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 x3CJOhVq000970 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 21:24:44 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1hF1gq-00066I-Ph for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 20:18:20 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1hF1gp-000669-6m for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 20:18:19 +0100 Received: from sonic307-2.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com ([74.6.134.41]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hF1cH-0002OU-9V for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 20:18:17 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aol.com; s=a2048; t=1555096179; bh=EPutBv2eGqXRjSuRvjdM0L2BhPdVp4oD1u91wV3Yo4s=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:From:Subject; b=daKn4ZJ/7G1WegypIwTOOQ4d5dyL0eLHf3z/5o9tgJ0Qv9deL5zPuZ24K6SrbL/Cw/MukBLvKP+p+QsawzAJ2sgQ9oi+nQuFaonLzvmEnQpB1eltl3+myYj9zl2SIPvN78k0TV4c++Ik1BJE74fZ0e9SbW5bBmeJaNSUrokSxt4cgXGI4rUl0qWfWJFNGYPXGx9Bvv28LkTXF27Md0N64xQkfkqSKe1pwY9AB/OwMfdPEwDlL/+1egiBHTX+/I5ZRhKjsHdkk7sGBeeEQ9cWShNqYIJ6evCbUEfpKtyfS/4QTPyfF8QuNVDjSvpoHzlfHkKIua7hcdXUlz6mGUVqjQ== X-YMail-OSG: WBPAPEIVM1lcyYFUeD4543t1cKRgmdrjzDNYYALXK1AIbod.glzf6UMJi7JMMkc 0GNkPlwUdCfRX3Uk35gCmn6D0POBKtrEdw9nuugHDJUok4Y8ByR4MDtavPr7tpm7Dt3xqMNQcQTW nsp2Ghpw4.9tKlSP5whwZHBsn5k67Ax3Dgm1nV06.mgC9ugePiQXDyw4fqGhVPZawqsD9hRXiZ5g 38jX_JrnF_01mWWJv_dopAboBslG8ua0Nb_NXzPCD0Sd3l9yGcpSS0NtmuU_uSnL5xbKHhNXPz2T M6L4xNHQrYOOqggPNKm1kXrcrUdLIDk6Wjm.tArMxLTGS8wyRo6QrIDY7RTfXhuYzn27g.Z.KoPQ 4ILntvUsCFtIQXG25AD.bajPZvrEO_oiCgC2qLySE_Ewn7yA.1BVVGdhmwmrHtFSgxdYOcMCISft vtcLRl7fuz8bJZ.YwZlQjaUl1FNmGim1SQQNkEO9PwIjkqTlC9cVsUAmDoIsQ11kRLwZbWmla1Cr s0gxMhydKxUC5MtrxsF1aV.WMt3DnrxePpttvTtcV8SvQd6rGp49vMRpdvENmQd_8DzYjGRB5LSR zikZ0FgKeXNA8iakKYoZo8iMNwD.7C7cY_cU7Bin7H4XCgT2Kci_LPTLJ9gd7VRzJ_o5yUs0XUV1 TuL6qWX.787ZgUtczaDjFCouEOgCEluziiotCzfcbZzPEMnY_3wtiLfaWY8h3SNspTS2tljozQ4x QZAR6jQZh.BnmuKdlnsVha.rh6yTtvoQv0gNXfVPpen2Mt8aPUGMVp6F7_heRb.FcEy1yAJObxN4 LhNWUhgooDJg090cimPCLsQ.FtRuxAKfhjvQhx8zHt5kMwJpYqDi5AgwsooxecL290mUZ1i_8fJ6 UK2aZwi1v.ykzy_peNG12.genl6W3VVkiQM3OcZyp63pbfeRdCREsvv74nYIMHV8q9wKEEzwbgVh Ps7k9Jec3DAcsrx7QAK2XGSBcrNan3yRxfQJmt8HLa5fMjWYYu6yrIBkeQo1lrs16TP4ILQPZGEl NT3V98ATRiGWL26H16DXHKtAfpGanQHtLUIhVcpzPjDI- Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic307.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 19:09:39 +0000 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 18:48:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Vester To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <166973769.857919.1555094896381@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <166973769.857919.1555094896381.ref@mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.13212 aolwebmail Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; Trident/7.0; Touch; rv:11.0) like Gecko 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 the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Paul, > I might use a higher sample rate to get more resolution with the -T Argument. Is there a specific reason for rounding the start offset to an integer number of samples? I would guess that allowing arbitrary offsets would allow a slightly better allocation of samples to their  [...] 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 [74.6.134.41 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 (markusvester[at]aol.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 027eb28428a0ed4e20e06b28d08cfc7b Subject: Re: LF: ebnaut results depend on sample rate Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_857918_2078460364.1555094896380" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.6 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,HTML_30_40, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR 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 ------=_Part_857918_2078460364.1555094896380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Paul, > I might use a higher sample rate to get more resolution with the -T Argum= ent. Is there a specific reason for rounding the start offset to an integer numb= er of samples?=C2=A0I would guess that allowing arbitrary offsets would=C2= =A0allow a slightly better allocation of samples to their=C2=A0nearest symb= ol intervals.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Best wishes, Markus -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung----- Von: Paul Nicholson An: rsgb_lf_group Verschickt: Fr, 12. Apr. 2019 14:36 Betreff: Re: LF: ebnaut results depend on sample rate Jacek wrote: > the results i get from ebnaut are different depending on > signal bandwidth. This is possible and quite common. > 10Hz: > found rank 6348 ber 4.2147e-01 Eb/N0 -2.0 > carrier Eb/N0: -0.3 dB > 240Hz: > found rank 16679 ber 4.3029e-01 Eb/N0 -3.1 > carrier Eb/N0: -1.6 dB For the carrier Eb/N0, the value of N0 is measured using the full bandwidth of the input signal.=C2=A0 When the band is wider it may present a higher N0 because of things like mains sidebands and harmonics, and other interference.=C2=A0 That's probably the case here. For the decode there should not be much difference, and indeed we see a similar BER. 42.1% and 43.0%. The Eb/N0 in the 'found' log message is estimated from the BER and the slope is quite steep, accuracy is poor for weak signals. The carrier Eb/N0 is usually more realistic, unless you have interference in the input band. I usually resample down to about 10 or 20 times the symbol rate, but at least 10Hz so as to get a reasonable N0 estimate.=C2=A0 If I expect to have to sweep for the time stamp I might use a higher sample rate to get more resolution with the -T argument. -- Paul Nicholson -- ------=_Part_857918_2078460364.1555094896380 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Paul,

> I might use a higher s= ample rate to get more resolution with the -T Argument.

Is there a specific reason for rounding the start offset to an integer num= ber of samples? I would guess that allowing arbitrary offsets would&nb= sp;allow a slightly better allocation of samples to their nearest symb= ol intervals.  

Best wishes,
Markus
-----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: = Paul Nicholson <vlf0403@abelian.org>
An: rsgb_lf_grou= p <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Verschickt: Fr, 12. = Apr. 2019 14:36
Betreff: Re: LF: ebnaut results depend on s= ample rate


Jacek wrote:
> the results i get from ebnaut are different depending on
> signal bandwidth.

This is possible and quite common.

> 10Hz:
> found rank 6348 ber 4.2147e-01 Eb/N0 -2.0=
> carrier Eb/N0: -0.3 dB

> 240Hz:
> found rank 16679 ber 4.3029e-01 Eb/N0 -3.1
> carrier Eb/N0: -1.6 dB

For the carrier Eb/N0, the value = of N0 is measured using the full
bandwidth o= f the input signal.  When the band is wider it may
present a higher N0 because of things like mains sidebands and=
harmonics, and other interference.  Th= at's probably the case

here.


For the decode there should not be m= uch difference, and indeed we
see a similar = BER. 42.1% and 43.0%.

The Eb/N0 in the 'found' log message is estimated from the BER an= d
the slope is quite steep, accuracy is poor= for weak signals.
The carrier Eb/N0 is usua= lly more realistic, unless you have
interfer= ence in the input band.

I usually resample down to about 10 or 20 times the symbol rate= ,
but at least 10Hz so as to get a reasonabl= e N0 estimate.  If I
expect to have to = sweep for the time stamp I might use a higher
sample rate to get more resolution with the -T argument.

--
Paul Nicholson

--

------=_Part_857918_2078460364.1555094896380--