Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:39:04.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An acceleration method employing sparse sensing matrix for fast analysis of the wide-angle electromagnetic problems based on compressive sensing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2024

Qi Qi
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
Xinyuan Cao*
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
Yi Liu
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China School of Computer Science and Technology, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
Meng Kong
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
Xiaojing Kuang
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
Mingsheng Chen
Affiliation:
Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University, Hefei, China
*
Corresponding author: Xinyuan Cao; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The electromagnetic scattering problem over a wide incident angle can be rapidly solved by introducing the compressive sensing theory into the method of moments, whose main computational complexity is comprised of two parts: a few calculations of matrix equations and the recovery of original induced currents. To further improve the method, a novel construction scheme of measurement matrix is proposed in this paper. With the help of the measurement matrix, one can obtain a sparse sensing matrix, and consequently the computational cost for recovery can be reduced by at least half. The scheme is described in detail, and the analysis of computational complexity and numerical experiments are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with The European Microwave Association.

Introduction

Method of moments (MoM) possesses the advantage of high accuracy in solving the electromagnetic (EM) scattering problems [Reference See, Chua and Liu1]. However, it will cost a huge computational amount when the incident wave is from a wide-angle range, since the procedure needs to be repeatedly implemented at every angle increment. To accelerate the solution process, many methods have been proposed, such as asymptotic waveform evaluation [Reference Erdemli, Gong, Reddy and Volakis2], model-based parameter estimation [Reference Miller3], etc., but these methods show some shortcomings [Reference Zhang, Zhao, Lin and Sha4]. Recently, a fast method based on MoM conjunction with compressive sensing (CS) theory has been put forward [Reference Chen, Liu, Du and Wu5]. In this method, a kind of new excitation sources containing abundant information of different incident angles is built firstly. Then, the induced currents over a wide-angle can be solved by means of the sparse transform and the recovery algorithm from the measurement results, which are obtained by a few calculations of traditional MoM with the new sources. The computational complexity of the fast method mainly consists of two parts: one is the measurement, i.e., the calculations of MoM; the other is to acquire the projections of induced currents in sparse domain.

In order to further improve the fast method, much effort has been devoted to the research on these two parts, and many effective schemes, such as Bayesian CS method [Reference Zhang, Zhao, Lin and Sha4], efficient basis function [Reference Chai and Guo6], and two-dimensional CS method [Reference Liu, Qi, Cao, Chen, Deng, Huang and Wu7], have been devised. In this paper, a novel scheme for designing the measurement matrix is raised, by which the sensing matrix shows remarkable sparsity when the orthogonal basis is taken as the sparse transform. Accordingly, the computational complexity for acquire the projections by using recovery algorithm can be sharply decreased. The principle and the complexity analysis are presented, and the effectiveness is validated by the numerical experiments, in which several typical orthogonal bases, such as the fast Fourier transform (FFT) basis, are taken as the sparse transforms, respectively.

Theory

Fast method based on CS

The wide-angle EM scattering problem solving by the traditional MoM can be described as a matrix equation with multiple right-hand sides

(1)\begin{equation}\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad {\mathbf{Z}}\left[ {{{\mathbf{I}}_1}{{\mathbf{I}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{\mathbf{I}}_n}} \right] = \left[ {{{\mathbf{V}}_1}{{\mathbf{V}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{\mathbf{V}}_n}} \right],\end{equation}

in which, Z is the impedance matrix, V1 to Vn are the excitation vectors at n different incident angles, and I1 to In represent the n corresponding induced current vectors.

In the fast method, M new excitation vectors based on CS theory are constructed as

(2)\begin{equation}{\mathbf{V}}_i^{{\text{CS}}} = {c_{i1}}{{\mathbf{V}}_1} + {c_{i2}}{{\mathbf{V}}_2} + \cdot \cdot \cdot + {c_{in}}{{\mathbf{V}}_n}\;\;(i = 1,2, \cdot \cdot \cdot ,M),\end{equation}

where cij is the element in the measurement matrix Ф. In CS theory, a measurement matrix must satisfy the restricted isometry property (RIP) [Reference Candes, Romberg and Tao8], which ensures the accurate reconstruction of original signal. In general, Gaussian random matrix is often used as Ф.

Substituting equation (2) to equation (1), one can obtain M current vectors under the new excitations by

(3)\begin{equation}{\mathbf{Z}}\left[ {{\mathbf{I}}_1^{{\text{CS}}}{\mathbf{I}}_2^{{\text{CS}}}\cdot \cdot \cdot {\mathbf{I}}_M^{{\text{CS}}}} \right] = \left[ {{\mathbf{V}}_1^{{\text{CS}}}{\mathbf{V}}_2^{{\text{CS}}}\cdot \cdot \cdot {\mathbf{V}}_M^{{\text{CS}}}} \right].\end{equation}

Due to the linearity of the problem, ${\mathbf{I}}_1^{{\text{CS}}}$ to ${\mathbf{I}}_M^{{\text{CS}}}$ can be written as

(4)\begin{equation}{\mathbf{I}}_i^{{\text{CS}}} = {c_{i1}}{{\mathbf{I}}_1} + {c_{i2}}{{\mathbf{I}}_2} + \cdot \cdot \cdot + {c_{in}}{{\mathbf{I}}_n}\;\;(i = 1,2, \cdot \cdot \cdot ,M).\end{equation}

The M current vectors can be regarded as the results of M measurements of the original induced current vectors I1 to In. If the original induced current vectors have a sparse representation, equation (4) can be described as

(5)\begin{equation} {\boldsymbol{\Phi}}\left[\mathbf{I_{1} I_{2} \cdot \cdot \cdot I_{n}}\right]^{\mathbf{T}} = {\boldsymbol{\Phi \Psi}} \left[\boldsymbol{\alpha_{1} \alpha_{2} \cdot \cdot \cdot \alpha_{N}}\right] = \left[\boldsymbol{I_{1}^{CS} I_{2}^{CS} \cdot\cdot\cdot I_{M}^{CS}}\right]^{\boldsymbol{T}},\end{equation}

in which Ψ is the sparse transform, N is the number of the basis functions, and α1 to αN are the projections of each column of [I1 I2In]T in sparse domain. In the wide-angle EM scattering problems, FFT basis, Hermite basis, discrete wavelet transform (DWT) [Reference Chen, Sha and Wu9] basis, or other orthogonal bases are often selected as Ψ [Reference Liu, Qi, Cao, Chen, Deng, Huang and Wu7, Reference Cao, Chen and Wu10].

By utilizing the recovery algorithm (e.g., orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP) [Reference Yang and Hoog de11]), the projections can be approximated by

(6)\begin{align}& \left[ {{{{{\hat \alpha }}}_1}{{{{\hat \alpha }}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{{\hat \alpha }}}_N}} \right]{\text{ = argmin}}{\left\| {\left[ {{{{{\hat \alpha }}}_1}{{{{\hat \alpha }}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{{\hat \alpha }}}_N}} \right]} \right\|_L}\;\;s.t.\;\;{{\Theta }}\left[ {{{{\alpha }}_1}{{{\alpha }}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{\alpha }}_N}} \right]\nonumber \\ & \qquad = {\left[ {{\mathbf{I}}_1^{{\text{CS}}}{\mathbf{I}}_2^{{\text{CS}}}\cdot \cdot \cdot {\mathbf{I}}_M^{{\text{CS}}}} \right]^{T}},\end{align}

where Θ is the sensing matrix and Θ=ФΨ.

Then, the original induced current vectors are reconstructed by

(7)\begin{equation}{\left[ {{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_1}{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_n}} \right]^{T} } = {{\Psi }}\left[ {{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat \alpha }}}}_1}{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat \alpha }}}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{{\boldsymbol{\hat \alpha }}}}_N}} \right].\end{equation}

The computational complexity for solving equation (6) by OMP is O(nKMN), where K is the sparsity of original induced current vectors in sparse domain, and the inner products of the columns in sensing matrix and the measurement results are the dominant computational cost.

Construction scheme of measurement matrix

To reduce the complexity of recovery, one can make the sensing matrix sparse to decrease the cost of inner products. For the purpose, a novel construction scheme of measurement matrix is proposed as follows:

First, by randomly extracting P columns from the sparse transform Ψ, one can obtain ψ1 to ψP, where ψ represents the column of Ψ.

Afterward, to better satisfy RIP, a linear superposition of these P vectors is implemented as

(8)\begin{equation}{{{\varphi }}_1} = {d_{11}}{{{\Psi }}_1} + {d_{12}}{{{\Psi }}_2} + \cdot \cdot \cdot + {d_{1P}}{{{\Psi }}_P}.\end{equation}

Finally, repeating the above two steps M times and a new measurement matrix [φ1 φ2φM]T is established, in which

(9)\begin{equation}{{{\varphi }}_i} = {d_{i1}}{{{\Psi }}_1} + {d_{i2}}{{{\Psi }}_2} + \cdot \cdot \cdot + {d_{iP}}{{{\Psi }}_P}\;\;(i = 1,2, \cdot \cdot \cdot ,M).\end{equation}

Obviously, when an orthogonal basis is taken as Ψ, the inner products of φi and the (n − P) columns in Ψ that are not extracted in the first step are zero, respectively. In other words, there are only P non-zero elements in the ith row of Θ. A sparse Θ with MP non-zero elements is obtained by using the proposed measurement matrix, and the operations of inner products in recovery algorithm are significantly accelerated. Accordingly, the computational complexity of solution to equation (6) is decreased to O(ηnKMN), where η is the proportion of non-zero elements in Θ and η = P/n. Generally, P is much less than n.

Using the proposed measurement matrix and an orthogonal basis as Ф and Ψ respectively, equation (5) can be transformed as

(10)\begin{align}& {\left[ {{{{\varphi }}_1}{{{\varphi }}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{\varphi }}_M}} \right]^{T} }{{\Psi }}\left[ {{{{\alpha }}_1}{{{\alpha }}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{\alpha }}_N}} \right] = {\mathbf{S}}{{{\Psi }}^{T} }{{\Psi }}\left[ {{{{\alpha }}_1}{{{\alpha }}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{\alpha }}_N}} \right]\nonumber\\ \qquad & = {\mathbf{S}}\left[ {{{{\alpha }}_1}{{{\alpha }}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{\alpha }}_N}} \right]= {\left[ {{\mathbf{I}}_1^{{\text{CS}}}{\mathbf{I}}_2^{{\text{CS}}}\cdot \cdot \cdot {\mathbf{I}}_M^{{\text{CS}}}} \right]^{T} },\end{align}

in which, the proposed measurement matrix is expressed as the multiplication of a sparse random matrix S and the transposed sparse transform Ψ. The ith row of S has P random coefficients di 1 to diP in the columns corresponding to the randomly extracted columns from Ψ in the ith measurement, and other entries in S are all zero.

So, equation (10) can be considered as measuring the sparse signals α1 to αN directly with the sparse random matrix S, which has been proved to satisfy a different form of RIP, so-called RIP(p) for p equal (or very close) to 1 [Reference Zhang, Liu and Wang12, Reference Gilbert and Indyk13]. Therefore, equation (6) can produce an accurate solution with high probability by using the proposed measurement matrix. It is interesting to note that, if the random coefficients are all set to 1 in (10), the sparse random matrix is simplified to a sparse binary matrix (SBM) [Reference Berinde, Gilbert, Indyk, Karloff and Strauss14], which consists of only 0 and 1. SBM is often applied as the measurement matrix in wireless sensor networks, since it is easy to be implemented on hardware and has low complexity [Reference Mamaghanian, Khaled, Atienza and Vandergheynst15].

Numerical results

Two numerical experiments with perfect electrical conductor objects of different shapes are presented in this section to validate the proposed scheme, in which the electric field integral equation is established to solve the problems, and OMP is taken as the recovery algorithm. For the convenience of comparison, we define the recovery error as

(11)\begin{equation}\Delta = \frac{{{{\left\| {\left[ {{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_1}{{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{{{\boldsymbol{\hat {\textbf{I}}}}}}_n}} \right] - \left[ {{{\mathbf{I}}_1}{{\mathbf{I}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{\mathbf{I}}_n}} \right]} \right\|}_2}}}{{{{\left\| {\left[ {{{\mathbf{I}}_1}{{\mathbf{I}}_2}\cdot \cdot \cdot {{\mathbf{I}}_n}} \right]} \right\|}_2}}}.\end{equation}

Sphere

A sphere with the radius of 5 m illuminated by the plane waves of 300 MHz is considered, who contains 12,620 Rao-Wilton-Glisson (RWG) basis functions. The waves are set in the xoy plane, and the incident angle is divided into 0.1°, 0.2°, …, 360°.

FFT basis is used as the sparse transform. As is shown in Fig. 1, the similar precision can be achieved at the same number (310) of measurements by applying the Gaussian random matrix and the proposed measurement matrix respectively, while the number of extracting columns P is larger than 1250. It means that one can get a sensing matrix with non-zero elements accounting for 1250/3600 (η) in the best case. Thus, the computational cost for acquiring the projections of original induced currents in sparse domain is cut by about two-thirds (1 − η) by using the proposed measurement matrix rather than Gaussian random matrix; meanwhile, the computational complexity of measurement for both is the same. The comparison of the computing time for acquiring the projections is presented in Table 1, which further proves the high efficiency.

Figure 1. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of FFT basis.

Table 1. Computing time of recovery for sphere (unit: s)

To show the universality of the proposed technique for orthogonal bases, FFT basis is, respectively, replaced by Hermite basis and DWT basis. The corresponding results are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. It is evident that, for both Hermite basis and DWT basis, much less computational complexity for acquiring the projections is available with the proposed measurement matrix than with Gaussian matrix under the same condition of measurement. The comparisons of computing time in the case of two bases are also provided in Table 1.

Figure 2. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of Hermite basis.

Figure 3. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of DWT basis.

Missile model

Then, consider a missile model who contains 1963 RWG basis functions, and the angle increment is set as 1°. The second kind of Chebyshev basis and Legendre basis is chosen as the sparse transforms, respectively. Other experimental parameters are the same with the previous one. Both Figs. 4 and 5 indicate that the proposed scheme is also validity for the complex-shaped objects.

Figure 4. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of the second kind of Chebyshev basis.

Figure 5. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of Legendre basis.

By using the second kind of Chebyshev basis and the proposed measurement matrix (M = 90, P = 100), and setting the elements less than 10−14 in the sensing matrix to zero, there are only 9000 non-zero elements in the sensing matrix, which is consistent with the expected number MP. Hence, the solution to equation (6) with the help of OMP is accelerated, which is demonstrated in Table 2. The bistatic radar cross section (RCS) of the missile model illuminated at a random incident angle (take 77° as an example) is also provided in Fig. 6, which agrees well with the result solved by the traditional MoM. From Table 2 and Fig. 6, we can see clearly that the computing time can be significantly reduced while the high accuracy is kept by using the proposed measurement matrix.

Figure 6. Comparison of RCS for the missile model illuminated at a random incident angle.

Table 2. Computing time of recovery for missile model (unit: s)

Conclusion

A novel scheme for constructing the measurement matrix has been developed. One can get a sparse sensing matrix by adopting the proposed measurement matrix in the solution to wide-angle EM scattering problem based on MoM conjunction with CS. In addition, the number of measurements required for both Gaussian random matrix and the proposed one is the same. Consequently, the computational complexity for acquiring the projections by using recovery algorithm can be significantly reduced under the condition that the computational cost for measurement remains unchanged.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Anhui Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 2208085QF183, the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61701163, the Universities Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province of China under Grant KJ2021A0905 and Grant KJ2020A0102, the Anhui Science and Technology Project under Grant 202104a05020004, the University Synergy Innovation Program of Anhui Province of China under Grant GXXT-2021-090.

Competing interests

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Qi Qi received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University, Hefei, China, in 2013 and 2020, respectively. He is currently an associate professor with the Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University. His current research interests include computational electromagnetics and radar signal processing.

Xinyuan Cao received the B.S. degree in computer science and technology from the Anhui University of Technology (AHUT), in 2005, the M.S. degree in software engineering from the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC), in 2008, and the Ph.D. degree electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University, China, in 2013. He is currently a professor with the Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University.

Yi Liu received the M.S. degree in electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University (AHU), China, in 2013. Since 2013, she has been with Hefei Normal University (HFNU), China.

Meng Kong received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University, Hefei, China, in 2009 and 2016, respectively. He is currently a professor with the Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University.

Xiaojing Kuang received the Ph.D. degree in electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University, Hefei, China, in 2020. She is currently a professor with the Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Simulation and Design for Electronic Information System, Hefei Normal University.

Mingsheng Chen received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electromagnetic field and microwave technology from Anhui University, Hefei, China, in 2003 and 2008, respectively. His research interests include fast numerical methods in computational electromagnetics, compressive sensing, and electromagnetic scattering and radiation.

References

See, KY, Chua, EK and Liu, Z (2009) Accurate and efficient evaluation of MoM matrix based on a generalized analytical approach. Progress in Electromagnetics Research 94, 367382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erdemli, YE, Gong, J, Reddy, CJ and Volakis, JL (1998) Fast RCS pattern fill using AWE technique. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 46(11), 17521753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, EK (1998) Model-based parameter estimation in electromagnetic III: Applications to EM integral equations. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine 40(3), 4966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H, Zhao, X, Lin, Z and Sha, W (2016) Fast monostatic scattering analysis based on Bayesian compressive sensing. Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society Journal 31(11), 12791285.Google Scholar
Chen, MS, Liu, FL, Du, HM and Wu, XL (2011) Compressive sensing for fast analysis of wide-angle monostatic scattering problems. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters 10, 12431246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chai, SR and Guo, LX (2016) Compressive sensing for monostatic scattering from 3-D NURBS geometries. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 64(8), 35453553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y, Qi, Q, Cao, XY, Chen, MS, Deng, GQ, Huang, ZX and Wu, XL (2021) Application of two-dimensional compressive sensing to wavelet method of moments for fast analysis of wide-angle electromagnetic scattering problems. International Journal of Antennas and Propagation 2021, 19.Google Scholar
Candes, EJ, Romberg, J and Tao, T (2006) Robust uncertainty principles: Exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 52(2), 489509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, MS, Sha, W and Wu, XL (2009) Solution of arbitrarily dimensional matrix equation in computational electromagnetics by fast lifting wavelet-like transform. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 80(8), 11241142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cao, XY, Chen, MS and Wu, XL (2012) Sparse transform matrices and their application in the calculation of electromagnetic scattering problems. Chinese Physics Letters 30(2), .Google Scholar
Yang, M and Hoog de, F (2015) Orthogonal matching pursuit with thresholding and its application in compressive sensing. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 63(20), 54795486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, B, Liu, Y and Wang, K (2014) Restricted isometry property analysis for sparse random matrices. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology 36(1), 169174.Google Scholar
Gilbert, A and Indyk, P (2010) Sparse recovery using sparse matrices. Proceedings of the IEEE 98(6), 937947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinde, R, Gilbert, AC, Indyk, P, Karloff, H and Strauss, MJ (2008) Combining geometry and combinatorics: A unified approach to sparse signal recovery. In 46th Annual Allerton Conference, Illinois, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mamaghanian, H, Khaled, N, Atienza, D and Vandergheynst, P (2011) Compressed sensing for real-time energy-efficient ECG compression on wireless body sensor nodes. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 58(9), 24562466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of FFT basis.

Figure 1

Table 1. Computing time of recovery for sphere (unit: s)

Figure 2

Figure 2. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of Hermite basis.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of DWT basis.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of the second kind of Chebyshev basis.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Relationship between the recovery error and the number of measurements in the case of Legendre basis.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Comparison of RCS for the missile model illuminated at a random incident angle.

Figure 7

Table 2. Computing time of recovery for missile model (unit: s)