the reflection coefficient of stage m. The input to the system can be considered as the zeroth-order forward and backward prediction errors, and the initialization for above recursions is given by ƒn|0=un 333 and bn|0=un 334 where un 307 is the output of the feedback canceller or input to the GAL filter. Substituting the above stage equations into the above cost function,
Differentiating with respect to the reflection coefficient κ gives,
The gradient adaptive lattice (GAL) algorithm for minimization of the cost function Jm is implemented according to the recursive equation,
by substitution,
where ξ(n|m−1) is an estimation of energy given by,
when κm is a block estimate of the reflection coefficient. Alternatively, the energy estimate is derived as a one pole averaging filter of the prediction errors,
where β is the smoothing constant. The desired signal is estimated at each stage with error criteria of the stages, in other words, the desired signal 312 is estimated order recursively,
e(n|m)=yn−ŷ(n|m)
where yn is the feedback leakage signal and ŷ(n|m) is the output of the mth stage, which is given by,
y(n|m)=y(n|m−1)−w(n|m)b(n|m).
In a order recursive adaptive filtering algorithm, the reflection coefficients are updated directly from the error feedback built into the algorithm. The weight update 335 of the second stage is similar to a NLMS algorithm and it is given by,
where μ is the weight and B(n|m) can be calculated order recursively, since b(n|m) of each stage is orthogonal to each other,
In various embodiments, entrainment avoidance is achieved by determining the magnitude of the reflection coefficients, or the time adjusted forward error across stages and evaluating the coefficients against a predetermined threshold or threshold formula. When a correlated input signal is presented to the system the lattice stage de-correlates the signal to orthogonal components. As a result of the correlation, the reflection coefficients become larger. For an uncorrelated input signal, the reflection coefficients remain small. In various embodiments, the coefficients are evaluated after applying a smoothing filter. In various embodiments, a one pole smoothening filter is used to avoid false detections. In various embodiments, analysis is divided into two stages, a lattice predictor following a NLMS algorithm. The lattice predictor de-correlates the signal and feeds to the NLMS stage. For white noise the predictor is unable to model the signal and the reflection coefficients are small. For correlated inputs the successive modes are modeled by the successive stages similar to Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization. The system identifies input signal correlation by evaluating the coefficients against a predetermined threshold determined by
where K is an empirical constant and M is the number of stages in the lattice. If the criteria is exceeded the adaptation is stopped. This condition is evaluated regularly to restore the adaptation of the system.
The forward prediction error is in turn related to the κ(n|m), since when κ(n|m)≈0 the ƒ(n|M−1)≈ƒ(n|M−2) and ƒ(n|M−1)≈ƒ(n|0) by time delaying and averaging the difference in ƒ(n|m), and by looking into the variance of f(n|m) enable the stopping of adaptation before entrainment.
This application is intended to cover adaptations or variations of the present subject matter. It is to be understood that the above description is intended to be illustrative, and not restrictive. The scope of the present subject matter should be determined with reference to the appended claims, along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled.
This application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/862,533, filed Oct. 23, 2006, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3601549 | Mitchell | Aug 1971 | A |
4495643 | Orban | Jan 1985 | A |
4731850 | Levitt et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4783817 | Hamada et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4879749 | Levitt et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
5016280 | Engebretson et al. | May 1991 | A |
5502869 | Smith et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5533120 | Staudacher | Jul 1996 | A |
5619580 | Hansen | Apr 1997 | A |
5621802 | Harjani et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5668747 | Ohashi | Sep 1997 | A |
6072884 | Kates | Jun 2000 | A |
6173063 | Melanson | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6219427 | Kates et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6356606 | Hahm | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6389440 | Lewis et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6434247 | Kates et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6480610 | Fang et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6494247 | Pedone | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6498858 | Kates | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6552446 | Lomba et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
7058182 | Kates | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7065486 | Thyssen | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7519193 | Fretz | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7809150 | Natarajan et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
8199948 | Theverapperuma | Jun 2012 | B2 |
20010002930 | Kates | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20030026442 | Fang et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030031314 | Tanrikulu et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030185411 | Atlas et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040086137 | Yu et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040125973 | Fang et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050036632 | Natarajan et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050047620 | Fretz | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20060140429 | Klinkby et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20070223755 | Salvetti et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080095388 | Theverapperuma | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080095389 | Theverapperuma | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080130927 | Theverapperuma et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090175474 | Salvetti et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20110091049 | Salvetti et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110116667 | Harikrishna et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20120230503 | Theverapperuma | Sep 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
19748079 | May 1999 | DE |
0585976 | Mar 1994 | EP |
1367857 | Dec 2003 | EP |
1718110 | Feb 2006 | EP |
2080408 | Aug 2012 | EP |
WO-0106746 | Jan 2001 | WO |
WO-0106812 | Jan 2001 | WO |
WO-0110170 | Feb 2001 | WO |
WO-2004105430 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO-2008051569 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2008051569 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2008051570 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2008051571 | May 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Haykin, S. “Adaptive Filter Theory: 3rd Edition”, Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, N.J 1996, pp. 915-918. |
“Advance Adaptive Feedback Cancellation”, IntriCon: Technology White Paper, [Online], Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.intricondownloads.com/D1/techdemo/WP—Advanced—AFC—rev101006.pdf>, (Oct. 10, 2005), 3 pg. |
“Entrainment (Physics)”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Entrainment—(physics)&printable=yes>, (Jun. 18, 2009), 2 pgs. |
“Inspiria Ultimate—GA3285”, [Online]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.sounddesigntechnologies.com/products—InspiriaUltimate.php>, (Jun. 18, 2009), 4 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Final Office Action mailed Jun. 11, 2009”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Final Office Action Mailed Jul. 24, 2008”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 26, 2010”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 26, 2007”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 31, 2008”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Notice of Allowance mailed Jul. 26, 2010”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Apr. 26, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Jan. 26, 2010”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Apr. 28, 2008 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 26, 2007”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Apr. 30, 2009 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Dec. 31, 2008”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Nov. 12, 2009 to Final Office Action mailed Jun. 11, 2009”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Nov. 16, 2007 to Restriction Requirement dated May 21, 2007”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Response filed Nov. 24, 2008 to Final Office Action mailed Jul. 24, 2008”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 10/857,599, Restriction Requirement mailed May 21, 2007”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Decision on Pre-Appeal Brief Request mailed Feb. 15, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Final Office Action mailed Sep. 14, 2010”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Non-Final Office Action mailed Apr. 2, 2010”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Notice of Allowance mailed Aug. 25, 2011”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Pre-Appeal Brief Request filed Jan. 14, 2011”, 5 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Response filed Jan. 11, 2010 to Restriction Requirement mailed Dec. 10, 2009”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Response filed Jun. 15, 2011 to Final Office Action mailed Sep. 14, 2010”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Response filed Jul. 2, 2010 to Non Final Office Action mailed Apr. 2, 2010”, 15 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/276,763, Restriction Requirement mailed Dec. 10, 2009”, 6 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,567, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 1, 2011”, 17 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,605 , Response filed Jan. 27, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 27, 2011”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,605, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 27, 2011”, 12 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Feb. 8, 2012”, 1 pg. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Final Office Action mailed Dec. 2, 2011”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Non Final Office Action mailed Jun. 10, 2011”, 12 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Notice of Allowance mailed Feb. 15, 2012”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Response filed Feb. 2, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Dec. 2, 2011”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,606, Response filed Sep. 12, 2011 to Non-Final Office Action mailed Jun. 10, 2011”, 7 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 29, 2011”, 13 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460, Response filed Jan. 30, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 29, 2011”, 25 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/875,646, Non Final Office Action mailed Jan. 30, 2012”, 4 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07250899.7, European Search Report mailed May 15, 2008”, 7 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07250899.7, Office Action Mailed Jan. 15, 2009”, 1 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07250899.7, Office Action mailed Mar. 21, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07250899.7, Response to Official Communication Filed Jul. 13, 2009”, 17 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07839767.6, Office Action mailed May 5, 2011”, 4 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07839767.6, Response filed Jun. 2, 2011 to Office Action mailed May 5, 2011”, 11 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07839768.4, Office Action Received Dec. 9, 2011”, 3 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022548, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed May 7, 2009”, 8 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022548, Search Report mailed Jun. 3, 2008”, 7 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022548, Written Opinion mailed Jun. 3, 2008”, 8 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022549, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed May 7, 2009”, 8 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022549, International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Feb. 15, 2008”, 12 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022550, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed May 7, 2009”, 8 pgs. |
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/022550, International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Oct. 23, 2006”, 12 pgs. |
Beaufays, Francoise, “Transform-Domain Adaptive Filters: An Analytical Approach”, IEEE Trans. on Signal Proc., vol. 43(2), (Feb. 1995), 422-431. |
Chankawee, A., et al., “Performance improvement of acoustic feedback cancellation in hearing aids using liner prediction”, Digital Signal Processing Research Laboratory(DSPRL), (Nov. 21, 2004), 116-119. |
Maxwell, J. A., et al., “Reducing Acoustic Feedback in Hearing Aids”, IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 3(4), (Jul. 1995), 304-313. |
Proakis, J. G, et al., “Digital Signal Processing”, Prentice-Hall, Inc., XP002481168, (1996), 213-214—p. 536. |
Rife, D., et al., “Transfer-Function Measurement With Maximum-Length Sequences”, J. Audio Eng. Soc., 37(6), (1989), 419-444. |
Theverapperuma, Lalin S, et al., “Adaptive Feedback Canceller: Entrainment”, Digital Signal Processing Workshop, 4TH IEEE, PI, (Sep. 1, 2006), 245-250. |
Theverapperuma, Lalin S, et al., “Continuous Adaptive Feedback Canceller Dynamics”, Circuits and Systems, 49th IEEE International Midwes T Symposium On, IEEE, PI, (Aug. 1, 2006), 605-609. |
Wong, T.W., et al., “Adaptive Filtering Using Hartley Transform and Overlap-Saved method”, IEEE Transaction on Signal Processing, vol. 39, No. 7, (Jul. 1991), 1708-1711. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,567, Notice of Allowance mailed May 31, 2012”, 11 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,605, Response filed Jul. 9, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Apr. 9, 2012”, 9 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,605, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 9, 2012”, 17 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460 , Response filed Jun. 27, 2012 to Final Office Action mailed Apr. 27, 2012”, 10 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460, Advisory Action mailed Jul. 30, 2012”, 3 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460, Final Office Action mailed Apr. 27, 2012”, 8 pgs. |
“U.S. Appl. No. 12/875,646, Response filed Jul. 30, 2012 to Non Final Office Action mailed Jan. 30, 2012”, 7 pgs. |
“European Application Serial No. 07839768.4, Response filed Apr. 5, 2012 to Office Action mailed Dec. 9, 2011”, 20 pgs. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,567, Notice of Allowance mailed Sep. 28, 2012, 8 pgs. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/877,605, Non Final Office Action mailed Nov. 20, 2012, 8 pgs. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/336,460, Non Final Office Action mailed Nov. 26, 2012, 6 pgs. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/875,646, Final Office Action mailed Oct. 25, 2012, 10 pgs. |
European Application Serial No. 07839766.8, Office Action mailed Sep. 17, 2012, 10 pgs. |
Spreiet, Ann, et al., “Adaptive Feedback Cancellation in Hearing Aids With Linear Prediction of the Desired Signal”, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 53(10), (Oct. 2005), 3749-3763. |
Theverapperurna, Lalin S, et al., “Adaptive Feedback Canceller: Entrainment”, Digital Signal Processing Workshop, 12th—Signal Processing Education Workshop, 4th, IEEE, (2006), 245-250. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080130926 A1 | Jun 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60862533 | Oct 2006 | US |