Robust adaptive beamforming using worst-case performance optimization: a solution to the signal mismatch problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive beamforming methods are known to degrade if some of underlying assumptions on the environment, sources, or sensor array become violated. In particular, if the desired signal is present in training snapshots, the adaptive array performance may be quite sensitive even to slight mismatches between the presumed and actual signal steering vectors (spatial signatures). Such mismatches can occur as a result of environmental nonstationarities, look direction errors, imperfect array calibration, distorted antenna shape, as well as distortions caused by medium inhomogeneities, near-far mismatch, source spreading, and local scattering. The similar type of performance degradation can occur when the signal steering vector is known exactly but the training sample size is small. In this paper, we develop a new approach to robust adaptive beamforming in the presence of an arbitrary unknown signal steering vector mismatch. Our approach is based on the optimization of worst-case performance. It turns out that the natural formulation of this adaptive beamforming problem involves minimization of a quadratic function subject to infinitely many nonconvex quadratic constraints. We show that this (originally intractable) problem can be reformulated in a convex form as the so-called second-order cone (SOC) program and solved efficiently (in polynomial time) using the well-established interior point method. It is also shown that the proposed technique can be interpreted in terms of diagonal loading where the optimal value of the diagonal loading factor is computed based on the known level of uncertainty of the signal steering vector. Computer simulations with several frequently encountered types of signal steering vector mismatches show better performance of our robust beamformer as compared with existing adaptive beamforming algorithms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".