| Literature DB >> 35214207 |
Fangzheng Zhao1, Guoping Hu2, Chenghong Zhan1, Yule Zhang1.
Abstract
For the multi-target DOA estimation problem of uniform linear arrays, this paper proposes a DOA estimation method based on the deep convolution neural network. The algorithm adopts the deep convolutional neural network, and the DOA estimation problem of the array signal is transformed into the inverse mapping problem of the array output covariance matrix to a binary sequence in which "1" indicates that there is a target incident in the corresponding angular direction at that position. The upper triangular array of the discrete covariance matrix is used as the data input to realize the DOA estimation of multiple sources. The simulation results show that the DOA estimation accuracy of the proposed algorithm is significantly better than that of the typical super-resolution estimation algorithm under the conditions of low SNR and small snapshot. Under the conditions of high SNR and large snapshot, the estimation accuracy of the proposed algorithm is basically the same as those of the MUSIC algorithm, ESPRIT algorithm, and ML algorithm, which are better than that of the deep fully connected neural network. The analysis of the simulation results shows that the algorithm is effective, and the time and space complexity can be further reduced by replacing the square array with the upper triangular array as the input.Entities:
Keywords: DOA estimation; covariance matrix; deep convolutional neural network; the upper triangular matrix
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35214207 PMCID: PMC8963012 DOI: 10.3390/s22041305
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1DCNN model.
Figure 2The specific CNN structure.
Figure 3Two convolution processes of the upper triangular array. (1), (2) and (3) in denote the form of the data before and after the convolution operation, respectively.
Figure 4The Leaky ReLU function.
Figure 5Accuracy of model output for different step sizes.
Figure 6RMSE of each algorithm with different numbers of snapshots.
Figure 7RMSE of each algorithm with different numbers of SNR.
RMSE comparison of Triu and Matrix arrays as inputs with different numbers of array elements.
| Array Elements | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Triu matrix | 0.0873 | 0.0864 | 0.0852 | 0.0835 |
| Matrix | 0.0882 | 0.0857 | 0.0844 | 0.0837 |
Comparisons of the number of operations between Triu and Matrix arrays as inputs in different layers with different numbers of array elements.
| Number | C1 | C2 | C3 | P1 | SUM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | Triu | 432 | 3024 | 8640 | 2592 | 14,688 |
| Matrix | 768 | 5184 | 13,824 | 3456 | 23,232 | |
| 8 | Triu | 660 | 5184 | 18,144 | 5184 | 29,172 |
| Matrix | 1200 | 9216 | 31,104 | 7776 | 49,296 | |
| 10 | Triu | 936 | 7920 | 31,104 | 8640 | 48,600 |
| Matrix | 1728 | 14,400 | 55,296 | 13,824 | 85,248 | |
| 12 | Triu | 1260 | 11,232 | 47,520 | 18,144 | 78,156 |
| Matrix | 2376 | 20,736 | 86,400 | 31,104 | 140,616 | |
Figure 8Comparisons of the number of intermediate parameters required under different inputs.