Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byAidan Lucas Modified over 5 years ago

1
Cooperative Transmit Power Estimation under Wireless Fading Murtaza Zafer (IBM US), Bongjun Ko (IBM US), Ivan W. Ho (Imperial College, UK) and Chatschik Bisdikian (IBM US)

2
Problem Synopsis Node T is a wireless transmitter with unknown Tx power P, and unknown location (x,y) Nodes {m 1,…, m N } are monitors that measure received power {p i } Goal – given {p i } and {(x i,y i )} (monitor locations), estimate unknown P (and also unknown location (x,y)) m2m2 P (x,y) m3m3 mNmN p N (x N,y N ) p 3 (x 3,y 3 ) p 2 (x 2,y 2 ) p 1 (x 1,y 1 ) m1m1 T

3
Problem Synopsis Sensor Networks – Event detection – {m 1,…, m N } are sensors, and T is the source point of an event – Goal – detect important events, eg: bomb explosion, based on measured power Wireless Ad-hoc Networks – physical layer monitoring – {m 1,…, m N } monitor a wireless network – Goal – detect maximum transmit power violation; i.e. detect misbehaving/mis- configured nodes, signal jamming m2m2 P (x,y) m3m3 mNmN p N (x N,y N ) p 3 (x 3,y 3 ) p 2 (x 2,y 2 ) p 1 (x 1,y 1 ) m1m1 T Applications Blind estimation – no prior knowledge (statistical or otherwise) of the location or transmission power of T

4
Talk Overview Power propagation model – Lognormal fading Deterministic Case – geometrical insights Single/two monitor scenario Multiple monitor scenario Stochastic Case Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimate Asymptotic optimality of ML estimate Numerical Results Conclusion

5
Power Propagation model Lognormal fading P i = received power at monitor i d i = distance between the transmitter and monitor i α = attenuation factor, (α > 1) k = normalizing constant H i = lognormal random variable W i – unknown to the monitor – represents the aggregated effect of randomness in the environment; eg: multi-path fading didi PiPi T mimi P

6
Deterministic Case Power propagation model: T 1 Monitor 1 P P1P1 d1d1 best estimate of transmit power: P* P 1 Single monitor measurement (no fading/random noise in power measurements)

7
Deterministic Case Monitor 2 Note: d 1, d 2 are unknown Monitor 1 P P1P1 P2P2 d 12 d1d1 d2d2 2 T 1 Simple Cooperation: P* max(P 1, P 2 ) Q: Can we do better? Locus of T, Two monitor scenario Eqn (1) Eqn (2) Equation of a circle

8
Deterministic Case Two monitor scenario P achieves lower bound, 2 1 T (x 1, y 1 )(x 2, y 2 ) P1P1 P2P2 T T T T T (x, y) x θ where, center of circle

9
Deterministic Case Multiple monitor scenario With multiple monitors – diversity in measurements System of equations with unknowns (x,y,P) We should be able to solve these equations to obtain exact P ? Answer: Yes and No !!

10
Deterministic Case 1 2 (x r, y r ) d r,1 d r,2 T (x, y) 3 4 d1d1 d2d2 Theorem: There is a unique solution (P*, x*, y*) except when the monitors are placed on an arc of a circle or a straight line that does not pass through the actual transmitter location. Proof: A location (x, y) is a solution if and only if it satisfies d 1 /d 2 =c 1, …, d N-1 /d N = c N-1 The actual location (x r, y r ) is one solution; thus d r,1 /d r,2 =c 1, …, d r,N-1 /d r,N = c N-1 There exists another solution at (x, y) if and only if, d r,1 /d r,2 = d 1 /d 2, …; equivalently, T

11
Deterministic Case 1 2 (x r, y r ) d r,1 d r,2 T (x, y) 3 4 d1d1 d2d2 Observation: Without transmit power information, and if monitors lie on an arc of a circle, even with infinite monitors and no fading, the transmission power (and transmitter location) cannot be uniquely determined. T Theorem: There is a unique solution (P*, x*, y*) except when the monitors are placed on an arc of a circle or a straight line that does not pass through the actual transmitter location.

12
Deterministic Case Multiple monitor scenario 12 Corollary 1: Two monitors always has multiple solutions

13
Deterministic Case Multiple monitor scenario 13 Corollary 1: Two monitors always has multiple solutions Counter-intuitive Insight: For any regular polygon placement of monitors the transmission power cannot be uniquely determined !! Corollary 2: Three monitors as a triangle always has multiple solutions 2 Conversely: For all non-circular placement of monitors, transmission power can be uniquely determined.

14
Talk Overview Power propagation model – Lognormal fading Deterministic Case – geometrical insights Single/two monitor scenario Multiple monitor scenario Stochastic Case ML estimate Asymptotic optimality of ML estimate Numerical Results Conclusion

15
Stochastic Case m1m1 P (x,y) m2m2 mNmN p N (x N,y N ) p 2 (x 2,y 2 ) p 1 (x 1,y 1 ) Let z i = ln(p i ), Let Z = ln(P), and ML estimate (Z*,x*,y*) is the value that maximizes the joint probability density function The joint probability density function Maximum Likelihood Estimate T Power attenuation model

16
Stochastic Case Theorem: The ML estimate for N monitor case is given as, (x*,y*) is the solution to the minimization above, where the objective function is sample variance of {ln(p i d i α )} distance between some location (x,y) and monitor i distance between estimated Tx. location (x*,y*) and monitor i P* is proportional to the geometric mean of {p i (d* i ) α }

17
Stochastic Case What happens when N increases ? more number of measurements of received power increase in the spatial diversity of measurements Does the transmission power estimate improve ? Answer: Yes !! ; Estimator is asymptotically optimal

18
Stochastic Case Asymptotic optimality as N increases Random Monitor Placement N monitors placed i.i.d. randomly in a bounded region Г Each monitor makes an independent measurement of the received power Random placement is such that it is not a distribution over an arc of a circle Let P N * be the estimated transmit power using the results presented earlier Theorem: As N increases the estimated transmit power converges to the actual power P almost surely,

19
Numerical Results Synthetic data set –N = 2 to 20 monitors placed uniformly at random in a disk of radius R = 40. –Received power is generated by i.i.d. lognormal fading model for each monitor. –Performance measured: averaged over estimation for 1000 transmitter locations. Empirical data set –Sensor network measurement data by N. Patwari. –Total 44 wireless devices; each device transmits at -37.47 dBm; received powers are measured between all pairs of devices –The data is statistically shown to fit well to the lognormal fading model = 2.3, and dB = 3.92. –Randomly chosen N=3,4,…,10 monitors out of 44 devices.

20
Numerical Results Performance metric –The above metric measures the average mean-square dB error Estimators –MLE-Coop-fmin ML estimate with fminsearch in MATLAB for location estimation –MLE-Coop-grid ML estimation with location estimation by dividing region into grid points –MLE-ideal ML estimate by assuming that the transmitter location is magically known –MLE-Pair ML estimate is obtained by considering only monitor pairs Average taken over all the pair-wise estimates

21
Numerical Results Synthetic data set Empirical data set (MLE-Coop-grid)

22
Conclusion Blind estimation of transmission power – Studied estimators for deterministic and stochastic signal propagation – Utilized spatial diversity in measurements – Obtained asymptotically optimal ML estimate – Presented numerical results quantifying the performance Geometrical insights – Two-monitor estimation was equivalent to locating the transmitter on a certain unique circle – If monitors are placed on a arc of a circle, the transmission power cannot be determined with full accuracy (even with infinite monitors)

Similar presentations

Presentation is loading. Please wait....

OK

Review of Probability and Random Processes

Review of Probability and Random Processes

© 2019 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Ads by Google