Logan Stromberg
2017-Nov-20 21:08 UTC
[opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
Just for fun, I tried to reproduce such an overflow. I turned on all debug macros, assertions, and checked arithmetic and then encoded 2 hours of mixed speech/audio with these parameters: Sample rate = 48000 Channels = 1 Application = OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO Bitrate = 24 KB/s Force Mode = MODE_SILK_ONLY Signal Type = OPUS_SIGNAL_AUTO Complexity = 10 Frame size = 480 samples (10ms) No errors came up in encoding. Chandrakala, are these the encoding parameters that you believe should trigger the error? - Logan Hi,> > We are looking at the VAD implementation used in opus. We are looking at > the code where speech probability is calculated based on which SNR is > estimated. Below is the part of the code I am talking about. > > /*********************************/ > /* Speech Probability Estimation */ > /*********************************/ > SA_Q15 = silk_sigm_Q15( silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_FACTOR_Q16, pSNR_dB_Q7 ) - > VAD_NEGATIVE_OFFSET_Q5 ); // step1: Calculate speech probability : comment > by me > > /* Power scaling */ > if( speech_nrg <= 0 ) { // step2: update speech probability based on > speech energy : comment by me > SA_Q15 = silk_RSHIFT( SA_Q15, 1 ); > } else if( speech_nrg < 32768 ) { > if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { > speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 16 ); // Energy is doubled > here : comment by me > } else { > speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 15 ); > } > > /* square-root */ > speech_nrg = silk_SQRT_APPROX( speech_nrg ); > SA_Q15 = silk_SMULWB( 32768 + speech_nrg, SA_Q15 ); > } > > /* Smoothing coefficient */ > smooth_coef_Q16 = silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_SMOOTH_COEF_Q18, silk_SMULWB( > (opus_int32)SA_Q15, SA_Q15 ) ); // step3: Update the smoothing factor based > on speech probability : comment by me > > if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { > smooth_coef_Q16 >>= 1; > } > > Here, in step1, Speech probability is calculated whose value is expected > to be within [0, 1) in Q15 format. Then based on the speech energy levels, > in Step2, the probability is updated whose value shall also lie between [0, > 1). Later in Step3, the smooth coeff is calculated. This code do not have > any issue when the frame size is more than or equal to 20msec. But, if the > frame size is 10ms, then in step2, the energy is doubled (this may be done > because the original Silk code is for 20ms. To convert the energy for 20ms, > it could have been doubled). When this is done the probability which is > updated in step2 becomes more than 1. When this is used in multiplication > in Step3, the value is treated as a negative number because its a 32x16 > multiplication. This is will result in a negative smooth coefficient. > Please let me know if this is a bug. > > > Thank you, > Chandrakala-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171120/56b6c725/attachment.html>
Chandrakala Madhira
2017-Nov-22 04:23 UTC
[opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
Hi Logan, Below is the configuration I am using. The remaining parameters have defaults. The stream is a 16KHz stream. The bitrate selected is 16KHz. As the thread have size limitations, I will try to attach the stream in next mail. At 125th frame of this stream, the probability (SA_Q15) value is 0x0000859c. This value is treated as a negative number in step-3. -e voip 16000 1 16000 -framesize 10 -cvbr Input/dg105_16k.wav Output/dg105_16k_16000Fs_mono_16000bps_10ms_vbr_voip.bit Thank you, Chandrakala Thank you, Chandrakala ----- Original Message ----- From: "Logan Stromberg" <loganstromberg at gmail.com> To: opus at xiph.org Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:38:16 AM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Just for fun, I tried to reproduce such an overflow. I turned on all debug macros, assertions, and checked arithmetic and then encoded 2 hours of mixed speech/audio with these parameters: Sample rate = 48000 Channels = 1 Application = OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO Bitrate = 24 KB/s Force Mode = MODE_SILK_ONLY Signal Type = OPUS_SIGNAL_AUTO Complexity = 10 Frame size = 480 samples (10ms) No errors came up in encoding. Chandrakala, are these the encoding parameters that you believe should trigger the error? - Logan Hi, We are looking at the VAD implementation used in opus. We are looking at the code where speech probability is calculated based on which SNR is estimated. Below is the part of the code I am talking about. /*********************************/ /* Speech Probability Estimation */ /*********************************/ SA_Q15 = silk_sigm_Q15( silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_FACTOR_Q16, pSNR_dB_Q7 ) - VAD_NEGATIVE_OFFSET_Q5 ); // step1: Calculate speech probability : comment by me /* Power scaling */ if( speech_nrg <= 0 ) { // step2: update speech probability based on speech energy : comment by me SA_Q15 = silk_RSHIFT( SA_Q15, 1 ); } else if( speech_nrg < 32768 ) { if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 16 ); // Energy is doubled here : comment by me } else { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 15 ); } /* square-root */ speech_nrg = silk_SQRT_APPROX( speech_nrg ); SA_Q15 = silk_SMULWB( 32768 + speech_nrg, SA_Q15 ); } /* Smoothing coefficient */ smooth_coef_Q16 = silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_SMOOTH_COEF_Q18, silk_SMULWB( (opus_int32)SA_Q15, SA_Q15 ) ); // step3: Update the smoothing factor based on speech probability : comment by me if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { smooth_coef_Q16 >>= 1; } Here, in step1, Speech probability is calculated whose value is expected to be within [0, 1) in Q15 format. Then based on the speech energy levels, in Step2, the probability is updated whose value shall also lie between [0, 1). Later in Step3, the smooth coeff is calculated. This code do not have any issue when the frame size is more than or equal to 20msec. But, if the frame size is 10ms, then in step2, the energy is doubled (this may be done because the original Silk code is for 20ms. To convert the energy for 20ms, it could have been doubled). When this is done the probability which is updated in step2 becomes more than 1. When this is used in multiplication in Step3, the value is treated as a negative number because its a 32x16 multiplication. This is will result in a negative smooth coefficient. Please let me know if this is a bug. Thank you, Chandrakala _______________________________________________ opus mailing list opus at xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171122/39119c82/attachment.html>
Logan Stromberg
2017-Nov-22 06:42 UTC
[opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
Yes, yes, I can reproduce it now, but only on platforms that define a 16-bit int by default (SA_Q15 is an opus_int rather than opus_int32). What system are you compiling this for? On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chandrakala Madhira < chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com> wrote:> Hi Logan, > > Please find attached the input stream we are using testing. > > Thank you, > Chandrakala > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Chandrakala Madhira" <chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com> > *To: *"Logan Stromberg" <loganstromberg at gmail.com> > *Cc: *opus at xiph.org > *Sent: *Wednesday, November 22, 2017 9:53:55 AM > > *Subject: *Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD > implementation > > Hi Logan, > > Below is the configuration I am using. The remaining parameters have > defaults. The stream is a 16KHz stream. The bitrate selected is 16KHz. As > the thread have size limitations, I will try to attach the stream in next > mail. At 125th frame of this stream, the probability (SA_Q15) value is > 0x0000859c. This value is treated as a negative number in step-3. > > -e voip 16000 1 16000 -framesize 10 -cvbr Input/dg105_16k.wav > Output/dg105_16k_16000Fs_mono_16000bps_10ms_vbr_voip.bit > > Thank you, > Chandrakala > > Thank you, > Chandrakala > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Logan Stromberg" <loganstromberg at gmail.com> > *To: *opus at xiph.org > *Sent: *Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:38:16 AM > *Subject: *Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD > implementation > > Just for fun, I tried to reproduce such an overflow. I turned on all debug > macros, assertions, and checked arithmetic and then encoded 2 hours of > mixed speech/audio with these parameters: > > Sample rate = 48000 > Channels = 1 > Application = OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO > Bitrate = 24 KB/s > Force Mode = MODE_SILK_ONLY > Signal Type = OPUS_SIGNAL_AUTO > Complexity = 10 > Frame size = 480 samples (10ms) > > No errors came up in encoding. Chandrakala, are these the encoding > parameters that you believe should trigger the error? > > - Logan > > Hi, >> >> We are looking at the VAD implementation used in opus. We are looking at >> the code where speech probability is calculated based on which SNR is >> estimated. Below is the part of the code I am talking about. >> >> /*********************************/ >> /* Speech Probability Estimation */ >> /*********************************/ >> SA_Q15 = silk_sigm_Q15( silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_FACTOR_Q16, pSNR_dB_Q7 ) - >> VAD_NEGATIVE_OFFSET_Q5 ); // step1: Calculate speech probability : comment >> by me >> >> /* Power scaling */ >> if( speech_nrg <= 0 ) { // step2: update speech probability based on >> speech energy : comment by me >> SA_Q15 = silk_RSHIFT( SA_Q15, 1 ); >> } else if( speech_nrg < 32768 ) { >> if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { >> speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 16 ); // Energy is doubled >> here : comment by me >> } else { >> speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 15 ); >> } >> >> /* square-root */ >> speech_nrg = silk_SQRT_APPROX( speech_nrg ); >> SA_Q15 = silk_SMULWB( 32768 + speech_nrg, SA_Q15 ); >> } >> >> /* Smoothing coefficient */ >> smooth_coef_Q16 = silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_SMOOTH_COEF_Q18, silk_SMULWB( >> (opus_int32)SA_Q15, SA_Q15 ) ); // step3: Update the smoothing factor based >> on speech probability : comment by me >> >> if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { >> smooth_coef_Q16 >>= 1; >> } >> >> Here, in step1, Speech probability is calculated whose value is expected >> to be within [0, 1) in Q15 format. Then based on the speech energy levels, >> in Step2, the probability is updated whose value shall also lie between [0, >> 1). Later in Step3, the smooth coeff is calculated. This code do not have >> any issue when the frame size is more than or equal to 20msec. But, if the >> frame size is 10ms, then in step2, the energy is doubled (this may be done >> because the original Silk code is for 20ms. To convert the energy for 20ms, >> it could have been doubled). When this is done the probability which is >> updated in step2 becomes more than 1. When this is used in multiplication >> in Step3, the value is treated as a negative number because its a 32x16 >> multiplication. This is will result in a negative smooth coefficient. >> Please let me know if this is a bug. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Chandrakala > > > _______________________________________________ > opus mailing list > opus at xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171121/ba47653d/attachment-0001.html>
Chandrakala Madhira
2017-Nov-22 10:43 UTC
[opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
Hi Logan, We are using MSVC platform. Here Opus_int is treated as 32-bit value but, when it comes to the multiplication, the lower 16-bits are considered. At this point, the positive value becomes a negative value. I think, this may happen on all platforms. So, I am just wondering if this is a bug. Thank you, Chandrakala ----- Original Message ----- From: "Logan Stromberg" <loganstromberg at gmail.com> To: "Chandrakala Madhira" <chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com> Cc: opus at xiph.org Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 12:12:39 PM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Yes, yes, I can reproduce it now, but only on platforms that define a 16-bit int by default (SA_Q15 is an opus_int rather than opus_int32). What system are you compiling this for? On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chandrakala Madhira < chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com > wrote: Hi Logan, Please find attached the input stream we are using testing. Thank you, Chandrakala From: "Chandrakala Madhira" < chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com > To: "Logan Stromberg" < loganstromberg at gmail.com > Cc: opus at xiph.org Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 9:53:55 AM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Hi Logan, Below is the configuration I am using. The remaining parameters have defaults. The stream is a 16KHz stream. The bitrate selected is 16KHz. As the thread have size limitations, I will try to attach the stream in next mail. At 125th frame of this stream, the probability (SA_Q15) value is 0x0000859c. This value is treated as a negative number in step-3. -e voip 16000 1 16000 -framesize 10 -cvbr Input/dg105_16k.wav Output/dg105_16k_16000Fs_mono_16000bps_10ms_vbr_voip.bit Thank you, Chandrakala Thank you, Chandrakala From: "Logan Stromberg" < loganstromberg at gmail.com > To: opus at xiph.org Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:38:16 AM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Just for fun, I tried to reproduce such an overflow. I turned on all debug macros, assertions, and checked arithmetic and then encoded 2 hours of mixed speech/audio with these parameters: Sample rate = 48000 Channels = 1 Application = OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO Bitrate = 24 KB/s Force Mode = MODE_SILK_ONLY Signal Type = OPUS_SIGNAL_AUTO Complexity = 10 Frame size = 480 samples (10ms) No errors came up in encoding. Chandrakala, are these the encoding parameters that you believe should trigger the error? - Logan <blockquote> Hi, We are looking at the VAD implementation used in opus. We are looking at the code where speech probability is calculated based on which SNR is estimated. Below is the part of the code I am talking about. /*********************************/ /* Speech Probability Estimation */ /*********************************/ SA_Q15 = silk_sigm_Q15( silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_FACTOR_Q16, pSNR_dB_Q7 ) - VAD_NEGATIVE_OFFSET_Q5 ); // step1: Calculate speech probability : comment by me /* Power scaling */ if( speech_nrg <= 0 ) { // step2: update speech probability based on speech energy : comment by me SA_Q15 = silk_RSHIFT( SA_Q15, 1 ); } else if( speech_nrg < 32768 ) { if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 16 ); // Energy is doubled here : comment by me } else { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 15 ); } /* square-root */ speech_nrg = silk_SQRT_APPROX( speech_nrg ); SA_Q15 = silk_SMULWB( 32768 + speech_nrg, SA_Q15 ); } /* Smoothing coefficient */ smooth_coef_Q16 = silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_SMOOTH_COEF_Q18, silk_SMULWB( (opus_int32)SA_Q15, SA_Q15 ) ); // step3: Update the smoothing factor based on speech probability : comment by me if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { smooth_coef_Q16 >>= 1; } Here, in step1, Speech probability is calculated whose value is expected to be within [0, 1) in Q15 format. Then based on the speech energy levels, in Step2, the probability is updated whose value shall also lie between [0, 1). Later in Step3, the smooth coeff is calculated. This code do not have any issue when the frame size is more than or equal to 20msec. But, if the frame size is 10ms, then in step2, the energy is doubled (this may be done because the original Silk code is for 20ms. To convert the energy for 20ms, it could have been doubled). When this is done the probability which is updated in step2 becomes more than 1. When this is used in multiplication in Step3, the value is treated as a negative number because its a 32x16 multiplication. This is will result in a negative smooth coefficient. Please let me know if this is a bug. Thank you, Chandrakala _______________________________________________ opus mailing list opus at xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus </blockquote> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171122/cc0b1fe9/attachment.html>
Chandrakala Madhira
2017-Nov-27 04:07 UTC
[opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
Hi, Can anyone let me know if this is a bug? Thank you, Chandrakala ----- Original Message ----- From: "Logan Stromberg" <loganstromberg at gmail.com> To: "Chandrakala Madhira" <chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com> Cc: opus at xiph.org Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 12:12:39 PM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Yes, yes, I can reproduce it now, but only on platforms that define a 16-bit int by default (SA_Q15 is an opus_int rather than opus_int32). What system are you compiling this for? On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chandrakala Madhira < chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com > wrote: Hi Logan, Please find attached the input stream we are using testing. Thank you, Chandrakala From: "Chandrakala Madhira" < chandrakala.madhira at soctronics.com > To: "Logan Stromberg" < loganstromberg at gmail.com > Cc: opus at xiph.org Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 9:53:55 AM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Hi Logan, Below is the configuration I am using. The remaining parameters have defaults. The stream is a 16KHz stream. The bitrate selected is 16KHz. As the thread have size limitations, I will try to attach the stream in next mail. At 125th frame of this stream, the probability (SA_Q15) value is 0x0000859c. This value is treated as a negative number in step-3. -e voip 16000 1 16000 -framesize 10 -cvbr Input/dg105_16k.wav Output/dg105_16k_16000Fs_mono_16000bps_10ms_vbr_voip.bit Thank you, Chandrakala Thank you, Chandrakala From: "Logan Stromberg" < loganstromberg at gmail.com > To: opus at xiph.org Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:38:16 AM Subject: Re: [opus] Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation Just for fun, I tried to reproduce such an overflow. I turned on all debug macros, assertions, and checked arithmetic and then encoded 2 hours of mixed speech/audio with these parameters: Sample rate = 48000 Channels = 1 Application = OPUS_APPLICATION_AUDIO Bitrate = 24 KB/s Force Mode = MODE_SILK_ONLY Signal Type = OPUS_SIGNAL_AUTO Complexity = 10 Frame size = 480 samples (10ms) No errors came up in encoding. Chandrakala, are these the encoding parameters that you believe should trigger the error? - Logan <blockquote> Hi, We are looking at the VAD implementation used in opus. We are looking at the code where speech probability is calculated based on which SNR is estimated. Below is the part of the code I am talking about. /*********************************/ /* Speech Probability Estimation */ /*********************************/ SA_Q15 = silk_sigm_Q15( silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_FACTOR_Q16, pSNR_dB_Q7 ) - VAD_NEGATIVE_OFFSET_Q5 ); // step1: Calculate speech probability : comment by me /* Power scaling */ if( speech_nrg <= 0 ) { // step2: update speech probability based on speech energy : comment by me SA_Q15 = silk_RSHIFT( SA_Q15, 1 ); } else if( speech_nrg < 32768 ) { if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 16 ); // Energy is doubled here : comment by me } else { speech_nrg = silk_LSHIFT_SAT32( speech_nrg, 15 ); } /* square-root */ speech_nrg = silk_SQRT_APPROX( speech_nrg ); SA_Q15 = silk_SMULWB( 32768 + speech_nrg, SA_Q15 ); } /* Smoothing coefficient */ smooth_coef_Q16 = silk_SMULWB( VAD_SNR_SMOOTH_COEF_Q18, silk_SMULWB( (opus_int32)SA_Q15, SA_Q15 ) ); // step3: Update the smoothing factor based on speech probability : comment by me if( psEncC->frame_length == 10 * psEncC->fs_kHz ) { smooth_coef_Q16 >>= 1; } Here, in step1, Speech probability is calculated whose value is expected to be within [0, 1) in Q15 format. Then based on the speech energy levels, in Step2, the probability is updated whose value shall also lie between [0, 1). Later in Step3, the smooth coeff is calculated. This code do not have any issue when the frame size is more than or equal to 20msec. But, if the frame size is 10ms, then in step2, the energy is doubled (this may be done because the original Silk code is for 20ms. To convert the energy for 20ms, it could have been doubled). When this is done the probability which is updated in step2 becomes more than 1. When this is used in multiplication in Step3, the value is treated as a negative number because its a 32x16 multiplication. This is will result in a negative smooth coefficient. Please let me know if this is a bug. Thank you, Chandrakala _______________________________________________ opus mailing list opus at xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus </blockquote> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20171127/00d363b1/attachment.html>
Seemingly Similar Threads
- Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
- Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
- Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
- Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation
- Reg an issue with smoothing factor in VAD implementation