2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.sigpro.2005.11.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Complexity of pruning strategies for the frequency domain LMS algorithm

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 12 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Common practical examples relate to, e.g., the least mean squared (LMS) optimal DFT-based pruned signal filtering [2], and the complexity-reduced computational implementation of the orthogonal frequency division multiplexing systems [3]. Another practical example relates to efficient implementation of the matched spatial filtering (MSF) algorithm for performing the range and azimuth data compression in unfocused of fractionally focused synthetic aperture radar (SAR) system that both employ the pruned DFT-based MSF processing of the trajectory data signals performed in a factorized fashion in the socalled slow time and fast time data acquisition scales [4][5][6].…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Common practical examples relate to, e.g., the least mean squared (LMS) optimal DFT-based pruned signal filtering [2], and the complexity-reduced computational implementation of the orthogonal frequency division multiplexing systems [3]. Another practical example relates to efficient implementation of the matched spatial filtering (MSF) algorithm for performing the range and azimuth data compression in unfocused of fractionally focused synthetic aperture radar (SAR) system that both employ the pruned DFT-based MSF processing of the trajectory data signals performed in a factorized fashion in the socalled slow time and fast time data acquisition scales [4][5][6].…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%