(HW3.A "grading" Brian Thomas) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I like how your definition is short and to the point. However, you may want to note that a non-causal signal ''may'' depend on past and present input signals, in addition to future input signals. --Brian Thomas | I like how your definition is short and to the point. However, you may want to note that a non-causal signal ''may'' depend on past and present input signals, in addition to future input signals. --Brian Thomas | ||
| + | |||
| + | Your definition is very short and easy to understand. You also give an example to help illustrate the point which I think is really useful. - Bavorndej Chanyasak | ||
| + | |||
| + | Clear to the point definition. It is easy to understand what a causal/noncausal system is using your definition. -Scott E | ||
Latest revision as of 15:33, 19 September 2008
Your definitions seem clear and accurate, but an example of a causal system might help. --Ben Laskowski
Short and to the point. I like the formality of your definitions. The example also helps make sure the reader understands what you're talking about. -Phil Cannon
I like how your definition is short and to the point. However, you may want to note that a non-causal signal may depend on past and present input signals, in addition to future input signals. --Brian Thomas
Your definition is very short and easy to understand. You also give an example to help illustrate the point which I think is really useful. - Bavorndej Chanyasak
Clear to the point definition. It is easy to understand what a causal/noncausal system is using your definition. -Scott E
