🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <sjreeves.921120110631@fourier.ee.eng.auburn.edu> sjreeves@eng.auburn.edu (Stan Reeves) writes:
>
>This is not only an oversimplification of the situation; it's just
>plain inaccurate.  DSP is *not* a subset of controls.  And DSP uses
>transfer functions all the time.  That's exactly how a lowpass filter
>is characterized!  DSP and controls use many of the same techniques but
>with different goals.  The goal of DSP is simply to process signals --
>to manipulate them into a form that is in some sense more useful
>(Fourier transforms, lowpass filters, deconvolution, compression,
>etc.).  In controls, the goal is to control a process.  Sometimes this
>involves manipulating signals, but that isn't an end in itself.  The
>goal is to achieve a specified output given a physical system.

However a complete control system has input signals which also need to be
manipulate into a form that is in some sense more useful. 

>As an example, if DSP is a subset of controls, then I would like to
>know how data compression fits within a controls framework.  (I realize
>that one can make analogies, but that's not the same as saying that
>compression is a controls problem.)

The inputs of a control system can be anything including compressed data and
images. For instance a polymer reactor control system controls the molecular
size based on a compressed image data (gif format) taken by a micrographier.

>Stan Reeves
>Auburn University, Department of Electrical Engineering, Auburn, AL  36849
>INTERNET: sjreeves@eng.auburn.edu

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.CHEN                               |E-MAIL: jchen@tomahawk.me.gu.edu.au
School of Microelectronic Engineering| Phone: +61-7-8755050
Faculty of Science and Technology    |   Fax: +61-7-8755198
Griffith University                  |   Fax: +61-7-8755050
Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia          | 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
ehunjfnlkdf dfdfjnlkdfl