Cooperative Radar and Communications Signaling:
The Estimation and Information Theory Odd Couple
Daniel W. Bliss
School of Electrical, Computer and Energy Engineering
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona USA
AbstractWe investigate cooperative radar and communica-
tions signaling. While each system typically considers the other
system a source of interference, by considering the radar and
communications operations to be a single joint system, the perfor-
mance of both systems can, under certain conditions, be improved
by the existence of the other. As an initial demonstration, we focus
on the radar as relay scenario and present an approach denoted
multiuser detection radar (MUDR). A novel joint estimation
and information theoretic bound formulation is constructed for
a receiver that observes communications and radar return in
the same frequency allocation. The joint performance bound is
presented in terms of the communication rate and the estimation
rate of the system.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Given the reality of the ever increasing strain on limited
spectral resources, radar and communications systems are in
some cases being forced into an uneasy coexistence. The
typical assumption is that the existence of one type of system
(either a radar or a communications system) will degrade the
performance of the other system. Consequently, the systems
are usually isolated temporally, spectrally, or spatially in most
operations.
A. Background
During the last decade, cognitive radio technologies [1], [2]
have been considered that implement opportunistic spectrum
sharing as they are able to sense under-utilized spectrum and
adaptively allocate it to other users [3]. A similar coexistence
problem is currently faced by radars as their performance de-
teriorates due to coexisting wireless communications systems.
Cognitive radars indicate initial attempts to adapt intelligently
to complicated environments [4].
Current research on the spectral coexistence of radar and
communications systems has mainly involved concepts similar
to cooperative sensing [5][9]. Other methodologies that have
been applied to the radar-communications coexistence problem
include signal sharing [10], [11] and waveform shaping [12]
[15]. In other research and applied systems radars based on
communication system waveforms have been considered. As
an example, operating the radar passively or parasitically by
using a broadcast communication system has been investigated
This work was sponsored in part by DARPA under the SSPARC program.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official
policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.
978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE
(for example in [16] and references therein). Also, radios
that communicate with radar systems by modulating the radar
waveform have been considered [17].
B. Contributions
The principal contribution of the paper is that we develop a
novel performance bound formulation to provide insight into
the limits of coexisting radar and communications systems.
For joint decoding and radar channel estimation (which we
denote multiuser detection radar: MUDR), we allow the radar
to demodulate and decode the communications signal jointly
with estimating its radar channel. Rather than have radar and
communications system performance degraded, the perfor-
mance of both systems is potentially enhanced by the systems
interactions. In its most general form, the coexisting radar
and communications system becomes a large heterogenous
multistatic radars or statistical multiple-input multiple-output
(MIMO) radar [18][20] and simultaneously a heterogenous
communication network [2]. These jointly cooperative systems
are only possible under certain theoretical constraints that we
begin to explore in this paper.
In this paper, as a preliminary exploration, we consider the
limited scenario of a joint radar and communications relay.
In this case, the node traditionally denoted radar is also a
communications relay that jointly estimates the radar return
and receives a communication signal. The radar waveform is
then assumed to be a communications waveform. Because
of the advantages of the radar power, the performance of
the communications between two or more nodes is typically
improved by using the radar as a relay compared to direct
ground-to-ground communications. The principal constraint in
performance of this system is in simultaneous reception of the
radar return and communications signal, and is therefore the
main thrust of this work.
II. J OINT E STIMATION /C OMMUNICATIONS B OUNDS
In general, much like network communications [2], exact
bounds are challenging. However, in certain cases, such as
the multiuser base station, bounds are tenable. We develop
a generalization of the multiple-access receiver discussion
for the joint radar channel estimation and communications
reception.
0050
 By employing mild mod- Thus, the communication rate improvement could potentially
ing
he radar mild mod- can broadcast Thus, thea communication be orders of magnitude. rate improvement could potentially
n with broadcastthe radar a waveform.
be orders of magnitude. To study the performance bounds associated with the radar
dar waveform.
mitted signal, it can employ To study the as aperformance
relay concept, bounds associated analogy
an interesting with thetoradar the information
hus,adar it can the employ
channel
communication as a relay
without rate concept,
loss theoreticancapacity
improvement interesting
couldofpotentially analogy
the multiuser to the information
receiver can be employed.
re without
aggressive
orders of loss theoretic capacity
communica-
magnitude. In particular,of the multiuser in considering receiver the two can transmitter,
be employed. single receiver
eTo communica-
ously wideband A. Multiple-Access
In particular,
communi-
study the performance bounds associated with the radar in
multiuser Communications
considering problem, the two
the Analogy
transmitter,
capacity regionsingle known [2], [21].insight
is receiver For into the simultaneous channel use by communications
and with
a relay communi-
essentially
concept,For multiuser
noanloss in
interesting problem,
a given
analogy the capacity
average to the regionpower,
transmit
information is known with [2],axes [21]. For by theand
defined data radar.
reference, we review the multiple-access communica-
allyormance.
eoretic loss in ofa given
no capacity the average
multiuser transmit
ratereceiver
of User can power,
1, andbe withdata
the
employed. axes rate defined
of User by2,the thedata capacity region
tions system
ratea of User
performance
1, and thebydata
bound
rate
[2], 2,[21].
of receiver
User
In the multiple-
the capacity region
simple
particular, example of
in considering sym- the two is given transmitter, an irregular
single pentagon.
access is channel that we discuss here, we assume that two B. Joint Radar-Communications Notation
ple of isaproblem,
stems
ultiuser sym-
the passive thegiven radar.by an
capacity regionirregular
In our is problem,
known pentagon. [2],for[21].the simultaneous
For reception of the source
given passive
Parasitic
mploys averageradar. independent
Communications:
a broadcasttransmitcom-In our transmitters
problem,
By
power, communications for
employing
with axes definedand the are
simultaneous
mild communicating
mod-
by the reception of with
the
data return, we can replace rate
the radar Thus, the communicationa single the rate
source improvement could potentially
roadcast
of the com-
radar receiver.
communications
waveform, The the channel-attenuation-power
of radartheand the
can
second radar
broadcast
user return,
by a thewe be canproduct
orders
information replace of for the
magnitude.
rate the
rate two
associated with
Because there is a significant quantity of notation in dis-
ting source. In this case,
e of User 1, and the data rate of User 2, the capacity region
transmitters
of bistatic
thepentagon.
second are thegiven
user bybythe 1 and a2 P of, respectively. Their cussing this topic, withinthe Table
radarI we present an overview of the
1information rate aassociated with
In normally.
this case, 2 2 To study
nication
tes
given bysignal parasitically
The
an irregular with the radar
time-varying awaveform.
Pparameters 2 radarthereturn. performance The solution bounds associated
munications:
.
nication The
the radar
In our problem, bistaticknowsBy
signalcorrespondingemploying
the
the
directly,
for the andtime-varying
transmitted mild
simultaneous inrates mod-
parameters
signal,
the large itThus,
are denoted
reception can ofthe
employ
communications a communication
of theRsourceradar as return.
1 andsignal a relay The
R2 . Assuming rate improvement
solution
concept,
power, low that an interesting
target return important
could analogy notation
potentially to the employed.
information
waveform,
al
erence directly,
ssion.
mmunications Itinuses thethis
and
estimating radar
power
and in the
reference
the can
the
is largebroadcast
radar
normalized
radar communications
power,
return, channel we asocan
portion be
without
that orders
ofsignal
replace theloss
the of magnitude.
power,
theoretic
information
noise
the rate lowbound
variance target
capacity return
is region
unity,of the isthetomultiuser
employ receiver can be employed.
parasitically
this
for reference
performance.
the the radar
second with
userIn the
power,
using
systemby radar
the portion
more
are waveform. of the rate
aggressive
successive
information informationTo
communica-
interference studybound
associated thewithperformance
In
cancellation1region
particular, [2], bounds
is to[21].
in employ
considering
If associated
the the two
communi- withtransmitter,
the radar single receiver TABLE I
fundamental limits on rate are given by
ws ar ar the
systemtransmitted
waveforms,
ealtime-varying
resource allocationare an signal,
successive
instantaneously
parameters it can
(for of cations employ
interference wideband
a radarsignal as
return. a
cancellation relay
communi-
operates
The solution concept,
[2], [21].
multiuser anIf interesting
the communi-
problem,
at a decodable rate and SINR observed analogy
the capacity to the information
region is known [2], [21]. S URVEY ForOF N OTATION .
ating
allocation
waveform ofthe radar
(for
can be channel
cations
employed without
signalwith byoperates loss
essentially
the Rradar attheoretic
a no
receiver loss+capacity
decodable 2rate
inareturn
(where of the
and
a given SINR multiuser
average observed
transmitreceiver power, can with be employed.
axes defined by the data
erms the large hardware.
communications No high signal power,1 log low target
2 (1 1 P1 )the interference here is the radar
ware.n
timation
owever using
wer, portion No more
many highof
and aggressive
by information
detection
of thethe the
signal communica-
radar return),
performance. receiver
bound (where
then In
region particular,
the the radar
is to can2indecode
interference
employ considering
rate ofhereUser the two
the iscommunications
1,theand radar transmitter,
the data rate signal, ofVariable
singleUserreceiver
2, the Description
capacity region
n ofinstantaneously
Parasitic the signal
Radar: wideband
return),
Another then communi-
simplethe R2
radar
example can log
multiuser
decode
of 2 (1
a
+problem,
sym- thea2 P 2 )given the
communications
is capacity
by an region
signal,
irregular is known
pentagon. [2],hi[21]. For Expectation
ccessive interference cancellation remodulate[2], [21].the If the signal,communi- and subtract it from the raw data
aand given average transmit 2 power, with axes defined kby k data L2-norm or absolute value
etions employed
ommunication signal operates with essentially
andremodulate
radar systems
at a decodable no
R 1 loss
the +is
observed R in
signal,
the
2
rate by passive
and log
the subtract
(1 radar.
2radar.
SINR a21 Pit1resulting
+observed
The from
+In aour 2 Pthe ) raw
problem,
2data stream data
for is (1)
the simultaneousthe
effectively reception of the source
R B Total system bandwidth
tection
mple,the radar aperformance.
bistatic
receiver observed
receiver
(where employs by
thefreethe radar.
ofa broadcast
interference the rate here of
Thecommunications
resultingUser
iscom- 1,
the data and
radar the
stream data rate
signalis contamination
communications effectivelyof User
and the radar 2, the capacity
and return, region
the z(t)we canObserved replace signal
the rate including radar and communications
r: cations
ions
urn), Another
signal
then Modelthe asVertices
simple anfree
radar exampleofare
illuminating
can thefound
decode ofsystem
athe sym-
source.by
communications canjointly
isthen
In
communications given solving
thisestimate by signal,
signal
case, two
ancontamination
irregular
of the
the bounds,
parameters pentagon.
second and user
of the
the byradar the return.
information z(t) rateObserved associated signalwithwith predicted radar return removed
and el radar systems
mmunications
modulate the system
signal, is the
system passive
can
operates
and then radar.
Innormally.
subtract estimate
addition, it from The
the Inthe
the 2our
bistatic
channel problem,
parameters
raw theof
estimated
data for the
the
time-varying
duringsimultaneous
radar return.
the parameters
decoding reception ofofthe zaof the(t)
radar source
return. The radar
Observed solutionreturn
joint air surveillance radar R2the=channel log2 (1communications
+ a2 P2 ) during
radar
cceiver receiver observes employs the aThe broadcast
Incommunication
addition, com-signal
communications estimated
directly, signal andmayincontain and thethe
the radar
decoding
large
bi-static return,the we
ofradar
communications cansignal
information replace
sradar the rate
(t)
power, Unit-variance
low target return transmitted radar signal
veillance
served
et) system byradarthe
[2].radar.
We assume resulting data stream is effectively
an illuminating source.
communications In this case,
signal of
may the2 second2 user by the information
contain bi-static radar information 2 rate Pradar with
associated Radar power
2].
ee ts aWe
unication/radarofreference
assume
the ofnodes,
R 1the transmission.
communications+ R such
2 R =
2about
signal It uses
log the (1 this reference
2 radar
contamination + a P
target.
1 1 and + a
This Ppower,
2 the 2 )
information portion
log (1 + of a
2 can be2combinedtheP 2information
) with bound region is to employ
 the time-varying 
parameters of awith radar return.canThe m solution Time delay to mth target
ystem h nodes,
for operates
targets. normally.
The about
allbenefits theThe
the radar
for bistatic
target.
the radar This information can
2successivebe combined interference Thecancellation [2],
(k) [21]. If the communi-
de ar
stem can
signals. such
then
While estimate nodes the
parameters results 1 system
ofof the
the
+ aradarP 1
are
2monostatic
+return.
a
1large communications
2 P radar
2
processing. radar
m return kth observation of delay for mth target
While thent communication
both
addition, all in
nodes
the terms
channelthe
of signal
results
spectral
estimateddirectly,
R of the
resource
then= and
monostatic
log
encode
during inthe
allocation
the thesignal
radar
decoding (for processing.
for
of cations
the
the next The
signal
radar radarsignal
operates
pulse can power,
and,at a
by low
decodable
using target rate and SINR observed
we assume in general that 1 2
1+ a2 P2 by m,pre Predicted time delay to mth target
fmmunications
one
npable the transmission.
was
general required),
that signal Itand
then uses
may inthis
encode terms
containreference
theofradar
the signal
hardware.
bi-static power,
for
waveform
 radarthe No portion
nextas2aradar
high
information of the information
pulse
communications and, receiver
radar bywaveform,
using bound
(where
 region is to employ
the interference
relaying here is the radar gain, cross-section, and propagation
radar/communication 2interference cancellation [2], [21]. If the communi- a m Combined antenna
Theransmitter
ommunication benefits was for the
required; radar
radar system
waveform
however the are
many
data asto a successive
of
thecommunications
the signal
destination a P node. waveform,
return), then relaying
the radar can decode the communications signal,
aout the radar
common target.channel.
control {RThis, information
R2the } =destination can be1 combined
log + signal2with 1 1
, log + a22 P2 )rate N Number of targets
ms of spectral resource
thethe data 1allocation (for 2 cations operates at 2a(1 decodable ,andsubtract
SINRTobserved
eers
ontrol nsresultsmay
signals be
channel. suboptimal.
ofsubtend
the monostatic fulltoradar IV.processing.
J OINT MThe
node. 1+
ULTIUSER radar a2 P remodulate
can
E 2STIMATION /C OMMUNICATION
the signal, and it from Radarthepulse
rawduration
data
ed),
ubtend
enweencode and thein theterms
full signalof hardware.
for the nextNo radar high pulse by the and, radar by receiver
usingobserved (where by the theradar.
interference
The
(2) here isNdata
resulting the radar
streamNumber of targets
is effectively
assume an operating
IV.
III.many MUDR J OINT M ULTIUSER E STIMATION /C
B OUNDS OMMUNICATION Pulse repetition interval
erequired;
an
radar operating however
waveform as ahigh- of the signal waveform,
communications return), then the
relaying radarofcan
free thedecode the communications
communications signal signal,
Tpricontamination and the
of the nodes have BmuchOUNDS Radar duty factor
rogeneous
optimal. and
Radar/Communications In general,
Model remodulate like the network
signal, communication
and subtract
system can then estimate the parameters it [2],from exact the raw data
es
etenna datahave to high-
arrays.the destination
TheseInnodes node. 
general, much are likeobserved networkbycommunication  [2], exact
 s (t) of Unit-variance
the radar return. transmitted communication signal
specific These nodes
example, consider a bounds
joint air surveillance challenging. radar However,
the Inradar.
addition, Thein2 resulting
certain
the channel cases, such asiscom
dataestimated
stream effectively
during theTotal
decoding of the power
communications
ditionally
IV. III.J OINT MUDR have been
M ULTIUSER bounds identi- Eare challenging. /C However, in certain a
cases, P 2such as P com
vebilere been ad hoc
relatively identi- network {R1(MANet)
disadvantaged , R2 } =theSTIMATION
system multiuser
log 2 (1
[2].+ We base
OMMUNICATION
free a 2
1P of1station,
assume ),the bounds
1 + are tenable.
logcommunications
2 communications
2
signalWecontamination
develop a b and the
2 P signal .may contain bi-static radar information
Communications propagation loss
ar/Communications theModelmultiuser
B OUNDS base station,
generalization system bounds
of thecan are
relay then tenable.
discussion.
aboutestimate 1 We
the
+radaradevelop
Furthermore,
the 1 parameters
1
target. a This weof sketch
the radar
information n(t) can return. Receiver
be combined thermalwith noise
disadvantaged
geneous
and in antenna gain. network of communication/radar
These nodes, such
In general, much generalization
like network a ofcommunication
more thegeneral
relay In discussion.
set
addition, of
[2], scalingFurthermore,
exact
the bounds.
channel
the results wethe
estimated
of sketch during
monostatic(3) theradar decoding 2
of
processing. theThermal
The noise
radar power
can
e,
na nodes
uld consider
gain. can These
traditionally a jointhave
potentially air surveillance
decode
been signals. radarWhile all nodes noise
a more generalThe set
in of scaling
fundamental bounds.
limits
suchon rate are
maygiven by1bi-static kB Boltzmann constant
work
allytunds have
perform are been
(MANet) challenging.
all The system
functions,region However,
[2]. we We
that assume
assumesatisfies certain these
general cases,
in communications theoretical
that assignal
then encode
bounds
1
contain
the
is signal
depicted for theradar nextinformation
radar pulse and, by using
Temperature
e multiuser base The fundamental
station, bounds are limits
tenable. about onWe rate
the are given
develop
radar a
target.
the by
radar This information
waveform as a can be
communications
Ttemp
combined with
waveform, relaying
n.k We of communication/radar
assume in relatively
Figure nodes,
capable such
radar/communication
1. we can replace the rate R 1 log 2 (1 + a 2
1 1P ) nint+n Interference plus noise for communications receiver
ntiallytions
neralization
nd assume and
decode the
that radar
ofsignals.
thethey relay return,
have discussion.
While all nodes
a common Furthermore,the results
1 log2channel.
Rcontrol (1 + weaof 2sketch
Pthe ) monostatic
1 the data to 2 theradar processing.
destination node.The radar can Set of nonspecific system and target parameters
R 1 log (1 + a P )
ond
more unctions,
analysis,
me user
all general by
we set
we the
assume
begin
radar/communications ofinformation
scaling
with bounds.
in ageneral ratethat
signals associatedthen encode thewith
2 the signal for the next radar pulse and,
2 2 2 by using Root-mean-squared radar bandwidth
R2subtend
log12 (1 +full a22 P2 ) IV. J OINT M ULTIUSER E STIMATION
Brms
/C OMMUNICATION
krying parameters ofradar a on radar + aa21 P 2
(1) relaying
weRreturn. The
The begin fundamental
with limits
a Specifically, rate are given the Rsolution
by 1radar
+ R2waveform log2 (1 as communications
1 + a 2 P2 ) waveform, Radar spectral shape parameter
eelatively with
bandwidth. capable
simultaneous radar/communication assume an operating 2 2
(1) B OUNDSBcom
etion communications signal power, + R
low
target
thelog (1 +
return
data to a theP + a
destination P ) node. Communications-only subband
ltaneous
they haveradar
III-B. aThis
common issmall control
1
channel. 2 2 1 1 2 2
in which some 1 an ex-
set (1of+ the
a1 Pnodes
Vertices 1 ) are have found high- by
2
R log In general, much like network B communication Mixed radar[2], andexact communications subband
This ion of
is an the information
ex- Vertices bound
2
arethe region
found is to employ Achievable mix
mmunications
in Section II. signals
The subtend 2 full byThese
mplifies
nterference
and R2 radar
high-gain
cancellation log antenna
[2], + aarrays.
(1 [21]. P2the
If ) communi- R IV.= Jnodes OINT M ULTIUSER
log (1 + a 2
bounds P )Rate are Echallenging.
Region
STIMATION /C OMMUNICATION
However, certain
in Fraction
cases, ofsuch
bandwidth
as for communications only
ond II. to
Specifically,
also The contains
those radar weanassume
that encoded
would an operating
2
traditionally 2
have 2
2 been2 identi- 21 2 2
B OUNDS Power fraction used by communications-only subband
R = log (1 + a P ) the
nal
me ationsadars.operates
an
small encoded
radio.
WhilesetRTheat
1of +athe
other Rdecodable
radar nodes
2nodes logare
will 2 (1 rate
have R 2
+1ahigh-and
+
relatively
2
1 PR 1 2+SINR
2a R2 2
2P observed
2)
disadvantaged =2 log2 (1 +(1)
2
a1 Pmultiuser
2 2 base station, bounds are tenable.
1 + a2 P2 ) log2 (1 + a2 P2 ) com
2 We develop
Channel a
of communications-only subband
r receiver (where R the + interference
R R2 = here
log (1 is+ In
thea 2general,
Pradar + a2 Pmuchgeneralization
) like network
2 log2 (12+ of a2 P the communication
) relay discussion. [2], exact
Furthermore,Channel we
of sketchuse subband
mixed
The
andigh-gain
hically,
Vertices radar
the inare will
antenna
radar
transmit
found arrays.
returns 1
power,
by 2These
for and in antenna nodes 2 gain. These
bounds 1 1 1+a
2 2
3 1 P1 + a 2 P2
2 2 mix
ndar the are challenging.
2 a more general However, set ofinscaling certainbounds. cases, such as
is radar can decode the communications
identi- R 1 = asignal,
2log
ar t would
orrespond returns typicallytofor
traditionally
thosesited thathave
in would
an been
2 Rtraditionally
1+ have 1P 1 2+ a2 P21 + a2 P
been
the signal, R =and log subtract
(1 + a P it ) =
1 from 2 log the the raw multiuser
 data  base The station,
fundamental
2 2 bounds
 are
limits tenable.
on rate We
 aredevelop
given by a1
lly
dher
it as sited
hasnodes inare
access
MANet anradios.
2 relatively
to relatively
2 disadvantaged
2 2 2
1 + a2 P2 of the relay 2
ysmit the radar.and The resulting generalization a P discussion. Furthermore, we sketch
(1 + adata P1 +stream P21), is Reffectively
  4 
2 2 2 1 1 2
1 in+ tocompared
R relatively
power,
2 R2 =toinlogaantenna
2typical gain. These
a2{R }=
2log 2 (1 + log
a21aP221P12 )set + , log R21(1+log a22P(1C.2 )+Jointa21 P1 )Radar-Communications Channel Model
DR:
deose Radar
communications as atotraditionally
Relay  {R1 ,1 2contamination a more general 1of +scaling
a(12P
2 abounds.
actsignal 2 log2 1and the 2
to
well a suited
that typical
would as a R
have2 } = been + , log 2 + P 2 )
1 + a 1 P1 + a 2 P 2 Thereturn.
1fundamental
+ a 2 P2 2 2
limits on rate R
2
are 2 givenlog2by 1
(1 (2)+ a22 P2 )
then
to two
basic
dios.
ple, actestimate
starting R1 a=point
as
nodes the2simply
log
that parameters
in the1analysis, 2
of the we radar
begin with a In this section, we consider bounds for the multiple-access
+ a2the P2 decoding of the (2) log2 (1 + a21 P1 + a22 P2 ) (1)
nable esdethe that channel
simply
communications
rate because estimated
 ofnetwork  during
their with 12Note:simultaneous
 radar signals,  R1 log2R(1 1+ +R a212P 1) communications and radar return channel. We employ a num-
Relay We
a1 P1radar information2assume complex so there are two degrees; thus, there
tions
cause
ality, {R1as signal
of their may
, Rdiscussed contain
in2relay. bi-static
Section III-B.
1/2 This isthe an
nicate via 2the
} =radar log
1 Note: 1We + assumeis no , log
before 2 (1 soex-
+ athere
term2 P2are) Vertices log
R2degrees; are (1found a22 by
+there P2 ) ber of simplifying assumptions for the sake of exposition;
a2complex signals, two 2thus,
log
adar
point
he to radar
the target.
in concepts
the
relay. This
Fig.isinformation
analysis, discussed we
1.no 1/2 begin
Pentagon
1 can
in
before the2be
+Section
with
that
P 2acombined
II. The
term
contains with
radar
communications multiple-access achievable a) Parasitic
22however, Communications:
of thenetworkmonostatic radar
log
can R1(2) + R2 logR2 (1 2 = +log 2
a1 P 1+
(1 +aaof 22P
generalizations
22)) radar waveform,
Pthe (1) the radar canare possible. As an example, we
nsmit ions its radarrate withpulse
region. thatprocessing.
simultaneous also contains radar Theanradar encoded 2ulation
2estimate
broadcast a
2 the range, but 2assume that the target cross-section is
sed in Section
nications signal to III-B. This is an
a destination radio.ex- The Vertices radar will are foundR1 + R by2 R2 = log2 (1 + a1 P1 + a2 P2 ) log2 (1 + a2 P2 )
1 Note: We assume
s discussed
the1/2 source in complex signals, so there are two degrees; thus, there
Section II. The radar
 known. We  assume that the targets are well separated and the
no before radiothe log signal
Unfortunately,
term and thethis radardiscussionreturns for servesR2 = only log2 (1as+aR a221motivation
P= 2 )log2
1 + a21 P1 + a22 P2
pulse that also
estimation. Because contains theradar an returns
radar encoded
is typically sitedsatisfy in an the fundamental that
1 + a22 P2 2
return is modeled well by a Gaussian distribution before
because do Rnot 2 commu- 2
ged to alocation,
destination andradio. because Theitradar has access will to relatively 1 + R 2 R2 = log 2 (1 + a 1 P 1 + a 2 P 
2 ) pulse
log 22 (1 compression.
+ a 
2 P 2 ) We assume  that the range of any given
nications assumption that they are drawn {R from
 a}2countable  a 1 P1
dio signal and the radar
nsmit power and high gain compared to a typical returns for 1 1, R
+ a
2 1 1 =P + loga 2 1+
P
2 2 target is predictable
, log 2 (1 + up
a 2
P
2 2 to
) some Gaussian random process
cause the transmitter, radardictionary.
is typically Consequently, an towe do notR1expect = log2 that this form2 is 1 + a22 P2
nications it is sited well insuited act as a 1 + a22 P2 variation (not be confused with estimation error). We consider
nd because
nications relay.it directly
has
As an access applicable.
example, to relatively
two nodes However, that simply by using  a formalism  similar
a21 P1 only the portion
 (2)
of time during which the radar return overlaps
nd high gain to the
compared
communicate at any reasonable rate because of their communications
to a typical multiple-access
{R , R } = bound,
log 1 we+ can gain , log (1 + a 2
P )
1 2 2
1 Note: We assume complex
1 + a22 P2 signals, with 2
thearecommunications
so there 2 2
two degrees; thus, there signal. We assume that temporal
mitter,y, mayitbeis able welltosuited communicate to act as via athe radar relay. is no 1/2 before the log term
1 Note: We assume complex baseband signals, so there are two degrees of uncertainty of (2) the random target process is within one over
As an example, two nodes that simply
freedom; thus, there is no 1/2 before the log term
any reasonable rate because of their 1 Note: We assume complex signals, so there are two degrees; thus, there
the bandwidth.
to communicate via the radar relay. is no 1/2 before the log term

978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE 0051

 For N targets, the observed radar return zradar (t) as a radar return at the receiver2
function of t is given by p
z(t) = Pcom b scom (t) + n(t) (11)
N
X p
p N
X
zradar (t) = am sradar (t m ) Pradar + n(t) . (4)
+ Pradar am [sradar (tm )sradar (tm,pre )] ,
m=1
m=1
The zero-mean noise is drawn from the complex Gaussian
where here we dropped the explicit indication of pulse index
with variance noise
2
,
(k). For small delay process variation, we can replace the
2
noise = kB Ttemp B , (5) difference between the waveforms at the correct and predicted
delay with a derivative,
where kB is the Boltzmann constant, Ttemp is the absolute
temperature, and B is the full bandwidth. Range r and delay sradar (t m ) sradar (t m,pre )
are related by = sradar (t m ) sradar (t m + n,proc )
2r sradar (t m )
= , (6) n,proc . (12)
c t
where c is the speed of light. The typical radar estimator The observed signal is then given by
attempts to estimate both the range and the amplitude. For p
the sake of discussion, we focus on range estimation. Similar z(t) Pcom b scom (t) + n(t)
developments can be found for amplitude estimation. A rea- p XN
sradar (t m )
sonable estimator (particularly if targets are well separated) + Pradar am n,proc . (13)
t
under the assumption that Doppler shifts are unresolvable is m=1

given by From the communications receivers perspective, the interfer-

Z ence plus noise is given by
m = argmaxm dt z(t) sradar (t m ) . (7) !
p XN
sradar (t m )
We assume that we are tracking the target, and we assume the nint+n Pradar am n,proc + n(t)
t
optimistic model that we have some well understood expected 2

m=1

value of the radar return (based upon prior observations); int+n = knint+n k2
!
however, there is some range fluctuation in the return due to XN
2 2 2 2 2
some underlying target process, so that the next observation is = Pradar am (2) Brms proc + noise ,
known up to some random Gaussian process variation n,proc , m=1
(14)
(k) (k)
m = m,pre + n,proc (8)
where Brms is extracted by employing Parsevals theorem
(k)
m,pre = f (k; Tpri , ) . [2]. The value is the scaling constant between B and
Brms times 2 that is dependent upon the shape of the radar
The function f (k; Tpri , ) is a prediction function with param- waveforms power spectral density. For a flat spectral shape,
eters Tpri , which is the time between updates (pulse repetition 2 = (2)2 /12.
interval), and which contains other parameters. The variance
of the process is given by
E. Radar Estimation Information Rate
 2 
2 (k) An essential tool of this paper is to consider the estimation
,proc = m f (k; Tpri , ) . (9)
information rate (estimating delay in this case). We develop
The observed signal at the receiver z(t) at time t in the this information rate by considering the entropy of a random
presence of a communications signal and the radar return is parameter being estimated and the entropy of the estimation
given by uncertainty of that parameter. As an observation, if the targets
p are well separated, then each target estimation can be consid-
z(t) = Pcom b scom (t) (10) ered an independent information channel.
p N
X 1) Estimation Entropy: To find the estimation entropy, we
+ Pradar am sradar (t m ) + n(t) find the delay estimation uncertainty for each target. For
m=1 circularly symmetric Gaussian noise, we employ the complex
Slepian-Bangs formulation of the Cramer-Rao bound [2], [22].
D. Radar-Prediction-Suppressed Observed Signal The variance of delay estimation for the mth target (ignoring
For the sake of the communications system, we can try to
mitigate unnecessary interference by subtracting the predicted 2 Note: this process would theoretically remove all clutter.

978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE 0052

inter-target interference) is given by If Rest 0 is sufficiently low, then the communications
operates according to the bound determined by the isolated
1
2;est = Var{m } = communications system,
(2)2 2
Brms
ISNR  
2
noise b2 Pcom
= Rcom B log2 1 + 2
(2)2 Brms
2 T B a2m Pradar noise
 
kB Ttemp b2 Pcom
= 2 , (15) = B log2 1 + . (20)
B (T B) a2m Pradar kB Ttemp B

where ISNR = T B a2m Pradar /noise

2
indicates the integrated If Rcom is sufficiently low for a given transmit power then
SNR, and the thermal noise is given by the communications signal can be decoded and subtracted
completely from the underlying signal, so that the radar
2
noise = kB Ttemp B . (16) parameters can be estimated without contamination,
 
Under the assumption of Gaussian estimation error, the result- b2 Pcom
Rcom B log2 1 + 2 (21)
ing entropy of the error is given by int+n
 
2
b2 Pcom
h,est = log2 [ e ,est ] = B log2 1 + 2 ,
  a Pradar 2 B 2 proc
2 + kB Ttemp B
kB Ttemp
= log2 e 2 . (17) where we used Equation (14). In this regime, the correspond-
B (T B) a2m Pradar
ing estimation rate bound Rest is given by Equation (19).
2) Radar Random Process Entropy: The entropy of the pro- These two vertices correspond to the points 2 (associated
cess uncertainty plus estimation uncertainty under a Gaussian with Equation (20)) and 4 (associated with Equations (21) and
assumption for both is given by [2], [21] (19)) in Figure 1, if R1 is interpreted as the estimation rate, and
 2 2
 R2 is interpreted as the communications rate. An achievable
h,rr = log2 e (,proc + ,est ) . (18) rate lies within the triangle constructed by connecting a
straight line between these points.
3) Estimation Information Rate: Consequently, the mutual
information rate in terms of bits per pulse repetition interval A. Water-filling
Tpri , which is related to the integration period T by the duty
factor T = Tpri , is approximately bounded by We hypothesize that we can construct tighter (larger) inner
bounds than we constructed in the previous section. In this
!
X h,rr h,est X 2
,proc section, we consider a water-filling approach that splits the
Rest = log2 1 + 2 total bandwidth into two sub-bands and we water fill the
Tpri T ,est
m m communications power between these bands. Water filling
!/(T B)
X 2 2 2
,proc B (T B) am Pradar optimizes the power and rate allocation between multiple
= B log2 1 + . channels [2], [21]. For this application, we separate the band
kB Ttemp
m into two frequency channels. One channel has only commu-
(19) nications, and the other channel is mixed-use and operates at
It is worth noting, that by employing this estimation entropy the SIC rate vertex define by Equations (19) and (21).
in the rate bound, it is assumed that the estimator achieves the Given some , that defines the bandwidth separation,
Cramer-Rao performance. If the error variance is larger, then
B = Bcom + Bmix (22)
the rate bound is lowered.
Bcom = B
III. I NNER R ATE B OUNDS Bmix = (1 ) B ,
It would be surprising if the performance bound displayed then we optimize that defines the power utilization,
for the communications multiple-access scenario in Figure
1 achieved the performance bounds of the joint estimation Pcom = Pcom,com + Pcom,mix (23)
and communications problem. Here, we search for a good Pcom,com = Pcom
achievable (inner) bounds. The fundamental system perfor- Pcom,mix = (1 ) Pcom .
mance limit lies between these achievable bounds and the
outer bounds found above. To find these inner bounds, we There are two effective channels
hypothesize an idealized receiver and determine the bounding b2
rates. To simplify the discussion, we consider only a single com =
kB Ttemp Bcom
target with delay and gain-propagation-cross-section product
a2 , and drop the explicit index to the target. For example b2
= , (24)
2
,proc 2
proc . kB Ttemp B

978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE 0053

for the channel with only communications signal, and the The resulting communications rate bound in the
mixed-use channel that includes the interference to the com- communications-only subband is given by
munications system from the radar  
Pcom,com b2
Rcom,com Bcom log2 1 +
b2 kB Ttemp Bcom
mix = (25)  
2
int+n Pcom b2
B log2 1 + . (32)
b2 kB Ttemp B
= .
a2 Pradar (1 )2 2 B 2 proc
2 + kB Ttemp (1 ) B If Pcom < 1/com 1/mix then Rcom,mix = 0 because
no communications power is allocated to the mixed use
The communications power is split between the two channels channel, otherwise the mixed use communications rate inner
[2], [21], bound is given by
 
Pcom = Pcom,com + Pcom,mix b2 Pmix
 +  + Rcom,mix Bmix log2 1 + 2
1 1
= + (1 ) . (26)  int+n2 
com mix b (1 ) Pcom
= (1 ) B log2 1 + 2 (33)
int+n
The critical point (the transition between using one or both 2
int+n = a2 Pradar (1 )2 2 B 2 proc
2
+ kB Ttemp (1 ) B
channels for communications) occurs when
The corresponding radar estimation rate inner bound is then
1
(1 ) =0 given by
mix
!/(T Bmix )
1 2
proc 2 Bmix (T Bmix ) a2 Pradar
Pcom = , (27) Rest Bmix log2 1 +
com kB Ttemp
so both channels are used if = (1 ) B log2 (1 + SNRradar )
/([1] T B)
(34)
1
Pcom . (28) 2
(1 ) mix com proc 2 (1 ) B ([1 ] T B) a2 Pradar
SNRradar = .
kB Ttemp
If the communications-only channel is used exclusively for (35)
communications, then Pcom = Pcom,com . If both channels are
employed for communications then We assume that [1] T B, which is the waveform integration,
is held constant as is varied so Rest is given by
1 !/
Pcom,com = 2
com proc 2 (1 ) B a2 Pradar
1 Rest (1 ) B log2 1 + ,
Pcom,mix = (1 ) , (29) kB Ttemp
mix (36)
and thus when Equation (28) is satisfied where waveform integration is denoted = (1 ) T B. For
some very large value of , corresponding to a very small
1 1
Pcom = + (1 ) radar subband, the problem is no longer self consistent because
com T > Trpi .
  mix
1 1
= Pcom + + . (30) B. Examples
com mix
In Figure 2, we display an example of inner bounds on per-
The value of power fraction is then given by formance. The parameters used in the example are displayed
Pcom,com in Table II. It is assumed that the communications system is
= received through an antenna sidelobe, so that the radar and
Pcom
1 communications receive gain are not identical. In the figure,
com
= we indicate a outer bound in red. We indicate in green, the
Pcom  bound on successive interference cancellation (SIC), presented
Pcom + 1
com + 1
mix 1
com
in Equation (21). The best case system performance given SIC
= is at the vertex (at the intersection of the green and red lines),
 Pcom  which is determined by the joint solution of Equations (21) and
1
1
=+ + ; (19). The inner bound that linearly interpolates between this
Pcom com mix vertex and the radar-free communications bound in Equation
1 (20) is indicated by the gray dashed line. The water-filling
when Pcom . (31)
(1 ) mix com bound is indicated by the blue line. The water-filling bound

978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE 0054

is not guaranteed to be convex. The water-filling bound is not [4] J. R. Guerci, Cognitive Radar: The Knowledge-Aided Fully Adaptive
guaranteed to be greater than the linearly interpolated bound. Approach. Artech House, Incorporated, 2010.
[5] L. S. Wang, J. P. McGeehan, C. Williams, and A. Doufexi, Applica-
In general, the inner bound is produced by the convex hull of tion of cooperative sensing in radar-communications coexistence, IET
all contributing inner bounds. In the example, we see that the Communications, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 856868, July 2008.
water-filling bound exceeds the linearly interpolated bound. [6] Y. Nijsure, Y. Chen, C. Yuen, and Y. H. Chew, Location-aware spectrum
and power allocation in joint cognitive communication-radar networks,
in International ICST Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless
TABLE II
Networks and Communications, 2011, pp. 171175.
PARAMETERS FOR E XAMPLE P ERFORMANCE B OUND .
[7] S. S. Bhat, R. M. Narayanan, and M. Rangaswamy, Bandwidth sharing
and scheduling for multimodal radar with communications and tracking,
Parameter Value
in IEEE Sensor Array and Multichannel Signal Processing Workshop,
Bandwidth 5 MHz June 2012, pp. 233236.
Center Frequency 3 GHz [8] R. Saruthirathanaworakun, J. M. Peha, and L. M. Correia, Opportunistic
Temperature 1000 K primary-secondary spectrum sharing with a rotating radar, in Inter-
Communications Range 10 km national Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications,
Communications Power 20 dBm 2012, pp. 10251030.
Communications Antenna Gain 0 dBi [9] , Opportunistic sharing between rotating radar and cellular, IEEE
Radar Target Range 100 km Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1900
Radar Antenna Gain 30 dBi 1910, 2012.
Radar Power 1 kW [10] X. Li, R. Yang, Z. Zhang, and W. Cheng, Research of constructing
Target Cross Section 10 m2 method of complete complementary sequence in integrated radar and
Target Process Standard Deviation 100 m communication, in IEEE Conference on Signal Processing, vol. 3, 2012,
Time-Bandwidth Product 100 pp. 17291732.
Radar duty factor 0.01 [11] M. Jamil, H. Zepernick, and M. I. Pettersson, On integrated radar and
communication systems using Oppermann sequences, in IEEE Military
Communications Conference, 2008, pp. 16.
[12] X. Chen, X. Wang, S. Xu, and J. Zhang, A novel radar waveform
compatible with communication, in International Conference on Com-
4106 putational Problem-Solving (ICCP), October 2011, pp. 177181.
[13] Y. Xie, R. Tao, and T. Wang, Method of waveform design for radar and
Data Rate HbsL

3106 communication integrated system based on CSS, in First International

Conference on Instrumentation, Measurement, Computer, Communica-
tion and Control, 2011, pp. 737739.
2106 [14] S. Sodagari, A. Khawar, T. Clancy, and R. McGwier, A projection-
based approach for radar and telecommunication systems coexistence,
in IEEE Global Communincations Conference, December 2012, pp.
1106 52325236.
[15] S. C. Surender, R. M. Narayanan, and C. R. Das, Performance analysis
of communications and radar coexistence in a covert UWB OSA
0 system, in IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, December

Estimation Rate HbsL

0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Fig. 2. Data rate and estimation rate bounds. Outer bounds on commu-
nications and radar are indicated by the red lines. Successive interference
cancellation (SIC) bound for the communications rate is indicated by the
green dashed line. The linear interpolation between SIC vertex and the radar-
free data rate bound is indicated by the gray dashed line. The water-filling
inner bound is indicated by the blue line.
IV. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we provide a novel approach for producing
joint radar and communications performance bounds. An
achievable inner bound based on a water-filling approach is
developed and an example is presented. This is an initial
investigation. There are a range of potentially significant
improvements to the inner bounds, and potentially interesting
extensions to the scenarios to which these bounds may be
applied.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. M. III, Cognitive Radio Architecture: The Engineering Foundations
of Radio XML. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[2] D. W. Bliss and S. Govindasamy, Adaptive Wireless Communications:
MIMO Channels and Networks. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[3] T. Yucek and H. Arslan, A survey of spectrum sensing algorithms
for cognitive radio applications, IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 116130, 2009.
2010.
[16] H. D. Griffiths, New directions in bistatic radar, IEEE Radar Confer-
ence, May 2008.
[17] P. Bidigare, The Shannon channel capacity of a radar system, in IEEE
Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, vol. 1, Nov.
2002, pp. 113117 vol.1.
[18] V. S. Chernyak, Fundamentals of Multisite Radar Systems: Multistatic
Radars and Multiradar Systems. Gordon and Breach Science Publish-
ers, 1998.
[19] E. Fishler, et al., MIMO radar: An idea whose time has come,
Proceedings of IEEE Radar Conference, April 2004.
[20] K. W. Forsythe and D. W. Bliss, MIMO radar: Concepts, performance
enhancements, and applications, in Signal Processing for MIMO Radar,
J. Li and P. Stoica, Eds. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
2008.
[21] T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory, 2nd
Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[22] S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation
Theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993.

978-1-4799-2035-8/14/$31.00@2014 IEEE 0055