radar adaptive detection and its applications · radar adaptive detection and its applications...
TRANSCRIPT
Radar Adaptive Detection and Its Applications
Presenter: Jun Liu
National Laboratory of Radar Signal ProcessingXidian University
2017.11.19
1
EIES 2017
2
Adaptive detection
2
BackgroundsA
nten
na
Pulse
Range cell
1 N
1
1
J
K
Guard cell
Cell under test
Training data
Covariance matrix estimation
Filter and detection
1
0
H
Hλ?
3
Adaptive detection
3
BackgroundsA
nten
na
Pulse
Range cell
1 N
1
1
J
K
Guard cell
Cell under test
Training data
Covariance matrix estimation
Filter and detection
1
0
H
Hλ?
2
1
3
① Adaptive detection: sufficient training data Detector design Statistical analysis
② Adaptive detection: limited training data Detector design Statistical analysis
③ Adaptive detection: no training data Detector design Statistical analysis
4
Contents
① Adaptive detection: sufficient training data
② Adaptive detection: limited training data
③ Adaptive detection: no training data
5
Contents
• The received data
– s is the steering vector of dimension N £ 1– a is a deterministic but unknown complex scalar– n is disturbance, and has Gaussian distribution with zero mean
and unknown covariance matrix αR, i.e.,– α = 1: homogeneous environment– α ≠ 1: partially homogeneous environment
• A set of training data: • Binary hypothesis testing
6
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Problem Formulation
• According to Neyman-Pearson criterion, the optimal detector is the likelihood ratio test given by
• Due to the unknown parameters, no uniformly most powerful test exists
• This motivates us to design detectors under various criteria
7
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Design Criteria
No uniformly most powerful test
• One-step generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT)
• Two-step GLRT
• Rao test:
• Wald test:
8
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Design Criteria
• Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test– E. J. Kelly, “An adaptive detection algorithm,” IEEE Trans.
Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 115–127, Mar. 1986.• Adaptive Matched Filter
– F. C. Robey, D. R. Fuhrmann, E. J. Kelly, and R. Nitzberg, “A CFAR adaptive matched filter detector,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 208–216, Jan. 1992.
• Adaptive Coherence Estimator– S. Kraut, L. L. Scharf, and R. W. Butler, “The adaptive coherent
estimator: A uniformly most-powerful-invariant adaptive detection statistic,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 427–438, Feb. 2005.
• Rao Test– A. De Maio, “Rao test for adaptive detection in Gaussian
interference with unknown covariance matrix,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 3577–3584, Jul. 2007.
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: State of the Art
9
• Homogeneous environment (α = 1):
• Partially homogeneous environment (α ≠ 1)
• These adaptive detectors are designed for rank-1 signal model10
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Conventional Adaptive Detectors
• Signal subspace model:
– S is the steering vector of dimension N £ p, and p < N– a is a deterministic but unknown complex vector of dimension p £ 1– n is disturbance, and has Gaussian distribution with zero mean and
unknown covariance matrix αR, i.e.,– α = 1: homogeneous environment– α ≠ 1: partially homogeneous environment
• A set of training data: • Advantages of signal subspace model
– Robustness– Polarization radar using multiple polarization channels
11
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Signal Subspace Model
Signal subspace model
• Binary hypothesis testing for the subspace model case:
• A uniformly most powerful test does not exist• Design detectors under various criteria:
– One-step GLRT– Two-step GLRT– Rao test– Wald test
12
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Signal Subspace Model
• Homogeneous environment (α = 1):
• Partially homogeneous environment (α ≠ 1)
13
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Detectors for Subspace Model
• The PFA of GLRT detector
• The PD of GLRT detector
14
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Analytical Performance-GLRT
• The PFA of AMF detector
• The PD of AMF detector
15
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Analytical Performance-AMF
• The PFA of Rao detector
• The PD of Rao detector
16
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Analytical Performance-Rao Test
• The PFA of ASD detector
• The PD of ASD detector
17
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Analytical Performance-ASD
• Double subspace model:
– X is the received data of N £ K– A is a known matrix of N £ J– C is a known matrix of M £ K– B is an unknown coordinate matrix of J £ M– N is noise matrix of N £ K, each column vector has IID Gaussian
distribution with zero mean and unknown covariance matrix αR• A set of training data:• This data model has many applications in
– Multichannel radar: sensor array, pulsed Doppler radar– MIMO radar– Distributed targets– Multiple-band radar
18
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Special cases in homogeneous environments (α = 1):– N > 1 and J = M = K = 1
multichannel radar– N > 1, J > 1, and M = K = 1
signal subspace model– N > 1, J = 1, and M = K > 1
multiple-band or distributed target– N > 1, J > 1, and M = K > 1
Distributed target detection with uncertain steering vector– N > 1, J > 1, M > 1, K > 1
MIMO radar
• Special cases in partially homogeneous environments (α ≠ 1):– N > 1, J = 1 and M = K >1
Distributed target detection
19
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Adaptive detectors in homogeneous environments (α = 1):
20
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Adaptive detectors in homogeneous environments (α = 1):
21
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Adaptive detectors partially homogeneous environments (α ≠ 1):
22
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Adaptive detectors partially homogeneous environments (α ≠ 1):
23
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Further Extension
• Adaptive detectors homogeneous environments (α = 1):
24
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Simulation Results
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 260
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
PD
AODGLRTRaoWald2SDSNT1SNT2SNT3
19.9 19.92 19.94 19.96 19.98 20 20.02 20.04 20.06 20.08 20.10.992
0.993
0.994
0.995
0.996
0.997
0.998
0.999
123
JMK
===
823
JMK
===
• Adaptive detectors homogeneous environments (α = 1):
25
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Simulation Results
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
cos2(φ)
PD
GLRTRaoWald2SDSNT1SNT2SNT3
225
JMK
===
• Adaptive detector design and performance analysis for the signal subspace model
• Many adaptive detectors are designed for the double subspace signal model
26
Adaptive Detection With Sufficient Data: Conclusions
1. Jun Liu, W. Liu, B. Chen, H. Liu, H. Li, and C. Hao, “Modified Rao test for multichannel adaptive signal detection,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 714—725, February 1, 2016.
2. W. Liu, W. Xie, Jun Liu, and Y. Wang, “Adaptive double subspace signal detection in Gaussian background—Part I: homogeneous environments,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 2345—2357, May 2014.
3. W. Liu, W. Xie, Jun Liu, and Y. Wang, “Adaptive double subspace signal detection in Gaussian background—Part II: partially homogeneous environments,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 2358—2369, May 2014.
4. Jun Liu, Z.-J. Zhang and Y. Yang, “Optimal waveform design for generalized likelihood ratio and adaptive matched filter detectors using a diversely polarized antenna,” Signal Processing, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1126—1131, Apr. 2012.
5. Jun Liu, Z.-J. Zhang, P.-L. Shui and H. Liu, “Exact performance of an adaptive subspace detector,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 4945—4950, Sep. 2012.
6. Jun Liu, Z.-J. Zhang, Y. Yang and H. Liu, “A CFAR adaptive subspace detector for first-order or second-order Gaussian signals based on a single observation,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 5126—5140, Nov. 2011.
① Adaptive detection: sufficient training data
② Adaptive detection: limited training data
③ Adaptive detection: no training data
27
Contents
• Reed, Mallett, and Brenann (RMB) rule:– the SNR loss is 3 dB when the amount of homogeneous
training data used to estimate the noise covariance matrix is approximately twice the dimension of the received signal
K ¼ 2N
• Problems: the number of homogeneous training data is limited
28
• Diagonal Loading– L. Du, and J. Li, “Fully Automatic Computation of Diagonal
Loading Levels for Robust Adaptive Beamforming,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 46, no. 1, January 2010
• Joint Domain Localized Processing– R. S. Adve, T. B. Hale and M. C. Wicks, “Practical joint domain
localised adaptive processing in homogeneous and nonhomogeneous environments. Part 1: Homogeneous environments,” IEE Proc.- Radar, Sonar Navig., vol. 147, No. 2, April 2000
• Knowledge-Aided Methods– J. R. Guerci and E. J. Baranoski, “Knowledge-aided adaptive
radar at DARPA,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 41, January 2006
29
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: The State of Art
• Persymmetry exists, when a radar is equipped with a symmetrically spaced linear array for spatial domain processing or symmetrically spaced pulse trains for temporal domain processing
• Persymmetry means double symmetry, for example
• Our focus on convergence rate analysis in the persymmetric case
30
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Prior Structure on Covariance matrix
11*12
*13
*14
1222*23
*13
132322*12
14131211
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Persymmetric matrix
11 12 13 14*12 22 23 24* *13 23 33 34* * *14 24 34 44
S S S SS S S SS S S SS S S S
Hermitian
Persymmetry
• The received data
– s is the steering vector of dimension N £ 1– a is a deterministic but unknown complex scalar– n is disturbance, and has Gaussian distribution with zero mean
and unknown covariance matrix R, i.e., • The minimum variance distortionless response (MVDR)
beamformer can be obtained by solving the optimization problem:
• The optimal weight vector is
31
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate
• Persymmetric structures– Persymmetric steering vector :– Persymmetric covariance matrix:
• The ML estimate of R with persymmetry (up to a scalar) is
• The persymmetric SMI beamformer in the matched case is given by
• The normalized output SNR of the persymmetric SMI beamformer in the matched case is
32
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• In practice, mismatches occur in:– Steering vector: – Covariance matrix:
• The persymmetric SMI beamformer in the mismatched case is
• The normalized output SNR in the mismatched case is
• Problem: what are the average SNR losses in the matched and mismatched cases?
33
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Consider the matched case:• We aim to derive the distribution of
• Define
• The ML estimation can be rewritten as
• It is easy to show that
34
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Define a unitary transformation
• Two real Gaussian vectors:
35
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• From complex domain to real domain
• The normalized output SNR of the persymmetric SMI beamformer can be recast as
36
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Using the Bartlett’s decomposition of a real Wishart matrix, we can obtain
• Then
• Recall RMB’s result:•
• The exploitation of persymmetry is equivalent to doubling the number of training data
• In the following we consider the mismatched case
37
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• In practice, mismatches occur in:– Steering vector mismatch: – Covariance matrix mismatch:
• The persymmetric SMI beamformer in the mismatched case is
• The normalized output SNR in the mismatched case is
• Problem:
38
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• It is very difficult to obtain an exact expression for • Instead, we seek to derive an approximate expression•
where
• Note that when
39
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Remark: for
• Hence,• Now, the problem of deriving the average SNR loss turns to
calculate• We prove that
40
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Result in the mismatched case:
• One special case:– When
– Recall Boroson’s result:
41
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Our Work
• Define• DOA of a target: 400
• DOAs of two interference signals: – 300 and 200
• Matched case:
4220 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
0
5
10
15
Sample Number K
Ave
rage
SIN
R L
oss
(dB
)
ρpermatch, MC
ρpermatch, theory
ρmatch
N = 50
N = 30
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Simulation Results
• Mismatched case:
43
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Sample Number K
Ave
rage
SIN
R L
oss
(dB
)
ρper
mismatch, MC
ρpermismatch, theory
ρmismatch
N = 30
N = 50
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Simulation Results
• Mismatched case:
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Sample Number (K)
Ave
rage
SIN
R L
oss
(dB
)
N = 30, MCN = 30, theoryN = 50, MCN = 50, theory
44
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Simulation Results
• Persymmetric structures are exploited in adaptive filtering• A distribution of the normalized output SNR of the
persymmetric SMI beamformer is derived • An exact expression for the average SNR loss is obtained
in the matched case• An approximate expression for the average SNR loss is
obtained in the mismatched case:– Mismatch in the steering vector– Mismatched in the covariance matrix
Jun Liu, W. Liu, H. Liu, C. Bo, X.-G. Xia, and F. Dai, “Average SINR calculation of a persymmetricsample matrix inversion beamformer,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 2135—2145, April 15, 2016.
45
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Convergence Rate-Conclusions
• The received data:
– p is the steering vector of dimension m £ 1– a is a deterministic but unknown complex scalar– c is noise, and has Gaussian distribution with zero mean and
unknown covariance matrix M, i.e., • A set of training data for estimating the covariance matrix M
• Persymetric structures– Persymmetric steering vector :– Persymmetric covariance matrix:
46
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• Binary hypothesis testing
• Use a unitary matrix T to transform the complex steering vector p and the complex covariance matrix M from complexdomain to real domain
47
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• After transformation
where
• Note that s and R are both real
48
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• The maximum likelihood estimate of R is
• The AMF using the persymmetric structures (i.e., P-AMF) becomes
• Note that s and are real, and x is complex
49
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• The probability of false alarm is derived as
• It is not convenient to use this expression to calculate the detection threshold λ, since an integral is included
• We provide simpler expression to compute the detection threshold
50
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• Case 1): when m is even and K = m/2, we have M =1/2, and
where
51
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• Case 2): when m is odd and K = (m+1)/2, we have M =1, and
52
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• Case 3): to facilitate setting the detection threshold in other cases, the probability of false alarm can be approximated as
53
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• There exists a real orthogonal matrix U:
• Define
• Then
54
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• It can be shown that
• The P-AMF detector can be equivalently written as
55
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• Define , its PDF conditioned on ρ is
• When m is odd, the detection probability conditioned on ρ is
• Note that 56
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
• The unconditioned probability of detection for odd m is
• When m is even, M is not an integer. Intuitively, we can approximate the detection probability for m even as the arithmetic mean of the detection probabilities obtained by replacing m with m+1 and m-1
57
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection
58
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Pro
babi
lity
of D
etec
tion
MFAMFPS-AMFMC
K = 7K = 35
Data dimension
m = 7
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Simulated Data
59
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Pro
babi
lity
of D
etec
tion
MFAMFPS-AMFMC
K =8K = 32
Data dimension
m = 8
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Simulated Data
60
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010
-3
10-2
10-1
100
Detection Threshold λ
Pro
balit
y of
Fal
se A
larm
m=8, Range #15
MC,K=4MC,K=6MC,K=8theory K=4theory K=6theory,K=8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010
-3
10-2
10-1
100
Detection Threshold λ
Pro
balit
y of
Fal
se A
larm
m=8, Range# 27
MC,K=4MC,K=6MC,K=8theory K=4theory K=6theory,K=8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010
-3
10-2
10-1
100
Detection Threshold λ
Pro
balit
y of
Fal
se A
larm
m=8, Range# 48
MC,K=4MC,K=6MC,K=8theory K=4theory K=6theory,K=8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010
-3
10-2
10-1
100
Detection Threshold λ
Pro
balit
y of
Fal
se A
larm
m=8, Range #56
MC,K=4MC,K=6MC,K=8theoryK=4theory K=6theory,K=8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4010
-3
10-2
10-1
100
Detection Threshold λ
Pro
balit
y of
Fal
se A
larm
m=8, Range #68
MC,K=4MC,K=6MC,K=8theory K=4theory K=6theory,K=8
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
• PFA = 0.01
61
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SCR(dB)
PD
m = 8, K = 8, Range#15, fd = 0.02
AMFP-AMFCA-CFAR
• PFA = 0.01
62
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SCR(dB)
PD
m = 8, K = 12, Range#15, fd = 0.02
AMFP-AMFCA-CFAR
• PFA = 0.01
63
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 400
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SCR(dB)
PD
m = 8, K = 16, Range#15, fd = 0.02
AMFP-AMFCA-CFAR
• Persymmetric structures are exploited in adaptive detection• Simpler expressions for the probability of false alarm of the
P-AMF are provided• Closed-form expression for the detection probability of the P-
AMF is derived• The P-AMF outperforms the conventional AMF, especially in
the case of limited training data
64
Jun Liu, G. Cui, H. Li, and B. Himed, “On the performance of a persymmetric adaptive matched filter,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 2605—2614, October 2015.
Adaptive Detection With Limited Data: Persymmetric Adaptive Detection-Conclusions
① Adaptive detection: sufficient training data
② Adaptive detection: limited training data
③ Adaptive detection: no training data
65
Contents
• Distributed MIMO radar – Spatial diversity
• Collocated MIMO radar– Waveform diversity
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: MIMO Radar Backgrounds
66
Center
T, R
T, R
• A collocated MIMO radar: M transmit antennas and N receive antennas
• The received data:
– X is the received data of N £ K– ar(θ) is the received steering vector of dimension N £ 1– at(θ) is the transmit steering vector of dimension M £ 1– S is the transmitted waveform matrix of M £ K– a is a deterministic but unknown complex scalar– V is disturbance, and each column vector has IID Gaussian
distribution with zero mean and unknown covariance matrix R• Binary hypothesis testing:
67
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Problem Formulation
• Known disturbance covariance matrix– I. Bekkerman and J. Tabrikian, “Target detection and localization
using MIMO radars and sonars,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 3873–3883, October 2006.
• Adaptive GLRT detector– L. Xu, J. Li, and P. Stoica, “Target detection and parameter
estimation for MIMO radar systems,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 927–939, July 2008.
– No statistical analysis for the GLRT detector
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: State of the Art
68
• Rao test:
• Wald test:
• Tunable detector:
69
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Proposed Detectors
• Probability of false alarm
• Probability of detection in the matched case
70
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Analytical Performance
• The nominal receive steering vector deviates from the actual one, and the mismatched angle is defined by
• Probability of detection
71
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Analytical Performance-Mismatched Case
• Matched case (cos2φ = 0, φ = 0o), M = N =10
72
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Simulated Data
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(a) K = 1.5N
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 5MC
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(b) K = 2N
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 5MC
• Mismatched case (cos2φ = 0.9412), M = N =10
73
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Simulated Data
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(a) K = 1.5N
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 5MC
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 300
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR (dB)
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(b) K = 2N
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 5MC
• Mismatched case, M = N = 10
74
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Simulated Data
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
cos2φ
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(a) SNR = 5 dB
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.1α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 10
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
cos2φ
Det
ectio
n P
roba
bilit
y
(b) SNR = 0 dB
GLRTα = 0 (i.e., Wald)α = 0.1α = 0.5α = 1 (i.e., Rao)α = 2
• M = N = 16
75
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.1410
-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Threshold
Pro
babi
lity
of fa
lse
alar
m
L = 5
GLRT, theoryGLRT, MCRao test, theoryRao test, MCWald test, theoryWald test, MC
• M = N = 16
76
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.510
-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
Threshold
Pro
babi
lity
of fa
lse
alar
m
L = 10
GLRT, theoryGLRT, MCRao test, theoryRao test, MCWald test, theoryWald test, MC
• M = N = 16
77
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
• M = N = 16
78
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
• M = N = 16
79
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
• M = N = 16
80
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
• M = N = 16
81
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 320
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR(dB)
PD
N = 16, L = 10, fd=0.02
GLRTRaoWaldCA-CFAR
• M = N = 16
82
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Numerical Results-Real Data
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 320
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
SNR(dB)
PD
N = 16, L = 5, fd = 0.02
GLRTRaoWaldCA-CFAR
• Rao test, Wald test, and tunable detector are proposed in collocated MIMO radar
• Training data is not required for the adaptive detection• All three detectors exhibit CFAR against clutter covariance
matrix• Analytical expressions for the PFA and PD are derived for both
matched and mismatched cases
83
1. W. Liu, Y. Wang, Jun Liu, W. Xie, H. Chen, and W. Gu, “Adaptive detection without training data in collocated MIMO Radar,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 2469—2479, July 2015.
2. Jun Liu, S. Zhou, W. Liu, J. Zheng, H. Liu, and J. Li, “Tunable adaptive detection in collocated MIMO Radar,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Accepted for publication.
Adaptive Detection Without Training Data: Conclusions
Thank you!
84