1 / 8

Optimum Passive Beamforming in Relation to Active-Passive Data Fusion

Optimum Passive Beamforming in Relation to Active-Passive Data Fusion. Bryan A. Yocom Literature Survey Report EE381K-14 – MDDSP The University of Texas at Austin March 04, 2008. What is Data Fusion?. Combining information from multiple sensors to better perform signal processing

liz
Download Presentation

Optimum Passive Beamforming in Relation to Active-Passive Data Fusion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Optimum Passive Beamforming in Relation to Active-Passive Data Fusion Bryan A. Yocom Literature Survey Report EE381K-14 – MDDSP The University of Texas at Austin March 04, 2008

  2. What is Data Fusion? • Combining information from multiple sensors to better perform signal processing • Active-Passive Data Fusion: • Active Sonar – good range estimates • Passive Sonar – good bearing estimates Image from http://www.atlantic.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/factsheets/22_UDF_e.shtml

  3. Passive Beamforming • A form of spatial filtering • Narrowband delay-and-sum beamformer • Planar wavefront, linear array • Suppose 2N+1 elements • Sampled array output: xn = a(θ)sn + vn • Steering vector: w(θ) • Beamformer output: yn = wH(θ)xn • Direction of arrival estimation: precision limited by length of array

  4. Adaptive Beamforming • Most common form is Minimum Variance Distortionless Response (MVDR) beamformer (aka Capon beamformer) [Capon, 1969] • Given cross-spectral matrix Rxand replica vector a(θ) • Minimize w*Rxw subject to w*a(θ)=1: • Direction of arrival estimation: much more precise, but very sensitive to mismatch

  5. Cued Beams [Yudichak, et al, 2007] • Need to account for sensitivity of adaptive beamforming (ABF) • Steer (adaptive) beams more densely in areas where the prior probability density function (PDF) is large • Cued beams are steered within a certain number of standard deviations from the mean of a Gaussian prior PDF • Use the beamformer output as a likelihood function • Use Bayes’ rule to generate a posterior PDF • Improvements: • Need to fully cover bearing • The use of the beamformer output as a likelihood function is ad hoc

  6. Bayesian Beamformer [Bell, et al, 2000] • Also assumes a priori PDF • Beamformer is a linear combination of adaptive MVDR beamformers weighted by the posterior probability density function, p(θ|X) • Computationally efficient, O(MVDR) • The likelihood function they derive assumes Gaussian random processes and is therefore less ad hoc then using the beamformer output • Difficult to extend their likelihood function to other classes of beamformers

  7. Robust Capon Beamformer [Li, et al, 2003] • A natural extension of the Capon beamformer • Directly addresses steering vector uncertainty by assuming an ellipsoidal uncertainty set:minimize a*R-1a subject to (a-a0)*C-1(a-a0) ≤ 1 • Computationally efficient, O(MVDR) • When used with cued beams its use could guarantee that bearing is fully covered

  8. Questions?

More Related