1 / 24

Generalized Sparse Signal Mixing Model and Application to Noisy Blind Source Separation

Generalized Sparse Signal Mixing Model and Application to Noisy Blind Source Separation. Justinian Rosca Christian Borss # Radu Balan. Siemens Corporate Research, Princeton, USA # Presently: University of Brawnschweig. s L-1. s 2. s 1. s L. n. x 1. x 2. x D. Signal Processor.

caspar
Download Presentation

Generalized Sparse Signal Mixing Model and Application to Noisy Blind Source Separation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Generalized Sparse Signal Mixing Model and Application to Noisy Blind Source Separation Justinian Rosca Christian Borss # Radu Balan Siemens Corporate Research, Princeton, USA # Presently: University of Brawnschweig

  2. sL-1 s2 s1 sL n x1 x2 xD Signal Processor S1,S2 ,…,SL ICA/BSS Scenario L sources D microphones

  3. Motivation • Solve ICA problem in realistic scenarios • In the presence of noise. Is this really feasible? • When A is “fat” (degenerate) • Successful DUET/Time-frequency masking - approach and implementation • Can we do better if we relax the DUET assumption about number of sources “active” at any time-frequency point? [Rickard et al. 2000,2001]

  4. Sparseness in TF • DUET assumption: the maximum number of sources active at any time - frequency point in a mixture of signals is one

  5. Example Voice Signal and TF Representation J.Rosca et al. – Scalable BSS under Noise – DAGA, Aachen 2003 Siemens Corporate Research

  6. s1 s2 s3 Sparseness in TF • Sources hop from one set of frequencies to another over time, with no collisions (at most one source active at any time-freq. point)

  7. s1 s2 s3 Generalized Sparseness in TF • Sources hop from one set of frequencies to another over time, with collisions (at most N sources active at any time-freq. point) N=2, L=3

  8. Assume the TF coefficient S(k,) is modeled as a product of a Bernoulli (0/1) r.v., V, and a continuous r.v. G: The p.d.f. of S becomes: For L independent signals the joint source pdf becomes: The Independence Assumption • W-Disjoint Orthogonality (DUET): q very small→ retain first two • terms; at most one source is active at any time-freq. point • Generalized W-Disj.Orth.: q very small→ retain first N+1 terms; at • most N sources are active at any time-freq. point

  9. 1 2 … D Signal Model (1) • Assumptions: • L sources, D sensors • Far-field • Direct-path • Noises iid, Gaussian (0,σ2)

  10. Signal Model (2) • Mixing model: • Source sparseness in TF • Let those be:

  11. Example Let N=2, two sources active at any time-freq. point

  12. BSS Problem • Given measurements {x(t)}1<=t<=T , D sensors • Determine estimate of parameters : • Note: L>D, degenerate BSS problem Mapping and Source signals Mixing parameters

  13. Approach: Two Steps • Estimate mixing parameters, e.g. using the stronger constraint of W-disjoint orthogonality • Estimate the source signals under the generalized W-disjoint orthogonality assumption

  14. Solution Sketch (Ad-Hoc) • Employ principle of coherence (e.g. N=2) • Given a pair of sources Sa and Sb active at some time-freq. point, then what we know what we should measure at all microphones pairs! • Sa and Sb are the true ones if they result in minimum variance across all microphone pairs, i.e. coherent measurements • Note: For N=2 and L=4 there are 6 pair of sources to be tested! (1,2),(1,3),(1,4),(2,3),(2,4),(3,4) i j

  15. Solution Sketch (ML-1) • Maximize likelihood function L(,R)=p(X| ,R)

  16. Solution Sketch (ML-2) • max L(,R), after taking log

  17. Solution Sketch (ML-3) • After substituting R:

  18. CD Interpretation of Solution • Criterion: • projection of X onto the span of columns of M • Solution  (“coherent” measurements) • N-dim subspace of CD closest to X among all L-choose-N subspaces spanned by different combinations of N columns of the matrix M • Existence iff N≤D-1

  19. Experimental Results (1) • Algorithm applied to realistic synthetic mixtures • From anechoic, low echoic, echoic to strongly echoic • 16kHz data, 256 sample window, 50% overlap, coherent noise, SIR (-5dB,10dB), 30 gradient steps/iteration (Step 2), 5 iterations • Evaluation: SIRGain, SegmentalSNR, Distortion

  20. Example Sources L=4, Mics D=2, N=2 Sources Mixing Estimates

  21. Discussion: L=4 sources, D=2 mics is a case too simple? • In some simulations, the N=2 assumption helps • Conjecture: approach is useful when N is a small fraction of L

  22. Conclusion • Contribution: ML approach to noisy BSS problem under generalized sparseness assumptions, addressing degenerate case D<L • Estimation problem can be addressed using sparse decomposition techniques: progress is needed

  23. Thank you!Real speech separation demo for those interested after session!

  24. Outline • Generalized sparseness assumption • Signal model and assumptions • BSS problem definition • Solution sketch: Ad-hoc and ML estimators • Geometrical interpretation of solution • Experimental results • Conclusion

More Related