Asymmetric Overlap Windows for Low-Delay Audio Transform Coding

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing audio coding techniques face challenges in reducing algorithmic delay while maintaining audio quality, particularly when using asymmetric windows, which can lead to audible degradation due to high weighting values exceeding 1, complicating fixed-point implementation and frequency selectivity.

Innovation Solution

A method for coding digital audio signals using asymmetrical weighting windows with four distinct portions: increasing, constant at 1, decreasing, and constant at 0, optimized to reduce complexity and improve audio quality by adjusting the intervals based on the desired delay and block duration, ensuring efficient implementation and perfect reconstruction.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If asymmetric windows with zeros at the tail of the analysis window are used to reduce delay, then algorithmic delay is reduced, but weighting values exceed 1 causing audible degradation and implementation complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealgorithmic delayVSAvoidimplementation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent modifies the window function parameters by introducing a constant section at value 1 between the increasing and decreasing portions, and setting the tail portion to 0. This parameter change ensures weighting values stay within [0,1] range while maintaining delay reduction benefits of asymmetric windows.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs asymmetric windowing where the analysis window has zeros only at the tail (not symmetric at both ends), creating unequal distribution of window portions. This asymmetry reduces algorithmic delay while the controlled parameter ranges prevent implementation issues.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

2Loss of time

If asymmetric windows are used to reduce delay, then algorithmic delay is reduced, but frequency selectivity deteriorates compared to symmetric windows

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealgorithmic delayVSAvoidfrequency selectivity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies different window characteristics to different portions of the signal: the increasing portion handles signal onset, the constant portion maintains steady-state with optimal weighting, and the decreasing portion handles signal decay. This local differentiation maintains frequency selectivity while achieving delay reduction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Loss of time

If weighting values exceed 1 in asymmetric windows, then delay reduction is achieved, but audio quality degrades due to high weighting values

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealgorithmic delayVSAvoidaudio quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent constrains the weighting function parameters so that values remain within the [0,1] range by introducing the constant section at value 1 and setting the tail to 0. This prevents the weighting values from exceeding 1, thereby maintaining audio quality while still achieving delay reduction through the asymmetric structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentEP2727107B1Delay-optimized overlap transform, coding/decoding weighting windows
Publication Date: 2019.05.15 ORANGE SA
  • EP2727107B1 patent drawingFigure 1~3
  • EP2727107B1 patent drawingFigure 4~6
  • EP2727107B1 patent drawingFigure 7

AI summary

The invention relates to the coding/decoding of a digital signal, consisting of successive blocks of samples, the coding being of the transform with overlap type and comprising, upon analysis, the application of a weighting window to two blocks of M successive samples. In particular, this weighting window is asymmetric and comprises four distinct portions extending successively over the two aforesaid blocks, with: a first portion (wl), increasing over a first interval of samples, a second portion (w2), constant at a value of 1 over a second interval, a third portion (w3), decreasing over a third interval, and a fourth portion (w4), constant at a value of 0 over a fourth interval.