EECE440- Fadi N Karameh

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
EECE440 Signals and Systems -Fall 2003
Lecturer: Prof. Fadi N Karameh

Lecture 12: More on the Unit Sample Response

Recall that the unit sample response we have discussed thus far was right sided,
that is h[n] = 0 for n < 0, and therefore, corresponded to a causal system. We
have seen how we can directly compute the output of a DT causal system to any
arbitrary input sequence using convolution. Next we will discuss stability and other
applications where the unit sample response is useful.
12.1 Bounded Input Bounded Output (BIBO) Stability
We have thus far characterized the stability of a DT causal system in the z-domain,
mainly that all poles of the system lie inside the unit disc. In this lecture, we will
define another notion of stability , BIBO stability, which is associated with the system
response in time. We will analyze conditions on the convergence of the unit sample
response h[n] of a system (namely that it is absolutely summable). Finally, will see
that a BIBO stable system is stable as defined by the locations of its poles.
Definition: A system is Bounded-input Bounded output (BIBO) stable if every
input to that system results in a bounded output. That is,
if |x(n)| Mx <

then |y(n)| = |x(n) ? h[n]| My <

This definition leads to the following theorem:

Theroem A causal DT system is BIBO stable if and only if
is h[n] is absolutely summable.

i=0

|h[n]| < , that

Sufficient condition: If
i=0 |h[n]| < , that is h[n] is absolutely summable, then
the corresponding causal DT system is BIBO stable.
P

Proof: Let x[n] be any bounded single sided input signal (x[n] = 0, n < 0)1 . Let
h[n] be the causal system unit sample response (h[n] = 0 f or n < 0). Expanding y[n]
we have
1

We can also consider two sided inputs x[n], < n < with nearly identical proofs

EECE440- Fadi N Karameh

|y[n]| = |h[n] x[n]|

= |
|

n
X
i=0

h(i)x(n i)|
h(i)x(n i)|

i=0

|h(i)||x(n i)|

i=0

max
|x(n)|
n

X
x

|h(i)|

i=0

|h(i)|

(since x[n] is bounded by assumption)

i=0

Thus if
stable.

i=0

|h(i)| < ., then the output |y[n]| is bounded. Hence system is BIBO

Necessary condition: If a DT causal system is stable, then its unit sample response
P
necessarily satisfies:
i=0 |h[n]| < .
Proof: We can proof this by contradiction, that is, letting h[n] be not absolutely
P
summable (
i=0 |h[i]| unbounded) and showing that the system cannot be BIBO
stable. To do this, choose an input sequence x[n], < n < that satifies the
following:
(
1,
h[n] 0;
x[n] = sign{h[n]} =
1, h[n] < 0.

Accordingly since y[n] =

i=0 x[i]h[n i], then y[0] =
i=0 x[i]h[i] =
which is not bounded, hence the system cannot be BIBO stable.

i=0

|h[i]|

Stability vs BIBO Stability

Recall that stability in the z-domain implied that all poles of a causal system lie inside
the unit circle. That is, if
PN
b(z)
bk z k

= Pk=0
H(z) =
N
i
a
(z)
i=0 ai z
i
Then the system is stable if roots of { N
i=0 ai z = 0} denoted by Pi , i = 1 . . . N satisfy

|Pi | < 1. Now assume that the poles are distinct, then we can write H(z)
as:

H(z)
=

B2
B1
+
+ ...
z P1 z P2
2

EECE440- Fadi N Karameh

and the corresponding unit sample response is

h[n] = c1 (P1 )n + c2 (P2 )n + . . . cn (PN )n
for some constants ci , i = 1 . . . N . Here, it is easy to see that, if |Pi | < 1 i = 1 . . . N ,
P
then h(n) 0 as n . Moreover,
i=0 |h[i]| will converge to some constant and
hence is bounded.
P
Conversely, if system is BIBO stable, that is,
i=0 |h[i]| is bounded, then h[n] is
bounded for all n. Therefore, |Pi | < 1 and hence system is stable.
P
Therefore,
i=0 |h[i]| < if and only if |Pi | < 1 and stability is an equivalent
notion to BIBO stability.
NOTE: The above derivations were made for causal DT systems. In general a
DT LTI system may not be causal, as we will see next. In this case, our notion
and condition of BIBO stability still holds, namely that the unit sample response is
absolutely summable. The conditions on stability, however, as implied by the poles
of the system might be different, as we will see later.
12.2 System Identification
Another application where the unit sample response of a system becomes handy is in
system identification. Here, suppose we have an unknown system model h[n]. Suppose
also that we are collecting samples of the input sequence x[n] and the corresponding
output sequence y[n] for some time n = 0 . . . N . Our aim is to utilize such collected
data to identify the underlying system or algorithm h[n].
For a DT causal LTI system we can write :
y[n] = h[n] x[n] =

n
X

x[n i]h[i]

n = 0...N

i=0

or

X(z)
Y (z) = H(z)

h[n] = Z 1 {H(z)

While the z -transform solution seems appealing and quite simple, it requires that
N = , that is, we will have to wait forever to obtain the necessary data.
Therefore, we will attempt to use the convolution formula to find h[n] for finite N.
In general, this is a hard problem to solve and is very dependent on the characteristics
of h[n]. In the special case when h[n] is a finite length sequence (so called FIR), this
problem can be solved exactly, as detailed below:
FIR systems: A Finite Impulse Response (FIR) system is one whose sample response has a finite number of elements. That is h[n] = 0, for all n > No . In this case
h[n] has No elements, and its z-transform can be generally written as:

H(z)
= ao + a1 z 1 + a2 z 2 + . . . + aNo z No
An FIR system function has the following characteristics:
(1) It has all zeros.
3

EECE440- Fadi N Karameh

(2) There are no finite poles except at the origin., and

(3) It is stable (and causal in this case).
Note here that the FIR system is normally refered to as an FIR filter (frequency of
the discrete domain, as we will see later). We also refer to No as the number of taps.
Thus an N-tap filter is an FIR with h[n] of length N.
In contrast, IIR systems has an Infinite Impulse Response and does have finite
poles other than the origin, and has an infinite number of taps.
Example: h[n] = u[n] u[n 100] corresponds to an FIR system. While h[n] =
( 31 )n u[n] corresponds to an IIR system.
System ID of FIR systems We can write in this case
y[n] =

n
X

x[n i]h[i]

n = 0...N

i=0

or
y[0] = x[0]h[0] = x[0]ao
y[1] = x[1]h[0] + x[0]h[1] = x[1]ao + x[0]a1
and for the Nth output
y[N ] =

N
X

aN i x[i]

i=0

which can be rewritten in matrix form:

y[0]
y[1]
y[2]
..
.
y[N ]

x[0]
x[1]
x[2]
..
.

0
x[0]
x[1]
..
.

0
0
x[0]

...
...
...

0
0
0

x[N ] x[N 1] x[N 2] . . . x[0]

ao
a1
a2
..
.
aN

(1)

which can be written as

y = Aa.
If N = No that is, we collected enough data points as length of the filter, then the
matrix B is square and we will be able to identify h[n] by computing:
a = A1 y
(Assuming A is invertible).