On the statistical efficiency of the LMS family of adaptive algorithms

被引:0
|
作者
Widrow, B [1 ]
Kamenetsky, M [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Elect Engn, ISL, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Two gradient descent adaptive algorithms are compared, the LMS algorithm and the LMS/Newton algorithm. LMS is simple and practical, and is used in many applications worldwide. LMS/Newton is based on Newton's method and the LMS algorithm. LMS/Newton is optimal in the least squares sense. It maximizes the quality of its adaptive solution while minimizing the use of training data. No other linear least squares algorithm can give better performance. LMS is easily implemented, but LMS/Newton, although of great mathematical interest, cannot be implemented in most practical applications. Because of its optimality, LMS/Newton serves as a benchmark for all least squares adaptive algorithms. The performances of LMS and LMS/Newton are compared, and it is found that under many circumstances, both algorithms provide equal performance. For example, when both algorithms are tested with statistically nonstationary input signals, their average performances are equal. When adapting with stationary input signals and with random initial conditions, their respective learning times are on average equal. However, under worst-case initial conditions, the learning time of LMS can be much greater than that of LMS/Newton, and this is the principal disadvantage of the LMS algorithm. But the strong points of LMS are ease of implementation and optimal performance under important practical conditions. For these reasons, the LMS algorithm has enjoyed very widespread application.
引用
收藏
页码:2872 / 2880
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Modified LMS algorithms for speech processing with an adaptive noise canceller
    Greenberg, JE
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SPEECH AND AUDIO PROCESSING, 1998, 6 (04): : 338 - 351
  • [22] An adaptive array antenna using combined DFT and LMS algorithms
    Watanabe, K
    Yoshii, I
    Kohno, R
    NINTH IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON PERSONAL, INDOOR AND MOBILE RADIO COMMUNICATIONS, VOLS 1-3, 1998, : 1417 - 1421
  • [23] COMPARISON OF DC OFFSET EFFECTS IN 4 LMS ADAPTIVE ALGORITHMS
    SHOVAL, A
    JOHNS, DA
    SNELGROVE, WM
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS II-ANALOG AND DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1995, 42 (03): : 176 - 185
  • [24] Comprehensive Analysis of LMS and NLMS algorithms using Adaptive Equalizers
    Teja, A.
    Meghashyam, B. K.
    Verma, C. Anubha
    2014 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING (ICCSP), 2014,
  • [25] Adaptive error-constrained method for LMS algorithms and applications
    Choi, S
    Lee, TW
    Hong, D
    SIGNAL PROCESSING, 2005, 85 (10) : 1875 - 1897
  • [26] LMS ADAPTIVE ALGORITHMS FOR JOINT FORWARD AND DECISION FEEDBACK EQUALIZATION
    ERNST, D
    IEE PROCEEDINGS-F RADAR AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1991, 138 (05) : 520 - 524
  • [27] On the efficiency of adaptive MCMC algorithms
    Andrieu, Christophe
    Atchade, Yves F.
    ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS IN PROBABILITY, 2007, 12 : 336 - 349
  • [28] A Family of Optimized LMS-Based Algorithms for System Identification
    Ciochina, Silviu
    Paleologu, Constantin
    Benesty, Jacob
    Grant, Steven L.
    Anghel, Andrei
    2016 24TH EUROPEAN SIGNAL PROCESSING CONFERENCE (EUSIPCO), 2016, : 1803 - 1807
  • [29] Statistical Analysis of Steepest Descend and LMS Detection Algorithms for MIMO Systems
    Zanella, Alberto
    Chiani, Marco
    Win, Moe Z.
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 60 (09) : 4667 - 4672
  • [30] Scalable algorithms for adaptive statistical designs
    Oehmke, R.
    Hardwick, J.
    Stout, Q.F.
    Scientific Programming, 2000, 8 (03) : 183 - 193