INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF c 2007 Institute for Scientic

INFORMATION AND SYSTEMS SCIENCES Computing and Information

Volume 3, Number 4, Pages 613622
A RECURSIVE METHOD IMPLEMENTATION FOR ROBUST
ADAPTIVE BEAMFORMING IN THE PRESENCE OF
MISMATCHES
XIN SONG , JINKUAN WANG, XUEFEN NIU AND YING GUAN
Abstract. When adaptive arrays are applied to practical problems, the per-
formance degradation of adaptive beamforming algorithms may become even
more pronounced than in the ideal case because some of underlying assump-
tions on the environment, sources, or sensor array can be violated and this
may cause a mismatch between the look direction of the beamformer and the
actual direction of arrival(DOA) of the signal. In the practical environment,
complete knowledge of signal characteristics is not available and the environ-
ment is time varying. In these cases, the recursive algorithm to robust adaptive
beamforming is required. In this paper, we propose robust adaptive beamform-
ing algorithm based on explicit modeling of uncertainties in source DOA and
a Bayesian approach. The proposed algorithm has nearly optimal performance
under good conditions, is robust to uncertainty in DOA under poor conditions
and makes the mean output array SINR consistently close to the optimal one.
Computer simulation results demonstrate better performance of our proposed
algorithm than that of other algorithms.
Key Words. adaptive arrays, robust adaptive beamforming, signal mismatch
problem, uncertainty in source DOA
1. Introduction
Adaptive beamforming is used for enhancing a desired signal while suppressing
noise and interference at the output of an array of sensors. Adaptive beamforming
has found numerous applications in elds such as radar, sonar, astronomy, medi-
cal imaging and wireless communications [1]-[5]. The perturbation of many array
parameters from their ideal conditions under which the theoretical performance of
the system is predicted causes degradation in the system performance by reducing
the array gain and altering the beam pattern. The performances of the existing
adaptive beamforming methods are known to degrade severely in the presence of
even slight mismatches between the actual and presumed array responses to the
desired signal. Therefore, robust adaptive beamforming algorithms appear to be of
primary importance. There are several ecient approaches are known to provide
an improved robustness against some types of mismatches. The most common is
linearly constrained minimum variance (LCMV) beamformer [6], which provides
robustness against uncertainty in the signal look direction. To account for the sig-
nal steering vector mismatches, additional linear constraints (point and derivative
constraints) can be imposed to improve the robustness of adaptive beamformers
[7], [8]. But, the beamformers lose degrees of freedom for interference suppression.
Diagonal loading [9] has been a popular approach to improve the robustness of the
Received by the editors June 1, 2006 and, in revised form, March 22, 2007.
613
614 X.SONG, J.K.WANG, X.F. NIU AND Y. GUAN
adaptive beamforming algorithms. However, a serious drawback of the approach
is that there is no reliable way to choose the diagonal loading factor. From the
above brief review, it is clear that these approaches can not be expected to provide
sucient robustness improvements.
In this paper, we propose a novel recursive approach to robust adaptive beam-
forming. We show clearly how to eciently compute the proposed algorithm by
using a Bayesian method. The proposed algorithm provides excellent robustness
to DOA uncertainty, enhances the array system performance under nonideal condi-
tions and makes the mean output array SINR consistently close to the optimal one.
The excellent performance of our proposed recursive algorithm is demonstrated via
a number of simulation examples.
2. Problem formulation
2.1. Mathematical model. Consider a uniform linear array with M omnidirec-
tional sensors spaced by the distance d and D narrow-band incoherent plane waves,
impinging from directions {
0
,
1
, ,
D1
}. The observation vector is given by
X(k) = s(k) +i(k) +n(k)
= s
0
(k)a +i(k) +n(k), (1)
where X(k) = [x
1
(k), x
2
(k), ..., x
M
(k)]
T
is the complex vector of array observations,
s
0
(k) is the signal waveform, a(k) is the signal steering vector, and i(k) and n(k) are
the interference and noise components, respectively. The output of a narrowband
beamformer is given by
(2) y(k) = W
H
X(k),
where W = [w
1
, w
2
, ..., w
M
]
T
is the complex vector of beamformer weights, and
()
T
and ()
H
stand for the transpose and Hermitian transpose, respectively.
The signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) has the following form:
(3) SINR =
W
H
R
s
W
W
H
R
i+n
W
,
where
(4) R
s
= E{s(k)s(k)
H
},
(5) R
i+n
= E{(i(k) +n(k))(i(k) +n(k))
H
},
are the M M signal and interference-plus-noise covariance matrices, respectively,
and E{} denotes the statistical expectation.
2.2. Minimumvariance distortionless response (MVDR) algorithm. Typ-
ically, the adaptive beamformer weights are computed in order to optimize the per-
formance in terms of a certain criterion. Although several criteria can be used, we
limit our consideration by the output SINR criterion which is rewritten as [10]
(6) SINR =

2
s
|W
H
a|
2
W
H
R
i+n
W
,
where
2
s
is the signal power.
The problem of nding the maximum of (6) is equivalent to the following opti-
mization problem
(7) min
W
W
H
R
i+n
W subject to W
H
a = 1.
ROBUST ADAPTIVE BEAMFORMING 615
From (7), this yields the version of the well-known minimum variance distortionless
response (MVDR) beamformer
(8) W
MV
=
R
1
i+n
a
a
H
R
1
i+n
a
.
In practical applications, the exact interference-plus-noise covariance matrix
R
i+n
is unavailable. Therefore, the sample covariance matrix
(9)

R =
1
N
N

i=1
X(i)X(i)
H
is used instead of R
i+n
, where N is the number of snapshots available.
A simple approximation of the MVDR weight vector is written as
(10)

W
MV
=

R
1
a
a
H
R
1
a
.
When DOA of the signal is known exactly, MVDR beamformer provides a dis-
tortionless response in the direction of the desired signal, while suppressing noise
and interference. However, if there is uncertainty in DOA of the desired signal, the
performance of MVDR beamformer is known to degrade severely.
2.3. Linearly constrained minimum variance (LCMV) algorithm. To ac-
count for DOA uncertainty, additional linear constraints can be imposed to reduce
sensitivity to pointing errors. The constraints is on the beamformer output at J
values of near the presumed DOA. The weight vector can be found from the
following constrained minimization problem:
(11) min
W
W
H
R
xx
W subject to C
H
W = f ,
where R
xx
= E[X(k)X(k)
H
] is the training data covariance matrix, C is the MJ
matrix of steering vectors for the constrained DOAs
C = [a(
1
), a(
2
), ..., a(
J
)]
and f is the J 1 vector of constraints.
The constrained weight vector is given by
(12) W
LC
= R
1
xx
C(C
H
R
1
xx
C)
1
f .
The unknown DOA can be estimated from L snapshots of the received data vector
taken at times t
1
, t
2
, ..., t
L
(13) X
L
= [X(t
1
)
T
, X(t
2
)
T
, ..., X(t
L
)
T
]
T
.
By using

(X(t
L
)) instead of , the weight vector can be rewritten as
(14)

W
LC
=
R
1
xx
a(

)
a(

)
H
R
1
xx
a(

)
.
When the observed data is sucient to yield good estimates of the DOA, LCMV
beamformer works well. But when the estimates are poor, there can be degradation
in performance. Moreover, the additional constraints protect the desired signal but
lose degrees of freedom used for noise and interference suppression.
616 X.SONG, J.K.WANG, X.F. NIU AND Y. GUAN
3. Robust adaptive beamforming
To account for the signal steering vector mismatches and uncertainty in source
DOA, we use a Bayesian approach to the robust adaptive beamforming algorithm.
Using a Bayesian approach, it is assumed that the DOA is a discrete random
variable with a priori probability density function (pdf) q(), which reects the
level of uncertainty in the source DOA. The Bayesian approach has been used for
detecting signals under directional uncertainty in [10], with averaging over the a
priori pdf q(). For computational simplicity, we assume that q() is dened only
on a discrete set of P points, = [
1
,
2
, ...,
P
], in the a priori parameter space.
Alternatively, the unknown DOA can be estimated from K snapshots of the
received data vector taken at times t
1
, ..., t
K
,
(15) X
K
= [X(t
1
)
T
, ..., X(t
K
)
T
]
T
.
For each
i
, the a posteriori pdf is given by
(16) p(
i
|X
K
) =
q(
i
)p(X
K
|
i
)

P
j=1
q(
j
)p(X
K
|
j
)
i = 1, 2, ..., P
where p(X
K
|
i
) is the pdf of
i
given the observations. If it is assumed that the
source and noise waveforms are the Gaussian random processes of uncorrelated,
zero-mean, stationary with variance
2
s
, and covariance
2
n
I, respectively, then
p(X
K
|
i
) is a Gaussian density with zero mean with covariance
(17) R
X
(
i
) =
2
s
a(
i
)a(
i
)
H
+R
i+n
.
If there are no interferers R
i+n
=
2
n
I, p(
i
|X
K
) has the form by applying Bayes
rule[11]
(18) p(
i
|X
K
) =
q(
i
)exp{Ka(
i
)

R
K
a(
i
)
H
}

P
j=1
q(
j
)exp{Ka(
j
)

R
K
a(
j
)
H
}
,
where

R
K
is the sample covariance matrix of X
K
and is a monotonically increas-
ing function of SNR.
when interferers are present, p(
i
|X
K
) is dicult to implement because it is a
function of R
i+n
, which is unknown and hard to estimate. We use the intuition
gained from no interferers case to derive approximate the p(
i
|X
K
) with a simpler
expression[12]
(19) p(
i
|X
K
) =
q(
i
)exp{K(a(
i
)

R
1
K
a(
i
)
H
)
1
}

P
j=1
q(
j
)exp{K(a(
j
)

R
1
K
a(
j
)
H
)
1
}
.
At high SNR, it will be sharply peaked near the true DOA and at low SNR, it will
be relatively at over all DOAs and revert to the priori pdf.
Cost function of the proposed algorithm minimizes the output power while main-
taining a distortionless response on the average. Note that the beamforming prob-
lem of interest here can be formulated as follows:
(20) min
W
J(W) =
n

i=1

ni
|W
H
X(i)|
2
subject to a
H
W = 1 ,
where denotes a forgetting factor, and a is an average steering vector averaged
over p(|X
K
)
(21) a =
P

i=1
a(
i
) p(
i
|X
K
) = Ap,
ROBUST ADAPTIVE BEAMFORMING 617
where A is the M P matrix of steering vectors
(22) A = [a(
1
), a(
2
), ..., a(
P
)],
and p is the P 1 vector
(23) p = [ p(
1
|X
K
), p(
2
|X
K
), ..., p(
P
|X
K
)]
T
.
In the beamformer, increasing number of DOAs in does not lose adaptive
degrees of freedom, because they are averaged to form a composite steering vec-
tor. The number of adding points is chosen to cover the a priori parameter space
suciently densely while keeping the computational requirements low.
The optimal weight vector can be found using Lagrange multiplier method by
means of minimization of the function
(24) H(W, ) =
1
2
n

i=1

ni
|W
H
X(i)|
2
+(1 a
H
W),
where is a Lagrange multiplier. Taking gradient of (24) and equating it to zero,
we obtain
(25) R
xf
W = a,
where
(26) R
xf
=
n

i=1

ni
X(i)X(i)
H
.
Multiplying (25) by R
1
xf
, we can rewrite this equation to obtain the optimal weight
vector
(27) W
R
= R
1
xf
a.
Inserting (27) into the constraint in (20) and taking into account that by denition
0, we obtain
(28) =
1
p
T
A
H
R
1
xf
Ap
.
Substituting (28) into (27), we obtain that the minimum of (24) is achieved at
(29) W
R
=
R
1
xf
Ap
p
T
A
H
R
1
xf
Ap
.
In an environment, complete knowledge of signal characteristics is not available
and the matrix inverse has more computation complexity, so we need a recursive
algorithm to replace computing inverse matrix directly.
Let
(30) Q(n) = R
1
xf
(n).
Using the matrix inverse lemma, we can obtain
Q(n) =
1

[Q(n 1)
Q(n 1)X(n)X(n)
H
Q(n 1)
+X(n)
H
Q(n 1)X(n)
]
=
1

[Q(n 1) G(n)X(n)
H
Q(n 1)], (31)
where
(32) G(n) =
Q(n 1)X(n)
+X(n)
H
Q(n 1)X(n)
.
618 X.SONG, J.K.WANG, X.F. NIU AND Y. GUAN
Based on a Bayesian approach, the proposed robust adaptive beamforming algo-
rithm is formulated as follows:
G(n) =
Q(n 1)X(n)
+X(n)
H
Q(n 1)X(n)
Q(n) =
1

[Q(n 1) G(n)X(n)
H
Q(n 1)]
W(n) =
Q(n)Ap
p
T
A
H
Q(n)Ap
. (33)
In summary, the proposed robust adaptive beamforming algorithm consists of
the following steps
step 1) Compute the sample covariance matrix

R
K
in (9).
step 2) for i = 1, ..., P
T
P
(
i
) = (a(
i
)
H

R
1
K
a(
i
))
1
p
den
=

P
j=1
q(
j
)exp{KT
P
(
j
)}
p(
i
|X) =
q(
i
)exp{KT
P
(
i
)}
p
den
step 3) Compute a = Ap in (21), Q(n) in (31) and G(n) in (32), respec-
tively.
step 4) Update the weight vector W(n).
4. Simulation results
In this section, we present some simulations to justify the performance of the
proposed robust adaptive beamforming with a Bayesian approach. We assume a
uniform linear array with M = 10 omnidirectional sensors spaced half a wavelength
apart. For each scenario, 100 simulation runs are used to obtain each simulated
point. The a priori uncertainty in the DOA is over the region u = sin [0.3, 0.3].
The set is composed of P = 20 evenly spaced points on the interval [0.3, 0.3].
We assume that the desired signal spatial signature is plane wave impinging from
the DOA u
s
= 0.223. Two interfering sources are assumed to impinge on the
array from the DOAs u
I1
= 0.6 and u
I2
= 0.6. For the LCMV beamformer, ve
distortionless constraints were used at the points {0.3, 0.15, 0, 0.15, 0.3}.
Example 1: The a posteriori pdf p(
i
|X
K
)
In the example, Fig.1 displays the a posteriori pdf p(
i
|X
K
) versus DOA for the
xed SNR = 0dB. Fig.2 displays the a posteriori pdf p(
i
|X
K
) versus DOA for the
xed SNR = 10dB. The vertical lines in the two gures denote the direction of
arrival of the desired signal u
s
= 0.223. From the example, we note that at high
SNR, the a posteriori pdf is sharply peaked near the true DOA and at low SNR, it
has a wide mainbeam over the a priori parameter space.
Example 2: Comparison of the beampatterns
Fig.3 displays the beampatterns of the three methods tested for the xed SNR =
0dB. Fig.4 displays the beampatterns of the three methods tested for the xed
SNR = 10dB. The vertical lines in the two gures denote the direction of arrival
of the desired signal u
s
= 0.223. In the example, the MVDR algorithm treats the
desired signal as a main beam interferer and is trying to place a null on it and the
LCMV algorithm does not suppress noise and interferences suciently. Note that
when SNR is high, the proposed algorithm can adapt the radiation pattern of the
antenna to direct narrow beam to the desired signal and place nulls on interfering
sources. When SNR is low, beampattern of the proposed algorithm is over 0dB,
which is more robust against DOA uncertainty.
ROBUST ADAPTIVE BEAMFORMING 619
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
u
Figure 1. The a posteriori pdf p(
i
|X
K
)(SNR = 0dB)
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
u
Figure 2. The a posteriori pdf p(
i
|X
K
)(SNR = 10dB)
Example 3: Comparison of output SINR
Fig.5 displays the performance of the three methods tested versus the number
of snapshots for the xed SNR = 0dB. The performance of these methods tested
versus the number of snapshots for the xed SNR = 20dB is shown in Fig.6.
In this example, the MVDR algorithm is sensitive to DOA uncertainty, which can
easily occur in practical situations. The LCMV algorithm can improve robustness
to pointing errors but can not suppress interferences suciently. Obviously, the
proposed robust adaptive beamforming algorithm with a Bayesian approach pro-
vides a signicantly improved robustness against DOA uncertainty. Moreover, the
proposed algorithm shows excellent performance at all values of N. Note that the
performance of the proposed algorithm can outperform that of the other algorithms.
620 X.SONG, J.K.WANG, X.F. NIU AND Y. GUAN
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
u
A
r
r
a
y

b
e
a
m
p
a
t
t
e
r
n
s

(
d
B
)
the proposed algorithm
LCMV algorithm
MVDR algorithm
Figure 3. Comparison of the beampatterns (SNR = 0dB)
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
u
A
r
r
a
y

b
e
a
m
p
a
t
t
e
r
n

(
d
B
)
the proposed algorithm
LCMV algorithm
MVDR algorithm
Figure 4. Comparison of the beampatterns (SNR = 10dB)
5. Conclusions
We have shown how to obtain a recursive algorithm implementation for robust
adaptive beamforming, which provides an improved robustness against uncertainty
in source DOA. Obviously, the mean output SINR of the proposed algorithm is
better than that of the conventional algorithms in a wide range of N and is close to
the optimal one. The proposed algorithm enhances the array system performance
under nonideal conditions. Computer simulation results are present which the
proposed algorithm enjoys signicantly better performance as compared with the
existing adaptive beamforming algorithms.
ROBUST ADAPTIVE BEAMFORMING 621
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
40
30
20
10
0
10
O
u
t
p
u
t

S
I
N
R

(
d
B
)
Number of snapshots
the proposed algorithm
optimal SINR
LCMV algorithm
MVDR algorithm
Figure 5. Output SINR versus N (SNR = 0dB)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
Number of snapshots
O
u
t
p
u
t

S
I
N
R

(
d
B
)
MVDR algorithm
LCMV algorithm
the proposed algorithm
optimal SINR
Figure 6. Output SINR versus N (SNR = 20dB)
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by Directive Plan of Science Research from the Bureau
of Education of Hebei Province, China, under Grant no.Z2004103.
References
[1] Brennan L. E., Mallet J. D., and Reed I. S., Adaptive arrays in airborne MTI radar, IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propagation, Vol.24, pp.607615, 1976.
[2] Krolik J. L., The performance of matched-eld beamformers with Mediterranean vertical
array data, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, Vol.44, pp.26052611, 1996.
[3] Gorodetskaya E. Y., Malekhanov A. I., Sazontov A. G. and Vdovicheva N. K., Deep-water
acoustic coherence at long ranges: Theoretical prediction and eects on large-array signal
processing, IEEE J. Ocean. Eng., Vol.24, pp.156171, 1999.
[4] Godara L. C., Application of antenna arrays to mobile communication, Part II: Beam-
forming and direction-of-arrival considerations, Proc. IEEE, Vol.85, pp.12181219, 1997.
622 X.SONG, J.K.WANG, X.F. NIU AND Y. GUAN
[5] Rapapport T. S., Ed., Smart Antennas: Adaptive Arrays, Algorithms, and Wireless Position
Location, Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 1998.
[6] Monzingo R. A. and Miller T. W., Introduction to adaptive arrays, New York: Wiley, 1980.
[7] Buckley K. M. and Griths L. J., An adaptive generalized sidelobe canceller with derivative
constraints, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., Vol.AP-34, pp.311319, 1986.
[8] Zhang S. and Thng I. L., Robust presteering derivative constraints for broadband antenna
arrays, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, Vol.50, pp.110, 2002.
[9] Carlson B. D., Covariance matrix estimation errors and diagonal loading in adaptive arrays,
IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., Vol.24, pp.397401, 1998.
[10] Hodgkiss W. S. and Nolte L. W., Optimal array processor performance trade-os under
directional uncertainty, in Proc. IEEE Trans. Aero. Elec. Syst., Vol. 12, pp. 605615, 2000.
[11] Bell K. L., Ephraim Y., and Van Trees H. L., Robust adaptive beamforming using data
dependent constraints, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech Signal Process., Munich,
Germany, Apr. 1997.
[12] Bell K. L., Ephraim Y., and Van Trees H. L., A Bayesian approach to robust adaptive
beamforming, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, Vol. 48, pp. 386398, 2000.
[13] Bell K. L., Ephraim Y., and Van Trees H. L., Robust adaptive beamforming under un-
certainty in source direction-of-arrival, in Proc. 8th IEEE Workshop Stat. Signal Array
Process., Corfu, Greece, June 1996.
Xin Song was born in Jilin, China, in 1978. She received M.S. degree in control theory and
control engineering at Northeastern University in China in 2005. Since March 2005, she has
been working for her PhD degree at the Northeastern University. Her research interest is robust
adaptive beamforming.
E-mail: sxin78916@mail.neuq.edu.cn
Jinkuan Wang received the PhD degree from the University of Electro-Communications, Japan,
in 1993. He is currently a professor in the School of Information Science and Engineering at
Northeastern University, China, since 1998. His main interests are in the area of intelligent
control and adaptive array.
E-mail: wjk@mail.neuq.edu.cn
School of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang, 110004,
China
URL: http://www.neuq.edu.cn/sasp/index.htm