Passive Location Resource Scheduling Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm
<p>Procedure for passive location in a practical system.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Architecture of a passive location system.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Procedure for the Improved Genetic Algorithm (IGA).</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Procedure for constraint-proof initialization (CI).</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Individual crossover.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Chromosome crossover.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Mutation.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Passive location resource scheduling diagram with 15 stations and six tasks: (<b>a</b>) distribution of resources and tasks; (<b>b</b>) the scheduling plan: dotted green line represents task assignment.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Convergence curves in the Monte-Carlo experiment.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Fitness curves for CI and random initializations</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Comparison of different algorithms.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Relationships among time complexity, fitness and population: (<b>a</b>) Time complexity-population curve; (<b>b</b>) Fitness-population curve.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Relationship between time complexity and coding length.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Accuracy over iterations (with six tasks and 15 stations).</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Completion rate in different scenario.</p> "> Figure 16
<p>Position dilution of precision (PDOP) in different scenario.</p> "> Figure 17
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> in different scenario (with 5 tasks).</p> "> Figure 18
<p>Experiment results of eight stations and six tasks.</p> "> Figure 19
<p>The experiment results in the scenario with 8 stations and 6 tasks (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>3</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.8</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>): (<b>a</b>) fitness curve; (<b>b</b>) PDOP curve; (<b>c</b>) completion rate curve; (<b>d</b>) resource utilization curve.</p> "> Figure 19 Cont.
<p>The experiment results in the scenario with 8 stations and 6 tasks (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>c</mi> <mn>3</mn> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.8</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>): (<b>a</b>) fitness curve; (<b>b</b>) PDOP curve; (<b>c</b>) completion rate curve; (<b>d</b>) resource utilization curve.</p> "> Figure 20
<p>PDOP curve in different scenarios.</p> "> Figure 21
<p>Completion rate curve in different scenarios.</p> "> Figure 22
<p>Resource utilization curve in different scenarios.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Low efficiency. Because manually allocated broadcast resources cannot achieve parallel processing very well, when task conflicts occur, some signals may be lost, reducing efficiency.
- Unstable location accuracy. Because location accuracy is highly relevant to the stations-to-tasks schedule plans, it is possible to encounter low location accuracy due to mistakes caused by human subjectivity.
2. Problem Formulation
2.1. Assumptions and Scenario Declaration
- We ignore the silence zone. This assumption is made to reduce the space constraint and make the model more concise. According to related studies, potential silence zones can be fully avoided if appropriate locations for building stations are chosen [10].
- Signals from all directions have the same gain in the receiving antennas. This assumption is made to ensure the strength of the signal directly reflects the distance between the station and the target, which simplifies the discussion about geographical relationships. This can be achieved by using an omnidirectional antenna.
- Targets are static or moving slowly enough that their locations do not noticeably change over a short time. This assumption avoids a heavy time delay or even invalidation of the scheduling due to drastic changes in geographical relationships.
- Prior knowledge about targets is available. This assumption ensures that the approximate potential area of the target is known, which is an essential condition of using the proposed scheduling method.
- In addition, the scenario discussed in this paper is specified by the following declarations.
- We only discuss the scheduling activity in one slot. We define one slot as the duration of a scheduling and location process. It is the minimum interval needed to implement one complete activity in the passive location system. Therefore, any length of time can be considered to be a sum of several slots.
- We only discuss narrow-band stations because wide-band stations can be considered the sum of several different narrow-band stations.
2.2. Notation
- 1.
- Task: We denote tasks as , where is the total number of tasks. We use four attributions to describe a task: frequency, location, collaboration and priority, , where denotes the task sequence number.
- gives the frequency range of the task signal, where and .
- denotes the two-dimensional coordinates of task , where .
- gives the cooperative station number requirement for task location, where .
- . We define the priority of tasks as an integer ranging from 1 to 6. The task is more important if its is higher.
- 2.
- Resources: We denote direction-finding stations as . We use three attributions to describe one station (resource): frequency, location and capability, . Here, denotes the station sequence number.
- is the frequency range at which the station implements direction-finding, where and .
- denotes the two-dimensional coordinates of station , .
- is the maximum number of tasks the station can process synchronously, implying its working capacity, where .
- 3.
- Scheduling matrix: We design a binary solution matrix with columns and rows as , where indicates the relation between station and task . Here means that station is assigned to process task , while means is not assigned to process .
2.3. Optimization Model
3. Multi-Objective and Multi-Constraint Properties
3.1. Objective Function
3.1.1. Location Accuracy
3.1.2. Completion Rate
3.1.3. Resource Utilization
3.1.4. Task Priority
3.2. Constraints
3.2.1. Frequency
3.2.2. Station Capability
3.2.3. Task Cooperation Requirement
4. IGA
Algorithm 1. IGA. |
1. Parameters setting and constraint-proof initialization. |
2. Terminate? Yes→Step 6, No→Step3. |
3. Calculate the fitness with the PF and select next generation. |
4. Use MGO to get next generation. |
5. Constrain satisfaction? Yes→step 2, No→Step 4. |
6. Get the solution. |
4.1. CI
4.2. PF
4.3. MGO
4.3.1. Roulette Wheel and Elitism Selection
4.3.2. Crossover
5. Experiment Results and Discussion
5.1. Simulation Setting
5.2. Experiment Results
5.3. Results and Discussion
5.3.1. Performance of the IGA
5.3.2. Time Complexity
5.3.3. Location Accuracy
5.4. Comparison with the Manual Method
5.5. Multi-Objective Function Weights
5.5.1. Analysis of Multi-Objective Weights
5.5.2. Reliability in Different Scenarios
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, Y.; Ma, Z.; Yang, A. Study on Theory of Signal and System in Modern Communication Technology. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Green Communications and Networks 2012 (GCN 2012); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; Volume 3, pp. 561–567. ISBN 978-3-642-35469-4. [Google Scholar]
- Lv, X.; Liu, K.; Hu, P. Geometry Influence on GDOP in TOA and AOA Positioning Systems. In Proceedings of the 2010 Second International Conference on Networks Security, Wireless Communications and Trusted Computing, Wuhan, China, 24–25 April 2010; pp. 58–61. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, J.; Ma, M.; Law, C.L. AOA Cooperative Position Localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE GLOBECOM 2008—2008 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 30 November–4 December 2008; pp. 233–237. [Google Scholar]
- Deng, P.; Liu, L.; Fan, P. A collaborative location model for cellular mobile position location. J. Electron. 2004, 21, 449–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, T.; Wu, Y. A Fast Direction Finding Algorithm Based on Subspace. Telecommun. Eng. 2008, 234, 51–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, C.H.; Cheng, J.Q.; Chen, L.F. Simulation of Shortwave Channel Model and Research on Improved Algorithm. Command Control Simul. 2009, 31, 76–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngoc Nguyen, T.L.; Shin, Y. A new approach for positioning based on AOA measurements. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Computing, Management and Telecommunications (ComManTel), Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 21–24 January 2013; pp. 208–211. [Google Scholar]
- Christensen, M.W.; Suzuki, K.; Zambri, B.; Stephens, G.L. Ship track observations of a reduced shortwave aerosol indirect effect in mixed-phase clouds: Ice-Cloud Indirect Effect in Ship-tracks. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2014, 41, 6970–6977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, S.; Zhang, J.; Sun, T. Nodes selection mechanism based on modified binary particle swarm optimization algorithm. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Information Sciences, Machinery, Materials and Energy, Wuhan, China, 27–28 June 2015; pp. 2023–2027. [Google Scholar]
- Xiu, J.-J.; He, Y.; Wang, G.-H.; Xiu, J.-H.; Tang, X.-M. Constellation of multi-sensors in bearing-only location system. IEE Proc. Radar Sonar Navig. 2005, 152, 215–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahoo, P.K.; Thakkar, H.K.; Hwang, I.S. Pre-Scheduled and Self Organized Sleep-Scheduling Algorithms for Efficient K-Coverage in Wireless Sensor Networks. Sensors 2017, 17, 2945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hu, W.; O’Rourke, D.; Kusy, B.; Wark, T. A virtual sensor scheduling framework for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 21–24 October 2013; pp. 655–658. [Google Scholar]
- Rusu, C.; Thompson, J.; Robertson, N.M. Sensor Scheduling with Time, Energy, and Communication Constraints. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 2017, 66, 528–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, T.; Zhang, J.; Ran, X.; Li, Y. The Direction-finding Stations Scheduling Algorithm Based on BPSO. In Proceedings of the 2015 4th National Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Engineering, Xi’an, China, 12–13 December 2015; pp. 1118–1123. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.; Chen, H. Research on improving the Accuracy of Shortwave Signal Positioning. Digit. Commun. World 2014, 111, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Xia, N.; Yang, W.; Jian, C.; Station, S.M. Research and Design of High Precision Short Wave Positioning System Based on TDOA. Comput. Meas. Control 2015, 23, 3144–3147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cess, R.D.; Nemesure, S.; Dutton, E.G.; Deluisi, J.J.; Potter, G.L.; Morcrette, J.J. The Impact of Clouds on the Shortwave Radiation Budget of the Surface-Atmosphere System: Interfacing Measurements and Models. J. Clim. 1993, 6, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wyatt, L.R. Shortwave Direction and Spreading Measured with HF Radar. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2011, 29, 286–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, R.; Krishnamurthy, V.; Nair, G.; Sciacca, L. Networked sensor management and data rate control for tracking maneuvering targets. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 2005, 53, 1979–1991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, R.L.; Black, Q.R.; Sonsteby, A.G. HF multipath passive single site radio location. IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 1994, 30, 462–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fabrizio, G. Geolocation of HF skywave radar signals using multipath in an unknown ionosphere. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Radar Conference, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 19–23 May 2014; pp. 422–425. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, R.L.; Black, R.Q.; Sonsteby, A.G. Passive Means for Single Site Radio Location. U.S. Patent US5444451, 22 August 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Xue, S.; Yang, Y. Understanding GDOP minimization in GNSS positioning: Infinite solutions, finite solutions and no solution. Adv. Space Res. 2017, 59, 775–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.; Vaidya, N.H. Priority Scheduling in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. Wirel. Netw. 2006, 12, 273–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwob, P.R. Broadcast Receiver Capable of Selecting Stations Based upon Geographical Location and Program Format. U.S. Patent US4969209, 6 November 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Hillermeier, C. Nonlinear Multi-objective Optimization. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 1999, 51, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deb, K.; Pratap, A.; Agarwal, S.; Meyarivan, T. A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evolut. Comput. 2002, 6, 182–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldberg, D.E. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning, 1st ed.; Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.: Boston, MA, USA, 1989; ISBN 978-0-201-15767-3. [Google Scholar]
- Potts, J.C.; Giddens, T.D.; Yadav, S.B. The development and evaluation of an improved genetic algorithm based on migration and artificial selection. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1994, 24, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chromosome Crossover Probability | Individual Crossover Probability | Mutation Probability | Population | Iteration | Penalty Factor | Objective Function Weights | Probability Distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.8 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 10 | 1000 | Gaussian |
Location Area (km × km) | Beginning Frequency (HZ) | Band (HZ) | Capacity | Probability Distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|
50 × 50 | 1000~5000 | 2000~3000 | 1~2 | Uniform Distribution |
Location Area (km × km) | Beginning Frequency (HZ) | Band (HZ) | Cooperation Requirement | Probability Distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|
50 × 50 | 1000~5000 | 2000~3000 | 2~3 | Uniform Distribution |
Task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Station | 1, 3, 14 | 2, 3, 9 | 5, 6, 10 | 8, 12, 13 | 2, 4, 11 | 6, 7, 9 |
Algorithm | Maximum Iterations | Population | Search Parameters | Other Parameters |
---|---|---|---|---|
PSO | 1000 | 10 | , | |
ACO | 1000 | 10 | , | , |
Chromosome Crossover Probability | Individual Crossover Probability | Mutation Probability | Population | Iteration | Penalty Factor | Objective Function Weights | Probability Distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.8 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 10 | 1000 | Gaussian |
Task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Priority | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Station | 1, 5, 6 | 7, 8 | 4, 8 | 2, 6 | 2, 6 | —— |
Chromosome Crossover Probability | Individual Crossover Probability | Mutation Probability | Population | Iteration | Penalty Factor | Objective Function Weights | Probability Distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.8 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 10 | 1000 | Gaussian |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jiang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, L.; Ran, X.; Tang, Y. Passive Location Resource Scheduling Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm. Sensors 2018, 18, 2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072093
Jiang J, Zhang J, Zhang L, Ran X, Tang Y. Passive Location Resource Scheduling Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm. Sensors. 2018; 18(7):2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072093
Chicago/Turabian StyleJiang, Jianjun, Jing Zhang, Lijia Zhang, Xiaomin Ran, and Yanqun Tang. 2018. "Passive Location Resource Scheduling Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm" Sensors 18, no. 7: 2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072093
APA StyleJiang, J., Zhang, J., Zhang, L., Ran, X., & Tang, Y. (2018). Passive Location Resource Scheduling Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm. Sensors, 18(7), 2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072093