APPLIED PHYSICS – UNDERWATER SOUNDS

SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO OPTIMIZATION USING TIME-FREQUENCY

AND AMBIDUITY FUNCTION MATCHED FILTERS*

A. DĂNIŞOR
“Ovidius” University of Constanta
Received December 21, 2004

This paper proposes a new method of signal to noise ratio maximization for
better underwater targets detection. Studying the properties of the underwater noise we
couldn’t conclude anything about his stationery, even in the restraint sense. Due this
fact, the time-frequency signal processing, signal affected by the underwater noise is
justified. This paper proposes a new method of signal to noise ratio optimization,
method based on a quadratic time-frequency processing (Wigner-Ville transform) of the
SONAR signals. This optimization is realized using a time-frequency matched filter,
similar with the classic matched filter. Using this quadratic matched filter we obtained a
signal to noise ratio visible better than the signal to noise ratio in the time domain,
using the classic matched filter.

INTRODUCTION

Time frequency methods have long been used for detection in applications
such as sonars. Time-frequency methods are of interest because of nonstationary
nature of these signals. The underwater noise is a nonstationary one and that’s why
it is necessary to use quadratic detectors for better performances.
Quadratic detectors theory has recently been exploited to derive optimal
quadratic time frequency detectors. Unfortunately, for an efficient implementation
of the matched time frequency filter presented in this paper it is necessary to use
performant computers.

THE QUADRATIC MATCHED FILTER

The time-frequency signal representation is utilized for subaquatic targets

detections and their parameters estimation, especially when the medium is affected
by a nonstationary noise like the underwater noise. This paper presents a time

*
Paper presented at the 5th International Balkan Workshop on Applied Physics, 5–7 July
2004, Constanţa, Romania.

Rom. Journ. Phys., Vol. 51, Nos. 1–2, P. 101–109, Bucharest, 2006
102 A. Dănişor 2

frequency filter that maximizes the signal to noise ratio, a time frequency matched
filter. The time frequency transfer function of this filter reseambles to the matched
filter impulse response of the linear detectors.
It is known that the quadratic detectors have good frequency selectivity, short
time transient response and noise suppression. If we consider the signal received by
a sonar system:
y (t ) = s (t ) + n(t )
if the target is present and:
y (t ) = n(t )
if the target is absent, where:
• y(t) is the received signal
• s(t) the reflected signal
• n(t) the noise
the quadratic detector’s response is:
∞ ∞
e= ∫ ∫ Q(t ,τ ) R (t ,τ )dtdτ
−∞ −∞
y (1)

where Ry (t ,τ ) is the instantaneous autocorrelation function of the received signal:

 τ  τ
R y ( t ,τ ) = y  t +  y ∗  t –  (2)
 2  2
and Q(t ,τ ) may be considered the impulse response of the nonstationary detector.
The statistical autocorrelation function is, in fact, the statistical mean of the
instantaneous autocorrelation function:
  τ   τ 
ry = E  y  t +  y*  t −   = E ( Ry (t )) (3)
  2   2 
E(*) denotes the statistical mean.
Using the Wigner-Ville distribution’s definition:
∞

∫ R (t ,τ )e
− j 2π f τ
WVy (t , f ) = y dτ (4)
−∞

the instantaneous autocorrelation function can be written as:

∞
Ry (t ,τ ) = ∫ WV (t , f )e
j 2π f τ
y df (5)
−∞
3 Signal to noise ratio optimization using time-frequency 103

To have a similarity with the definition of instantaneous autocorrelation

function, equation (2),we choose for the detector impulse response Q(t ,τ ) an
expression like:

 τ τ
Q(t ,τ ) = h  t − , t +  (6)
 2 2
and using the Weyl symbol of the impulse response of the nonstationary detector,
defined as:
∞
 τ τ
∫ h  t + 2 , t − 2  e
− j 2πντ
LH (t ,ν ) = dτ (7)
−∞

we can express the quadratic detector response by the equation:

∞
Q(t ,τ ) = ∫L
−∞
H (t ,ν )e j 2πντ dν (8)

Using the relations (5) and (8) the response (1) becomes:
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
e= ∫ ∫ ∫ ∫L (t ,ν )WVy (t , f )e j 2π ( f −ν )τ dtdfdν dτ
*
H (9)
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞

Equation (9) shows the relation between the response o the quadratic detector
and the Weyl symbol associated with the detector. Using Fourier transform of the
Dirac impulse relation (9) becomes more simple:

e = ∫ ∫ L*H (t , f )WVy (t , f )dtdf (10)

The essential problem is to find a suitable formula for Weyl symbol of the time-
frequency filter LH(t,f), formula which maximize the response of the quadratic
detector. Like the impulse response formula of the classic matched filter we choose
for the Weyl symbol an expression similar with the symmetric Wigner-Ville
distribution of the reflected signal. The symmetry between the Weyl symbol and
the Wigner-Ville distribution is in time domain as in frequency domain:
L*H (t , f ) = WVs* (−t , − f ) (11)

It is known that the Wigner-Ville distribution of a real signal is real too, previous
equation (11) can be wrote as:
L*H (t , f ) = WVs (−t , − f ) (12)
104 A. Dănişor 4

Based on these considerations, the output of the matched time-frequency filter

becomes:
∞ ∞
o(t , f ) = ∫ ∫ WV (−(t '− t ), −( f '− f ))WV (t ', f ')dt ' df '
−∞ −∞
s y (13)

By similarity with the classic matched filter, for a physical realization it is

necessary to introduce a delay time T, and a supplementary shift frequency F,
equivalent to the time delay, but on the frequency axis. Based on these
considerations, the output of the matched time-frequency filter becomes:
∞ ∞
o(t , f ) = ∫ ∫ WV (T − t '+ t , F − f '+ f )WV (t ', f ')dt ' df '
−∞ −∞
s y (14)

The maximum response of the time-frequency filter is obtained at the time t = T

and for the frequency f = F and its expression appears as:
∞ ∞
e = o(t , f ) t =T , f = F = ∫ ∫ WV (t ', f ')WV (t ', f ')dt ' df '
−∞ −∞
s y (15)

Relation (15) represents in fact the output of the quadratic detector.

In the previous relation T represents in fact the duration of the hidroacoustic signal
and F his frequency band. To appreciate the efficiency of time frequency matched
filter we must compute the signal to noise ratio. Signal to noise ratio is defined as a
rapport between the power of the peak signal and the medium power of the filter
output if only the noise is present, both measured at the output of the time
frequency matched filter.
PS
SNR = (16)
Pn
It is known that the maximum value at the output of the matched time frequency
filter is obtained at:

t =T
f =F

In consequence the maximum power of the signal at the output of the matched time
frequency filter is:

Ps = e2 (17)
5 Signal to noise ratio optimization using time-frequency 105

The medium power of the time frequency matched filter output is:
T F
1
T ∫0 ∫0
Pn = o(t , f ) y (t )= n (t ) dtdf (18)

where o(t,f) is the output of the time frequency matched filter in absence of the
reflected signal (target absent).
We can obtain a very interesting result using the ambiguity function. It is
known that the ambiguity function of the received signal y (t ) is defined as:
∞
Ay (τ ,ν ) = ∫ R (t ,τ )e
− j 2πν t
y dt (19)
−∞

The ambiguity function represents the bidimensional Fourier transform of the

Wigner-Ville distribution:

WVy ( f , t ) = ∫ ∫ Ay (τ ,ν )e − j 2π ( f τ −ν t ) dτ dν

If the Wigner-Ville distribution is assimilated to the time representation of a signal,

the ambiguity function can be assimilated to the frequency domain representation
of the same signal. That is why the output of the time-frequency matched filter (13)
is similar to:
∞ ∞

∫ ∫ A (ν ,τ ) A (ν ,τ )e
j 2π (ν t −τ f )
o(t , f ) = s y dν dτ (20)
−∞ −∞

But it is known that the relation (13) defines an unrealisable filter and that is why
the output o(t , f ) in the relation (12) is unrealisable too. For a realisable quadratic
filter, which output is expressed in the equation (14), using the ambiguity function
we obtain:
∞ ∞

∫ ∫ A (ν ,τ ) A (ν ,τ )e dν dτ
j 2π (ν ( t −T ) −τ ( f − F ))
o(t , f ) = y s (21)
−∞ −∞

The maximum value of the output filter in the relation (21) is:

∞ ∞
e = o(t , f ) t =T , f = F = ∫ ∫ A (ν ,τ ) A (ν ,τ )dτ dν
−∞ −∞
y s
106 A. Dănişor 6

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

To validate the concepts outlined in the preceding section an experimental

study on two kind of signals affected by a real subaquatic noise. We considered,
first, a sinus sonar signal received and processed by the time frequency matched
filter. Its frequency is 1.8 kHz. The signal to noise ratio at the filter’s input is
unitary. The aspect of the time frequency output filter is presented in Figure 1. In
this case the signal to noise ratio at the filter’s output, computed with (16) is:
SNR = 53.85 dB
If the complexity of the sonar signal increase, the signal to noise ratio gains
about 5dB. For a chirp hydroaccoustic signal, with a linear variation of frequency
between 1.5 and 1.8 [kHz] the signal to noise ratio is:
SNR = 58.57 dB
The time frequency matched filter response in this case is shown in Figure 2.
In the absence of a reflected signal, only the noise present, the filter’s output
is shown in Figure 3.
To detect the presence of a submarine target it must sample the output
quadratic detector only when his output signal is maximum (at t=T and f=F)
obtaining an eventually maximum response defined by equation (15). If a digital
system is used to sample the signal, the filter’s response can be observed after the
acquisition of every new sample. The maximum response of the time frequency
matched filter, after the reception of every sample is presented in Figure 4, if the
signal is sinus signal and in Figure 5, in case of a chirp signal.

Fig. 1 – Time frequency matched filter output. Sinus signal.

7 Signal to noise ratio optimization using time-frequency 107

Fig. 2 – Time frequency matched filter output. Chirp signal.

Fig. 3 – Time frequency matched filter output. Noise only presence.

108 A. Dănişor 8

Fig. 4 – Maximum response of the time frequency matched filter. Sinus signal.

Fig. 5 – Maximum response of the time frequency matched filter. Chirp signal.
9 Signal to noise ratio optimization using time-frequency 109

REFERENCES

1. Bouvet, M., Traitements des signaux pour les systems sonar- Ed. Masson, Paris 1991.
2. Coates M., Time frequency modeling - University of Cambridge, PhD., 1998.
3. Dănişor A., The study of the underwater noise – “Ovidius” University. Annals of Physics,
Constanţa, 2000.
4. Dănişor A, Optimizarea detecţiei ţintelor submarine – Telecomunicaţii, Bucureşti, 2000.
5. Maurice, A., Time frequency analysis; a real time differential spectral methods for an application
on sonar signals - J.Accostic Society of America, Aug., 1992.
6. Sayeed, A., Optimal kernels for nonstationary spectral estimation - IEEE Transaction on
information theory, Feb. 1995.