Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] seeking old Kaiser paper From: "Richard F. Lyon" <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 23:20:27 -0800 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>--f403045c0d7c4d2f6b05658b8791 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I asked Leland Jackson; he says "Yes, Roberts et al did great work at Colorado, but were initially better known in the controls community. I knew Dick Roberts best and was greatly saddened when he died at a young age." Looks like he died in 1990, according to his 1992 book: https://books.google.com/books?id=3DhSDvAAAAMAAJ&q=3D% 22richard+a+roberts%22&dq=3D%22richard+a+roberts%22&hl=3Den& sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwigpZD-r7HZAhWGx4MKHU7sD8wQ6AEIOTAD His "book on Signal Detectability in 1965" was his dissertation at University of Michigan. And Robert A. Gabel went from Colorado to MIT Lincoln Laboratory, where he was for 25 years by 2009, says here: http://news.mit.edu/2009/qcc-0527 Dick On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > It seems unlikely that a couple of guys from Denver and Boulder, who wrot= e > three editions of a good book, and authored some other papers, would not = be > legit. > > Here are papers by Richard A. Roberts: > https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=3Den&as_sdt=3D1%2C5&q=3D%22R > ICHARD+A.+ROBERTS%22 > > He wrote a book on Signal Detectability in 1965: > https://books.google.com/books?id=3DHUtXFud4u_8C&q=3Dinauthor:% > 22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&dq=3Dinauthor:%22Richard+A.+ > Roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj_v8fspajZAhUP-J8KHft6CdMQ6AEIPTAE > (so he probably retired before the web became a big thing). > > and he wrote a book on DSP in 1987: > https://books.google.com/books?id=3DGiBoQgAACAAJ&dq=3D%22richard > +a+roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj7q5i5pajZAhUEwlQKHeqBAeUQ6AEIK= TAA > and a book on probability in 1992: > https://books.google.com/books?id=3DhSDvAAAAMAAJ&q=3Dinauthor:% > 22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&dq=3Dinauthor:%22Richard+A.+ > Roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj_v8fspajZAhUP-J8KHft6CdMQ6AEINDAC > > Robert A. Gabel was with Bede Liu at Princeton, and then C.U. Boulder EE > department according to this paper: > https://www.osapublishing.org/ao/abstract.cfm?uri=3Dao-9-5-1180 > and looks like maybe he became or physiologist, or is that someone with > the same name? > https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=3Den&as_sdt=3D1%2C5&q=3D%22r > obert+a+gabel%22&btnG=3D > > Dick > > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Sharath chandra <looplogic@xxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> Dear Richard >> >> I've heard of this thing going around called 'predatory publishing'. It'= s >> has dark underground roots, involving amazing manuscripts and books that >> capture the essence of leading research from different sources compiled >> into a single publication, written by a team of 'ghost authors' >> >> There is a high chance that Gabel and Roberts are fictitious names/ghost >> authorships of what indeed could be a book of amazing content. >> Google search for these authors reveals close to nothing. >> >> Regards >> Sharath >> >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, February 13, 2018, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> More on gammatones in the Gabel & Roberts "Signals and Linear Systems" >>> book: >>> >>> I got the 1980 second edition and 1973 first edition. Like the 1987 >>> third, they have a table of z transforms of sampled impulse responses o= f >>> gammatone-like filters (complex gammatones); the second and third go to >>> order 4, but the first goes all the way to order 5! The fifth order ha= s >>> numerator [1, 11, 11, 1], which I haven't checked, but seems plausible; >>> that makes zeros at z =3D -9.8990, -1.0000, -0.1010. >>> >>> In terms of the funny correction to impulse invariance for impulses wit= h >>> a step at t =3D 0 that Leland Jackson and Wolfgang Mecklenbra=C3=BCker = separately >>> published in 2000, yes, it's in all three editions of Gabel & Roberts, >>> going back to 1973; and not quite in any of Jim Kaiser's papers. >>> >>> Speaking of Jim Kaiser, I sent him a copy of my book, which was >>> delivered yesterday; his son says "He couldn't remember receiving the b= ook >>> yesterday. Our healthcare worker found the book this morning on his ni= ght >>> stand. He had already started reading it but forgot that he had! He >>> appreciated your inscription. He was able to recall your interactions = at >>> Bell in the early 70's. Long term memory still seems relatively good." >>> Jim is 89, living in Chapel Hill NC. >>> >>> One other reader of this list tells me he's a big fan of Gabel & >>> Roberts, recently read it cover to cover, and is planning to use it for= a >>> course. It's still in print at a low price in Asian markets. >>> >>> I repeat my question: does anybody know these guys (Robert A. Gabel >>> and/or Richard A. Roberts)? >>> >>> Dick >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I got a copy that Jim Beauchamp found in a library near him. Thanks, >>>> Jim. >>>> >>>> If anyone wants a copy, let me know. Or of the 1964 Golden & Kaiser >>>> BSTJ paper. >>>> >>>> The "correction" term in the 1966 version is not there in 1963, nor in >>>> 1964. >>>> >>>> The correction term would not be needed, and the problem would never >>>> have existed, if the discrete impulse response at h[0] had been define= d in >>>> terms of the continuous impulse response h(t) as (h(0-) + h(0+)/2; tha= t is, >>>> as the average across the step discontinuity at 0 if there is one, as = two >>>> different papers in 2000 pointed out. The examples in the older paper= s and >>>> the correction term in the 1966 paper make it clear that such a reason= able >>>> choice was not made at that time. >>>> >>>> This issue (but not its history) is covered in great detail in the 198= 7 >>>> book Signals and Linear Systems, third edition, by Gabel and Roberts (= does >>>> anyone know these guys?). I haven't looked at earlier editions. They= not >>>> only discuss the discontinuity in depth, but also address repeated pol= es, >>>> which are ignored in most treatments, and provide a table up to order = 4 >>>> repeated poles, which agrees precisely with Volker Hohmann's derivatio= n of >>>> zeros in the numerator of the impulse-invariance design of discrete-ti= me >>>> complex gammatone filters: a numerator [1, 4, 1] independent of pole >>>> frequencies and dampings, yielding zeros at z =3D -3.7321 and z =3D -0= .2679, >>>> which do just a little smoothing on top of the repeated-poles filter. >>>> >>>> Dick >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxxx> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Does anyone have the 1963 Proceedings of the First Allerton Conferenc= e >>>>> on Circuit and System Theory? Or just "Design methods for sampled-da= ta >>>>> filters" by J. F. Kaiser? >>>>> >>>>> I'm trying to resolve a disconnect in derivations of the >>>>> impulse-invariance method, which was "corrected" in several places ov= er the >>>>> years, though Kaiser had the key to the correction in his chapter "Di= gital >>>>> Filters" in the 1966 "System Analysis by Digital Computer" book, in w= hich >>>>> he says his stuff on IIR design closely follows that missing paper as= well >>>>> as a BSTJ paper that does not have the key piece. >>>>> >>>>> The key observation is that using the naive impulse invariance method >>>>> adds a constant (frequency independent) term to the frequency respons= e of >>>>> the digital filter proportional to the impulse response on the right = side >>>>> of time zero: T/2 * h(0+). He didn't go as far as the "corrections" = which >>>>> said to take the impulse response h[k] at k =3D 0 to be (h(0-) + h(0+= ))/2, >>>>> though it's pretty obvious from there. It's funny that at some point= he >>>>> got as far as including that unwanted term yet didn't comment on the = easy >>>>> way to remove it. Maybe in the missing paper... >>>>> >>>>> Dick >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > --f403045c0d7c4d2f6b05658b8791 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>I asked Leland Jackson; he says "Yes, Rober= ts et al did great work at Colorado, but were initially better known in the= controls community.=C2=A0 I knew Dick Roberts best and was greatly saddene= d when he died at a young age."<br></div>Looks like he died in 1990, a= ccording to his 1992 book:<br><a href=3D"https://books.google.com/books?id= =3DhSDvAAAAMAAJ&q=3D%22richard+a+roberts%22&dq=3D%22richard+a+rober= ts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwigpZD-r7HZAhWGx4MKHU7sD8wQ6AE= IOTAD" target=3D"_blank">https://books.google.com/<wbr>books?id=3DhSDvAAAAM= AAJ&q=3D%<wbr>22richard+a+roberts%22&dq=3D%<wbr>22richard+a+roberts= %22&hl=3Den&<wbr>sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwigpZD-<wbr>r7HZAhWGx4MKHU7= sD8wQ6AEIOTAD</a><br><br></div><div>His "book on Signal Detectability = in 1965" was his dissertation at University of Michigan.<br></div><div= ><br></div><div>And Robert A. Gabel went from Colorado to MIT Lincoln Labor= atory, where he was for 25 years by 2009, says here:<br><a href=3D"http://n= ews.mit.edu/2009/qcc-0527">http://news.mit.edu/2009/qcc-0527</a><br></div><= div><br></div>Dick<br><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D= "gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Richard F. Lyon <span dir=3D= "ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:dicklyon@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">dicklyon@xxxxxxxx= m.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m= argin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left= :1ex"><span><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>It seems unlikely that a couple of guys f= rom Denver and Boulder, who wrote three editions of a good book, and author= ed some other papers, would not be legit.<br><br></div><div>Here are papers= by Richard A. Roberts:<br><a href=3D"https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl= =3Den&as_sdt=3D1%2C5&q=3D%22RICHARD+A.+ROBERTS%22" target=3D"_blank= ">https://scholar.google.com/sch<wbr>olar?hl=3Den&as_sdt=3D1%2C5&q= =3D%22R<wbr>ICHARD+A.+ROBERTS%22</a><br></div><div><br>He wrote a book on S= ignal Detectability in 1965:<br><a href=3D"https://books.google.com/books?i= d=3DHUtXFud4u_8C&q=3Dinauthor:%22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&dq=3Dinautho= r:%22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj_v8fspa= jZAhUP-J8KHft6CdMQ6AEIPTAE" target=3D"_blank">https://books.google.com/book= s<wbr>?id=3DHUtXFud4u_8C&q=3Dinauthor:%<wbr>22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&= ;dq=3D<wbr>inauthor:%22Richard+A.+<wbr>Roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&am= p;ved=3D<wbr>0ahUKEwj_v8fspajZAhUP-J8KHft6C<wbr>dMQ6AEIPTAE</a><br></div><d= iv>(so he probably retired before the web became a big thing).<br><br></div= ><div>and he wrote a book on DSP in 1987:<br><a href=3D"https://books.googl= e.com/books?id=3DGiBoQgAACAAJ&dq=3D%22richard+a+roberts%22&hl=3Den&= amp;sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj7q5i5pajZAhUEwlQKHeqBAeUQ6AEIKTAA" target=3D"_= blank">https://books.google.com/books<wbr>?id=3DGiBoQgAACAAJ&dq=3D%22ri= chard<wbr>+a+roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0<wbr>ahUKEwj7q5i5= pajZAhUEwlQKHeqBAe<wbr>UQ6AEIKTAA</a><br></div><div>and a book on probabili= ty in 1992:<br><a href=3D"https://books.google.com/books?id=3DhSDvAAAAMAAJ&= amp;q=3Dinauthor:%22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&dq=3Dinauthor:%22Richard+A.+R= oberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D0ahUKEwj_v8fspajZAhUP-J8KHft6CdM= Q6AEINDAC" target=3D"_blank">https://books.google.com/books<wbr>?id=3DhSDvA= AAAMAAJ&q=3Dinauthor:%<wbr>22Richard+A.+Roberts%22&dq=3D<wbr>inauth= or:%22Richard+A.+<wbr>Roberts%22&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ved=3D<wbr>0ahU= KEwj_v8fspajZAhUP-J8KHft6C<wbr>dMQ6AEINDAC</a><br><br></div><div>Robert A. = Gabel was with Bede Liu at Princeton, and then C.U. Boulder EE department a= ccording to this paper:<br><a href=3D"https://www.osapublishing.org/ao/abst= ract.cfm?uri=3Dao-9-5-1180" target=3D"_blank">https://www.osapublishing.org= /<wbr>ao/abstract.cfm?uri=3Dao-9-5-118<wbr>0</a><br></div><div>and looks li= ke maybe he became or physiologist, or is that someone with the same name?<= br></div><div><a href=3D"https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=3Den&as_= sdt=3D1%2C5&q=3D%22robert+a+gabel%22&btnG=3D" target=3D"_blank">htt= ps://scholar.google.com/sch<wbr>olar?hl=3Den&as_sdt=3D1%2C5&q=3D%22= r<wbr>obert+a+gabel%22&btnG=3D</a><br><br></div>Dick<br><br><br></div><= /span><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span>On Th= u, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Sharath chandra <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href= =3D"mailto:looplogic@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">looplogic@xxxxxxxx</a>&g= t;</span> wrote:<br></span><div><div class=3D"gmail-m_5389312762144718194h5= "><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;borde= r-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Dear R= ichard<div><br></div><div>I've heard of this thing going around called = 'predatory publishing'. It's has dark underground roots, involv= ing amazing manuscripts and books that capture the essence of leading resea= rch from different sources compiled into a single publication, written by a= team of 'ghost authors'</div><div><br></div><div>There is a high c= hance that Gabel and Roberts are fictitious names/ghost authorships of what= indeed could be a book of amazing content.=C2=A0</div><div>Google search f= or these authors reveals close to nothing.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards= <span class=3D"gmail-m_5389312762144718194m_5334541293323984831HOEnZb"><fon= t color=3D"#888888"><br>Sharath</font></span></div><div><br></div><div><br>= </div><div><span><br><br>On Tuesday, February 13, 2018, Richard F. Lyon <= ;<a href=3D"mailto:dicklyon@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">dicklyon@xxxxxxxx</a>= > wrote:<br></span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px= 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><di= v dir=3D"ltr"><span><div><div><div><div>More on gammatones in the Gabel &am= p; Roberts "Signals and Linear Systems" book:<br><br></div>I got = the 1980 second edition and 1973 first edition.=C2=A0 Like the 1987 third, = they have a table of z transforms of sampled impulse responses of gammatone= -like filters (complex gammatones); the second and third go to order 4, but= the first goes all the way to order 5!=C2=A0 The fifth order has numerator= [1, 11, 11, 1], which I haven't checked, but seems plausible; that mak= es zeros at z =3D -9.8990, -1.0000, -0.1010.<br><br></div>In terms of the f= unny correction to impulse invariance for impulses with a step at t =3D 0 t= hat Leland Jackson and Wolfgang Mecklenbra=C3=BCker separately published in= 2000, yes, it's in all three editions of Gabel & Roberts, going ba= ck to 1973; and not quite in any of Jim Kaiser's papers.<br><br>Speakin= g of Jim Kaiser, I sent him a copy of my book, which was delivered yesterda= y; his son says "He couldn't remember receiving the book yesterday= .=C2=A0 Our healthcare worker found the book this morning on his night stan= d.=C2=A0 He had already started reading it but forgot that he had!=C2=A0 He= appreciated your inscription.=C2=A0 He was able to recall your interaction= s at Bell in the early 70's.=C2=A0 Long term memory still seems relativ= ely good."=C2=A0 Jim is 89, living in Chapel Hill NC.<br><br></div>One= other reader of this list tells me he's a big fan of Gabel & Rober= ts, recently read it cover to cover, and is planning to use it for a course= .=C2=A0 It's still in print at a low price in Asian markets.<br><br></d= iv><div>I repeat my question: does anybody know these guys (Robert A. Gabel= and/or Richard A. Roberts)?<br></div><div><br></div>Dick<br><br></span><di= v><div class=3D"gmail-m_5389312762144718194m_5334541293323984831h5"><div><b= r><div><br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo= te">On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Richard F. Lyon <span dir=3D"ltr"><<= a href=3D"mailto:dicklyon@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">dicklyon@xxxxxxxx</a>&g= t;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0= px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div = dir=3D"ltr"><span><div><div><div><div>I got a copy that Jim Beauchamp found= in a library near him.=C2=A0 Thanks, Jim.<br><br></div>If anyone wants a c= opy, let me know.=C2=A0 Or of the 1964 Golden & Kaiser BSTJ paper.<br><= br></div>The "correction" term in the 1966 version is not there i= n 1963, nor in 1964.<br><br></div>The correction term would not be needed, = and the problem would never have existed, if the discrete impulse response = at h[0] had been defined in terms of the continuous impulse response h(t) a= s (h(0-) + h(0+)/2; that is, as the average across the step discontinuity a= t 0 if there is one, as two different papers in 2000 pointed out.=C2=A0 The= examples in the older papers and the correction term in the 1966 paper mak= e it clear that such a reasonable choice was not made at that time.</div><d= iv><br></div><div>This issue (but not its history) is covered in great deta= il in the 1987 book Signals and Linear Systems, third edition, by Gabel and= Roberts (does anyone know these guys?).=C2=A0 I haven't looked at earl= ier editions.=C2=A0 They not only discuss the discontinuity in depth, but a= lso address repeated poles, which are ignored in most treatments, and provi= de a table up to order 4 repeated poles, which agrees precisely with Volker= Hohmann's derivation of zeros in the numerator of the impulse-invarian= ce design of discrete-time complex gammatone filters: a numerator [1, 4, 1]= independent of pole frequencies and dampings, yielding zeros at z =3D -3.7= 321 and z =3D -0.2679, which do just a little smoothing on top of the repea= ted-poles filter.<br></div><div><br></div>Dick<br><br></span><div class=3D"= gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span>On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8= :15 PM, Richard F. Lyon <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:dicklyon@xxxxxxxx= m.org" target=3D"_blank">dicklyon@xxxxxxxx</a>></span> wrote:<br></span><= div><div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8e= x;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div><div d= ir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>Does anyone have the 1963 Proceedings of the Firs= t Allerton Conference on Circuit and System Theory?=C2=A0 Or just "Des= ign methods for sampled-data filters" by J. F. Kaiser?=C2=A0 <br><br><= /div>I'm trying to resolve a disconnect in derivations of the impulse-i= nvariance method, which was "corrected" in several places over th= e years, though Kaiser had the key to the correction in his chapter "D= igital Filters" in the 1966 "System Analysis by Digital Computer&= quot; book, in which he says his stuff on IIR design closely follows that m= issing paper as well as a BSTJ paper that does not have the key piece.=C2= =A0 <br><br></div>The key observation is that using the naive impulse invar= iance method adds a constant (frequency independent) term to the frequency = response of the digital filter proportional to the impulse response on the = right side of time zero: T/2 * h(0+).=C2=A0 He didn't go as far as the = "corrections" which said to take the impulse response h[k] at k = =3D 0 to be (h(0-) + h(0+))/2, though it's pretty obvious from there.= =C2=A0 It's funny that at some point he got as far as including that un= wanted term yet didn't comment on the easy way to remove it.=C2=A0 Mayb= e in the missing paper...<br><br></div>Dick<br><br><div><div><br></div></di= v></div> </div></div></blockquote></div></div></div><br></div></div> </blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></div> </blockquote></div> </div> </blockquote></div></div></div><br></div> </blockquote></div><br></div></div></div> --f403045c0d7c4d2f6b05658b8791--