Coefficient precision — where it appears
Named by 2 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Also named here as direct form — the same set of essays touches all of them, so they are one junction rather than several.
The same filter, rounded twice
The filters field measured two realisations of one analogue response and found the passband error growing as the 0.99 power of a component tolerance in a cascade and the 2.00 power in a ladder. The digital version of that argument comes out harder. At eighth order and sixteen bits, a cascade of biquads moves its poles by 6.6 × 10⁻⁴ and stays at a radius of 0.9748; the same filter written as one polynomial moves its poles to a radius of 1.4536, which is not an inaccurate filter but an unstable one.
The word length that is not a threshold
The essay below this one measured an eighth-order direct form at five word lengths, found its poles outside the unit circle at every one, and left behind a phrase — the coefficient resolution required. Sixty word lengths later there is no such resolution. That filter is stable at 28 bits, unstable at 29 and stable again at 30, and the smallest word length a search would return is not one anybody can use. What survives is a law with a slope: 4.53 bits of coefficient for every pole added, rising to 47 bits at twelfth order, and none at all for a cascade.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Biquad cascadeDirect formPolesStabilityZ planeBisectionConditioningModel refusal