Open Access

Optimal receiver antenna location in indoor environment using dynamic differential evolution and genetic algorithm

  • Shu-Han Liao1,
  • Chien-Hung Chen2,
  • Chien-Ching Chiu1Email author,
  • Min-Hui Ho1,
  • Tadeusz A Wysocki3 and
  • Beata J Wysocki3
EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking20132013:235

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-1499-2013-235

Received: 8 May 2013

Accepted: 3 September 2013

Published: 25 September 2013

Abstract

Using the impulse responses of these multipath channels, the bit error rate (BER) performance for binary pulse amplitude modulation impulse radio ultra-wideband communication system is calculated. The optimization location of receiving antenna is investigated by dynamic differential evolution (DDE) and genetic algorithm (GA) to minimize the outage probability. Numerical results show that the performance for reducing BER and outage probability by DDE algorithm is better than that by GA.

Keywords

BER BPAM UWB DDE GA

1 Introduction

Ultra-wideband (UWB) transmissions can legally operate in the range from 3.1 up to 10.6 GHz at a limited transmit power of -41 dBm/MHz [1]. All wireless systems must be able to deal with the challenges of operating over a multipath propagation channel, where the object in the environment can cause multiple reflections. Bit error rate (BER) degradation is caused by the inter-symbol interference due to a multipath propagation made up of radio wave reflections by walls, ceilings, floors, and office fixtures. In general, effective antenna selection and deployment strategies are important for reducing BER in indoor wireless systems [2, 3]. To the best of our knowledge, there is still no investigation using the dynamic differential evolution (DDE) and genetic algorithm (GA) to optimize the location of receiving antennas for minimizing the BER in indoor wireless communication channel.

Based on the BER formula, the outage probability is chosen as the cost function in our optimization procedure. Thus, the optimization of location of receiving antenna in this paper is using DDE and GA to overcome the above situation and to minimize the outage probability.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, channel modeling, system description, dynamic differential evolution, and genetic algorithm procedure are presented. The numerical results are then presented in Section 3, and conclusion is made in Section 4.

2 Channel modeling and system description

2.1 Channel modeling

The following two steps are used to calculate the multipath radio channel:
  1. 1.

    Frequency responses for sinusoidal waves by shooting and bouncing ray (SBR)/image [423] techniques. The SBR/image method can deal with high-frequency radio wave propagations in the complex indoor environments [24, 25].

     
  2. 2.

    Inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT) and Hermitian processing. The frequency responses are transformed to the time domain using the inverse Fourier transform with the Hermitian signal processing [26]. Using the Hermitian processing, the pass-band signal is obtained with zero padding from the lowest frequency down to direct current (DC), taking the conjugate of the signal and reflecting it to the negative frequencies. The result is then transformed to the time domain using IFFT [27]. Since the signal spectrum is symmetric around DC. The resulting doubled-side spectrum corresponds to a real signal in the time domain.

     
The equation for modeling the multipath radio channel is a linear filter with an impulse response given by
h t = n = 1 N α n δ t - τ n ,
(1)

where N is the number of paths observed at time, δ(·) is the Dirac delta function, and a n and τ n are the channel gain and time delay for the n-th path, respectively.

2.2 System block diagram

The block diagram of the simulated communication system is shown in Figure 1. The received signal r(t) can be expressed as follows:
r t = x t h t + n t ,
(2)
where x(t) is the transmitted signal, h(t) is the impulse response of the equivalent baseband, and n(t) is the white Gaussian noise with zero mean and variance N0/2.
Figure 1

Block diagram of the simulated communication system.

The transmitted UWB pulse stream can be expressed as follows [28]:
x t = n = 1 p t - n - 1 T d d n ,
(3)
where p(t) is the transmitted waveform. d n {±1} is a binary pulse amplitude modulation (B-PAM) symbol and is assumed to be independent and identically distributed. Td is the duration of the transmitting signal. The transmitted waveform p(t) is the Gaussian waveform with ultra-short duration Tp at the nanosecond scale. Note that Td is the duration of the transmitting signal, and Tp is the pulse duration. The value of Td is usually much larger than that of Tp. The Gaussian waveform p(t) can be described by the following expression:
p t = 1 2 π σ e - t 2 2 σ 2 ,
(4)
where t and σ are time and standard deviation of the Gaussian wave, respectively. The average transmit energy symbol Et can be expressed as
E t = 0 T d p 2 t dt ,
(5)

where Et is the average transmitted energy.

The correlation receiver samples the received signal at the symbol rate and correlates them with suitably delayed references given by
q t = p t - τ 1 - n - 1 T d ,
(6)
where τ1 is the delay time of the first wave. The output of the correlator at t = nTd is [29, 30]:
Z n = n - 1 T d n T d n = 1 p t - n - 1 T d d n h t · q t dt + n - 1 T d n T d n t q t dt = V n + η ( n ) .
(7)
It can be shown that the noise components η(n) of Equation 7 are uncorrelated Gaussian random variables with zero mean. The variance of the output noise η is
σ 2 = N 0 2 E . t
(8)
The conditional error probability of the n-th bit is thus expressed by
P e Z n | d = 1 2 erfc V n 2 σ · d n ,
(9)
where erfc x = 2 π x e - y 2 dy is complementary error function and d = d 0 , d 1 , , d n is the binary sequence. Note that the average BER for B-PAM impulse radio UWB system can be expressed as [10]
BER = i = 1 2 n P d · 1 2 erfc V i 2 σ · d n ,
(10)

where P d is the occurring probability of the binary sequence d .

2.3 Dynamic differential evolution

In dynamic differential evolution (DDE), after generating the initial population, the candidate solutions are refined by applying mutation, crossover, and selection, iteratively. The flowchart of the DDE algorithm is shown in Figure 2. In this strategy, a mutant vector for each target vector V j k + 1 at the k + 1 generation is computed by
V j k + 1 i = ( X j k ) i + ζ · [ ( X best k ) i - ( X j k ) i ] + χ · [ ( X m k ) i - ( X n k ) i ] , j , m , n 0 , N p - 1 , m n ,
(11)
where i = 1 ~ D and χ and ζ are the scaling factors associated with the vector differences X best k - X j k and X m k - X n k , respectively. The disturbance vector V due to the mutation mechanism consists of parameter vector X j k , the best particle X best k , and two randomly selected vectors. As comparison, the mutant vector V j k + 1 is generated according to Equation 12 for typical DE [31]:
V j k + 1 i = ( X j k ) i + χ · [ ( X m k ) i - ( X n k ) i ] , j , m , n 0 , N p - 1 , m n ,
(12)
where i = 1 ~ D and χ is the scaling factor associated with the vector difference X m k - X n k . Note that ζ is set to 0 for DE; therefore, the main differences between DDE and DE is that DDE includes the idea of approaching the 'best’ during the course of optimization procedure.
Figure 2

The flowchart of the dynamic differential evolution.

After mutation, the crossover operator is applied to generate another kind of new vector u j . The crossover operation in DDE delivers the crossover vector u j k + 1 by mixing the components of the current vector X i and the above mutant vector V i . It can be expressed as
u j k + 1 = V j k + 1 i , Q k < CR X j k i , Q k CR ,
(13)
where i = 1 ~ D and Q k is a random number uniformly distributed within [0,1]. CR (0, 1) is a predefined crossover rate. DDE uses a greedy selection operator that is defined by
X j k + 1 = u j k + 1 , if CF ( u j k ) < CF ( X j k ) X j k , otherwise .
(14)

Selection operation is conducted by comparing the parent vector X j k + 1 with the crossover vector u j k + 1 . The vector with smaller cost function (CF) value is selected as a member for the next generation.

In the synthesis procedure, the DDE is used to minimize the following CF:
CF = outage probability ,
(15)

where cost function is the outage probability for UWB system. The outage probabilities for 100-Mbps B-PAM and for a BER < 10-3 versus SNR are calculated. DDE is used to search the receiver antenna location to minimize the outage probability of the communication system. This SBR/image method technique is used to calculate the UWB channel impulse response for each location of the receiver. Based on the channel impulse response, the number of multipath components, the root mean square (RMS) delay spread τRMS, and the mean excess delay τMED are computed. The DDE algorithm iteratively generates a new population that springs from the previous population through the application of the reproduction by mutation and replacement operators. In our simulation, when the cost function is bigger than the threshold value or DDE does not find a better individual within 300 successive generations, the DDE will be terminated, and a solution is then obtained.

2.4 Genetic algorithm

Genetic algorithm (GA) is the global numerical optimization methods based on genetic recombination and evaluation in nature [32, 33]. They use the iterative optimization procedures, which start with a randomly selected population of potential solutions and then gradually evolve toward a better solution through the application of the genetic operators. GA typically operates on a discretized and coded representation of the parameters rather than on the parameters themselves. These representations are often considered to be 'chromosomes’ , while the individual element, which constitutes chromosomes, is the 'gene’ . Simple but often very effective chromosome representations for optimization problem involving several continuous parameters can be obtained through the juxtaposition of discretized binary representations of the individual parameter.

We regulate the receiver antenna location of the indoor environment to minimize the outage probability. The GA starts with a population containing a total of GP candidates (i.e., GP is the population size). Each candidate is described by a chromosome. Then, the initial population can simply be created by taking GP random chromosomes. GA iteratively generates a new population, which is derived from the previous population through the application of the reproduction, crossover, and mutation operators.

The GA is used to minimize the cost function in Equation 15, where cost function is the outage probability for UWB system. Through repeated applications of reproduction, crossover, and mutation operators, the initial population is transformed into a new population in an iterative manner. New populations will contain increasingly better chromosomes and will eventually converge to an optimal population that consists of the optimal chromosomes.

As for the GA calculations, each chromosome is assigned information of the position of transmitter as the optimization variables. For each generated chromosome, the GA reruns the ray tracing program to calculate the BER for each receiver from the given location of transmitter provided by the chromosome. In our simulation, when the BER is lower than the threshold value or GA does not find a better individual within 300 successive generations, the GA will be terminated and a solution is then obtained.

3 Numerical results

A ray tracing technique is developed to calculate the channel impulse response from 3.1 to 10.6 GHz with frequency interval of 5 MHz, i.e., 1,501 frequency components are used. Since the dielectric constant and conductivity of the materials change with frequency, the different values of dielectric constant and conductivity of materials for different frequencies are carefully considered in channel calculation [3437]. The BER for different receiver positions in the indoor environments are investigated. Figure 3 is the top view of the indoor environment with dimensions of 10 m (length) × 9.2 m (width) × 3 m (height). The transmitting and receiving antennas are with simple omnidirectional radiation pattern and vertically polarized. Each antenna is with a fixed height of 1 m. The optimal antenna location for minimizing the outage probability is searched by DDE and GA. The relative coefficients of the DDE are set as follows: The scaling factors of F and λ are both 0.8, and the crossover rate CR = 0.6. The population size Np = 30. The relative coefficients of the GA are set as follows: The crossover rate Gr = 0.6. The mutation probability GM= 0.025, and the population size GP = 30. The cases with different transceiver positions are considered in our simulation. The receiving antenna RxCenter (5 m × 4.6 m × 0.73 m) located in the center of the indoor environment with a fixed height of 1 m is used for our reference, as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3

A plan view of the simulated environment.

Based on the channel impulse response, the number of multipath components, the RMS delay spread τRMS, and the mean excess delay τMED are computed. The cumulative distributions of the RMS delay spread τRMS is defined as [38]
τ RMS = n = 1 N τ n 2 a n 2 G - n = 1 N τ n a n 2 G 2 ,
(16)

where G = n = 1 N a n 2 is the total multipath gain.

The mean excess delay, τMED, is defined as [39]
τ MED = n = 1 N τ n a n 2 G .
(17)

By Equations 16 and 17, we can obtain the RMS delay spreads and mean excess delay.

We compare the effects of RxCenter, RxDDE, and RxGA on UWB transmission. For the case, the receiver is mobile in the whole indoor environment and the transceivers are located on the desk, in which 25 measurements are carried out (e.g., transmission from a computer 'Tx’ to a printer 'Rx’). Figure 4 shows that the transmitting antenna RxCenter (5 m × 4.6 m × 0.73 m) is located in the center of the indoor environment. In this case, six bad receiving signal points (BER > 10-3) occurred including (not highlighted in the figure) the transmitter points. The DDE and GA optimization position of the receiver is shown in Figure 5. The optimal locations of the receiving antennas are at RxDDE (3.52 m × 6.25 m × 0.73 m) and RxGA (3.56 m × 6.24 m × 0.73 m) using the DDE and GA, respectively. The optimization receiver points RxDDE and RxGA are chosen as the receiver locations as squares/triangle, and no bad transmitting signal point exists. The outage probability versus SNR is calculated, as shown in Figure 6. Here, SNR is defined as the ratio of the average transmitted power to the noise power at the front end of the receiver. It is seen that the outage probability at SNR = 28 dB are about 68%, 8%, and 12% for RxCenter, RxDDE, and RxGA, respectively. It is clear that the outage probability decreased by DDE is better than those by GA about 50%. The performance for the antenna location by DDE is better than that by GA.
Figure 4

Outage areas (BER > 10 -3 ) with the use of one transmitter.

Figure 5

Optimized receiver position when only one receiver is used. () Receiver position RxCenter is located in the center of the indoor environment. (▲) GA optimized receiver position RxGA. (■) DDE optimized receiver position RxDDE.

Figure 6

Outage probability versus SNR for the two kinds of algorithms.

The outage probability versus generation DDE and GA are calculated, as shown in Figure 7. It is found that the outage probability decreases quickly by the DDE, and good convergences are achieved within 182 generations. It also shows that the convergent speed for the DDE is faster than that for GA.
Figure 7

Average outage probability versus generations by two different algorithms.

In order to determine the multipath effect, the τRMS and τMED were calculated. A summary of these values are given in Table 1 for scenarios. For the transceivers located on the table's case scenario, the τRMS for RxCenter, RxDDE, and RxGA are 12.5, 2.80, and 2.86 ns, respectively. It is clear that the τRMS for the RxCenter case is the biggest.
Table 1

The channel parameters ( τ MED and τ RMS ) for the two kinds of algorithms

 

Transmitter channel parameters

τMED(ns)

τRMS(ns)

RxCenter

7.64

12.50

RxGA

2.86

7.12

RxDDE

2.80

6.69

4 Conclusions

Using the impulse responses of these multipath channels, the BER performance for UWB communication system is calculated. The DDE and GA are used to minimize the BER. Numerical results show that BER in the cases can be decreased. It is also found that the BER decreased by DDE is better than that by GA. Numerical results also show that the DDE outperforms the GA in convergence speed.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Electrical Engineering, Tamkang University
(2)
Department of Computer and Communication Engineering, Taipei College of Maritime Technology
(3)
Peter Kiewit Institute, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

References

  1. Federal Communications Commission First report and order. In Revision of part 15 of the commission’s rules regarding ultra-wideband transmission systems. FCC, Washington, DC; 2002.Google Scholar
  2. Wong AH, Neve MJ, Sowerby KW: Antenna selection and deployment strategies for indoor wireless communication systems. IET Commun. 2007, 1(4):732-738. 10.1049/iet-com:20050487View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Lee DCK, Neve MJ, Sowerby KW: The impact of structural shielding on the performance of wireless systems in a single-floor office building. IEEE Trans. on Wireless Comm. 2007, 6(5):1787-1795.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Chiu CC, Liu CL, Liao SH: Channel characteristics of ultra-wideband systems with single co-channel interference. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2013, 13(9):864-873. 10.1002/wcm.1146View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Chiu CC, Yu CY, Liao SH, Wu MK: Channel capacity of multiple-input multiple-output systems for optimal antenna spacing by particle swarm optimizer. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2013, 69(4):1865-1876. 10.1007/s11277-012-0667-6View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiu CC, Chen CH, Liao SH, Chen KC: Bit error rate reduction by smart UWB antenna array in indoor wireless communication. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2012, 15(2):139-148.Google Scholar
  7. Chiu CC, Chen CH, Liao SH, Tu TC: Ultra-wideband outdoor communication characteristics with and without traffic. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2012, 2012: 92. 10.1186/1687-1499-2012-92View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiu CC, Kao YT, Liao SH, Huang YF: UWB communication characteristics for different materials and shapes of the stairs. J. Commun. 2011, 6(8):628-632.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Liao SH, Chen HP, Chiu CC, Liu CL: Channel capacities of indoor MIMO-UWB transmission for different material partitions. Tamkang J. Sci. Eng. 2011, 14(1):49-63.Google Scholar
  10. Liu CL, Chiu CC, Liao SH, Chen YS: Impact of metallic furniture on UWB channel statistical characteristics. Tamkang J. Sci. Eng. 2009, 12(3):271-278.Google Scholar
  11. Liao SH, Chiu CC, Ho MH: Comparison of dynamic differential evolution and genetic algorithm for MIMO-WLAN transmitter antenna location in indoor environment. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2013, 71(4):2677-2691. 10.1007/s11277-012-0963-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiu CC, Ho MH, Liao SH: MIMO-UWB smart antenna communication characteristics for different antenna arrays of transmitters. Int. J. RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Eng. 2013, 23(3):378-392. 10.1002/mmce.20684View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiu CC, Ho MH, Liao SH: PSO and APSO for optimizing coverage in indoor UWB communication system. Int. J. RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Eng. 2013, 23(3):300-308. 10.1002/mmce.20674View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Liao SH, Chiu CC, Chen CH, Ho MH: Channel characteristics of MIMO-WLAN communications at 60 GHz for various corridors. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2013, 2013: 96. 10.1186/1687-1499-2013-96View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Ho MH, Chiu CC, Liao SH: Comparison of different antenna arrays for the BER reduction in indoor wireless communication. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2013, 26(2):161-176. 10.1002/dac.1334View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Sun CH, Chiu CC, Ho MH, Li CL: Comparison of dynamic differential evolution and self-adaptive dynamic differential evolution for buried metallic cylinder. Res. Nondestruct. Eval. 2013, 24: 35-50. 10.1080/09349847.2012.699607View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Ho MH, Chiu CC, Liao SH: Optimization of channel capacity for MIMO smart antenna using particle swarm optimizer. IET Commun. 2012, 6(16):2645-2653. 10.1049/iet-com.2011.0558View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Ho MH, Chiu CC, Liao SH: Bit error rate reduction for circular ultrawideband antenna by dynamic differential evolution. Int. J. RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Eng. 2012, 22(2):260-271. 10.1002/mmce.20604View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Liao SH, Ho MH, Chiu CC, Lin CH: Optimal relay antenna location in indoor environment using particle swarm optimizer and genetic algorithm. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2012, 62(3):599-615. 10.1007/s11277-010-0083-8View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Liao SH, Chiu CC, Ho MH, Liu CL: Channel capacity of multiple-input multiple-output ultra wide band systems with single co-channel interference. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2010, 23(12):1600-1612. 10.1002/dac.1131View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Liao SH, Ho MH, Chiu CC: Bit error rate reduction for multiusers by smart UWB antenna array. Prog. Electromagn. Res.C 2010, 16: 85-98.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Ho MH, Liao SH, Chiu CC: UWB communication characteristics for different distribution of people and various materials of walls. Tamkang J. Sci. Eng. 2010, 13(3):315-326.Google Scholar
  23. Ho MH, Liao SH, Chiu CC: A novel smart UWB antenna array design by PSO. Prog. Electromagn. Res.C 2010, 15: 103-115.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Chen SH, Jeng SK: An SBR/image approach for indoor radio propagation in a corridor. IEICE Trans. Electron 1995, E78-C: 1058-1062.Google Scholar
  25. Chen SH, Jeng SK: SBR/image approach for indoor radio propagation in tunnels with and without traffic. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 1996, 45: 570-578. 10.1109/25.533772View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Oppermann I, Hamalainen M, Iinatti J: UWB Theory and Applications. New York: Wiley; 2004.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Kamen EW, Heck BS: Fundamentals of Signals and Systems Using the Web and MATLAB. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River; 2000.Google Scholar
  28. Zhi T, Giannakis GB: BER sensitivity to mistiming in ultra-wideband impulse radios—part I: nonrandom channels. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 53: 1550-1560.Google Scholar
  29. Homier EA, Scholtz RA IEEE Conference on Ultra Wideband System and Technologies, Baltimore, May 2002. In Rapid acquisition of ultra-wideband signals in the dense multipath channel. Piscataway: IEEE; 2002:105-109.Google Scholar
  30. Gargin DJ: A fast and reliable acquisition scheme for detecting ultra wide-band impulse radio signals in the presence of multi-path and multiple access interference, International Workshop on Ultra Wideband System, May 2004. IEEE: Piscataway; 2004. pp. 106–110Google Scholar
  31. Storn R, Price K: Differential evolution—a simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces, Technical report TR-95-012. Berkeley: International Computer Science Institute; 1995.Google Scholar
  32. Goldberg DE: Genetic Algorithm in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Boston: Addison-Wesley; 1989.MATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Michael Johnson J, Rahmat-Samii Y: Genetic algorithms in engineering electromagnetics. IEEE Antenn. Propag. Mag. 1997, 39(4):7-21. 10.1109/74.632992View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhao Y, Hao Y, Akram A, Clive P: UWB on-body radio channel modeling using ray theory and subband FDTD method. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theor. Tech. 2006, 54: 1827-1835.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Buehrer RM, Safaai-Jazi A, Davis W, Sweeney D Final report, DARPA NETEX Program Virginia Tech. Ultra-wideband propagation measurements and modeling 3rd edition. 2004, 38-216.Google Scholar
  36. Muqaibel A, Safaai-Jazi A, Bayram A, Attiya AM, Riad SM IEEE Proceedings Microwaves, Antennas and Propagation, December 2005. In Ultra-wideband through-the-wall propagation. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2005:581-588.Google Scholar
  37. Jazi AS, Riad SM, Muqaibel A, Bayram A: Through-the-wall propagation and material characterization, DARPA NETEX Program Report. 2002.Google Scholar
  38. Gabriella M, Benedetto D, Giancola G: Understanding Ultra Wide Band Radio Fundamentals. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2004.Google Scholar
  39. Rappaport TS: Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice. 2nd edition. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River; 2002.MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Liao et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.