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 x1CMu0DN004494 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:56:06 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1gtgsm-0001tJ-KH for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:50:28 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1gtgs3-0001t1-Gi for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:49:43 +0000 Received: from rhcavuit04.kulnet.kuleuven.be ([2a02:2c40:0:c0::25:137]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1gtgs0-00065o-8X for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:49:41 +0000 X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: rik.strobbe@kuleuven.be X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean X-KULeuven-ID: 3752412000A.AFC0C X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Received: from icts-p-smtps-1.cc.kuleuven.be (icts-p-smtps-1e.kulnet.kuleuven.be [134.58.240.33]) by rhcavuit04.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3752412000A for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:49:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-EXMBX3.luna.kuleuven.be (icts-s-exmbx3.luna.kuleuven.be [10.112.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by icts-p-smtps-1.cc.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0EAB40B4; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:49:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-EXMBX26.luna.kuleuven.be (10.112.11.61) by ICTS-S-EXMBX3.luna.kuleuven.be (10.112.11.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:49:33 +0100 Received: from ICTS-S-EXMBX27.luna.kuleuven.be (10.112.11.62) by ICTS-S-EXMBX26.luna.kuleuven.be (10.112.11.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:49:33 +0100 Received: from ICTS-S-EXMBX27.luna.kuleuven.be ([fe80::291a:cc4f:6953:698a]) by ICTS-S-EXMBX27.luna.kuleuven.be ([fe80::291a:cc4f:6953:698a%25]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:49:33 +0100 X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster From: Rik Strobbe To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" , "600MRG@mailman.qth.net" <600MRG@mailman.qth.net>, "rsgb-lf-group@groups.io" Thread-Topic: SlowJT9 update (v0.9.16.0) Thread-Index: AQHUwyI/BRhRN/86aUen18zwG+robQ== Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:49:33 +0000 Message-ID: <1550011754803.48795@kuleuven.be> References: <1541712573053.31739@kuleuven.be> <1542362144885.30626@kuleuven.be> <1542721669174.9290@kuleuven.be> <1542902405876.64977@kuleuven.be> <1544631368092.16214@kuleuven.be> <1544826336986.15705@kuleuven.be> <1545855021519.36262@kuleuven.be> , ,<1546865627715.6950@kuleuven.be>,<1548945782023.57164@kuleuven.be> In-Reply-To: <1548945782023.57164@kuleuven.be> Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-GB, en-US Content-Language: nl-BE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.112.50.1] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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 the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Dear all, Beta-release v0.9.16.0 of SlowJT9 has been uploaded, see http://www.472khz.org/SlowJT9/. As mentioned earlier I was intrigued by one sentence in the mail from David, G0MRF, (17 Januari): Content analysis details: (-2.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [2a02:2c40:0:c0:0:0:25:137 listed in] [list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: fce77e88417377663dedf94f027ec622 Subject: LF: SlowJT9 update (v0.9.16.0) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_155001175480348795kuleuvenbe_" 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 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 --_000_155001175480348795kuleuvenbe_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, Beta-release v0.9.16.0 of SlowJT9 has been uploaded, see http://www.472khz.= org/SlowJT9/. As mentioned earlier I was intrigued by one sentence in the mail from David= , G0MRF, (17 Januari): "Interestingly Rik's SlowJT9 which was running in parallel, managed to deco= de a couple of more transmissions than WSJT-X." As SlowJT9 uses the JT9 decoder from the WSJT-X suite the performance of Sl= owJT9 and WSJT-X should be identical. The only difference between both coul= d be a small timing difference that made SlowJT9 to decode some extra trans= missions (pure luck, it could have been the other way around as well). So maybe the performance of SlowJT9 can be improved by running the recorded= audio several times through the decoder with each time a small (0.1 second= ?) time shift induced in the audio and then taking a "best off" all decode= d signals? A computer simulation showed an inprovement of 1-2 dB, see http://www.472kh= z.org/SlowJT9/multidec.html. So I decided to add a "Multiple decoding" option (Settings ? Mode ? check "= Allow multiple decoding"). If "Multiple decoding" is enabled the received audio will first de decoded = as it is and then shifted +/- 1 second in time steps of 0.2 seconds and dec= oded again for each step. Thus there will 11 decoding steps in total. However decoding always will stopped at 1 second before the end of the cycl= e at latest, so the next cycle will not be corrupted. Decoding can also be stopped by clicking on the Band activity or RX frequen= cy windows. After each decoding step the new (non-duplicate) decoded messag= es are shown. So even during the decoding process any already decoded message can be sele= cted by triple-clicking on it (a single click for stopping the decoding fol= lowed by a double click for selecting the message). Be aware that for now all decodings are performed one after another and eac= h one can take several seconds on a slow computer. In that case only a limi= ted number of decoding steps will be performed. But if multiple decoding also shows a significant improvement in the field = I will have a look at parallel processing of the decodings. In order to be able to evaluate multiple decoding the DT parameter now does= not show the time offset of the received signal but the time offset of the= decoded audio file. This means that any message with a DT value different = from 0.0 is a decoded message that would have been missed before. I will appreciate all feedback about the number of decoded messages with a = DT diffeternt from 0.0. Of course bug reports, remarks and suggestions are still welcome. ?73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T --_000_155001175480348795kuleuvenbe_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,

Beta-release v0.9.16.0 of SlowJT9 has been uploaded, see http://www.472khz.org/SlowJT9/.

As mentioned earlier I = was intrigued by one sentence in the mail from David, G0MRF,  (17= Januari):

"Interestingly Rik's SlowJT= 9 which was running in parallel, managed to decode a couple of more transmi= ssions than WSJT-X."

As SlowJT9 uses the JT9 decoder from the WSJT-X suite the performance = of SlowJT9 and WSJT-X should be identical. The only difference between both= could be a small timing difference that made SlowJT9 to decode some extra = transmissions (pure luck, it could have been the other way around as well). 
So maybe the performance of SlowJT9 can be improved by running the rec= orded audio several times through the decoder with each time a small (0.1 s= econd ?) time shift induced in the audio and then taking a "best off&q= uot; all decoded signals?
A computer simulation showed an inprovement of 1-2 dB, see http://www.472khz.org/SlowJT9/= multidec.html.

So I decided to add a <= /span>"Multiple decoding" option=  (Settings → Mode → check "Allow multiple decoding&qu= ot;).
If "Multiple decoding" is enabled the received audio will fi= rst de decoded as it is and then shifted +/- 1 second in time steps of = 0.2 seconds and decoded again for each step.
Thus there will 11 decoding steps in total.
However decoding always will stopped at 1 second before the end of the cycl= e at latest, so the next cycle will not be corrupted.
Decoding can also be stopped by clicking on the Band activity=  or RX frequency windows. After each decoding step = the new (non-duplicate) decoded messages are shown.
So even during the decoding process any already decoded message can be sele= cted by triple-clicking on it (a single click fo= r stopping the decoding followed by a double click for selecting the messag= e).

Be aware that for now all decodings are performed one after = another and each one can take several seconds on a slow computer. = ;In that case only a limited number of decoding steps will be performed.
But if multiple decoding also shows a significant improvement in = the field I will have a look at parallel processing of the decodings.
In order to be able to evaluate multiple decoding the DT paramete= r now does not show the time offset of the received signal but the tim= e offset of the decoded audio file. This means that any message with a DT value different from 0.0 is a= decoded message that would have been missed before.

I will appreciate all feedback about the number of decoded messages with a = DT diffeternt from 0.0.
Of course bug reports, remarks and suggestions are still welcome.

​73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T
--_000_155001175480348795kuleuvenbe_--