Short Time Fourier Transform - invertible?

AI Thread Summary
The Short Time Fourier Transform (STFT) is indeed invertible, allowing for the recovery of the original signal through the Inverse STFT. The discussion highlights that while the Gabor transform can retrieve a modulated version of the original signal, the true original signal may not be fully recoverable due to the modulation effects introduced by the window function. A key point raised is the nature of element-wise multiplication in the context of time-varying signals, which is essential for understanding the recovery process. Clarifications were sought regarding the implications of modulation on signal recovery. Ultimately, the conversation underscores the complexities involved in recovering original signals from their transformed states.
jiapei100
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Short Time Fourier Transform -- invertible?

On Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-time_Fourier_transform"

The STFT is invertible, that is, the original signal can be recovered from the transform by the Inverse STFT.

However, it's also said


It can be seen, comparing to above that windowed "grain" or "wavelet" of x(t) is

http://www.visionopen.com/iGabor.png

the inverse Fourier transform of X(τ,ω) for τ fixed.


That is to say, Gabor is invertible, it's able to obtain the original signal, but modulated.

original signal is obviously x(t),
w(t-τ) is the window function used to extract a local signal within this window,
which can also be looked on as a kind of modulation.

Therefore, in the above function (attached picture),
x(t)w(t-τ) can be computed, from the Gabor transformed data,
But, I'm dropping questions to ask, whether the true original data x(t) can be finally recovered?
as it's declared by Wiki itself
The STFT is invertible, that is, the original signal can be recovered from the transform by the Inverse STFT.


Can anybody help to make me clarified?


Best Regards
JIA Pei
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org


I'll answer your question by asking you another question.

Let's say I have a time-varying signal. I multiply it by a gaussian then send it to you. Will you be able to recover the original signal?
 


Sorry for my stupidity.

Your word "multiply" hints me. !

This is a "element-wise" multiplication! Right? Yes, it should be.

Thanks for your answering to clarify my doubts.

Best Regards
JIA Pei


IttyBittyBit said:
I'll answer your question by asking you another question.

Let's say I have a time-varying signal. I multiply it by a gaussian then send it to you. Will you be able to recover the original signal?
 


Yes, it's element-wise.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top