The stability of stationary recursive inverse filtering depends on the phase of the causal filter: if (and only if) the filter is minimum phase, then its inverse filter is stable. This raises the question: is non-stationary inverse filtering stable if all filters contained in the filter-bank are minimum-phase?
For the case of inverse filtering with a two-point filter (Na=2), equation (9) reduces to x0=y0, and the following formula for k>0:
xk = yk - a1,(k-1) xk-1. | (124) |
![]() |
(125) |
![]() |
(126) |
There is a larger class () of stable non-stationary
recursive filters that can be obtained by repeatedly multiplying
stable bidiagonal matrices. However, given a general non-stationary
filter matrix, there is no straightforward way to determine whether it
is a member of this stable class.
In fact, it is relatively easy to find an example filter-bank
consisting of minimum-phase individual filters whose recursive output
is unbounded for finite input.
Consider the filter-bank,
, consisting of
minimum-phase filters,
![]() |
||
(127) |
one
Figure 1 Impulsive input (a) and response (b) to non-stationary filtering with filter-bank defined in equation ( ![]() | ![]() |
The instability stems from the fact that as N increases, so does the number of boundaries between different filters. Such rapid non-stationary filter variations, as in the example above, are pathological in the context of seismic applications, where filters are typically quasi-stationary. For these applications instability is rarely observed; however, we must be aware that we are not dealing with an unconditionally stable operator, and instability may rear its ugly head from time-to-time.