Dissertation Report

On

Optimal design of FIR filter using different selection

methods in Genetic Algorithm

ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

SARDAR VALLABHBHAI NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SUBMITTED BY
Mr. RAKESH PATIDAR
(P13VL010)

GUIDE
Prof. P.K. SHAH
Associate Professor
ECED, SVNIT

Thesis outline
FIR

Filter & Different design methods of it.

Optimization Technique
Genetic Algorithm
Results
Conclusion & Future scope

Digital Filters
It operates on the digital samples of the signals.
These kinds of filters are defined using linear difference equations.
Analog Filters
It operates on the analog(actual) signal.

It is defined by linear differential equations.

Applications of Filters:
in Audio signal processing
speech processing
image enhancement

Communication Systems

FIR vs IIR Filters

FIR Filters are linear phase & always stable.

FIR requires higher order(N).

FIR generally Non-Recursive.

Filter design methods:

window method
w(n) = 1
= 0
h(n) = hd(n) w(n)
= hd(n)
=0

0 n M-1
otherwise
0 n M-1
otherwise

Bartlett triangular window

Rectangular(Gibbs phenomenon effect ), Hanning, Hamming and
Blackman windows
Kaiser window
Advantage of window method
Simplicity to use As compared to other methods.
Disadvantages of window method
This method is applicable only if Hd(w) is absolutely integrable.
Only in design of prototype filters.
The Frequency Sampling Technique

jT
Put z e

H (e jT )

j NT 1
1

2 N

NT

2
T k
Sin

2 N

H ( k )e
N 1

k 0

j k
N

Sin

The approximation error would then be exactly zero at the sampling

frequencies and would be finite in frequencies between them.
In order to reduce this error increase no. of sample points (N).
Merit of Frequency Sampling Technique
Any given magnitude response
Non prototype filter
Demerit of Frequency Sampling Technique
Frequency response obtained = Desired Frequency response
(Only at sampling points)

Optimal Filter Design Methods

Least squared error frequency domain design

Error(E) = |(H(wk)-Hd(wk)|2
j 2 k
1 L 1
h( n) H ( k )e N
N k 0

N 1

L>N

H ( w) h(n)e j n
n 0

Weighted Chebyshev Approximation

The weighting function enables the designer to choose the relative size of
the error in different frequency bands.

When L=0 h(n) will be Symmetric.

When L=1 h(n) will be AntiSymmetric.

E ( ) Min[ Max E ]

Optimization

Statement of an optimization problem

Objective Function f ( X )
X= [x1 x 2 x3 ........ x n ]T

g j( X ) 0

j = 1, 2............................m

hj(X)=0

j = 1, 2............................ p

g j( X ) & h j ( X ) are inequality &equality constraint.

Singal variable optimization algorithm

These algorithms optimize only single objective

Multi variable optimization algorithm

These algorithms optimize more than one objective

f ( X ) = a1 f1 ( X ) + a 2 f 2 ( X )

Optimallity criteria

Local optimal point

Global optimal point

Inflaction point

Genetic

algorithm

Darwin's evolution theory

A set of solutions (represented by chromosomes)

called population.

Solutions which are selected to form new solutions

(offspring) are selected according to their fitness.

Population size

The Objective

For maximization problem

For minimization problem

Relative Fitness Function

Important steps in GA

Encoding

Selection

Crossover

Mutation

Encoding
Binary Encoding
Chromosome A

101100101100101011100101

Chromosome B

111111100000110000011111

Permutation Encoding
Chromosome A

1 5 3 2 6 4 7 9 8

Chromosome B

8 5 6 7 2 3 1 4 9

Value Encoding
Chromosome A

1.2324 5.3243 0.4556 2.3293 2.4545

Chromosome B

ABDJEIFJDHDIERJFDLDFLFEGT

Chromosome C

(back), (back), (right), (forward), (left)

Selection
Roulette Wheel Selection
Selected based on fitness

Rank Selection

Situation before ranking

Less chance to be selected

Situation after ranking

slow convergence problem

Tournament
several tournaments among a few individuals chosen at random from the
population.
If the tournament size is larger, weak individuals have a smaller chance to
be selected

Elitism
Copy few best chromosome to new population.
Crossover
Parent 1: 11001|010
Parent 2: 00100|111
Offspring1: 11001|111
Offspring2: 00100|010
Crossover probability
all offspring are made by crossover (100%).
offspring are exact copies of parents (0 %).

Mutation Probability
Whole chromosome is changed (100%).
No change (0 %).
Multiobjective Optimization
Does not exist one solution that is best with respect to all objectives
In MOOP problem the decision maker articulates its preference concerning
the different objectives: never, before, during or after optimization procedure.

Classifications of Methods of
Multi Objective Optimization

 Results

FIR Low pass filter designed with following parameters for all
methods

Passband ripple(rp) = 0.02

Stopband ripple(rs ) = 0.01

Passband frequency(fp) = 1500 Hz

Stopband frequency(fs) = 2000 Hz

Sampling frequency(fs) = 6000 Hz

physical realizable low pass filter

FIR Filter using rectangular window method

FIR Filter using Hanning

window method

FIR Filter using Hamming

window method

FIR Filter using Kaiser

window method with = 5.8

FIR Filter using Frequency

Sampling method

FIR Filter using Least squared

error method

FIR Filter using Roulette Wheel

Selection method

FIR Filter using Rank Selection

method

FIR Filter using Tournament

Selection method

Comparison of different filter design methods

Filter design method

Transition width

Peak side lobe(in dB)

Rectangular window

0.0975

-21.09

Hanning window

0.2977

-44.03

Hamming window

0.3487

-55.21

Kaiser window

0.3742

-60.93

Frequency Sampling

0.4403

-59.94

Least squared error

0.3123

-37.46

Roulette Wheel Selection

0.13879

-50

Rank Selection

0.10604

-54.67

Tournament Selection

0.1572

-58

 Conclusion

& Future Scope

Results

obtained through different selection

methods are more optimal than other methods.
Different new heuristic optimization methods: Reduce

complexity of the implementation of the

algorithms
Reduce design error
increase convergence speed
Improve performance of the design methods

Any queries ?

THANK YOU