1 / 15

Closed-Form MSE Performance of the Distributed LMS Algorithm

Closed-Form MSE Performance of the Distributed LMS Algorithm. Gonzalo Mateos, Ioannis Schizas and Georgios B. Giannakis ECE Department, University of Minnesota Acknowledgment: ARL/CTA grant no. DAAD19-01-2-0011 USDoD ARO grant no. W911NF-05-1-0283. Motivation.

weldon
Télécharger la présentation

Closed-Form MSE Performance of the Distributed LMS Algorithm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Closed-Form MSE Performance of the Distributed LMS Algorithm Gonzalo Mateos, Ioannis Schizas and Georgios B. Giannakis ECE Department, University of Minnesota Acknowledgment: ARL/CTA grant no. DAAD19-01-2-0011 USDoD ARO grant no. W911NF-05-1-0283

  2. Motivation • Estimation using ad hoc WSNs raises exciting challenges • Communication constraints • Limited power budget • Lack of hierarchy / decentralized processing Consensus • Unique features • Environment is constantly changing (e.g., WSN topology) • Lack of statistical information at sensor-level • Bottom line: algorithms are required to be • Resource efficient • Simple and flexible • Adaptive and robust to changes Single-hop communications

  3. Prior Works • Single-shot distributed estimation algorithms • Consensus averaging [Xiao-Boyd ’05, Tsitsiklis-Bertsekas ’86, ’97] • Incremental strategies [Rabbat-Nowak etal ’05] • Deterministic and random parameter estimation [Schizas etal ’06] • Consensus-based Kalman tracking using ad hoc WSNs • MSE optimal filtering and smoothing [Schizas etal ’07] • Suboptimal approaches [Olfati-Saber ’05],[Spanos etal ’05] • Distributed adaptive estimation and filtering • LMS and RLS learning rules [Lopes-Sayed ’06 ’07]

  4. Problem Statement • Ad hoc WSN with sensors • Single-hop communications only. Sensor ‘s neighborhood • Connectivity information captured in • Zero-mean additive (e.g., Rx) noise • Goal: estimate a signal vector • Each sensor , at time instant • Acquires a regressor and scalar observation • Both zero-mean and spatially uncorrelated • Least-mean squares (LMS) estimation problem of interest

  5. Power Spectrum Estimation • Find spectral peaks of a narrowband (e.g., seismic) source • AR model: • Source-sensor multi-path channels modeled as FIR filters • Unknown orders and tap coefficients • Observation at sensor is • Define: • Challenges • Data model not completely known • Channel fades at the frequencies occupied by

  6. Proposition [Schizas etal’06]: For satisfying 1)-2) and the WSN is connected, then A Useful Reformulation • Introduce the bridge sensor subset • For all sensors , such that • For , a path connecting them devoid of edges linking two sensors • Consider the convex, constrained optimization

  7. Algorithm Construction • Associated augmented Lagrangian • Two key steps in deriving D-LMS • Resort to the alternating-direction method of multipliers Gain desired degree of parallelization • Apply stochastic approximation ideas Cope with unavailability of statistical information

  8. Steps 1,2: Step 3: Tx Rx Tx to from to Bridge sensor Sensor Rx from D-LMS Recursions and Operation • In the presence of communication noise, for and • Simple, distributed, only single-hop exchanges needed Step 1: Step 2: Step 3:

  9. Error-form D-LMS • Study the dynamics of • Local estimation errors: • Local sum of multipliers: (a1) Sensor observations obey where the zero-mean white noise has variance • Introduce and Lemma: Under (a1), for then where and consists of the blocks and with

  10. MSD EMSE Local Global Performance Metrics • Local (per-sensor) and global (network-wide) metrics of interest (a2) is white Gaussian with covariance matrix (a3) and are independent • Define • Customary figures of merit

  11. Proposition:Under (a2)-(a4), the covariance matrix of obeys with . Equivalently, after vectorization where Tracking Performance (a4) Random-walk model: where is zero-mean white with covariance ; independent of and • Let where • Convenient c.v.:

  12. Proposition: Under (a1)-(a4), the D-LMS algorithm achieves consensus in the mean, i.e., provided the step-size is chosen such that with Proposition: Under (a1)-(a4), the D-LMS algorithm is MSE stable for sufficiently small Stability and S.S. Performance • MSE stability follows • Intractable to obtain explicit bounds on • From stability, has bounded entries • The fixed point of is • Enables evaluation of all figures of merit in s.s.

  13. Step-size Optimization • If optimum minimizing EMSE • Not surprising • Excessive adaptation MSE inflation • Vanishing tracking ability lost • Recall • Hard to obtain closed-form , but easy numerically (1-D).

  14. Regressors: w/ ; i.i.d.; w/ Observations: linear data model, WGN w/ Time-invariant parameter: Random-walk model: Simulated Tests node WSN, Rx AWGN w/ , , D-LMS:

  15. Concluding Summary • Developed a distributed LMS algorithm for general ad hoc WSNs • Detailed MSE performance analysis for D-LMS • Stationary setup, time-invariant parameter • Tracking a random-walk • Analysis under the simplifying white Gaussian setting • Closed-form, exact recursion for the global error covariance matrix • Local and network-wide figures of merit for and in s.s. • Tracking analysis revealed minimizing the s.s. EMSE • Simulations validate the theoretical findings • Results extend to temporally-correlated (non-) Gaussian sensor data

More Related