pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.04186 · v1 · pith:L6WRLQGMnew · submitted 2019-07-08 · 📡 eess.SP

Bandwidth Is Not Enough: "Hidden" Outlier Noise and Its Mitigation

Alexei V. Nikitin , Ruslan L. Davidchack This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 00:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords outlier noiseimpulsive interferencenonlinear filteringexcess bandclipping distortionOFDMchirp signalsreal-time mitigation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Outlier interference hidden in signals can be mitigated in real time by intermittently nonlinear filters that observe excess band.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper claims that communication and sensor systems contain outlier interference, including from nonlinear distortions like clipping, whose impulsive nature often stays hidden even when bandwidth is ample. It shows that this interference can be observed separately in the excess band and then mitigated in-band using intermittently nonlinear filters, with resulting signal quality gains ranging from none to substantial. The work details why standard techniques fail on complex waveforms and supplies the basic components and arrangements for real-time filtering. A sympathetic reader would care because these methods address a practical limit on performance that extra bandwidth alone cannot remove.

Core claim

Outlier interference (including that caused by nonlinear signal distortions, e.g. clipping) can be efficiently mitigated in real-time using intermittently nonlinear filters. Depending on the interference nature and composition, improvements in the quality of the signal of interest achieved by such filtering will vary from 'no harm' to substantial. The excess-band observation of outlier noise enables its efficient in-band mitigation, and the approach works even for challenging waveforms such as broadband chirps and high-crest-factor OFDM signals that severely obscure low-amplitude outlier noise.

What carries the argument

Intermittently nonlinear filters that use excess-band observations to separate and suppress outlier noise while leaving the in-band signal of interest intact.

If this is right

  • Real-time mitigation is possible for both wide-band and narrow-band outlier noise using complementary filter arrangements.
  • The same structures can be realized in effectively analog digital implementations.
  • Channel capacity can increase when the mitigation is applied to interference from clipping or impulsive sources.
  • Performance gains hold across radar, sonar, and spread-spectrum signals that use chirps.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The approach may reduce reliance on wider bandwidth allocations when the dominant impairment is outlier noise rather than thermal noise.
  • Hardware platforms built for these filters could serve as testbeds for other non-Gaussian noise problems in sensor arrays.
  • The method suggests a general separation principle that could be tested on recorded field data from existing communication links.

Load-bearing premise

The outlier characteristics of interference remain observable and separable via excess-band measurements even when the signal waveform itself severely obscures low-amplitude outlier noise.

What would settle it

A controlled test on a broadband chirp or high-crest-factor OFDM waveform in which excess-band measurements show no separable outlier component and the intermittently nonlinear filter produces no measurable improvement in output SNR or error rate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.04186 by Alexei V. Nikitin, Ruslan L. Davidchack.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Interference due to clipping clearly contains outliers, yet resulting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Impulse and chirp signals with same spectral content. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Conversely, reduction in bandwidth may reveal outlier noise. Here, original wideband signals are “raw” outputs of 1-bit ∆Σ modulators given Gaussian or impulsive inputs. the pulses becomes greater than the distance between them, the pulses begin to overlap and interfere with each other. For a random pulse train, when the ratio of the bandwidth and the pulse arrival rate becomes significantly smaller than t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Reduction in bandwidth “hides” outlier noise. Reproduced from [1] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Removing wideband outlier noise while preserving signal of interest. Reproduced from [1]. Gate Arrays (FPGA) or software. Such digital implementations would require little memory and would be typically inexpensive computationally (e.g. they are O(1) per output value in both time and storage), which makes them suitable for high-rate real-time digital processing. 1) ADiC as main building block [PITH_FULL_IM… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Block diagram of Quantile Tracking Filter (QTF). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Feedback-based ADiC replacing outliers with χ(t). Reproduced from [1]. the 3rd (Q[3]) quartiles: [α−, α+] = Q[1]−β [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Complementary ADiC filtering (CAF) for removing wideband noise outliers while preserving band-limited signal of interest. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The high sampling rate allows the use of “relaxed,” wideband antialiasing filtering to ensure the availability of sufficiently wide excess band. As a practical matter, a wideband filter with a flat group delay and a small time-bandwidth product (e.g. with a Bessel response) should be used in order to increase the mitigable rates. Further, a simple analog clipper should be employed ahead of the ∆Σ modulato… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Prototype of ADiC filtering demo board. Reproduced from [1]. The CINF-based structures described in the tutorial are mostly “blind” as they do not rely on any assumptions for the underlying interference beyond its “inherent” outlier structure, yet they are adaptable to nonstationary signal and noise conditions and to various complex signal and interference mixtures. Thus they can be successfully used to s… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Interference resilient ADiC-based receiver. Reproduced from [1]. Finally, various embodiments of the presented filtering structures can be integrated into, and manufactured as IC components for use in different products, e.g. as A/D converters with incorporated interference suppression. AC K N OW L E D G M E N T The authors would like to thank Keith W. Cunningham of Atkinson Aeronautics & Technology Inc.,… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In addition to ever-present thermal noise, communication and sensor systems can contain significant amounts of interference with outlier (e.g. impulsive) characteristics. Such outlier interference (including that caused by nonlinear signal distortions, e.g. clipping) can be efficiently mitigated in real-time using intermittently nonlinear filters. Depending on the interference nature and composition, improvements in the quality of the signal of interest achieved by such filtering will vary from "no harm" to substantial. In this tutorial, we explain in detail why the underlying outlier nature of interference often remains obscured, discussing the many challenges and misconceptions associated with state-of-art analog and/or digital nonlinear mitigation techniques, especially when addressing complex practical interference scenarios. We then focus on the methodology and tools for real-time outlier noise mitigation, demonstrating how the "excess band" observation of outlier noise enables its efficient in-band mitigation. We introduce the basic real-time nonlinear components that are used for outlier noise filtering and provide examples of their implementation. We further describe complementary nonlinear filtering arrangements for wide- and narrow-band outlier noise reduction, providing illustrations of their performance and the effect on channel capacity. Finally, we outline "effectively analog" digital implementations of these filtering structures, discuss their broader applications, and comment on the ongoing development of the platform for their demonstration and testing. To emphasize the effectiveness and versatility of this approach, in our examples we use particularly challenging waveforms that severely obscure low-amplitude outlier noise, such as broadband chirp signals (e.g. used in radar, sonar, and spread-spectrum communications) and "bursty," high crest factor signals (e.g. OFDM).

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a tutorial claiming that outlier (impulsive) interference—including that arising from nonlinear distortions such as clipping—remains hidden in conventional observations but can be efficiently mitigated in real time by intermittently nonlinear filters that exploit excess-band observations for in-band reconstruction. It asserts that the resulting quality improvements for the signal of interest range from “no harm” to substantial, even when the signal of interest consists of broadband chirps or high-crest-factor OFDM waveforms that themselves obscure low-amplitude outliers, and it supplies implementation examples, complementary wide-/narrow-band arrangements, and capacity illustrations.

Significance. If the excess-band separability and real-time reconstruction steps hold for the cited waveform classes, the approach would supply a bandwidth-efficient, implementable alternative to conventional linear or purely digital nonlinear mitigation, with direct relevance to radar, sonar, and spread-spectrum links. The tutorial format, emphasis on “effectively analog” digital realizations, and explicit performance illustrations on challenging signals constitute concrete strengths.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract (and the methodology section that introduces excess-band observation)] The central claim that excess-band observations remain informative for intermittently nonlinear filtering even when the signal of interest produces large self-peaks (broadband chirps, high-CFR OFDM) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit analysis or detector design that distinguishes interference-induced outliers from signal-induced excursions; without such handling the filter risks either passing residual interference or attenuating legitimate signal components, undermining the “no harm to substantial improvement” guarantee.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the basic nonlinear components (e.g., the intermittently nonlinear operators) should be introduced with explicit block diagrams or pseudocode before the wide-/narrow-band arrangement figures are presented.
  2. The capacity illustrations would benefit from explicit statement of the SNR and interference-to-signal ratios used, together with the number of Monte-Carlo realizations underlying each curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and for highlighting a key aspect of the central claim. We respond to the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract (and the methodology section that introduces excess-band observation)] The central claim that excess-band observations remain informative for intermittently nonlinear filtering even when the signal of interest produces large self-peaks (broadband chirps, high-CFR OFDM) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit analysis or detector design that distinguishes interference-induced outliers from signal-induced excursions; without such handling the filter risks either passing residual interference or attenuating legitimate signal components, undermining the “no harm to substantial improvement” guarantee.

    Authors: The manuscript's methodology section explains that intermittently nonlinear filters are activated by excess-band observations, where the signal of interest (including broadband chirps and high-CFR OFDM) does not produce the same outlier signatures as impulsive interference; the excess band thereby supplies the separability needed for in-band reconstruction. The tutorial supplies concrete performance illustrations on precisely these challenging waveforms, showing outcomes ranging from no harm to substantial improvement and thereby indicating that legitimate signal excursions are not attenuated. We agree, however, that an expanded discussion of the detection threshold and reconstruction logic in the excess band would make the distinction more explicit. We will add this clarification to the methodology section in revision. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: tutorial description with no load-bearing derivations or self-referential fits

full rationale

The paper is a tutorial-style exposition of intermittently nonlinear filtering for outlier noise mitigation via excess-band observations. No equations, parameter fits, predictions, or uniqueness theorems appear in the abstract or described content. Central claims rest on explanatory methodology and waveform examples rather than any chain that reduces outputs to inputs by definition, self-citation, or renaming. The reader's assessment of score 1.0 aligns with absence of detectable circular steps under the enumerated patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract introduces no mathematical derivations, fitted parameters, or new entities; it describes practical filtering techniques without specifying any free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5825 in / 1128 out tokens · 34403 ms · 2026-05-25T00:52:35.808391+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    General filtering effects: For example, as illustrated in Fig. 1, apparent outliers in a signal can disappear and reappear due to various filtering effects, including fading and multipath, as the signal propagates through media and/or the signal processing chain, and such filtering can make apparent outliers wax and wane. In the analog domain, such filtering ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Outliers

    “Outliers” vs “outlier noise” ambiguity: Even when the wideband noise itself contains clearly identifiable outliers, the noise outliers would not necessarily be observable as outliers in the signal+noise mixture. That would be the case, e.g., when the typical amplitude of the noise outliers is not significantly larger than that of the signal of interest. In...

    work page

  3. [3]

    disappearance

    Insufficient observation bandwidth: Once outlier noise becomes apparent, additional reduction in bandwidth typically makes it less evident. Fig. 3 illustrates the basic mechanism of outlier noise “disappearance” with the reduction in observation bandwidth. First note that a band-limited signal will not be affected by the change in the bandwidth of a filter,...

    work page

  4. [4]

    spectrograms) allow us to reliably identify outliers, as signals with very distinct temporal and/or amplitude structures can have identical spectra

    Spectral ambiguity: Neither power spectral densities (PSDs) nor their short-time versions (e.g. spectrograms) allow us to reliably identify outliers, as signals with very distinct temporal and/or amplitude structures can have identical spectra. Fig. 4 provides an emblematic example of such spectral ambiguity, depicting an impulse and a chirp signals with ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    histograms) are also highly ambiguous as an outlier- detection tool

    Ambiguity of amplitude densities: Amplitude distributions (e.g. histograms) are also highly ambiguous as an outlier- detection tool. Although a super-Gaussian (heavy-tailed) amplitude distribution normally indicates presence of outliers, it does not necessarily reveal presence or absence of outlier noise in a signal+noise mixture. For example, two identic...

    work page

  6. [6]

    excess band

    Wide range of powers across spectrum: Further, the outlier noise can be obscured by strong non-outlier signals, such as the thermal noise and/or adjacent channel interference, or by the signal of interest itself. More important, a wide range of powers across a wideband spectrum allows a signal containing outlier noise to have any type of amplitude distrib...

    work page

  7. [7]

    ADiC as main building block: Fig. 6 illustrates the basic concept of an Analog Differential Clipper (ADiC) for wideband outlier noise removal while preserving the signal of interest and the wideband non-outlier noise. First, we establish a robust range that excludes noise outliers while including the signal of interest. Then, we replace the outlier values...

    work page

  8. [8]

    7 shows a Quantile Tracking Filter (QTF) introduced in [2], [7] and described in detail in [4]

    QTFs for robust range: Fig. 7 shows a Quantile Tracking Filter (QTF) introduced in [2], [7] and described in detail in [4]. Given the input y(t), the output Qq(t) of a QTF approximates (“tracks”) the q-th quantile of y(t) obtained in a moving time window. (See [8], [9] for discussion of quantiles of continuous signals.) Then various linear combinations of...

    work page

  9. [9]

    the arithmetic mean of the QTF outputs for the 1st and the 3rd quartiles)

    Basic ADiC structure: In the basic ADiC structure the range is constructed as a range between Tukey’s fences, and the mid-range is the arithmetic mean of these QTF fences (i.e. the arithmetic mean of the QTF outputs for the 1st and the 3rd quartiles)

    work page

  10. [10]

    8 presents a feedback-based ADiC variant that has a number of practical advantages and is well suited for mitigation of hidden outlier noise [1]

    Much better way: Feedback-based ADiC: Fig. 8 presents a feedback-based ADiC variant that has a number of practical advantages and is well suited for mitigation of hidden outlier noise [1]. As the diagram in the upper left of the figure shows, the ADiC output y(t) can be described as    y(t) =χ(t) +τ ˙χ(t) ˙χ(t) = 1 τBα+ α− (x(t)−χ(t)) , (2) where x(t) i...

    work page

  11. [11]

    efecto cucaracha

    Spectral reshaping by ADiC and efecto cucaracha: We first point out that an ADiC applied to a filtered outlier noise can significantly reshape its spectrum. Such spectral reshaping by an ADiC can be called an “efecto cucaracha” (a “cockroach effect”), when reducing the effects of outlier noise in some spectral bands increases its PSD in the bands with previo...

    work page

  12. [12]

    9 illustrates the use of a Complementary ADiC Filtering (CAF) arrangement employed for mitigation of wideband outlier noise affecting a linear chirp signal

    CAF: Removing outlier noise while preserving signal of interest: For example, Fig. 9 illustrates the use of a Complementary ADiC Filtering (CAF) arrangement employed for mitigation of wideband outlier noise affecting a linear chirp signal. In Fig. 9, the output I of the wideband front-end filter consists of the chirp signal of interest x(t) and the wideban...

    work page

  13. [13]

    Complementary ADiC filtering (CAF) for removing wideband noise outliers while preserving band-limited signal of interest

    CAF vs linear: Effect on channel capacity: We then outline the simulation setup for quantification of the improvements in signal quality provided by the CAF mitigation of outlier noise in comparison with linear filtering, and illustrate the relative increases in the baseband SNRs and in the channel 5 Figure 9. Complementary ADiC filtering (CAF) for removing ...

    work page

  14. [14]

    No harm” (default) CAF configurations: In all these simulations, a “default

    “No harm” (default) CAF configurations: In all these simulations, a “default” set of CAF parameters was used, with the “no harm” constraint such that nonlinear filtering does not degrade the resulting signal quality, as compared with the linear filtering, for any signal+noise mixtures. Thus, while providing resistance to outlier noise, in the absence of such...

    work page

  15. [15]

    effectively analog

    Digital: Where to get bandwidth?: However, efficient mitigation of wideband outlier noise requires availability of a sufficiently broad excess band, and thus the respectively high ADC sampling rate. In addition, the sampling rate may need to be further increased so that analog differentiation can be replaced by its accurate finite-difference approximation, t...

    work page

  16. [16]

    default” set of CINF parameters satisfies the “no harm

    Addressing complex interference scenarios: Although it is perhaps unrealistic to require that any “default” set of CINF parameters satisfies the “no harm” constraint while improving the signal quality for all conceivable interference conditions, this constraint can always be met, for any particular interference scenario, in an ADiC-based filtering. For exam...

    work page

  17. [17]

    used in radar, sonar, and spread-spectrum communications) and “bursty,” high crest factor signals such as OFDM

    Practical configurations: CAF for chirp signals and OFDM: To emphasize the effectiveness and versatility of the CINF approach, we provide a detailed discussion of its practical application to particularly challenging waveforms that severely obscure low-amplitude outlier noise, such as broadband chirp signals (e.g. used in radar, sonar, and spread-spectrum ...

    work page

  18. [18]

    CAF for clipping distortions: Further, we demonstrate the use of CAF for mitigation of clipping distortions as a particular type of outlier interference

    work page

  19. [19]

    effectively analog

    Designing development & testing platform: Fig. 11 shows an early prototype of an ADiC development and demonstration board that uses the “effectively analog” implementation approach outlined above. This board employs the 1-bit isolated 2nd order ∆Σ modulator AD7403, implements ADiC-based filtering in FPGA using National Instruments’ (NI’s) reconfigurable I/O...

    work page

  20. [20]

    Hidden outlier noise and its mitigation,

    A. V . Nikitin and R. L. Davidchack, “Hidden outlier noise and its mitigation,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, 2019

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    Analog-domain mitigation of outlier noise in the process of analog-to-digital conversion,

    ——, “Analog-domain mitigation of outlier noise in the process of analog-to-digital conversion,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. 2018 (ICC 2018), Kansas City, MO, 20-24 May 2018

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Method and apparatus for mitigation of outlier noise,

    A. V . Nikitin, “Method and apparatus for mitigation of outlier noise,” Patent, US 10,263,635 (Apr. 16, 2019)

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Method and apparatus for nonlinear filtering and for mitigation of interference,

    A. V . Nikitin, “Method and apparatus for nonlinear filtering and for mitigation of interference,” US patent applications 16/265,363 (Feb. 1,

    work page

  24. [24]

    15, 2019)

    and 16/383,782 (Apr. 15, 2019)

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    Impulsive interference in communication channels and its mitigation by SPART and other nonlinear filters,

    A. V . Nikitin, M. Epard, J. B. Lancaster, R. L. Lutes, and E. A. Shumaker, “Impulsive interference in communication channels and its mitigation by SPART and other nonlinear filters,” EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process. , vol. 2012, no. 79, 2012

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    Pulse pileup effects in counting detectors,

    A. V . Nikitin, “Pulse pileup effects in counting detectors,” PhD thesis, University of Kansas, Lawrence, 1998, OCLC Control No. 41141343

    work page 1998

  27. [27]

    Nonlinear rank-based analog loop filters in delta-sigma analog-to-digital converters for mitigation of technogenic interference,

    A. V . Nikitin and R. L. Davidchack, “Nonlinear rank-based analog loop filters in delta-sigma analog-to-digital converters for mitigation of technogenic interference,” in Proc. IEEE Military Commun. Conf. 2017 (MILCOM 2017), Baltimore, MD, 23-25 Oct. 2017

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    Signal analysis through analog representation,

    ——, “Signal analysis through analog representation,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A , vol. 459, no. 2033, pp. 1171–1192, 2003

    work page 2033

  29. [29]

    Adaptive approximation of feedback rank filters for continuous signals,

    ——, “Adaptive approximation of feedback rank filters for continuous signals,” Signal Processing, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 805–811, 2004. 8

    work page 2004

  30. [30]

    J. W. Tukey, Exploratory Data Analysis . Addison-Wesley, 1977

    work page 1977

  31. [31]

    The influence curve and its role in robust estimation,

    F. R. Hampel, “The influence curve and its role in robust estimation,” J. Am. Stat. Assoc. , vol. 69, no. 346, pp. 383–393, 1974

    work page 1974

  32. [32]

    Complementary Intermittently Nonlinear Filtering for Mitigation of Hidden Outlier Interference

    A. V . Nikitin and R. L. Davidchack, “Complementary intermittently nonlinear filtering for mitigation of hidden outlier interference,” preprint, http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.01456, 2019. 9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1906