FPGA Implementation of an Optimized NLMS
Algorithm
Cristian Stanciu, Cristian Anghel, Constantin Paleologu, Silviu Ciochină
Telecommunications Department
University Politehnica of Bucharest
Bucharest, Romania
Email: {cristian, canghel, pale, silviu}@comm.pub.ro
This paper is dedicated to the memory of Steven L. Grant for his exceptional contributions to the echo cancellation problem.
Abstract—The recently proposed joint-optimized normalized
least-mean-square (JO-NLMS) adaptive algorithm employs a
variable step-size parameter to achieve both high convergence
and low misadjustment. In this paper, an efficient hardware
implementation design is proposed, which exploits the key numer-
ical properties of the JO-NLMS algorithm to reduce the hardware
workload (corresponding to the adaptive filter’s operations), in
terms of binary numerical representations and multiplication
blocks. Simulation results are provided in an acoustic echo
cancellation scenario, using a ModelSIM-Matlab testing platform.
Index Terms—Adaptive filters; echo cancellation; FPGA im-
plementation; normalized least-mean-square (NLMS) algorithm;
variable step-size NLMS.
I. I NTRODUCTION
In many application of adaptive filtering, the family of
least-mean-square (LMS) algorithms [including the normal-
ized LMS (NLMS)] [1], [2] represents a reliable choice. The
main reasons behind this popularity are the good numerical
properties and low computational complexity of the LMS-
based algorithms.
The main parameter that controls the overall performance
of LMS-based algorithms is the step-size. The choice of this
parameter reflects a compromise between the convergence
rate and tracking of the algorithm versus misadjustment and
robustness. In order to control this issue, a variable step-size
could be used (instead of the constant one). Consequently,
many interesting variable step-size (VSS) algorithms can be
found in the literature, e.g., [3]–[11].
Most of these algorithms were developed in a system iden-
tification context, following an optimization criterion based
on the minimization of the system misalignment. However, in
most of the developments, the unknown system is considered
time-invariant, which is not the case in many applications. For
example, in echo cancellation [12], [13], the impulse response
of the echo path is variable in time, requiring good tracking
capabilities for the adaptive filters.
The recently proposed joint-optimized NLMS (JO-NLMS)
algorithm [10], [11] was developed in the context of a state
variable model, inheriting some features from Kalman filter-
ing [14], [15]. This algorithm behaves like a VSS adaptive
978-1-5090-3748-3/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
Jacob Benesty
INRS-EMT
University of Quebec
Montreal, Canada
Email: benesty@emt.inrs.ca
filter, achieving a good compromise between the performance
criteria.
In this paper, we provide an FPGA implementation of
the JO-NLMS algorithm, in the context of acoustic echo
cancellation [12], [13] (which is one of the most challenging
system identification problems). Simulation results indicate
that the JO-NLMS algorithm could be a reliable choice in
real-world applications.
II. T HE JO-NLMS A LGORITHM
In this section, we briefly detail the development and the
performance features of the JO-NLMS algorithm [10], [11].
In the context of a system identification problem, the desired
signal at the discrete-time index 𝑛 is obtained as
𝑑(𝑛) = x𝑇 (𝑛)h(𝑛) + 𝑣(𝑛), (1)
[ ]𝑇
where x(𝑛) = 𝑥(𝑛) 𝑥(𝑛 − 1) ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ 𝑥(𝑛 − 𝐿 + 1)
is a vector containing the 𝐿 most recent samples of the
input signal, superscript 𝑇 is the transpose operator, h(𝑛) =
[ ]𝑇
ℎ0 (𝑛) ℎ1 (𝑛) ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ℎ𝐿−1 (𝑛) is the impulse response
(of length 𝐿) of the system that we need to identify, and 𝑣(𝑛)
is the system noise (usually considered as a zero-mean white
Gaussian noise signal).
Let us consider that the unknown system h(𝑛) follows a
simplified first-order Markov model (which is reasonable to
assume in the context of many applications), i.e.,
h(𝑛) = h(𝑛 − 1) + w(𝑛), (2)
where w(𝑛) is a zero-mean white Gaussian noise signal
vector [uncorrelated with h(𝑛 − 1)]. The correlation matrix
2
of w(𝑛) is assumed to be Rw = 𝜎𝑤 I𝐿 , where I𝐿 is the
2
𝐿 × 𝐿 identity matrix and the variance, 𝜎𝑤 , captures the
uncertainties in h(𝑛). In this framework, the main objective is
to estimate h(𝑛) with an adaptive filter, denoted by ĥ(𝑛) =
[ ]𝑇
. Equations (1) and (2)
ℎ̂0 (𝑛) ℎ̂1 (𝑛) ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ℎ̂𝐿−1 (𝑛)
define a state variable model, like in the Kalman filtering [15].
Let us consider the update of the LMS-based algorithms
[1], [2], which is given by
ĥ(𝑛) = ĥ(𝑛 − 1) + 𝜇x(𝑛)𝑒(𝑛), (3)
where 𝜇 denotes the step-size parameter and TABLE I
JO-NLMS ALGORITHM .
𝑒(𝑛) = 𝑑(𝑛) − x𝑇 (𝑛)ĥ(𝑛 − 1) (4)
represents the error signal of the adaptive filter. In this context,
Initialization:
we can define the a posteriori misalignment as c(𝑛) = h(𝑛) −
ĥ(0) = 0𝐿×1
ĥ(𝑛). Consequently, developing (3) in terms of the a posteriori
𝑚(0) = 𝜀 > 0
misalignment, we obtain
𝑞(0) = 0
c(𝑛) = c(𝑛 − 1) + w(𝑛) − 𝜇x(𝑛)𝑒(𝑛). (5) ˆ𝑑2 (0) = 𝜎
𝜎 ˆ𝑦2ˆ(0) = 0
1
At this point, we focus on an optimization criterion based 𝜆=1− , 𝐾≥1
𝐾𝐿
on the minimization of the system misalignment, which is a
reliable choice in system identification problems. Therefore, For time index 𝑛 = 1, 2, ...:
taking the ℓ2 norm in (5), followed by mathematical expecta- 𝑦ˆ(𝑛) = x𝑇 (𝑛)ĥ(𝑛 − 1)
tion on both sides, it results in 𝑒(𝑛) = 𝑑(𝑛) − 𝑦ˆ(𝑛)
[ ] [ ] 𝑝(𝑛) = 𝑚(𝑛 − 1) + 𝑞(𝑛 − 1)
2 2 2
𝐸 ∥c(𝑛)∥2 = 𝐸 ∥c(𝑛 − 1)∥2 + 𝐿𝜎𝑤 1
[ ] [ ] ˆ𝑥2 (𝑛) = x𝑇 (𝑛)x(𝑛)
𝜎
𝐿
− 2𝜇𝐸 x𝑇 (𝑛)c(𝑛 − 1)𝑒(𝑛) − 2𝜇𝐸 x𝑇 (𝑛)w(𝑛)𝑒(𝑛)
[ ] ˆ𝑑2 (𝑛) = 𝜆ˆ
𝜎 𝜎𝑑2 (𝑛 − 1) + (1 − 𝜆)𝑑2 (𝑛)
+ 𝜇2 𝐸 𝑒2 (𝑛)x𝑇 (𝑛)x(𝑛) . (6) ˆ𝑦2ˆ(𝑛) = 𝜆ˆ
𝜎 𝜎𝑦2ˆ(𝑛 − 1) + (1 − 𝜆)ˆ
𝑦 2 (𝑛)
Following the development ˆ𝑣2 (𝑛) = 𝜎
𝜎 ˆ𝑑2 (𝑛) − 𝜎
ˆ𝑦2ˆ(𝑛)
[ ]from [16] and introducing the
2
notation 𝑚(𝑛) = 𝐸 ∥c(𝑛)∥2 , (6) results in 𝜎𝑣2 (𝑛) + (𝐿 + 2)ˆ
𝑟(𝑛) = 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛)𝑝(𝑛)
[ ] 𝑝(𝑛)
𝜇(𝑛) =
𝑚(𝑛) = 1 − 2𝜇𝜎𝑥2 + (𝐿 + 2)𝜇2 𝜎𝑥4 𝑚(𝑛 − 1) 𝑟(𝑛)
[ ] u(𝑛) = 𝜇(𝑛)x(𝑛)𝑒(𝑛)
+ 𝐿𝜇2 𝜎𝑥2 𝜎𝑣2 + (𝐿 + 2)𝜎𝑥2 𝜎𝑤 2
− 2𝐿𝜇𝜎𝑥2 𝜎𝑤
2
+ 𝐿𝜎𝑤2
, (7)
[ ] [ ] ĥ(𝑛) = ĥ(𝑛 − 1) + u(𝑛)
[ ]
where 𝜎𝑥2 = 𝐸 𝑥2 (𝑛) and 𝜎𝑣2 = 𝐸 𝑣 2 (𝑛) are the variances 𝑚(𝑛) = 1 − 𝜇(𝑛)ˆ 𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛) 𝑝(𝑛)
of 𝑥(𝑛) and 𝑣(𝑛), respectively. Consider that the step-size 𝜇 is 𝑞(𝑛) = u𝑇 (𝑛)u(𝑛)
time dependent and evaluating ∂𝑚(𝑛)/∂𝜇(𝑛) = 0, we obtain
an optimal step-size:
1
𝜇(𝑛) = . (8)
𝐿𝜎𝑣2
2
(𝐿 + 2)𝜎𝑥 + 2
where 𝜎ˆ𝑑2 (𝑛) and 𝜎
ˆ𝑦ˆ2 (𝑛) represent the power estimates of 𝑑(𝑛)
𝑚(𝑛 − 1) + 𝐿𝜎𝑤 and 𝑦ˆ(𝑛), respectively. The terms in (11) can be evaluated as
Finally, based on (8), the filter update is
ˆ𝑑2 (𝑛) = 𝜆ˆ
𝜎 𝜎𝑑2 (𝑛 − 1) + (1 − 𝜆)𝑑2 (𝑛), (12)
ĥ(𝑛) = ĥ(𝑛 − 1) + 𝜇(𝑛)x(𝑛)𝑒(𝑛) (9)
ˆ𝑦ˆ2 (𝑛) = 𝜆ˆ
𝜎 𝜎𝑦ˆ2 (𝑛 − 1) + (1 − 𝜆)ˆ
𝑦 2 (𝑛), (13)
and the update of the parameter 𝑚(𝑛) becomes
[ ][ ] where 𝜆 = 1 − 1/(𝐾𝐿), with 𝐾 ≥ 1 [6].
𝑚(𝑛) = 1 − 𝜇(𝑛)𝜎𝑥2 𝑚(𝑛 − 1) + 𝐿𝜎𝑤 2
. (10) The third parameter to be found is 𝜎𝑤 2
. Following the
Consequently, the resulting JO-NLMS algorithm is defined proposal from [15], we can take the ℓ2 norm on both sides of
by the relations (4), (9), and (10). As an alternative, the (2), then replacing h(𝑛) by its estimate ĥ(𝑛). Consequently,
JO-NLMS algorithm can be also obtained starting from the 2 1
2

𝜎
ˆ𝑤 (𝑛) = ĥ(𝑛) − ĥ(𝑛 − 1) . (14)
NLMS algorithm and following a joint-optimization problem 𝐿 2
on its important parameters, i.e., the normalized step-size and Finally, the JO-NLMS algorithm is presented in Table I, in
regularization term [10], [11]. order to facilitate its implementation [16].
It should also mentioned that, in practice, we need to
estimate three main parameters of the JO-NLMS algorithm. III. FPGA I MPLEMENTATION OF THE JO-NLMS
The first one is the variance of the input signal, which A LGORITHM
could be evaluated as 𝜎 ˆ𝑥2 (𝑛) = x𝑇 (𝑛)x(𝑛)/𝐿 (similar to
The JO-NLMS algorithm is implemented in fixed-point
the NLMS algorithm). Second, there is the noise power, 𝜎𝑣2 ,
arithmetic using the VHDL language with two’s complement
which can be estimated in different ways, e.g., like in [17],
numerical representations, for a Xilinx Virtex XC5VFX70T
[18]. For example, the method proposed in [17] assumes that
target device available on the ML507 evaluation platform [19].
the adaptive filter has converged to a certain degree, i.e.,
The implementation block scheme is represented in Fig. 1.
𝑦(𝑛) ≈ 𝑦ˆ(𝑛), where 𝑦ˆ(𝑛) denotes the output of the adaptive
We consider 16 bits input/output signals [i.e., 𝑥(𝑛), 𝑑(𝑛), and
filter. Consequently,
𝑒(𝑛)] with a sampling rate of 8 kHz. The same precision is
ˆ𝑣2 (𝑛) = 𝜎
𝜎 ˆ𝑑2 (𝑛) − 𝜎
ˆ𝑦ˆ2 (𝑛), (11) used for the representation of the adaptive filter coefficients.
 d(n)

d(n)

4
3
x(n) 5
mem_x yˆ(n)
1, 2
н e(n)
Ͳ
н
6
y 1, 2, 6
e(n)
ACCUMULATOR 1
2 3
M1 Lσˆ x2 (n) Lσˆ x2 (n) p( n)

н
mem_h
y
1 z -1 1
4 μ(n)e(n)
2 r(n) ͬ
3 6 5 4
q(n-1) M2 3 2

н
1
p(n) 2
3
3, 5
σˆ d2 (n) − σˆ y2ˆ (n)
m(n-1) н
z
-1
нͲ
μ (n)

u(n)

Fig. 1. Block scheme of the JO-NLMS implementation.

A system clock frequency of 100 MHz is targeted, associated
with a number of 12500 clock cycles between consecutive
input samples 𝑥(𝑛). Two 18 kb BRAMs (block random access
memories) are used to store the values corresponding to the
vectors x(𝑛) and ĥ(𝑛).
The arithmetic workload corresponding to the multiplica-
tions is distributed between two distinct blocks (denoted as
M1 and M2 in Fig. 1), which are implemented with digital
signal processing (DSP) modules available on the FPGA. The
multiplications units are working with 16 bits × 16 bits,
respectively 32 bits × 32 bits operands. Considering that
the DSP physical blocks are limited to 18 bits × 25 bits
multiplications, the modules require a total number of 5 DSPs
(one unit for M1 and the rest for M2 ).
The module M1 is employed for most of the multiplications
performed in the JO-NLMS algorithm. At its output, it is
connectable to a resetable accumulator based on configurable
logic, for the computations of the echo estimate 𝑦ˆ(𝑛) and the
term 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛). The error signal 𝑒(𝑛) is obtained by truncating
𝑦ˆ(𝑛) to a 16 bits representation (from the full precision of
32 bits generated by M1 ) and subtracting it from the desired
signal 𝑑(𝑛). However, the value of 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛) is computed by
accumulating the output of M1 with 25 bits for the fractional
part and 6 bits for the integer part (an overall representation
is comprised of 32 bits).
As the analysis performed in [16] revealed that the variables
𝑞(𝑛), 𝑝(𝑛), 𝑚(𝑛), and 𝑟(𝑛) (see Table I) require high precision
in order to obtain a good performance of the JO-NLMS
algorithm, we implemented 32 bits corresponding registers.
Consequently, we use the approximation 𝐿 + 2 ≈ 𝐿 (which
is valid for 𝐿 ≫ 1) and perform the multiplication between
𝐿ˆ𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛) and 𝑝(𝑛) using M2 . The result is truncated to 32 bits
and added to the value 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑣2 (𝑛) in order to compute 𝑟(𝑛). Since
we need the product 𝐿ˆ𝜎𝑣2 (𝑛), the estimates from (12) and (13)
can be expressed (using a general notation) as
ˆ𝛼2 (𝑛 − 1) 𝛼2 (𝑛)
𝜎
𝜎𝛼2 (𝑛) = 𝐿ˆ
𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝛼2 (𝑛 − 1) − + . (15)
𝐾 𝐾
Choosing the value of 𝐾 as a power of 2, we replace
the divisions required for the computation of 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑣2 (𝑛) with
bit-shifts to the right. The remaining multiplications [i.e.,
corresponding to 𝛼2 (𝑛)] are performed using M1 . The final
estimate has a 32 bits format with 6 bits for the integer part,
in order to be aligned with the binary structure of 𝐿ˆ𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛)𝑝(𝑛)
for the addition performed to obtain the parameter 𝑟(𝑛).
Next, the step-size computation generates a 16 bits result,
where 7 bits are associated with the integer part. The result
is used as input for M1 , which computes the product with
the error signal. The M2 multiplier is further employed for
𝐿 multiplications of the M1 outputs with the input samples
𝑥(𝑛). The results [i.e., the values of u(𝑛)] are truncated to 16
bits and used for two operations. First, the filter coefficients
are updated through 𝐿 reading/writing operations associated
with mem h memory block (see Fig. 1). Second, the values
of u(𝑛) are used as operands for M1 , in order to compute
the associated squared values, which are accumulated to
generate the parameter 𝑞(𝑛). The procedures are synchronized
in such manner that the vector u(𝑛) does not require BRAM
resources.
The module M2 is finally used for the multiplication of 𝜇(𝑛)
with 𝐿ˆ 𝜎𝑥2 (𝑛)𝑝(𝑛). The result is shifted and aligned with the
format of 𝑝(𝑛), and the corresponding subtraction is performed
in order to generate 𝑚(𝑛).
IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS
The fixed-point design of the JO-NLMS algorithm is sim-
ulated using a ModelSIM-Matlab test platform in an acoustic
 so that it requires 4835 Slice Registers and 2208 Look-Up-
(a)
10 JO-NLMS (Matlab) Tables (i.e., 10.79%, respectively 4.9% of the corresponding
Misalignment (dB)

0
JO-NLMS (VHDL) available resources on the targeted FPGA model). In addition,
NLMS (Matlab)
the two multiplication units require only 5 of the 128 DSP48E
-10 available slices and two 18 kb BRAMs.
-20 V. C ONCLUSIONS
-30 This paper proposed a hardware implementation of the JO-
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
NLMS algorithm. The design uses a moderate computational
Time (seconds)
(b)
cost to achieve good performance, in terms of both fast
40 JO-NLMS (Matlab) converge rate and tracking, but also low misadjustment and
Misalignment (dB)

JO-NLMS (VHDL)
20 NLMS (Matlab)
0
-20
-40
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (seconds)
Fig. 2. Normalized misalignment of the NLMS algorithm using the step-size
1/[𝛿 + x𝑇 (𝑛)x(𝑛)] and JO-NLMS (VHDL precision and Matlab precision)
in (a) a tracking scenario and (b) a double-talk scenario. The input signal is
speech, 𝐿 = 512, and SNR = 25 dB.
echo cancellation (AEC) scenario. The measured acoustic
impulse response has 512 coefficients and the same length
is used for the adaptive filter (i.e., 𝐿 = 512). The input (i.e.,
far-end) signal is a speech sequence and the output of the echo
path is corrupted by an independent white Gaussian noise; the
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is 25 dB. The performance of the
fixed-point implementation of the JO-NLMS is compared to
the full Matlab precision. Also, the NLMS algorithm using the
largest step-size (i.e., the fastest convergence mode) 1/[𝛿 +
x𝑇 (𝑛)x(𝑛)] (with 𝛿 = 20𝜎𝑥2 ) is used for comparison. The

performance measure is the normalized 
misalignment (in dB),
 
which is evaluated as 20log10 h(𝑛) − ĥ(𝑛) / ∥h(𝑛)∥2 .
2 Processing Lett., vol. 19, pp. 817–820, Dec. 2012.
In the first experiment, a single-talk case is considered. Also,
in order to evaluate the tracking capability of the algorithms,
an echo path change scenario is simulated in the middle of the
experiment, by shifting the impulse response to the right by
25 samples. The results are presented in Fig. 2(a). First, it can
be noticed that the JO-NLMS algorithm clearly outperforms
the NLMS algorithm in terms of misalignment. Second, in the
case of the JO-NLMS algorithm, the difference between the
VHDL implementation and the full Matlab precision is minor.
In the second experiment, a double-talk scenario is consid-
ered. The near-end speech appears between time 25 and 30
seconds. The algorithms do not use any double-talk detector
(DTD), which are usually required in these scenarios [12],
[13]. According to the results presented in Fig. 2(b), the JO-
NLMS algorithm is much more robust in this case, due to the
practical evaluation of the near-end signal power from (11).
Finally, it should be mentioned that the synthesis process
was performed using the Xilinx ISE Design Suite for the
target Virtex 5 device. The results showed that the system
can work with a maximum clock frequency of 102.039 MHz,
robustness. Simulation results performed in an AEC scenario
recommend the JO-NLMS algorithm as a reliable option for
practical implementations and real-world applications.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
60
This work was supported by the UEFISCDI under Grants
PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-1880 and PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0097.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. Haykin, Adaptive Filter Theory. Fourth Edition, Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002.
[2] A. H. Sayed, Adaptive Filters. New York, NY: Wiley, 2008.
[3] E. Hänsler and G. Schmidt, “Control of LMS-type adaptive filters,” in S.
Haykin and B. Widrow (eds.), Least-Mean-Square Adaptive Filters, pp.
175–240. New York, NY: Wiley, 2003.
[4] A. I. Sulyman and A. Zerguine, “Convergence and steady-state analysis
of a variable step-size NLMS algorithm,” Signal Processing, vol. 83, pp.
1255–1273, June 2003.
[5] H.-C. Shin, A. H. Sayed, and W.-J. Song, “Variable step-size NLMS and
affine projection algorithms,” IEEE Signal Processing Lett., vol. 11, pp.
132–135, Feb. 2004.
[6] J. Benesty, H. Rey, L. Rey Vega, and S. Tressens, “A nonparametric VSS-
NLMS algorithm,” IEEE Signal Processing Lett., vol. 13, pp. 581–584,
Oct. 2006.
[7] P. Park, M. Chang, and N. Kong, “Scheduled-stepsize NLMS algorithm,”
IEEE Signal Processing Lett., vol. 16, pp. 1055–1058, Dec. 2009.
[8] H.-C. Huang and J. Lee, “A new variable step-size NLMS algorithm and
its performance analysis,” IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, vol. 60, pp.
2055–2060, Apr. 2012.
[9] I. Song and P. Park, “A normalized least-mean-square algorithm based
on variable-step-size recursion with innovative input data,” IEEE Signal
[10] C. Paleologu, S. Ciochină, J. Benesty, and S. L. Grant, “An overview on
optimized NLMS algorithms for acoustic echo cancellation,” EURASIP
J. Advances in Signal Processing, vol. 2015:97, pp. 1–19, Dec. 2015.
[11] S. Ciochină, C. Paleologu, and J. Benesty, “An optimized NLMS
algorithm for system identification,” Signal Processing, vol. 118, pp. 115–
121, Jan. 2016.
[12] J. Benesty, T. Gaensler, D. R. Morgan, M. M. Sondhi, and S. L. Gay,
Advances in Network and Acoustic Echo Cancellation. Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag, 2001.
[13] C. Paleologu, J. Benesty, and S. Ciochină, Sparse Adaptive Filters for
Echo Cancellation. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, Synthesis Lectures
on Speech and Audio Processing, 2010.
[14] P. A. C. Lopes and J. B. Gerald, “New normalized LMS algorithms
based on the Kalman filter,” in Proc. IEEE ISCAS, 2007, pp. 117–120.
[15] C. Paleologu, J. Benesty, and S. Ciochină, “Study of the general Kalman
filter for echo cancellation,” IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Language
Process., vol. 21, pp. 1539–1549, Aug. 2013.
[16] C. Stanciu, C. Anghel, C. Paleologu, S. Ciochină, and J. Benesty, “On
the numerical properties of an optimized NLMS algorithm,” in Proc. IEEE
COMM, 2016, 4 p.
[17] C. Paleologu, S. Ciochină, and J. Benesty, “Variable step-size NLMS
algorithm for under-modeling acoustic echo cancellation,” IEEE Signal
Processing Lett., vol. 15, pp. 5–8, 2008.
[18] M. A. Iqbal and S. L. Grant, “Novel variable step size NLMS algorithms
for echo cancellation,” in Proc. IEEE ICASSP, 2008, pp. 241–244.
[19] Xilinx ML507 evaluation platform user guide, www.xilinx.com.