Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id wALGGEkE002280 for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:16:15 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1gPV6r-0005oL-Kg for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:12:13 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1gPV6r-0005oC-8r for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:12:13 +0000 Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91_59-0488984) (envelope-from ) id 1gPV6p-0002QS-5o for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:12:12 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id b14so5329380edt.6 for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 08:12:11 -0800 (PST) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mDwJP762DjdoVAcRLEgESVdK2gVi27Vx12Il2QVSF2M=; b=dJ7hNFBHIw6ihlhAb52VQnn2U50gFgJ3EBz44iXfqIceIQR5LR0PVPkXWFY+d2IExr 07V3rjoqgRvqnLAMIJMuU7e7vtKjwkjwV5/PYs/mDye0Anxvp1PYLdOIWpAUB/GHcLre 5QuOaa2+360uPiL+NIetRksxa5M4Ua9TvKD1PHQiwhtx/MBWkqVUS95OBP+zIlfweLsu yDbk2T4GJwxt/ft/llEc5F3wxWAVEBl4TY3biva2/JIiFaSYx33lFwmdAnKG67v46LXT 1g1czJ8QWj7vQ0+88I7pMCzjURdETRYhQg3SXxUo5J+eHOA6leQxSaa7ze1Dhtn8Pwsd zWqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mDwJP762DjdoVAcRLEgESVdK2gVi27Vx12Il2QVSF2M=; b=bLcQhty+3eOfcUaK88mUtZb5DFe06yUj5kK5x89jnPsHDpswHO2UI/WGHZrGgbQNyl qftxRg/k+OanG+rsMmmxkGSl6bf9YX4JlzjKLst+sDuRKgd/eFr38vC/aW53GaTbF18H CZGTLClaookq23V5mQRGE5elDl3oVx3qBWM3GQN/HfxXrQu9K01Tk7IYGy8JO9bSFn8x /QfCwEIUi1se3b4uUjLV7e4UNLn386EyfSbAuHonJfzaZsKlY9inEKSzAHU7rjB2PArK n2iVfkSVlf3iQBcFlW58I3PMmSoP5Fsktl1Fk/dzfQu8/G2TZkAF7jtMga6em+GQL9y6 usXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWacMZefFgIHVPnwI9t/5X3KmOdD81MloI6NNWXgC0kyuWTg6IX/ PW+09xsd0nMHE+x9UDVTWMokr49azzaEwmJ2gpGd1w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/UFBpBosyLY5MtHgCKYwQtX0IkzgXa5lnTmNYC2jD3uT/Ml3x+eDNL0/PFRwY8eT4cbPU4OPVMtWgjgk3+WNWs= X-Received: by 2002:a50:9784:: with SMTP id e4mr6156806edb.165.1542816730306; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 08:12:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1541712573053.31739@kuleuven.be> <1542362144885.30626@kuleuven.be> <1542721669174.9290@kuleuven.be> <1542724318123.33202@kuleuven.be> <4c469b8e-72ca-08f9-f8f6-a382109537b5@n1bug.com> <1542728224113.91361@kuleuven.be> <8c07075d-4453-5362-1697-4abc779a8ae0@n1bug.com> <1542813050896.24684@kuleuven.be> <1542815371548.82873@kuleuven.be> In-Reply-To: <1542815371548.82873@kuleuven.be> From: Andy Talbot Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:11:59 +0000 Message-ID: To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Cc: 600MRG@mailman.qth.net, rsgb_lf_group X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Rik Are you sure you are going about this the best way? If you want to stay with the original JT9-slow values, then wouldn't it be better to go to the WSJT repository and find the original source code. Or [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:533 listed in] [list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (andy.g4jnt[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: bc223f74149f392a7d9f3881f05f1e70 Subject: Re: LF: SlowJT9 averaging (in conversion to JT9-1) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000029e287057b2f0375" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30,HTML_MESSAGE, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false --00000000000029e287057b2f0375 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Rik Are you sure you are going about this the best way? If you want to stay with the original JT9-slow values, then wouldn't it be better to go to the WSJT repository and find the original source code. Or dive inside the decoding software and change the numbers, instead of speeding things up and averaging ALTERNATIVELY, if you wish to stay with the speeded up version and the latest decoder, then go back to your original idea of integer ratios. Forget backwards compatibility. After all, no one is likely to be using the old WSJT-X 1 suite with these modes so there is no need for backwards compatibility. You can start with a fresh and the simpler approach The only thing I suggest is that you change the name of the mode slightly. Stay with JT9 for the normal one, but instead of JT9-2 and JT9-5 call it , say JT9-R2 and JT9-R4 (R for Rik :-) That way no one can think it is backwards compatible. Andy www.g4jnt.com On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 at 15:53, Rik Strobbe wrote: > For those interested: > > > in order to get JT9-2, JT9-5 and JT9-10 signals decoded with a JT9 decoder > (from the WSJT-X suite), the JT9-2, JT9-5, JT9-10 audio is "speeded up" to > JT9-1. During the process the signal is also averaged (otherwise ther would > be no S/N improvement). > > In the initial versions of SlowJT9 the ratios were integer values: 2 for > JT9-2 anf 5 for JT9-5, making averaging very simple. > > In SlowJT9 v0.9.10 however the original parameters for JT9-2, JT9-5 and > JT9-10 are used, resulting in some non-integer conversion rates: 2.2222 > (15360/6912) for JT9-2 and 5.9259 (40960/6912) for JT9-5. > > So, how to average with for example each 2.2222 incoming samples are > converted to 1 outgoing sample? > > Not finding relevant information about this on the web, I did it quite > straigh forward: > > Assuming I1, I2, I3, I4, ... are the incoming JT9-2 samples and O1, O2, > O3, O4, ... are the outgoing JT9(-1) samples > > O1 = (I1+I2+0.222*I3)/2.222 > > O2 = (0.778*I3+I4+0.444*I5)/2.222 > > O3 = (0.556*I5+I6+0.667*I7)/2.222 > > O4 = (0.333*I7+I8+0.889*I9)/2.222 > > and so on. > > I am by no means sure that this is the best way to average for > non-integer conversion rates (it was just the best I could think of), so > any suggestion to do this better is welcome. > > > 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T > > > > --00000000000029e287057b2f0375 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Rik

Are you s= ure you are going about this the best way?=C2=A0 =C2=A0If you want to stay = with the original JT9-slow values, then wouldn't it be better to go to = the WSJT repository and find the original source code.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Or dive = inside the decoding software and change the numbers, instead of speeding th= ings up and averaging

ALTERNATIVELY, if = you wish to stay with the speeded up version and the latest decoder, then g= o back to your original idea of integer ratios.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Forget backward= s compatibility.=C2=A0 After all, no one is likely to be using the old WSJT= -X 1 suite with these modes so there is no need for backwards compatibility= .=C2=A0 =C2=A0You can start with a fresh and the simpler approach

The only thing I suggest is that you change the n= ame of the mode slightly.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Stay with JT9 for the normal one, but= instead of JT9-2 and JT9-5 call it , say JT9-R2 and JT9-R4=C2=A0 =C2=A0(R = for Rik :-)=C2=A0 That way no one can think it is backwards compatible.





On Wed, = 21 Nov 2018 at 15:53, Rik Strobbe <rik.strobbe@kuleuven.be> wrote:

For those interested:


in order to get JT9-2, JT9-5 and JT9-10 signals decoded with a JT9 decod= er (from the WSJT-X=C2=A0suite), the JT9-2, JT9-5, JT9-10 audio is "sp= eeded up" to JT9-1. During the process the signal is also averaged (ot= herwise ther would be no S/N improvement).

In the initial versions of SlowJT9 the ratios were integer values: 2 for= JT9-2 anf 5 for JT9-5, making averaging very simple.

In SlowJT9 v0.9.10 however the original parameters for JT9-2, JT9-5 and = JT9-10 are used, resulting in some=C2=A0non-integer=C2=A0conversion rates: = 2.2222 (15360/6912) for JT9-2 and=C2=A05.9259 (40960/6912) for JT9-5.

So, how to average with for example each 2.2222 incoming samples are con= verted to 1 outgoing sample?

Not finding relevant information about=C2=A0this on the web, I did it qu= ite straigh forward:

Assuming I1,=C2=A0I2,=C2=A0I3,=C2=A0I4, ... are the incoming JT9-2=C2=A0= samples and O1, O2, O3, O4, ... are the outgoing JT9(-1)=C2=A0samples

O1 =3D (I1+I2+0.222*I3)/2.222

O2 =3D (0.778*I3+I4+0.444*I5)/2.222

O3 =3D (0.556*I5+I6+0.667*I7)/2.222

O4 =3D (0.333*I7+I8+0.889*I9)/2.222

and so on.

I am=C2=A0by no means sure that this is the best way to average for non-= integer=C2=A0conversion rates=C2=A0(it was just the best I=C2=A0could think= of), so any suggestion to do this better is welcome.


73, Rik=C2=A0 ON7YD - OR7T



--00000000000029e287057b2f0375--