0% found this document useful (0 votes)
17 views

Finite Wordlength Effects: Professor A G Constantinides

Finite wordlength effects can cause errors in digital systems due to: (i) Input quantization (ii) Coefficient (or multiplier) quantization (iii) Products of multiplication being truncated or rounded due to limited register lengths. This quantization introduces noise and can cause systems to become unstable, leading to limit cycles in the output rather than converging to zero. The level of noise and stability depends on the number of bits used in the finite wordlength representation.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
17 views

Finite Wordlength Effects: Professor A G Constantinides

Finite wordlength effects can cause errors in digital systems due to: (i) Input quantization (ii) Coefficient (or multiplier) quantization (iii) Products of multiplication being truncated or rounded due to limited register lengths. This quantization introduces noise and can cause systems to become unstable, leading to limit cycles in the output rather than converging to zero. The level of noise and stability depends on the number of bits used in the finite wordlength representation.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 26

Finite Wordlength Effects

• Finite register lengths and A/D converters


cause errors in:-
(i) Input quantisation.
(ii) Coefficient (or multiplier)
quantisation
(iii) Products of multiplication truncated
or rounded due to machine length

1 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Quantisation
Output
eo (k )

Q
ei (k )
Input

Q Q
  ei ,o (k ) 
2 2

2 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• The pdf for e using rounding
1
Q

Q Q

2 2

Q 2
• Noise power    e p(e).de  E{e }
2 2 2

or Q 2
2
Q
 
2
12
3 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Let input signal be sinusoidal of unity
amplitude. Then total signal power P  1
2
• If b bits used for binary then Q  2 2b

so that  2  22b 3
• Hence 3  2b
P   .2
2
2
or SNR  1.8  6b dB
4 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Consider a simple example of finite
precision on the coefficients a,b of second
order system with poles e  j

1
H ( z)  1 2
1  az  bz
1
H ( z)  1 2 2
1  2  cos  .z   .z

• where a  2  cos  b 2


5 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
bit pattern 2  cos  ,  2 
000 0 0
001 0.125 0.354

010 0.25 0.5
011 0.375 0.611
100 0.5 0.707
101 0.625 0.791
110 0.75 0.866
111 0.875 0.935
6 1.0 1.0 1.0Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Finite wordlength computations

INPUT OUTPU
T
+

7 Professor A G Constantinides
Limit-cycles; "Effective Pole"
Model; Deadband
• Observe that for H ( z )  1
(1  b1 z 1  b2 z 2 )
• instability occurs when b2  1
• i.e. poles are
• (i) either on unit circle when complex
• (ii) or one real pole is outside unit
circle.
• Instability under the "effective pole" model
8
is considered as follows Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• In the time domain with H ( z )  Y ( z )
X ( z)

y(n)  x(n)  b1 y(n  1)  b2 y(n  2)

• With b2  1 for instability we have


Qb2 y(n  2) indistinguishable from y(n  2)
• Where Q is quantisation

9 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• With rounding, therefore we have
b2 y(n  2)  0.5 y (n  2)
are indistinguishable (for integers)
or b2 y(n  2)  0.5  y(n  2)
• Hence  0.5
y (n  2) 
1  b2
• With both positive and negative numbers
 0.5
y (n  2) 
10 1  b2 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
 0.5
• The range of integers
1  b2

constitutes a set of integers that cannot be


individually distinguished as separate or from the
asymptotic system behaviour.
• The band of integers  0.5 0.5 
  ,  
 1  b2 1  b2 
is known as the "deadband".
• In the second order system, under rounding, the
output assumes a cyclic set of values of the
deadband. This is a limit-cycle.
11 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Consider the transfer function
G( z)  1
(1  b1 z 1  b2 z 2 )
yk  xk  b1 yk 1  b2 yk 2

• if poles are complex then impulse response


is given by hk
k
hk  .sin(k  1) 
sin 
12 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Where   b2   cos 1   b1 

 2 b2 
• If b2  1 then the response is sinusiodal
with frequency
1 1   b1 
  cos  
T  2 
• Thus product quantisation causes instability
implying an "effective “ b2  1 .

13 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Consider infinite precision computations for
yk  xk  yk 1  0.9 yk 2 x0  10
xk  0 ; k  0
10

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10
-10 -5 0 5 10

14 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Now the same operation with integer
precision
10

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10
-10 -5 0 5 10

15 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects

• Notice that with infinite precision the


response converges to the origin

• With finite precision the reponse does not


converge to the origin but assumes
cyclically a set of values –the Limit Cycle

16 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Assume e1 (k ) ,e2 (k ) ….. are not
correlated, random processes etc.
2  2
 0i   e  hi (k )  e
2 2 2
 Q
k 0 12
Hence total output noise power
22b  2 k sin 2 (k  1) 
0 2
  012
  02 2
 2.  .
12 k 0 sin 2 
b
• Where Q  2 and
sin(k  1) 
h1 (k )  h2 (k )   . k
; k 0
sin 
17 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects

• ie
 2b
2 1  2
1 
 02  
6 1   1   4  2  2 cos 2 
2
.

18 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects

A(n) B(n+1)
• For FFT
B(n) -
B(n+1)
W(n)

A(n  1)  A(n)  W (n).B(n)


B(n  1)  A(n)  W (n).B(n)
A(n)
A(n+1)
B(n+1)
B(n) B(n)W(n)

19 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• FFT
A(n  1)  B(n  1)  2
2 2

A(n  1)  2 A(n)
2 2

A(n)  2 A(n)
• AVERAGE GROWTH: 1/2 BIT/PASS

20 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
IMAG 1.0
• FFT
-1.0 1.0
REAL

-1.0
Ax ( n  1)  Ax ( n)  Bx ( n)C ( n)  B y ( n) S ( n)
Ax ( n  1)  Ax ( n)  Bx ( n) C ( n)  B y ( n) S ( n)
Ax ( n  1)
 1.0  C ( n)  S ( n)  2.414....
Ax ( n)

• PEAK GROWTH: 1.21.. BITS/PASS


21 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• Linear modelling of product quantisation
x(n) ~
x ( n)
Q

• Modelled as
x(n) + x ( n)  x ( n)  q ( n)
~
q(n)

22 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• For rounding operations q(n) is uniform
distributed between  Q2 , Q2
and where Q is
the quantisation step (i.e. in a wordlength of
bits with sign magnitude representation or
mod 2, Q  2 b ).
• A discrete-time system with quantisation at
the output of each multiplier may be
considered as a multi-input linear system

23 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
q1 (n)...q2 (n)...q p (n)

x(n) h(n) y (n)


• Then
 
y ( n)   x( r ).h( n  r )    q ( r ).h ( n  r ) 
 p

r 0  1
 r 0 
• where h (n) is the impulse response of the
system from  the output of the multiplier
to y(n).

24 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• For zero input i.e. x(n)  0, n we can write
p 
y (n)   qˆ .  h (n  r )
 1 r 0

• where q̂ is the maximum of q (r ) ,  , r


which is not more than Q
2
Q p
• ie y (n)  .   h (n  r ) 
2  1n 0 

25 Professor A G Constantinides
Finite Wordlength Effects
• However
 
 h (n)   h(n)
n 0 n 0

• And hence
pQ 
y ( n)  .  h( n)
2 n0
• ie we can estimate the maximum swing at
the output from the system parameters and
quantisation level
26 Professor A G Constantinides

You might also like