Hi Joe - Yes, I am comfortable with making wsprd_exp the official wsprd. It has been working very well here. I had a couple of 16-decode cases again last night on 20 meters.
Say, I just happened to be sitting here working on tracking down the signal dropouts. When you get a chance, would you please have a look at the images linked below: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33211132/375Hzdata.png https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33211132/1500Hzdata.png The first one is absolute value of the complex 375 Hz data from a .c2 file plotted as a 108x400 pixel image. The dropouts are clearly seen along to the top of the image. The second one is the 1500 Hz c0 “common” data written from within the writec2.f90 function. The second image is (108*4)x400 pixels - and shows that the features have a 432-pt fundamental period (at 1500 Hz). I’m scratching my head over here trying to figure out how a pattern like this gets produced. Right now I’m looking at the wspr_downsample function, and specifically the lowpass filter function. Does this sound right to you? I’m not clear on what the timf2 function is doing - do you think that the problem could originate in there? Steve > On Jun 27, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Joe Taylor <j...@princeton.edu> wrote: > > Hi Steve, > > Sorry to be slow in getting back to you. After my post about wsprd_exp > I got involved in chasing a bug in the ISCAT decoder ... > > On 6/26/2015 12:31 PM, Steven Franke wrote: >> I’m glad to see that you were able to confirm the improved performance >> of the two-pass decoder. I’m guessing that your dataset includes a more >> representative mixture of bands and conditions than the group of >> 20m files that I used. Hence the smaller, but still significant, >> increase in the number of decodes over the default wsprd. > > Probably so. I thought the increased number of decodes was very > worthwhile, anyway. > >> I am surprised by your observation that the two-pass decoder is faster >> than the default one. That’s not what I see here. Are you using your >> wspr_timer.out times? Or some other measure of execution time? >> The numbers that I reported were the “Total” times from wspr_timer.out. > > I ran both tests a couple of times, and I also used the “Total” times > from wspr_timer.out. However, I was concentrating on decoder > performance rather than timing, so my observation needs a more careful > look before being taken very seriously. I hope to find time to look at > it more thoroughly next week, and maybe see if any further optimizations > are possible. > > Are you comfortable with making wsprd_exp the "official" wsprd now ? > > -- Joe > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager! > OpManager is web-based network management software that monitors > network devices and physical & virtual servers, alerts via email & sms > for fault. Monitor 25 devices for free with no restriction. Download now > http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/292181274;119417398;o > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager! OpManager is web-based network management software that monitors network devices and physical & virtual servers, alerts via email & sms for fault. Monitor 25 devices for free with no restriction. Download now http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/292181274;119417398;o _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
