Why does direct-MUSIC on sparse-arrays work?

The nested and coprime arrays have recently been introduced as systematic structures to construct difference coar-rays with O(m2) elements, where m is the number of array elements. They are therefore able to identify O(m2) sources (or DOAs) under the assumption that the sources are uncorrelated. In view of their larger aperture compared to uniform linear arrays (ULAs) with the same number of elements, these arrays have some advantages over conventional ULAs even in the cases where the number of sources is less than m, such as improved Cramer-Rao bounds and improved resolvability for closely spaced sources. It has recently been shown that in such situations and under mild assumptions on source locations, it is possible to use subspace techniques such as the MUSIC algorithm directly on these sparse arrays, instead of on the coarrays, thereby making the resulting algorithms simpler. Thus the ambiguity introduced by the sparsity of the arrays is overcome with the help of extra elements with coprime spacing, even if there are multiple sources. The purpose of this paper is to give the theoretical justification for this.

[1]  Dmitry M. Malioutov,et al.  A sparse signal reconstruction perspective for source localization with sensor arrays , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[2]  R. T. Hoctor,et al.  The unifying role of the coarray in aperture synthesis for coherent and incoherent imaging , 1990, Proc. IEEE.

[3]  P. P. Vaidyanathan,et al.  Nested Arrays: A Novel Approach to Array Processing With Enhanced Degrees of Freedom , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[4]  P. P. Vaidyanathan,et al.  Direct-MUSIC on sparse arrays , 2012, 2012 International Conference on Signal Processing and Communications (SPCOM).

[5]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  Compressive Sensing , 2008, Computer Vision, A Reference Guide.

[6]  R.G. Baraniuk,et al.  Compressive Sensing [Lecture Notes] , 2007, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[7]  S.A. Hovanessian,et al.  An Algorithm for Calculation of Range in a Multiple PRF Radar , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[8]  Bhaskar D. Rao,et al.  Sparse signal reconstruction from limited data using FOCUSS: a re-weighted minimum norm algorithm , 1997, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[9]  M. Skolnik,et al.  Introduction to Radar Systems , 2021, Advances in Adaptive Radar Detection and Range Estimation.

[10]  Donald W. Tufts,et al.  Simple, effective estimation of frequency based on Prony's method , 1996, 1996 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing Conference Proceedings.

[11]  Tariq S. Durrani,et al.  Temporal and spatial sampling influence on the estimates of superimposed narrowband signals: when less can mean more , 1996, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[12]  Xiang-Gen Xia,et al.  On estimation of multiple frequencies in undersampled complex valued waveforms , 1999, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[13]  R. O. Schmidt,et al.  Multiple emitter location and signal Parameter estimation , 1986 .

[14]  A. Moffet Minimum-redundancy linear arrays , 1968 .

[15]  Athanassios Manikas Differential Geometry of Array Manifold Surfaces , 2004 .

[16]  P. P. Vaidyanathan,et al.  Sparse Sensing With Co-Prime Samplers and Arrays , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[17]  Petre Stoica,et al.  MUSIC, maximum likelihood and Cramer-Rao bound , 1988, ICASSP-88., International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[18]  P.P. Vaidyanathan,et al.  Compressed sensing in MIMO radar , 2008, 2008 42nd Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers.

[19]  Joel A. Tropp,et al.  Greed is good: algorithmic results for sparse approximation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[20]  P. Vaidyanathan,et al.  Coprime sampling and the music algorithm , 2011, 2011 Digital Signal Processing and Signal Processing Education Meeting (DSP/SPE).

[21]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Decoding by linear programming , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.