Journal of Electronics (China)

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 254–260 | Cite as

Effect of multipath channel models to the recovery algorithms on compressed sensing in UWB channel estimation

Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
  • 137 Downloads

Abstract

Multipath arrivals in an Ultra-WideBand (UWB) channel have a long time intervals between clusters and rays where the signal takes on zero or negligible values. It is precisely the signal sparsity of the impulse response of the UWB channel that is exploited in this work aiming at UWB channel estimation based on Compressed Sensing (CS). However, these multipath arrivals mainly depend on the channel environments that generate different sparse levels (low-sparse or high-sparse) of the UWB channels. According to this basis, we have analyzed the two most basic recovery algorithms, one based on linear programming Basis Pursuit (BP), another using greedy method Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP), and chosen the best recovery algorithm which are suitable to the sparse level for each type of channel environment. Besides, the results of this work is an open topic for further research aimed at creating a optimal algorithm specially for application of CS based UWB systems.

Key words

Compressed Sensing (CS) Ultra-WideBand (UWB) system Recovery algorithms Multipath channel 

CLC index

TP391 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    FCC 04-48. First Report and Order in the Matter of Revision of Part 15 of the Commission Rules Regarding Ultra-wideband Transmission Systems. 2002.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    I. Oppermann, M. Hamalainen, and J. Iinatti. UWB Theory and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England, 2004, 67–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Newaskar and A. P. Chandrakasan. A/D precision requirements for an ultra-wideband radio receiver. IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Systems, San Diego, CA, USA, 2002, Vol. 1, 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Oka and L. Lampe. A compressed sensing receiver for UWB impulse radio in bursty applications like wireless sensor networks. Elsevier Physical Communication, Special Issue on Advances in Ultra-wideband Wireless Communications, 2(2009)4, 248–264.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Z. Peng, H. Zhen, R. C. Qiu, and B. M. Sadler. A compressed sensing based ultra-wideband communication system. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Dresden, Germany, 2009, 1–5.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Yu Huanan and Guo Shuxu. Pre-filtering ultra-wideband channel estimation based on compressed sensing. Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Communications and Mobile Computing (CMC’10), Washington DC, USA, 2010, 110–114.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E. Candes, J. Romberg, and T. Tao. Robust uncertainty principles: Exact signal reconstruction from highly imcomplete frequency information. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(2006)2, 489–509.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    D. L. Donoho. Comressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(2006)4, 1289–1306.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Mishali and Y. C. Eldar. From theory to practice: sub-Nyquist sampling of sparse wideband analog signals. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 4(2010) 2, 375–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Gishkori, G. Leus, and V. Lottici. Compressive sampling based differential detection of ultra wideband signals. Proceedings of IEEE PIMRC 2010, Istanbul, Turkey, 2010, 189–194.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. Haupt, W. Bajwa, G. Raz, et al.. Toeplitz compressed sensing matrices with applications to sparse channel estimation. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 56(2010)11, 5862–5875.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Z. G. Karabulut and A. Yongacoglu. Sparse channel estimation using orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm. 2004 IEEE 60th Vehicular Technology Conference, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2004, Vol. 6, 3880–3884.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. R. Foerster, M. Pendergrass, and A. F. Molisch. A channel model for ultrawideband indoor communication. Proceedings of Wireless Personal Multimedia Communication, WPMC-03, Kanagawa, Japan, 2003, Vol. 2, 116–120.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Foerster. Channel Modeling Sub-Committee Report Final. IEEE P802.15-02/368r5-SG 3a, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    D. L. Donoho and M. Elad. Optimally sparse representation in general (nonorthogonal) dictionaries via l1-minimization. Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences of the United Statas of Amenica, 100(2003), 2197–2202.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    E. J. Candès and T. Tao. Decoding by linear programming. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 51(2005)12, 4203–4215.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    S. S. Chen, D. L. Donoho, and M. A. Saunders. Atomic decomposition by Basis Pursuit. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 20(1998)1, 33–61.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    B. Mehmet, E. Serhat, and Ali C. Hakan. The effect of channel models on compressed sensing based UWB channel estimation. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Ultra Wideband (ICUWB’11), Bologna, Italy, 2011, 375–379.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    S. Erküc, ük, D. I. Kim, and K. S. Kwak. Effects of channel models and Rake receiving process on UWB-IR system performance. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC’07), Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2007, 4896–4901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    S. M. Kay. Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1998, 595.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Electronics, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Electronic Science and EngineeringJilin UniversityChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations