This invention relates generally to signal processing, and more particularly to transforming an input signal to an output signal using a dynamic model, where the signal is an audio (speech) signal.
A common framework for modeling dynamics in non-stationary signals is a hidden Markov model (HMM) with temporal dynamics. The HMM is the de facto standard for speech recognition. A discrete-time HMM models a sequence of N observed (acquired) random variables
i.e., signal samples, by conditioning probability distributions on the sequence of unobserved random state variables {hn}. Two constraints are typically defined on the HMM.
First, the state variables have first-order Markov dynamics. This means that p(hn|hl:n-1)=p(hn|hn−1), where the p(hn|hn−1) are known as transition probabilities. The transition probabilities are usually constrained to be time-invariant.
Second, each sample xn, given the corresponding state hn, is independent of all other hidden states hn′, n′≠n, so that p(xn|h1:N)=p(xn|hn), where the p(xn|hn) are known as observation probabilities. In many speech applications, the states hn are discrete, and observations xn are F-dimensional vector-valued continuous acoustic features,
where the parentheses indicate that n is not iterated. Typical frequency features are short-time log power spectra, where f indicates a frequency bin.
Defining initial probabilities
the joint distribution of the random variables of the HMM is
Linear Dynamical Systems
A related model is a linear dynamical system used in Kalman filters. The linear dynamical system is characterized by states and observations that are continuous, vector-valued, and jointly Gaussian distributed
h
n
=Ah
n−1+εn, (2)
v
n
=Bh
n
+v
n, (3)
where hnεRK (or hnεCK) is the state at lime n, K the dimension of the state space, A is a state transition matrix, εn is additive Gaussian transition noise, vnεRF (or vnεCF) is the observation at time n, F is the dimension of the observation (or feature) space, B is an observation matrix, vn is additive Gaussian noise, and R is real.
Non-Negative Matrix Factorization
In the context of audio signal processing, the signal is typically processed using a sliding window and a feature vector representation that is often a magnitude or power spectrum of the audio signal. The features are nonnegative. In order to discover repeating patterns in the signal in an unsupervised way, nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) is extensively used.
For a nonnegative matrix V of dimensions F×N, a rank-reduced approximation is
V≈WH,
where W and H are nonnegative matrices of dimensions F×K and K×N, respectively. The approximation is typically obtained from a minimization
where d(x|y) is a positive function scalar cost function with a unique minimum at x=y.
Itakura-Saito Nonnegative Matrix Factorization (IS-NMF)
For the audio signal, where the matrix V is the power spectrogram of a complex-valued short-time Fourier transform (STFT) matrix X, conventional methods have used the Itakura-Saito distance, which measures the difference between the actual and approximated spectrum, as the cost function, because the cost function implies a latent model of superimposed zero-mean. Gaussian components that is relevant for audio signals. More precisely, let xfn be the complex-valued STFT coefficient at frame n and frequency f, and
c
fkn
:N
c(0,wfkhkn).
Then,
The model can also be expressed as
It is equivalent to assume that |x|fn2 is exponentially distributed with parameter Σkwfkhkn and uniform phase
Smooth IS-NMF
In smooth variants of IS-NMF, an inverse-gamma or gamma random walk is assumed for independent rows of H. More precisely, the following model has been considered:
h
kn
=h
k(n-1)∘εkn,
where εkn is nonnegative multiplicative innovation random variable with mode 1, such as
εkn:G(α,α−1), or
εkn:IG(α,α+1),
where by convention gamma and inverse-gamma are
Models Combining HMMs and NMF
If HMMs and NMF are combined, then the restriction that only one discrete state can be active at a time is inherited from the HMMs. This means that multiple model are required for multiple source, leading to potential issues to computational tractability.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,047,047 describes denoising a speech signal using an estimate of a noise-reduced feature vector and a model of an acoustic environment. The model is based on a non-linear function that describes a relationship between the input feature vector, a clean feature vector, a noise feature vector and a phase relationship indicative of mixing of the clean feature vector and the noise feature vector.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,015,003 describes denoising a mixed signal, e.g., speech and noise, using a NMF constrained by a denoising model. The denoising model includes training basis matrices of a training acoustic signal and a training noise signal, and statistics of weights of the training basis matrices. A product of the weights of the basis matrix of the acoustic signal and the training basis matrices of the training acoustic signal and the training noise signal is used to reconstruct the acoustic signal.
In general, the prior art methods that focus on slow-changing noise, are inadequate for fast-changing nonstationary noise, such as experienced by using a mobile telephone in a noisy environment.
Although HMMs can handle speech dynamics, HMMs often lead to combinatorial issues due to the discrete state space, which is computationally complex, especially for mixed signals from several sources. In conventional HMM approaches it is also not straightforward to handle gain adaptation.
NMF solves both the computational and gain adaptation issues. However, NMF does not handle dynamic signals. Smooth IS-NMF attempts to handle dynamics. However, the independence assumption of the rows of H is not realistic, as the activation of a spectral pattern at frame n is likely to be correlated with the activation of other patterns at a previous frame n−1.
It is an object of the invention to solve inherent problems associated with signal and data processing using HMMs and NMF frameworks.
It is an object of the invention to transform an input signal to an output signal when the input signal is a non-stationary signal, and more specifically a mixture of signals. Therefore, the embodiments of the invention provide a non-negative linear dynamical system model for processing the input signal, particularly a speech signal that is mixed with noise. In the context of speech separation and speech denoising, our model adapts to signal dynamics on-line, and achieves better performance than conventional methods.
Conventional models for signal dynamics frequently use hidden Markov models (HMMs) or non-negative matrix factorization (NMF).
HMMs lead to combinatorial problems due to the discrete state space, are computationally complex, especially for mixed signals from several sources. In conventional HMM approaches it is also not straightforward to handle gain adaptation.
NMF solves both the computational complexity and gain adaptation problems. However, NMF does not take advantage of past observations of a signal to model future observations of that signal. For signals with predictable dynamics, this is likely to be suboptimal.
Our model has advantages of both the HMMs and the NMF. The model is characterized by a continuous non-negative state space. Gain adaptation is automatically handled during inference. The complexity of the inference is linear in the number of signal sources, and dynamics are modeled via a linear transition matrix.
Specifically the input signal, in the form of a sequence of feature vectors, is transformed to the output signal by first storing parameters of a model of the input signal in a memory.
Using the vectors and the parameters, a sequence of vectors of hidden variables is inferred. There is at least one vector hn of hidden variables hi,n for each feature vector xn, and each hidden variable is nonnegative.
The output signal is generated using the feature vectors, the vectors of hidden variables, and the parameters. Each feature vector Xn is dependent on at least one of the hidden variables hi,n or the same n. The hidden variables are related according to
where j and l are summation indices. The parameters include non-negative weights ci,j,l, and εl,n are independent non-negative random variables.
The embodiments of our provide a model for transforming and processing dynamic (non-stationary) signal and data that has advantages of HMMs and NMF based models.
The model is characterized by a continuous non-negative state space. Gain adaptation is automatically handled on-line during inference. Dynamics of the signal are modeled using a linear transition matrix A. The model is a non-negative linear dynamical system with multiplicative non-negative innovation random variables εn. The signal can be a non-stationary linear signal, such as an audio or speech signal, or a multi-dimensional signal. The signal can be expressed in the digital domain as data. The innovation random variable is described in greater detail below.
The embodiments also provide applications for using the model. Specifically, the model can be used to process an audio signal acquired from several, sources, e.g., the signal is a mixture of speech and noise (or other acoustic interference) and the model is used to enhance the signal by, e.g., reducing noise. When we say “mixed,” we mean that the speech and noise are acquired by a single sensor (microphone).
However, it is understood that the model can also be used for other non-stationary signals and data that have characteristics that vary over time, such as economic or financial data, network data and signals, or signals, medical signals, or other signals acquired from natural phenomena. The parameters include non-negative weights ci,j,l, and εl,n are independent non-negative random variables, the distributions of which also have parameters. The indices i,j,l, and n are described below.
General Method
As shown in
The input signal is received as a feature vectors xn 104 of salient characteristics of the signal. The features are of course application and signal specific. For example, if the signal is an audio signal, the features can be log power spectra. It is understood that the different type of features that can be used is essentially unlimited for many types of different signals and data that can be processed by the method according to the invention.
The method infers 110 a sequence of vectors of hidden variables 111. The inference is based on the feature vector 104, the parameters, a hidden variable relationship 130, and a relationship 140 of observations to hidden variables. There is at least one vector hn of hidden variables hi,n for each feature vector xn. Each hidden variable is nonnegative.
An output signal 122 corresponding to the input signal is generated 120 to form the feature vectors, the vectors of hidden variables, and the parameters.
General Method Details
In our method, each feature vector xn is dependent on at least one of the hidden variables hi,n for the same n. The hidden variables are related according to a hidden variable relationship
130, where j and l are summation indices. The stored parameters include non-negative weights ci,j,l, and εl,n are independent non-negative random variables. This formulation enables the model to represent statistical dependency over time in a structured way, so that the hidden variables for the current frame, n, are dependent on those of the previous frame, n−1 with a distribution that is determined by the combination of ci,j,l, and the parameters of the distribution of the weights εl,n. The weight εl,n, for example, may be Gamma random variables with shape parameter α and inverse scale parameter β.
In one embodiment, ci,j,l=δ(i,l)ai,j, where ai,j are non-negative scalars, so that
where δ is a Kronecker delta. In this case, if the weights εl,n, are Gamma random variables with shape parameter α and inverse scale parameter β, then the conditional distribution of hi,n given {hj,n-1}j=1K, where K is a number of elements in the hidden states vector, is
where
is the gamma distribution for random variable x with shape a, inverse scale b, and
is the gamma function. This embodiment is designed to conform to the simplicity of the basic structure of a conventional linear dynamical system, but differs from prior art by the non-negative structure of the model, and the multiplicative innovation random variables.
In another embodiment, ci,j,l=α(m(i,j),l),ai,j, where ai,j are non-negative scalars, δ is the Kronecker delta, δ(a,b)={0: otherwise1: if a=b, and m(i,j) is a one-to-one mapping from each combination of i and j to an index corresponding to l, (e.g., m(i,j)=(i−1)K+j, where K is a number of elements in the hidden variable hn) so that
This embodiment enables flexibility in modeling the signal, because each transition, can be inferred independently.
Another embodiment that is important to modeling multiple sources comprises partitioning hidden variables hi,n into S groups, where each group corresponds to one independent source in a mixture. Likewise, the non-negative random variables εl,n are partitioned according to the same S groups. This can be accomplished by a special case of the parameters ci,j,l where ci,j,l=0 when hi,n, and hj,n are not in the same group or when hi,n and εl,n are not associated with the same group. When the hidden variables are ordered accordingly, this gives ci,j,l block structure, where each block corresponds to the model for one of the signal sources.
In our embodiments, the hidden variables are related 140 to feature variables via a non-negative feature vf,n, of the signal indexed by feature f and frame n. An observation model is based on
where cf,i,l(v) is a non-negative scalar, and εl,n(v) are independent non-negative random variables, and j, and l are indices of different components.
In a more constrained embodiment cf,i,l(v)=δ(i,l)wf,i, where wf,i are non-negative scalars, where δ is the Kronecker delta, and εf,n(v) are the Gamma distributed random variables, so that the observation model based, at least in part, on
where vf,n is non-negative feature of the signal at frame n and frequency f, α(v) and β(v) are positive scalars, and wf,i are non-negative scalars.
In applications where the features xf,n are complex spectrogram values of the input signal, a frame n and frequency f, the observation model can use vf,n=|xf,n|2, which is the power in frame n, and frequency f. Thus, an observation model can be formed based on
where √{square root over (−1)} is the unit imaginary number, and θf,n=∠xf,n is a phase for a frame n and frequency f.
In another embodiment, we select the parameter α(v)=1, so that the gamma distribution reduces to an exponential distribution as a special case. In this case, if the phases θf,n are distributed uniformly, then we obtain the observation model
where NC is a complex Gaussian distribution. This observation model corresponds to the Itakura-Saito nonnegative matrix factorization described above, and is combined in our embodiments with the non-negative dynamical system model.
Another embodiment uses an observation model for vf,n based on a cascade of transformations of the same type:
where ci′,i,l′(u) and cf,i′,l″(v) are non-negative scalars, and εl′,n(u) and εl″,n(v) are independent non-negative random variables, and i, i′, l′, l″ are indices.
The method for inferring the hidden variables depends on the model parameterization for each embodiment.
Model Parameters
As shown in
For example, the training signal is a speech signal, or a mixed signal from multiple acoustic sources, perhaps including non-stationary noise, or other acoustic interference. The signal is processed as frames of signal samples. The sampling rate and number of samples in each frame is application specific. It is noted that the updating 230 described below for processing the current frame n is dependent on a previous frame n−1. For each frame we determine 210 a feature vector xn representation. For an audio input signal, frequency features such as log power spectra could be used.
Parameters of the model are initialized 220. The parameters can include basis functions W, a transition matrix A, activation matrix H, and a fixed shape parameter ca and an inverse scale parameter β of a continuous gamma distribution parameter, and various combinations of these parameters depending on the particular application. For example in some applications, updating H and β are optional. In a variational Bayes (VB) method, H is not used. Instead an estimate of the posterior distribution of H is used and updated. If a maximum a-posteriori (MAP) estimation, then updating β is optional.
During each iteration of the method, the activation matrix, the basis function, the transition matrix, and the gamma parameter are updated 231-134. It should again be noted that the set of parameters to be updated is also application specific.
A termination condition 260, e.g., convergence or a maximum number of iterations, is tested after the updating 230. If true, store the parameters in a memory, otherwise if false, repeat at step 230.
The above steps of the general method and the parameter determination can be performed in a processor connected to a memory and input/output interfaces as know. Specialized microprocessors, and the like can also be used. It is understood that the signals processed by the method, e.g., speech or financial data, can be extremely complex. The method transforms the input signal into features which can be stored in the memory. The method also stores the model parameters and inferred hidden variables in the memory.
Model Parameters Details
For simplicity of this description, we limit the notation to the embodiment where cf,i,l(v)=δ(i,l)wf,i, the wf,i are non-negative scalars δ is a Kronecker delta, and εf,n(v) are gamma distributed random variables, with parameter α(v)=1, and phases θf,n are distributed uniformly. In this case, our model is
where xfn is the complex-valued STFT coefficient at frame n and frequency f, NC is the complex Gaussian distribution, wfk is the value of the kth basis function for the power spectrum at frequency f, hn and hn−1 are the nth and the (n−1)th columns of the activation matrix H, respectively, A is the nonnegative K×K transition matrix that models the correlations between the different patterns in successive frames n−1 and n, εn is a nonnegative innovation random variable, e.g., a vector of dimension K, and ∘ denotes entry-wise multiplication. The smooth IS-NMF can be obtained as a particular case of our model by setting A=IK, where IK is the K×K identity matrix.
A distinctive and advantageous property of our model is that more than one state dimension can be non-zero at a given time. This means that a signal simultaneously acquired from multiple sources by a single sensor can analyzed using a single model, unlike the prior art HMM which requires multiple models.
Gamma Model of Innovations
We use an independent gamma distribution for the innovation εkn, namely
p(εin|α,β)=G(αi,βi).
It follows that hn is conditionally gamma distributed, such that
and in particular
For h1, we use an independent scale-invariant noninformative Jeffreys prior i.e.,
In Bayesian probability, the Jeffreys prior is a non-informative (objective) prior distribution on a parameter space that is proportional to the square root of the determinant of Fisher information.
MAP Inference in the Gamma Innovation Model
The maximum a-posteriori (MAP) objective function is
Scales
Scale-Ambiguity Between A and β
A K×K nonnegative diagonal matrix with coefficients λi on its diagonal is Λ, thus,
C(W,H,ΛA,Λβ)=C(W,H,A,β),
which has a scale-ambiguity between A and β. When both A and β are estimated, the scale-ambiguity can be corrected in a number of ways, for example by fixing β to arbitrary values or by normalizing the rows of A at every iteration 230 and rescaling β accordingly. For example, we can normalize the rows of the transition matrix A such that the rows sum to 1, or so that the maximum coefficient in every row is 1. In some embodiments, βi=αi, i.e., the model expectation of the innovation random variable is 1.
Ill-Posedness of MAP
The scales of W and H are related by
where λi is the i-th element of the diagonal of Λ.
Without further constraints, the minimization of the MAP objective leads to a degenerate solution such that ∥W∥→∞ and ∥H∥→0. If we assume that all the diagonal elements of Λ are equal, such that Λ=λIK, then
C(WΛ−1,ΛH,A)=C(W,H,A)+KN log λ.
The MAP objective can be made arbitrarily small by decreasing the value of λ. Hence, the norm of W is controlled during optimization. This can be achieved by hard or soft constraints. The hard constraint is a regular constraint that must be satisfied, and the soft constraint is a cost functions expressing a preference.
Hard Constraint
We solve
minC(W,H,A)s·t W≧0,H≧0,∥|wk∥|1=1
using the change of variable
minC(
Soft Constraint (Penalization)
Another way we can control the norm of W is to add an appropriate penalty to the objective function, e.g.,
minC(W,H,A)+λ∥W∥1s·t W≧0,H≧0
The soft constraint is typically simpler to implement than the hard constraint, but requires the tuning of λ.
Learning and Inference Procedures for MAP Estimation
We describe a majorization-minimization (MM) procedure. The MM is an iterative optimization procedure that can be applied to a convex objective function to determine maximums. That is, MM is a way to construct the objective function. MM determines a surrogate function that majorizes the objective function by driving the function to a local optimum. In our embodiments, the matrices H, A, and W are updated conditionally on one and another. In the following, tildes ({tilde over ( )}) denote current parameter iterations.
Inequalities
For {φk} such that Σkφk=1, we have
by Jensen s inequality. We can form an upper bound on log α by linearization, at any point φ,
In particular,
Fit to Data
Penalty Terms
Update Rules
The MM framework includes majorizing the terms of the objective function with the previous inequalities, providing an upper bound of the objective function that is tight at the current parameters, and minimizing the upper bound instead of the original objective. This strategy applied to the minimization of the MAP objective with the soft constraint on the norm of W leads to the following updates 230 as shown in
Update 231 Activation Matrix H
The columns of H are updated 231 sequentially. Left to right updates makes the update hn(1) of hn at iteration l dependent of hn−1(l) and hn+1(l−1). The update of hkn involves rooting a polynomial of order 2, such that
where the values of a, b, c are given in the next table.
In particular, for the exponential innovation with expectation 1 (αi=βi=1), we obtain the following multiplicative updates:
Update 232 Basis Function W
Update 233 Transition Matrix A
Variational EM Procedure for Maximum Likelihood Estimation
The activation parameter H is a latent variable to integrate from the joint likelihood. For generality, we assume the gamma distribution parameters β={βi} to be free. The shape parameters αi are treated as fixed parameters. We minimize
C(W,A,β)=−log p(V|W,A,β)=−log∫Hp(V|W,H)p(H|A,β)dH.
This yields a better posed estimation problem because the set of parameters is of fixed-dimensionality w.r.t to the number of samples N. Furthermore, the objective is now better posed in terms of scales. For any positive diagonal matrix Λ, we have
C(W,A,β)=C(WΛ−1,ΛAΛ−1,β)
so that the renormalization of solution W* only induces a renormalization of A*. This is not true for the MAP approach.
For minimizing C(W,A,β), the EM procedure can be based on the complete dataset (V,H), and on the iterative minimization of
Q(θ|{tilde over (θ)})=−∫H log p(V,H|W)p(H|V,{tilde over (θ)})dH,
where θ={W,A,β}. We do not use the posterior probability p(H|V,θ). Instead, we use a variational EM procedure. For any probability density function q(H), the following inequality holds:
C(θ)≦−log p(V|WH)
q−
log p(H|A)
q+
log q(H)
q=Bq(θ),
where •
q denotes the expectation under q(H). Variational EM minimizes Bq(θ), instead of C(θ). At each iteration, the bound is first evaluated and tightened, given W and A by minimizing Bq(θ) over q, or more precisely, over the shape parameters of q, given a specific parameterized form, and then minimized with respect to (θ) given q. Variational EM coincides with EM when q(H)=p(H|θ), in which case C(θ) is decreased at every iteration. In other cases, variational EM conducts approximate inference. The validity depends on how well q(H) approximates the true posterior probability p(H|θ).
Derivation of the Bound
The expressions of log p(V|WH) and log p(H|A) show that the coefficients of H are coupled through ratios or logarithms of linear combinations Σkwfkhkn and Σjaijhj(n-1). This makes expectations of log p(V|WH) and log p(H|A) very difficult to determine independently of the specific form of q(H).
Therefore, we majorize log p(V|WH) and log p(H|A), to obtain a tractable bound. Using the above inequalities and assuming a factored form of the variational distribution, such that
is an upper bound of C(W,A,β), the function
Where φfkn are nonnegative coefficients such that Σkφfkn=1,
vijn are nonnegative coefficients such that Σivijn=1,
ρin, ψfn are nonnegative coefficients,
ξ denotes the set of all tuning parameters {φfkn, vijn, ρin, ψfn}fknij,•
denotes expectation w.r.t q, i.e., corresponds to
•
q. We remove subscript q to alleviate notations.
The expression of the bound involves the expectation of hkn, 1/hkn and log hkn. These expectations are precisely the sufficient statistics of the generalized inverse-Gaussian (GiG), which is a practical convenience for q(H). We use
and where Kα is a modified Bessel function of the second kind and x, β and γ are nonnegative scalars. Under the GIG distribution,
For any α, Kα+1(x)=2(α/x)Kα(x)+Kα−1(x), which leads to the alternative, implementation-efficient expression of
Optimization of the Bound
We give the conditional updates of the various parameters of the bound. Update orders are described below.
Updates
Tuning parameters v
Variational distribution q
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
Parameters of Interest
Updating Order
We denote the set of tuning parameter for frame n by ξn, i.e., ξn{{φfkn}fk,{vijn}ij,{ρin}i,{ψfn}f}.
As shown in
At iteration (l) do
For n=1, . . . , N,
Update 231 the activation parameters [q(hn)](l) as a function of [q(hn−1)](l), [q(hn)](l-1), [q(hn+1)](l-1), ξn(2l-2), W(l-1), A(l-1), β(l-1).
Update ξn(2l-1).
Update 232 the basis function W(l) as a function of W(l-1), [q(H)](l), ξ(2l-1).
Update 233 the transition matrix A(l) as a function of A(l-1), β(l-1), [q(H)](l), ξ(2l-1),
Update tuning parameters ξ(2l)
Update 234 gamma distribution parameters β(l) as a function of the transition matrix A(l) and the activation parameters, [q(H)](l).
Under this updating order, the VB-EM procedure is:
Update q(H).
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
kn
Speech Denoising with the Dynamic Model
As shown in
Similarly, we construct a noise model 307 with bases W(n) and transition matrix A(n), and combining the two models 306-307 into the single model 300 by concatenating W(s) and W(n) into W=[W(s),W(n)], and A(s) and A(n) into A, where A is a block-diagonal matrix with A(s) and A(n) on the diagonal.
We can also train for noise on some noise training data, or we can fix the speech part of the model, and train for the noise part on the test data, thus making the noise part a general model that collects parts of the signal that cannot be modeled by the speech model. The simplest version of the later model uses a single basis for the noise, and uses an identity matrix as the transition matrix A.
After the model 300 is constructed, we can use the model to enhance an input audio signal x 301. We determine 310 a time-frequency feature representation. We estimate 320 the parameters of the model 300 that vary, i.e., the activation matrix H(s) for the speech and H(n) for the noise (n), and the bases W(n) and transition matrix A(n) for the noise.
Thus, we obtain a single model that combines speech, W(s)H(s) and noise W(n)H(n), which we then use to reconstruct 330 the complex STFT of the enhanced speech {circumflex over (x)} 340, using
The time-domain signal can be reconstructed using a conventional overlap-add method, which evaluates a discrete convolution of a very long input signal with a finite impulse response filter
Extensions
Other complex models can also generated based on the above embodiments.
Dirichlet Innovations
Instead of considering the innovation random variables εn to be gamma distributed, the innovation can be Dirichlet distributed, which is similar to a normalization of the activation parameter hn.
HMM-Like Behavior
We can constrain hn to be 1-sparse during inference.
Structured Variational Inference
Conventional variational inference assumes that the variational posterior probabilities q(hn) are independent of each other, which, given a strong dependency relation between hn and hn−1, is likely to be very wrong. We can model the posterior probability in terms of q(hn|hn−1). One possibility for such a q distribution uses a GIG distribution with parameters dependent on Ahn−1.
Gamma Distribution of Innovation
The complex Gaussian model on the complex STFT coefficients in Eqn. (6) is equivalent to assuming that the power is exponentially distributed with parameter WH. We can extend the model by assuming that the power is gamma distributed, thus leading to a donut-shaped distribution for the complex coefficients.
Full Covariance of Innovation Random Variables
In linear dynamical systems, the innovation random variables can have a full-covariance. For positive random variables, one way to include the correlations is to transform an independent random vector with a non-negative matrix. This leads to the model,
h
n=(Ahn−1)∘(Bfn),
where fn is a nonnegative random vector of size J×1 and B is a nonnegative matrix of dimension K×J. When B=IK×K, this simplifies to fn=εn. This can be accomplished in the more general form of the model
by setting the parameters to a factorized form: ci,j,l=ai,jbi,l, where ai,j are the elements of A, and bi,j are the elements of B.
Transition Innovations
It can also be useful to model the transition between each of the components of hn and hn−1 using separate innovation random variables. This is analogous to the use of Dirichlet prior probabilities in discrete Markov models. One method would admit hn=(A∘En)hn−1, where En is a nonnegative innovations matrix of dimension K×K. This can be accomplished in the more general form of the model
by setting the parameters ci,j,l=δ(m(i,j),l)ai,j, where ai,j are the elements of A and m(i,j) is a one-to-one mapping from each combination of i and j to an index corresponding to l. Then, the i, j-th element of En is εm(i,j),n.
Considering Other Innovation Types Besides Gam Ma
A log-normal, Poisson distribution leads to yet different types of dynamical systems.
Considering Other Divergences
We so far only considered the Itakura-Saito divergence. We can also use the KL-divergence, and different divergences for hn|hn−1 and for v|h.
Online Procedure
For real-time applications, only the signal up to the current time is used, e.g., an application where only the activation matrix H are estimated, or another application where all parameters are optimized. In the later application, we can perform a “warm” start with pretrained bases W and transition matrix A.
Multi-Channel Version
Because our model relies on a generative model involving the complex STFT coefficients, the model can be extended to a multi-channel application. Optimization in this setting involves EM updates between mixing system and a source NMF procedure.
The embodiments of the invention provide a non-negative linear dynamical system model for processing non-stationary signals, particularly speech signals mixed with noise. In the context of speech separation and speech denoising, our model adapts to signal dynamics on-line, and achieves better performance than conventional methods.
Conventional models for signal dynamics frequently use hidden Markov models (HMMs) or non-negative matrix factorization (NMF). HMMs lead to combinatorial problems due to the discrete state space, are computationally complex, especially for mixed signals from several sources, and make it difficult to handle gain adaptation. NMF solves both the computational complexity and gain adaptation problems. However, NMF does not take advantage of past observations of a signal to model future observations of that signal. For signals with predictable dynamics, this is likely to be suboptimal.
Our model has advantages of both the HMMs and the NMF. The model is characterized by a continuous non-negative state space. Gain adaptation is automatically handled during inference. The complexity of the inference is linear in the number of sources, and dynamics are modeled via a linear transition matrix.
Although the invention has been described by way of examples of preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that various other adaptations and modifications can be made within the spirit and scope of the invention. Therefore, it is the object of the appended claims to cover all such variations and modifications as come within the true spirit and scope of the invention.