A method of coding a sampled speech signal vector

Abstract: The invention relates to a method of coding a sampled speech signal vector by selecting an optimal axcitation vector in an adaptive code book (100). This optimal excitation vector is obtained by maximizing the energy normalized square of the cross correlation between the convolution (102) of the excitation vectors with the impulse response (h w (n)) of a linear filter and the speech signal vector. Before the convolution the vectors of the code book (100) are block normalized (200) with respect to the vector component largest in magnitude. In a similar way the speech signal vector (s(n)) is block normalized (202) with respect to its component largest in magnitude. Calculated values for the squared cross correlation C I and the energy E I and corresponding values C M , E M for the best excitation vector so far are divided into a mantissa and a scaling factor with a limited number of scaling levels. The number of levels can be different for squared cross correlation and energy. During the calculation of the products C I ·E M and E I ·C M , which are used for determining the optimal excitation vector, the respective mantissas are multiplied and a seperate scaling factor calculation is performed.

Description: TECHNICAL FIELD The present invention relates to a method of coding a sampled speech signal vector by selecting an optimal excitation vector in an adaptive code book. PRIOR ART In e.g. radio transmission of digitized speech it is desirable to reduce the amount of information that is to be transferred per unit of time without significant reduction of the quality of the speech. A method known from the article "Code-excited linear prediction (CELP): High-quality speech at very low bit rates", IEEE ICASSP-85, 1985 by M. Schroeder and B. Atal to perform such an information reduction is to use speech coders of so called CELP-type in the transmitter. Such a coder comprises a synthesizer section and an analyzer section. The coder has three main components in the synthesizer section, namely an LPC-filter (Linear Predictive Coding filter) and a fixed and an adative code book comprising excitation vectors that excite the filter for synthetic production of a signal that as close as possible approximates the sampled speech signal vector for a frame that is to be transmitted. Instead of transferring the speech signal vector itself the indexes for excitation vectors in code books are then among other parameters transferred over the radio connection. The receiver comprises a corresponding synthesizer section that reproduces the chosen approximation of the speech signal vector in the same way as on the transmitter side. To choose between the best possible excitation vectors from the code books the transmitter portion comprises an analyzer section, in which the code books are searched. The search for optimal index in the adative code book is often performed by a exhaustive search through all indexes in the code book. For each index in the adaptive code book the corresponding excitation vector is filtered through the LPC-filter, the output signal of which is compared to the sampled speech signal vector that is to be coded. An error vector is calcultated and filtered through the weighting filter. Thereafter the components in the weighted error vector are squared and summed for forming the quadratic weighted error. The index that gives the lowest quadratic weighted error is then chosen as the optimal index. An equivalent method known from the article "Efficient procedures for finding the optimum innovation in stochastic coders", IEEE ICASSP-86, 1986 by I.M. Trancoso and B.S. Atal to find the optimal index is based on maximizing the energy normalized squared cross correlation between the synthetic speech vector and the sampled speech signal vector. These two exhaustive search methods are very costly as regards the number of necessary instruction cycles in a digital signal processor, but they are also fundamental as regards retaining a high quality of speech. Searching in an adaptive code book is known per se from the American patent specification 3 899 385 and the article "Design, implementation and evaluation of a 8.0 kbps CELP coder on a single AT&T DSP32C digital signal processor", IEEE Workshop on speech coding for telecommunications, Vancouver, Sept. 5-8, 1989, by K. Swaminathan and R.V. Cox. A problem in connection with an integer implementation is that the adaptive code book has a feed back (long term memory). The code book is updated with the total excitation vector (a linear combination of optimal excitation vectors from the fixed and adaptive code books) of the previous frame. This adaption of the adaptive code book makes it possible to follow the dynamic variations in the speech signal, which is essential to obtain a high quality of speech. However, the speech signal varies over a large dynamic region, which means that it is difficult to represent the signal with maintained quality in single precision in a digital signal processor that works with integer representation, since these processors generally have a word length of 16 bits, which is insufficient. The signal then has to be represented either in double precision (two words) or in floating point representation implemented in software in an integer digital signal processor. Both these methods are, however, costly as regards complexity. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION An object of the present invention is to provide a method for obtaining a large dynamical speech signal range in connection with analysis of an adaptive code book in an integer digital signal processor, but without the drawbacks of the previously known methods as regards complexity. In a method for coding a sampled speech signal vector by selecting an optimal excitation vector in an adaptive code book, in which (a) predetermined excitation vectors successively are read from the adaptive code book, (b) each read excitation vector is convolved with the impulse response of a linear filter, (c) each filter output signal is used for forming (c1) on the one hand a measure C I of the square of the cross correlation with the sampled speech signal vector, (c2) on the other hand a measure E I of the energy of the filter output signal, (d) each measure C I is multiplied by the measure E M of that excitation vector that hitherto has given the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal, (e) each measure E I is multiplied by the measure C M for that excitation vector that hitherto has given the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal, (f) the products in steps (d) and (e) are compared to each other, the measures C M , E M being substituted by the measures C I and E I , respectively, if the product in step (d) is larger than the product in step (e), and (g) that excitation vector that corresponds to the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal is chosen as the optimal excitation vector in the adaptive code book, the above object is obtained by (A) block normalizing the predetermined excitation vectors of the adaptive code book with respect to the component with the maximum absolute value in a set of excitation vectors from the adaptive code book before the convolution in step (b), (B) block normalizing the sampled speech signal vector with respect to that of its components that has the maximum absolute value before forming the measure C I in step (c1), (C) dividing the measure C I from step (c1) and the measure C M into a respective mantissa and a respective first scaling factor with a predetermined first maximum number of levels, (D) dividing the measure E I from step (c2) and the measure E M into a respective mantissa and a respective second scaling factor with a predetermined second maximum number of levels, and (E) forming said products in step (d) and (e) by multiplying the respective mantissas and performing a separate scaling factor calculation. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS The invention, further objects and advantages obtained by the invention are best understood with reference to the following description and the accompanying drawings, in which Figure 1 shows a block diagram of an apparatus in accordance with the prior art for coding a speech signal vector by selecting the optimal excitation vector in an adaptive code book; Figure 2 shows a block diagram of a first embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention; Figure 3 shows a block diagram of a second, preferred embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention; and Figure 4 shows a block diagram of a third embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention. PREFERRED EMBODIMENT In the different Figures the same reference designations are used for corresponding elements. Figure 1 shows a block diagram of an apparatus in accordance with the prior art for coding a speech signal vector by selecting the optimal excitation vector in an adaptive code book. The sampled speech signal vector s w (n), e.g. comprising 40 samples, and a synthetic signal s and w (n), that has been obtained by convolution of an excitation vector from an adaptive code book 100 with the impulse response h w (n) of a linear filter in a convolution unit 102, are correlated with each other in a correlator 104. The output signal of correlator 104 forms an measure C I of the square of the cross correlation between the signals s w (n) and s and w (n). A measure of the cross correlation can be calculated e.g. by summing the products of the corresponding components in the input signals s w (n) and s and w (n). Furthermore, in an energy calculator 106 a measure E I of the energy of the synthetic signal s and w (n) is calculated, e.g. by summing the squares of the components of the signal. These calculations are performed for each of the excitation vectors of the adaptive code book. For each calculated pair C I , E I the products C I ·E M and E I ·C M are formed, where C M and E M are the values of the squared cross correlation and energy, respectively, for that excitation vector that hitherto has given the largest ratio C I /E I . The values C M and E M are stored in memories 108 and 110, respectively, and the products are formed in multipliers 112 and 114, respectively. Thereafter the products are compared in a comparator 116. If the product C I ·E M is greater than the product E I ·C M , then C M , E M are updated with C I , E I , otherwise the old values of C M , E M are maintained. Simultaneously with the updating of C M and E M a memory, which is not shown, storing the index of the corresponding vector in the adaptive code book 100 is also updated. When all the excitation vectors in the adaptive code book 100 have been examined in this way the optimal excitation vector is obtained as that vector that corresponds to the values C M , E M , that are stored in memories 108 and 110, respectively. The index of this vector in code book 100, which index is stored in said memory that is not shown in the drawing, forms an essential part of the code of the sampled speech signal vector. Figure 2 shows a block diagram of a first embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention. The same parameters as in the previously known apparatus in accordance with Figure 1, namely the squared cross correlation and energy, are calculated also in the apparatus according to Figure 2. However, before the convolution in convolution unit 102 the excitation vectors of the adaptive code book 100 are block normalized in a block normalizing unit 200 with respect to that component of all the excitation vectors in the code book that has the largest absolute value. This is done by searching all the vector components in the code book to determine that component that has the maximum absolute value. Thereafter this component is shifted to the left as far as possible with the chosen word length. In this specification a word length of 16 bits is assumed. However, it is appreciated that the invention is not restricted to this word length but that other word lengths are possible. Finally the remaining vector components are shifted to the left the same number of shifting steps. In a corresponding way the speech signal vector is block normalized in a block normalizing unit 202 with respect to that of its components that has the maximum absolute value. After the block normalizations the calculations of the squared cross correlation and energy are performed in correlator 104 and energy calculator 106, respectively. The results are stored in double precision, i.e. in 32 bits if the word length is 16 bits. During the cross correlation and energy calculations a summation of products is performed. Since the summation of these products normally requires more than 32 bits an accumulator with a length of more than 32 bits can be used for the summation, whereafter the result is shifted to the right to be stored within 32 bits. In connection with a 32 bits accumulator an alternative way is to shift each product to the right e.g. 6 bits before the summation. These shifts are of no practical significance and will therefore not be considered in the description below. The obtained results are divided into a mantissa of 16 bits and a scaling factor. The scaling factors preferably have a limited number of scaling levels. It has proven that a suitable maximum number of scaling levels for the cross correlation is 9, while a suitable maximum number of scaling levels for the energy is 7. However, these values are not critical. Values around 8 have, however, proven to be suitable. The scaling factors are preferably stored as exponents, it being understood that a scaling factor is formed as 2 E , where E is the exponent. With the above suggested maximum number of scaling levels the scaling factor for the cross correlation can be stored in 4 bits, while the scaling factor for the energy requires 3 bits. Since the scaling factors are expressed as 2 E the scaling can be done by simple shifting of the mantissa. To illustrate the division into mantissa and scaling factor it is assumed that the vector length is 40 samples and that the word length is 16 bits. The absolute value of the largest value of a sample in this case is 2¹⁶⁻¹. The largest value of the cross correlation is: CC max = 40·2 2(16-1) = (5·2¹²)·2²¹ The scaling factor 2²¹ for this largest case is considered as 1, i.e. 2°, while the mantissa is 5·2¹². It is now assumed that the synthetic output signal vector has all its components equal to half the maximum value, i.e. 2¹⁶⁻², while the sampled signal vector still only has maximum components. In this case the cross correlation becomes: CC I = 40·2¹⁵·2¹⁴ = (5·2¹²)·2²⁰ The scaling factor for this case is considered to be 2¹, i.e. 2. while the mantissa still is 5.2¹². Thus, the scaling factor indicates how many times smaller the result is than CC max . With other values for the vector components the cross correlation is calculated, whereafter the result is shifted to the left as long as it is less then CC max . The number of shifts gives the exponent of the scaling factor, while the 15 most significant bits in the absolute value of the result give the absolute value of the mantissa. Since the number of scaling factor levels can be limited the number of shifts that are performed can also be limited. Thus, when the cross correlation is small it may happen that the most significant bits of the mantissa comprise only zeros even after a maximum number of shifts. C I is then calculated by squaring the mantissa of the cross correlation and shifting the result 1 bit to the left, doubling the exponent of the scaling factor and incrementing the resulting exponent by 1. E I is divided in the same way. However, in this case the final squaring is not required. In the same way the stored values C M , E M for the optimal excitation vector hitherto are divided into a 16 bits mantissa and a scaling factor. The mantissas for C I and E M are multiplied in a multiplier 112, while the mantissas for E I and C M are multiplied in a multiplier 114. The scaling factors for these parameters are transferred to a scaling factor calculation unit 204, that calculates respective scaling factors S1 and S2 by adding the exponents of the scaling factors for the pair C I , E M and E I , C M , respectively. In scaling units 206, 208 the scaling factors S1, S2 are then applied to the products from multipliers 112 and 114, respectively, for forming the scaled quantities that are to be compared in comparator 116. The respective scaling factor is applied by shifting the corresponding product to the right the number of steps that is indicated by the exponent of the scaling factor. Since the scaling factors can be limited to a maximum number of scaling levels it is possible to limit the number of shifts to a minimum that still produces good quality of speech. The above chosen values 9 and 7 for the cross correlation and energy, respectively, have proven to be optimal as regards minimizing the number of shifts and retaining good quality of speech. A drawback of the implementation of Figure 2 is that shifts may be necessary for both input signals. This leads to a loss of accuracy in both input signals, which in turn implies that the subsequent comparison becomes more uncertain. Another drawback is that a shifting of both input signals requires unnecessary long time. Figure 3 shows a block diagram of a second, preferred embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention, in which the above drawbacks have been eliminated. Instead of calculating two scaling factors the scaling factor calculation unit 304 calculates an effective scaling factor. This is calculated by subtracting the exponent for the scaling factor of the pair E I , C M from the exponent of the scaling factor for the pair C I , E M . If the resulting exponent is positive the product from multiplier 112 is shifted to the right the number of steps indicated by the calculated exponent. Otherwise the product from multiplier 114 is shifted to the right the number of steps indicated by the absolute value of the calculated exponent. The advantage with this implementation is that only one effective shifting is required. This implies fewer shifting steps, which in turn implies increased speed. Furthermore the certainty in the comparison is improved since only one of the signals has to be shifted. An implementation of the preferred embodiment in accordance with Figure 3 is illustrated in detail by the PASCAL-program that is attached before the patent claims. Figure 4 shows a block diagram of a third embodiment of an apparatus for performing the method in accordance with the present invention. As in the embodiment of Figure 3 the scaling factor calculation unit 404 calculates an effective scaling factor, but in this embodiment the effective scaling factor is always applied only to one of the products from multipliers 112, 114. In Figure 4 the effective scaling factor is applied to the product from multiplier 112 over scaling unit 406. In this embodiment the shifting can therefore be both to the right and to the left, depending on whether the exponent of the effective scaling factor is positive or negative. Thus, the input signals to comparator 116 require more than one word. Below is a comparison of the complexity expressed in MIPS (million instructions per second) for the coding method illustrated in Figure 1. Only the complexity for the calculation of cross correlation, energy and the comparison have been estimated, since the main part of the complexity arises in these sections. The following methods have been compared: 1. Floating point implementation in hardware. 2. Floating point implementation in software on an integer digital signal processor. 3. Implementation in double precision on an integer digital signal processor. 4. The method in accordance with the present invention implemented on an integer digital signal processor. In the calculations below it is assumed that each sampled speech vector comprises 40 samples (40 components), that each speech vector extends over a time frame of 5 ms, and that the adaptive code book contains 128 excitation vectors, each with 40 components. The estimations of the number of necessary instruction cycles for the different operations on an integer digital signal processor have been looked up in "TMS320C25 USER'S GUIDE" from Texas Instruments. 1. Floating point implementation in hardware. Floating point operations (FLOP) are complex but implemented in hardware. For this reason they are here counted as one instruction each to facilitate the comparison. This gives 128·85 / 0.005 = 2.2 MIPS 2. Floating point implementation i software. The operations are built up by simpler instructions. The required number of instructions is approximately: Floating point multiplication: 10 instructions Floating point addition: 20 instructions This gives: This gives 128·2460 / 0.005 = 63 MIPS 3. Implementation in double precision. The operations are built up by simpler instructions. The required number of instructions is approximately: Multipl.-addition in single precision: 1 instruction Multiplication in double precision: 50 instructions 2 substractions in double precision: 10 instructions 2 normalizations in double precision: 30 instructions This gives: This gives 128-350/0.005 = 9.0 MIPS 4. The method in accordance with the present invention. The operations are built up by simpler instructions. The required number of instructions is approximately: Multipl.-addition in single precision: 1 instruction Normalization in double precision: 8 instructions Multiplication in single precision: 3 instrutions Subtraction in single precision: 3 instructions This gives: This gives 128·118 / 0.005 = 3.0 MIPS It is appreciated that the estimates above are approximate and indicate the order of magnitude in complexity for the different methods. The estimates show that the method in accordance with the present invention is almost as effective as regards the number of required instructions as a floating point implementation in hardware. However, since the method can be implemented significantly more inexpensive in an integer digital signal processor, a significant cost reduction can be obtained with a retained quality of speech. A comparison with a floating point implementation in software and implementation in double precision on an integer digital signal processor shows that the method in accordance with the present invention leads to a significant reduction in complexity (requried number of MIPS) with a retained quality of speech. The man skilled in the art appreciates that different changes and modifications of the invention are possible without departure from the scope of the invention, which is defined by the attached patent claims. For example, the invention can be used also in connection with so called virtual vectors and for recursive energy calculation. The invention can also be used in connection with selective search methods where not all but only predetermined excitation vectors in the adaptive code book are examined. In this case the block normalization can either be done with respect to the whole adaptive code book or with respect to only the chosen vectors. The following is an example of program implementation of the method in PASCAL, in accordance with the embodiment of Figure 3:

Claims: A method of coding a sampled speech signal vector by selecting an optimal excitation vector in an adaptive code book, in which method (a) predetermined excitation vectors successively are read from the adaptive code book, (b) each read excitation vector is convolved with the impulse response of a linear filter, (c) each filter output signal is used for forming (c1) on the one hand a measure C I of the square of the cross correlation with the sampled speech signal vector, (c2) on the other hand a measure E I of the energy of the filter output signal, (d) each measure C I is multiplied by the measure E M of that excitation vector that hitherto has given the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal, (e) each measure E I is multiplied by the measure C M for that excitation vector that hitherto has given the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal, (f) the products in steps (d) and (e) are compared to each other, the measures C M , E M being substituted by the measures C I and E I , respectively, if the product in step (d) is larger than the product in step (e), and (g) that excitation vector that corresponds to the largest value of the ratio between the measure of the square of the cross correlation between the filter output signal and the sampled speech signal vector and the measure of the energy of the filter output signal is chosen as the optimal excitation vector in the adaptive code book, characterized by (A) block normalizing the predetermined excitation vectors of the adaptive code book with respect to the component with the maximum absolute value in a set of excitation vectors from the adaptive code book before the convolution in step (b), (B) block normalizing the sampled speech signal vector with respect to that of its components that has the maximum absolute value before forming the measure C I in step (c1), (C) dividing the measure C I from step (c1) and the measure C M into a respective mantissa and a respective first scaling factor with a predetermined first maximum number of levels, (D) dividing the measure E I from step (c2) and the measure E M into a respective mantissa and a respective second scaling factor with a predetermined second maximum number of levels, and (E) forming said products in step (d) and (e) by multiplying the respective mantissas and performing a separate scaling factor calculation. The method of claim 1, characterized by said set of excitation vectors in step (A) comprising all the excitation vectors in the adaptive code book. The method of claim 1, characterized by the set of excitation vectors in step (A) comprising only said predetermined excitation vectors from the adaptive code book. The method of claim 2, characterized by said predetermined excitation vectors comprising all the excitation vectors in the adaptive code book. The method of any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the scaling factors are stored as exponents in the base 2. The method of claim 5, characterized in that the total scaling factor for the respective product is formed by addition of corresponding exponents for the first and second scaling factor. The method of claim 6, characterized in that an effective scaling factor is calculated by forming the difference between the exponent for the total scaling factor for the product C I ·E M and the exponent for the total scaling factor of the product E I ·C M . The method of claim 7, characterized in that the product of the mantissas for the measures C I and E M , respectively, are shifted to the right the number of steps indicated by the exponent of the effective scaling factor if said exponent is greater than zero, and in that the product of the mantissas for the measures E I and C M , respectively, are shifted to the right the number of steps indicated by the absolute value of the exponent of the effective scaling factor if said exponent is less than or equal to zero. The method of any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the mantissas have a resolution of 16 bits. The method of any of the preceding claims, characterized in that the first maximum number of levels is equal to the second maximum number of levels. The method of any of the preceding claims 1-9, characterized in that the first maximum number of levels is different from the second maximum number of levels. The method of claim 10 or 11, characterized in that the first maximum number of levels is 9. The method of claim 12, characterized in that the second maximum number of levels is 7.

Inventors: MINDE TOR BJOERN, MINDE, TOR BJOERN, Minde, Tor Björn
Applicants: ERICSSON TELEFON AB L M, TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L M ERICSSON
Application year: 1991
Main classification: G10L9
IPC codes: G10L19, G10L11