Research Article Frequency estimator by combination of phase difference method and interpolation algorithm Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology Volume 13: 1–10 ! The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/1748301819833032 journals.sagepub.com/home/act Haitao Xu1 , Leng Han1, Qingqing Huang2, Song Feng1 and Junhui Cao1 Abstract In the traditional time-shifting based phase difference method, considerable errors may be introduced by wrapped phase problem as long as translation coefficient tends to one even in a small-scale turbulence noise. In this paper, an improved frequency estimator is proposed to overcome the problem of wrapped phase by combination of phase difference method and interpolation algorithm. Compared with the traditional method of phase difference based on timeshifting, the improved algorithm can obtain an accurate estimate when translation coefficient exceeds one. Comparative studies were done by means of root-mean-square error over Cramer–Rao lower bound. According to the computer simulations, it is demonstrated that root-mean-square errors can cross Cramer–Rao lower bound if the translation coefficient is properly selected even in the case of the low signal-to-noise ratio, which implies that the proposed algorithm has a strong noise immunity. Finally, the advantage of the proposed algorithm is illustrated for the simulation signal which contained strong local random noise. Keywords Phase difference, wrapped phase, translation coefficient, frequency estimation Received 12 March 2018; Revised received 11 July 2018; accepted 28 October 2018 Introduction Phase difference method and interpolation algorithm are two of effective spectrum correction techniques to reduce the bias caused by the non-integer period sampling.1 The interpolation-based method, in which the frequency error can be corrected by the ratio of a certain number of known discrete Fourier transform (DFT) spectral bins, has the advantage of low computational burden.2–9 Early in 1970s, the interpolation algorithm, based on the modulus of two DFT bins, was proposed by Rife and Vincent.2 In the following decades, various improved algorithms were presented, such as the multi-point interpolated DFT approach,3 the weighted interpolation approach.4–6 However, most of the interpolation algorithms were established on the specific window or a cluster of windows. In 2015, Candan7 proposed a frequency estimator by calculating the correcting factor of window function7 to break the limit of window choice. At the same time, Luo et al.8,9 investigated the interpolation algorithms for classic windows based on main-lobe fitting technique and zero padding technique. In contrast, the phase difference method is feasible for all kinds of windows and can be implemented conveniently without calculating any parameters in advance. As a result, it is extensively applied to various engineering fields, such as vibration monitoring,10 fault diagnosis,11–13 coriolis mass flowmeter,14,15 power electronic parameter estimation16 and so on. The phase interpolation estimator (PIE) method was firstly proposed by McMahon et al.17 to estimate the 1 School of Advanced Manufacture Engineering, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing, China 2 School of Automation, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing, China Corresponding author: Haitao Xu, School of Advanced Manufacture Engineering, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing 400065, China. Email: xuhaitao@zoho.com.cn Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us. sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). 2 Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology frequency. In 1994, the leakage-induced phase error was researched through analyzing the windowing signal.18 In 2002, an universal method of phase difference based on time-shifting (PDTS) was presented by Ding and Zhong,19 in which the translation coefficient was less than or equal to 1. The algorithm proposed by Ding et al.20 was a special case of PDTS by employing two continuous segment signals. In the light of the translation of the window center, Huang and Xu21 derived a new phase difference algorithm. Meanwhile, the synthesized phase difference method based on time-domain translation and the changing width of symmetrical window were put forward by Ding et al. In 2007, the estimation error of PDTS in the case of Gauss White noise was analyzed.23 By considering the effect from negative frequency, an algorithm for low-frequency vibration signal was provided by Zhang and Tu.24 Recently, McKilliam et al.25 deduced a phase unwrapping estimator in the least squares sense. In view of utilizing the peak DFT bins of sub-segment from input samples with N points, the phase difference method, which is similar to the PDTS, was derived.26 Simultaneously, the calculation burden and statistical properties were also investigated. What’s more, Luo et al. made full use of the phase characteristics of asymmetric window and presented a new phase difference method, which can gain precise frequency estimated value only from one signal segment.1 The time-shifting based phase difference method has many advantages. For example, as translation coefficient increases, the errors caused by random noise or other interference would be reduced, consequently enhancing the estimation accuracy. In particular, the method is also advantageous for sampled signal containing strong local noise. However, once the translation coefficient exceeds one, considerable estimation errors would appear in the case of a large frequency deviation because of wrapped phase problem. In this paper, we focus on this problem and try to establish an improved phase difference algorithm which can still work when the translation coefficient is more than one. The remaining structure of the paper is as follows, in the next section, the theoretical background is illustrated. The derivation of the improved phase difference based on time shifting is then described. The simulations and results can be found in the subsequent section. Finally, some conclusions are summarized in the last section. For simplicity but without losing the generality, we consider an exponential signal emerged in random white noise f 2p f0s nþh0 þ zðnÞ k0 ¼ f0 f0 ¼ Df fs =N (2) At this stage, we ignore the noise term in the following part. After multiplying the time-shifting window function wN ðnÞ to the exponential signal in equation (1), the weighted samples can be written as xw0 ðnÞ ¼ x0 ðnÞwN ðnÞ (3) where wN ðnÞ can be achieved by wN ðnÞ ¼ wðn N=2Þ (4) According to the convolution theorem, the DFT coefficients at spectrum line k of equation (3) can be calculated by Xw0 ðkÞ ¼ AWN ðk k0 Þejh0 ¼ AWðk k0 Þej½h0 þsðkÞðk0 kÞ 0kN1 (5) where sðkÞ is the slope of phase for wN ðnÞ at k-bin, and WN ðÞ, WðÞ denote the DFT coefficients of wN ðnÞ and wðnÞ, respectively. In general, k0 lies between two DFT bins due to non-integer sampling. Therefore, k0 can be further described as k0 ¼ m þ d n ¼ 0; 1; . . . N 1 (1) (6) where m is the integer part which can be rapidly located with its maximum peak of signal in frequency domain, and d(0:5 d 0:5) is the fractional part of k0 . Classic interpolation method Subscribing equation (6) into equation (5) and replacing k by m, the highest amplitude can be given by Xw0 ðmÞ ¼ AWðdÞ Theoretical background x0 ðnÞ ¼ Aej where A, f0 , h0 , fs , N represent the amplitude, theoretical frequency, initial phase, sample rate and the number of samples, respectively. The last term zðnÞ denotes the Gauss White noise, in which the mean is zero and variance is r2 . If the normalized frequency is described as k0 , and frequency resolution is expressed as Df, the relationship can be obtained (7a) Similarly, the second highest amplitude can be written as Xw0 ðm1Þ ¼ AWðd1Þ (7b) Xu et al. 3 In two-point interpolation methods, the ratio of two highest amplitude is defined as a¼ jXw0 ðm1Þj jWðd1Þj ¼ jXw0 ðmÞj jWðdÞj (8) d ¼ gw ðaÞ (9) It can be seen in equation (9) that frequency offset can be solely determined once the window is selected. For the maximum side-lobe decay (MSD) window, the relationship can be simply written as5 Ha ðH 1Þ aþ1 (10) where H is the number of terms in the MSD window, and the sign of d can be determined by the second highest amplitude.28 For other windows, the polynomial approximation6 or the iterative approximation9 is suggested. Compared with interpolation algorithm, the timeshifting based phase difference method requires two signal frames. The signal with M points delay of equation (1) is expressed as x1 ðnÞ ¼ Ae f f n ¼ 0; 1; . . . N 1 (11) Similar to equation (3) and equation (5), the DFT coefficients of the weighted time-shifting signal can be described as k0 X1 ðkÞ ¼ AWðk k0 Þej½h0 þ2p N MþsðkÞðk0 kÞ 0kN1 (12) After substituting m into equations (5) and (12), the phases for the two signal frames can be calculated by u0 ðmÞ ¼ h0 þ sðmÞ ðk0 mÞ where {} denotes implementing 2p modulo operation. Let us define D u ¼ fDu 2pmSg. Since the phase belongs to the range ðp; pÞ, D u may exceed the range ðp; pÞ. To guarantee the range of phase difference and frequency offset corrected by PDTS, the following operation is required D u¼ D u 2p D u þ 2p (13a) and u1 ðmÞ ¼ h0 þ sðmÞ ðk0 mÞ þ 2pðm þ dÞS (13b) In equation (13b), S ¼ M=N is the translation coefficient. Since the period of phase is 2p, the phase obtained through DFT is the main value of original phase. If we define the phases calculated from DFT D u>p D u < p (15) For the traditional PDTS, the translation coefficient is less than 1, equation (14) can be further simplified as (see Appendix 1) D u ¼ 2pdS (16) As a result, the frequency offset can be expressed as d¼ Phase difference method based on time-shifting j 2p f0s nþ2p f0s Mþh0 Du ¼ /1 /0 ¼ u1 ðmÞ u0 ðmÞ ¼ f2pmS þ 2pdSg (14) In terms of equation (8), the frequency bias can be described as a function of a related to window d¼ as /0 and /1 , respectively, the phase difference Du can be established as D u 2pS (17) Finally, the frequency estimate can be calculated by f0 ¼ ðm þ dÞ Df (18) Derivation of the improved algorithm It is known from ‘Phase difference method based on time-shifting’ section that the traditional PDTS is built on ignoring the phase ambiguity while translation coefficient is less than 1. However, phase ambiguity is supposed to be taken into account once translation coefficient is equal to or beyond 1. Considering the phase ambiguity and the noise interference on frequency estimator, frequency error corrected by PDTS should be rewritten as (see Appendix 1) ^d ¼ Du þ 2pl 2pmS þ Zn ¼ Du þ 2pl 2pmS þ Zn 2pS 2pS 2pS (19) where l is the number of phase wrapping and Zn is the noise term in frequency domain. As illustrated in equation (19), the influence of noise term would be reduced and would approach with the increasing translation coefficient, and hence the estimation value would be more precise. However, the number of wrapped phase cannot be known according 4 Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology to translation coefficient in advance, so the effectively corrected range of traditional PDTS would be shrunk as the increasing translation coefficient. To guarantee the feasibility of PDTS using equation (16) while translation coefficient is larger than one, it is necessary to add a correction value of high accuracy which can ensure the residual bias to meet the requirement in equation (32) (Appendix 1). The initial correction value can be achieved in the absence of noise and approximately obtained as much as possible in the presence of noise by the interpolation method (simplified as Selva) proposed in Selva.29 First of all, we employed, respectively, Selva algorithm to estimate frequency from signal xw0 ðnÞ; xw1 ðnÞ. Subsequently, two estimated values of frequency can be obtained, and are defined as k1 and k2 . There are a set of mean values in statistics, such as arithmetic mean value, geometric mean value, harmonic mean value, and the quadratic mean value. In this paper, we take the arithmetic mean operation to reduce the random error of initial estimate and define k as arithmetic mean. k can be given by equation (20). k ¼ k1 þ k2 2 (20) Replacing m with k in equation (14), and expressing the bias addressed by the improved PDTS as d, the final estimate of normalized frequency can be computed by ^k ¼ k þ d (21) At last, the improved PDTS can be summarized as follows: 1. Two discrete signals x0 ðnÞ and x1 ðnÞ ¼ x0 ðn þ MÞ with N samples are acquired. 2. Obtain the tappered sequences xw0 ðnÞ ¼ x0 ðnÞwN ðnÞ and xw1 ðnÞ ¼ x1 ðnÞwN ðnÞ, where wN ðnÞ is the adopted window function. 3. Estimate the coarse frequency estimates k1 and k2 , respectively, from xw0 ðnÞ and xw1 ðnÞ by Selva method. 4. Compute the arithmetic mean by k ¼ ðk1 þ k 2 Þ=2. 5. Calculate the phase difference Du ¼ arg Y1 ðkÞ arg Y0 ðkÞ , where Y1 ðÞ and Y0 ðÞ are the DFT coefficients of xw1 ðnÞ and xw0 ðnÞ, respectively. 6. Return the bias by d ¼ D u =2pS, where D u¼ Du 2pkS and S ¼ M=N. 7. The final frequency estimate is expressed as f^ ¼ ðk þ d Þ Df. Simulations and results Performance of the improved algorithm without noise In this section, the comparative study between traditional PDTS and improved PDTS is investigated in the case of noiselessness. For convenience but without losing the generality, the sample rate and the number of samples were set as 256, which implied the frequency resolution was equal to 1. The theoretical frequency and phase were varied from [63.5,64.5] with steps of 0.025 and ½p; p with steps of p=20, respectively, and the translation coefficient was selected with 0.0625 interval in the range of [0.0625,4]. For different phases, the maximum absolute error of frequency was selected. Figure 1(a) and (b) depicts the curve of maximum absolute error corresponding to traditional PDTS and improved PDTS. As described in Figure 1(a), the maximum error introduced by wrapped phase problem in traditional PDTS is about 1 under noiseless situation, and it also exams equation (16) that the effectively corrected range of traditional PDTS is decreased (blue district in Figure 1(a)) with the increasing translation coefficient. Otherwise, Figure 1(b) reveals that the improved method can be described as a frequency estimator of high accuracy, because the maximum absolute errors are all below 1013 for different frequency deviations and translation coefficients. Figure 1. Maximum absolute error of frequency versus d when Hanning window is used. (a) Traditional PDTS (b) Improved PDTS. Xu et al. 5 Performance of the improved algorithm with random Gaussian noise To verify the feasibility and robustness of improved algorithm in the case of random noise, following simulations are performed. The exponential signal corrupted by Gauss White noise was generated by equation (1). The ratio of root-mean-square error (RMSE) to Cramér–Rao lower bound (CRLB) was investigated to evaluate the behavior of the improved algorithm. The expressions of RMSE1 and CRLB30 can be calculated by vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi u Ntr u 1 X RMSE ¼ t ðf i f 0 Þ2 Ntr i¼1 (22) where Ntr denotes the number of independent instances and fi denotes the estimation value of frequency for each independent instance 8 > > > > < 6fs 2 h i 2 SNR ðM þ NÞ ðM þ NÞ2 1 4p CRLB ¼ > > 6fs 2 > > : 2 8p SNR N ð4N2 1Þ S<1 S1 (23) In equation (23), the SNR is defined as SNR ¼ 10log10 ðA2 =r2 Þ (24) Maximum translation coefficient. In this subsection, the maximum translation coefficient in the case of different SNRs (dB) is discussed. The theoretical frequency and initial phase were selected randomly in [63.5,64.5] and ½p; p, respectively. The translation coefficient was varied from 1 to 20 with steps of 1, and for each translation coefficient, a total of 10,000 instances were tested. Figure 2 depicts the ratio of RMSE to CRLB with different SNRs (dB) and window functions. From the pictures, it should be pointed out that the performance trend is identical with regard to different SNRs when the translation coefficient is less than or equal to 4. In addition, it is obvious for all selected windows that the ratio curve initially declines as we add translation coefficient, then minimum value and starts to go up as the translation coefficient increases except the situation that the SNR =10. The point with maximum translation coefficient and minimum ratio value, which reflects the excellent capability of antinoise, is different for variable SNR. The reason is that the improved method can only compensate the error caused by wrapped phase problem in certain Figure 2. Ratio of RMSE to CRLB versus S. (a) Rectangle window (b) Hanning window (c) Hamming window (d) Blackman window. 6 extend. As the translation coefficient increases, the interference from noise on PDTS is deceased, and the accuracy is remarkably improved. For instance, the minimum ratio can approximately attach to 0.3, while SNR is equal to 5 dB. However, it should be stressed that the interpolation algorithm in Step 3 would suffer obstacle from noise disturbance if a low SNR is encountered. The problem may, in turn, lead to a considerable residual error d1 , which is intended to be corrected by PDTS. Unfortunately, PDTS may not work because it is possible that d1 S exceeds the effective range in equation (32). As a result, we have to make a careful balance between maximum translation coefficient and noise disturbance in practise. However, it is complicated to establish the relationship by theoretical derivation, so we attempt to zoom the simulation parameters to simulate the corresponding relationship between maximum translation coefficient and random noise. The parameters of theoretical frequency and phase were same as above. The SNR was varied from 5 dB to 15 dB with steps of 1 dB, and translation coefficient was varied from 0.25 to 20 with steps of 0.25. Figure 3 describes the ratio of RMSE to CRLB as a function of S and SNR for different windows. It is shown in pictures that the relationship is almost identical for different window techniques, because the capability to resolve the problem of wrapped phase is Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology dependent on the accuracy of the interpolation algorithm. The phenomenon implies that the relationship between S and SNR can be obtained by curve fitting technique through one of selected windows. The result of curve fitting with rectangle window is depicted in Figure 4, and the formula for the relationship is established in equation (25). In Figure 4, it can be seen that the value of line-fitting is a little larger than data when the SNR is in the range of [1 dB,6 dB]. To guarantee the high accuracy with maximum translation coefficient calculated by the fitted expression, the floor function, where floor () denotes the nearest integers less than or equal to (), should be operated. What’s more, it can also be known that the maximum translation coefficient can be attached to 20, while SNR is larger than 10 dB in equation (25), and at this time, the RMSE of improved method can be 0.07 times over CRLB. Smax floorð7:338 e0:1114SNR Þ SNR < 10 20 SNR 10 (25) Influence of frequency deviation. In order to assess the performance of the improved phase difference for changing deviations of frequency, we set theoretical frequency to vary with 0.05 interval in the range of [63.5,64.5] and SNR is equal to 5 dB. Initial phase Figure 3. Ratio of RMSE to CRLB versus S and SNR (a) Rectangle window (b) Hanning window (c) Hamming window (d) Blackman window. Xu et al. was randomly selected in ½p; p and translation coefficient was selected separately as S ¼ 1, S ¼ 2, S ¼ 3, S ¼ 4. For different window functions, the performance of the improved method for different deviations is depicted in Figure 5. From these pictures, it can be found that the trend of ratio curves is almost a uniform flat in the whole range of frequency deviations due to the first scheme corrected by interpolation method.29 The interpolation Figure 4. Line-fitting curve of S versus SNR. 7 method can eliminate the effect for wrong location maximum spectral bins when frequency deviation is close to 0:5. Moreover, with the increase of S, the ratios are all reduced, and particularly, RMSEs can cross CRLB when S is larger than or equal to 2 for different window functions. The ratio of RMSE to CRLB can approximately reach 0.58, 0.67, 0.7, 0.75 corresponding to rectangle window, Hamming window, Hanning window and Blackman window supposing S ¼ 2, and approximated equal to 0.3, 0.33, 0.35, 0.37 supposing S ¼ 4. Thus, these features exam that the capability of noise immunity of the improved algorithm is independent on frequency deviations and can be enhanced with the increase of translation coefficient as shown in equation (19). Algorithm analysis under simulated signal interfered by strong local random noise. In practical process of sampling, it is possible that the signal may be corrupted by strong local noise. In this subsection, the problem is considered to exam the advantages of the improved phase difference algorithm. At first, the Gauss White noise with zero mean was generated with SNR ¼ 15 dB and 25 dB, respectively. In order to simulate well the real environment noise, the Kaiser–Bessel window (b ¼ 3:5) was used to weight the noise to change the Figure 5. Ratio of RMSE and CRLB versus different deviations (a) Rectangle window (b) Hanning window (c) Hamming window (d) Blackman window. 8 Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology Figure 6. Simulation sampled signal when the additive noise is weighted by Kaiser–Bessel window (b ¼ 3:5). (a) SNR ¼ 15 dB (b) SNR ¼ 25 dB. Figure 7. RMSEs of different estimation values versus deviations when the noise is weighted by Kaiser–Bessel window (b ¼ 3:5). (a) SNR¼15 dB (b) SNR¼25 dB. distribution of noise. For the sake of brevity, the basic simulation parameters are set as follows. The number of samples and sample rate was equal to 200, and the frequency deviation was scanned with 0.05 interval in [0.5,0.5]. A total of 5N signal was generated with random phase. For example, the curve of simulated signal (d ¼ 0:5) with different strong local noise can be found in Figure 6. Here, we compared the RMSE of the improved algorithm (rectangle window) and the interpolation algorithm in Selva29 (simplified as Selva). In Figure 7(a) and (b), FN and LN denote the first segment signal and the last segment signal with N points, respectively. The RMSEs of two methods and arithmetic mean of estimation value are comprehensively compared. It can be seen that the RMSEs of Selva method with N points are not related to the FN or LN, and the operation, taking arithmetic mean, can reduce the random error caused by noise. For the two kinds of signal frames, the RMSE of improved algorithm is approximately 0.02 times over Selva (5N) in Figure 7(a). It can be seen in Figure 7(b) that the RMSE even approximately attach to 28, which vertifies the Selva (5N) method has worst behavior due to the wrong location of maximum spectral bin. In contrast, the frequency corrected by the improved method always keeps the privilege than other frequency estimates. Consequently, it can be concluded that the improved PDTS can be a good strategy to achieve the precise estimation of frequency when samples are submerged by strong local random noise. Conclusions The paper illustrates a frequency estimator by combining the PDTS and interpolation algorithm to estimate frequency. The extensive simulation results verify the effectiveness of the proposed frequency estimator, and the improved method can be applied for several kinds of window functions. As the translation coefficient increases, the capability against random noise becomes stronger; in particular, the ratios of RMSE to CRLB can even approximately attach to 0.35 for different Xu et al. 9 window functions when translation coefficient is equal to 4. For the sake of keeping the balance between maximum translation coefficient and random noise, curve fitting technique is used to obtain the arithmetic relationship. It can be known in equation (25) that the maximum translation coefficient can be 20 if SNR is equal to or larger than 10 dB and high precise estimate can be achieved. What’s more, while the stable samples interfered by strong local noise, which may be generated by sampling environment, the improved algorithm can still achieve high accuracy parameters estimation. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, and the help is of great significance for improving the quality of the paper. We also want to express our appreciation for the guidance by Dr. J. Luo. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51705059 and 51605065), Chongqing Municipal Education Commission (Grant No. KJ1600428), also partly supported by the found of Chongqing Science and Technology Committee (No. cstc2017jcyjAX0033). ORCID iD Haitao Xu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8629-6273 References 1. Luo J and Xie M. Phase difference methods based on asymmetric windows. Mech Syst Signal Process 2015; 54–55: 52–67. 2. Rife DC and Vincent GA. Use of the discrete Fourier transform in the measurement of frequencies and levels of tones. Bell Labs Tech J 1970; 49: 197–228. 3. Belega D, Dallet D and Petri D. Accuracy of sine wave frequency estimation by multipoint interpolated DFT approach. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 2010; 59: 2808–2815. 4. Agrez D. Weighted multipoint interpolated DFT to improve amplitude estimation of multifrequency signal. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 2002; 51: 287–292. 5. Belega D and Dallet D. Multifrequency signal analysis by Interpolated DFT method with maximum sidelobe decay windows. Measurement 2009; 42: 420–426. 6. Duda K. DFT Interpolation algorithm for Kaiser–Bessel and Dolph–Chebyshev windows. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 2011; 60: 784–790. 7. Candan C. Fine resolution frequency estimation from three DFT samples: case of windowed data. Signal Process 2015; 114: 245–250. 8. Luo J, Xie Z and Xie M. Interpolated DFT algorithms with zero padding for classic windows. Mech Syst Signal Process 2015; 70: 1011–1025. 9. Luo J, Xie Z and Xie M. Frequency estimation of the weighted real tones or resolved multiple tones by iterative interpolation DFT algorithm. Digital Signal Process 2015; 41: 118–129. 10. Zhu LM, Jia MP and Zhong BL. Sampling and phase error compensation methods in rotor vibration monitoring. J Southeast Univ 1997; 2: 115–120. 11. Xinyi L, Zhijiang X and Jiufei L. Application of the phase difference correct method in rolling bearing fault diagnosis. J Algorithm Comput Technol 2017; 11: 378–387. 12. Wei D, Tang B and Renxiang C. Study on holospectrum based on spectrum refining and correction of phase difference. China Mech Eng 2011; 22: 2577–2582. 13. Hu WB, Xia L, Xiang DY, et al. An improved frequency spectrum correction method based on phase difference correction method. J Vib Shock 2012; 31: 162–166. 14. Zhang H and Tu Y. New signal processing method with negative frequency contribution for Coriolis mass flowmeter. Chin J Sci Instrum 2007; 28: 539–544. 15. Yang H, Tu Y, Zhang H, et al. Phase difference measuring method based on SVD and Hilbert transform for Coriolis mass flowmeter. Chin J Sci Instrum 2012; 33: 2101–2107. 16. Huang C. Improved spectrum correction algorithm of estimating power electric parameters and its applications. Proc CSEE 2005; 25: 86–91. 17. Mcmahon DRA, Barrett RF, et al. An efficient method for the estimation of the frequency of a single tone in noise from the phases of discrete Fourier transforms. Signal Process 1986; 11: 169–177. 18. Huang D. Phase error in fast Fourier transform analysis. Mech Syst Signal Process 1995; 9: 113–118. 19. Ding K and Zhong SC. A universal phase difference correcting methods on discrete spectrum. Acta Electron Sin 2003; 31:142–145. 20. Ding K, Xie M and Zhang XF. Phase difference correction method for phase and frequency in spectral analysis. Mech Syst Signal Process 2000; 14: 835–843. 21. Huang Y and Xu K. Study on the spectrum correcting method based on phase difference. J Vibr Eng 2005; 24: 77–79. 22. Ding K, Zhu XY, Xie M, et al. Synthesized correcting method of phase difference on discrete spectrum. J Vibr Eng 2002; 15: 114–118. 23. Yang ZJ and Ding K. Accuracy analysis of frequency estimated by applying time-shifting correcting method of phase difference in presence of Gaussian white noise. J Vibr Eng 2007; 20: 274–279. 24. Zhang HT and Ya-Qing TU. A new phase difference measurement method for low-frequency vibration signals based on DTFT. J Vibr Eng 2007; 20: 180–184. 10 Journal of Algorithms & Computational Technology 25. Mckilliam RG, Quinn BG, Clarkson IVL, et al. Frequency estimation by phase unwrapping. IEEE Trans Signal Process 2010; 58: 2953–2963. 26. Huang X and Xia XG. A fine resolution frequency estimator based on double sub-segment phase difference. IEEE Signal Process Lett 2015; 228: 1055–1059. 27. Luo J, Xie Z and Li X. Asymmetric windows and their application in frequency estimation. J Algorith Comput Technol 2015; 9: 389–412. 28. Luo J, Zhang Y, Zhou W, et al. Research on choices of spectral bins in energy-based frequency estimators under intensive noise. J Algorith Comput Technol 2017; 11: 336–344. 29. Selva J. ML estimation and detection of multiple frequencies through periodogram estimate refinement. IEEE Signal Process Lett 2017; 24: 249–253. 30. Rife DC and Boorstyn RR. Single tone parameter estimation from discrete-time observations. IEEE Trans Inform Theory 2003; 20: 591–598. Appendix 1 Du ¼ f2pmS þ 2pdSg (26) After some algebraic operation, equation (26) can be transformed as fDug f2pmS þ 2pdSg ¼ 0 (27) because of Du 2 ð2p; 2pÞ. Given the property of Modulo operation, equation (27) can be rewritten as fDug f2pmS þ 2pdSg ¼ ðDu 2pmSÞ 2pdS ¼ D u f2pdSg ¼ 0 (28) where D u ¼ fDu 2pmSg. To guarantee D u 2 ½p; p, the adjustment is required D u¼ D u 2p D u þ 2p D u 2pdS ¼ 0 d¼ D u 2p D u>p D u < p (29) (31) As illustrated earlier, for different translation coefficients, the requirement, that equation (28) transforms into equation (30), must meet p < 2pdS < p to guarantee 2p < D u 2pdS < 2p. Further, we can obtain (32) When S is less than one, equation (32) can be satisfied easily, and frequency error ð0:5 d 0:5Þ can be addressed by equation (31). However, when S is equal to or larger than one, equation (31) can only correct the error d, which meets the requirement of equation (32). It will lead to considerable error for other d. In such cases, a supplementary term 2pl due to wrapped phase has to be considered in the left part of equation (26). It becomes Du þ 2pl ¼ 2pmS þ 2pdS (33) The frequency bias can be rewritten as d¼ the (30) The frequency bias can be corrected by 0:5 < dS < 0:5 Recall from equation (14) It is easy to learn that D u is in the range of ½p; p after the adjustment, and 2pdS is in the range of ðp; pÞ if S is less than one. As a result, D u 2pdS will be varied in the range of ð2p; 2pÞ. Accordingly, equation (28) can be simplified as Du þ 2pl 2pmS 2p (34)