Closed form position of airborne targets in new design of geometric constrained problem by bearing measurements

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Positioning involves a wide range of military and industrial applications. In a positioning based on directional measurement, the transmitter's position is the intersection of the hypothetical orientation lines that send out the sensors to the transmitter. In the absence of noise, the location of these lines will be unique. But in reality, existing noise causes uncertainty in measurements and positioning. So far, various approaches have been introduced for orientation measurement based positioning. Most of these methods are based on numerical algorithms and the traditional maximum likelihood in order to estimate the optimal target position. These methods are equivalent to minimizing the total measurement errors by assuming Gaussian noise. Although TML is accurate, but due to the use of a recursive numerical algorithm, when the noise measurements are large or the geometry of the problem is undesirable, it causes a divergence of algorithm. Because of the use of numerical algorithms, these methods do not have a mathematical closed form for the answer. In addition to these methods, limited efforts are made to solve the problem and extract the closed form answer based on the geometric properties of the problem, most notably the Stansfield method. This algorithm is based on the assumption that the Gaussian noise is small and that the transmitter's approximate distance from the sensors is known. In this paper, attention is paid to the geometric properties of the problem in order to extract the closed form answer. But the assumption of the small Gaussian noise and the approximate distance between the transmitter and the sensors are not required. In most papers, the response of the TML algorithm as a benchmark has been compared in order to determine the precision of the proposed method. In this paper, it is shown in several scenarios that the proposed algorithm has a lower RMSE error than the TML, in addition to providing a mathematical closed form answer.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] R. G.Stansfield, Statistical theory of DF fixing, Journal of IEE, vol. 94, no. 15, pp. 762-770, 1947.
[2] H. E. Daniels, The theory of position finding, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B13, pp. 186-207, 1951.
[3] I. Shames, A. N. Bishop, M. Smith, B. D. O. Anderson,Doppler Shift Target Localization, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 49, Issue. 1, pp. 266-276, Jan 2013.
[4] S. Lim, H. Bang, Guidance laws for target localization using vector field approach, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 50, Issue. 3, pp. 1991-2003, July 2014.
[5] L. M. Kaplan, Q. Le, N. Molnar, Maximum likelihood methods for bearings-only target localization, in Proc. Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process., 2001, vol. 5, pp. 3001-3004.
[6] Z. Berman, A reliable maximum likelihood algorithm for bearingonly targetmotion analysis, in Proc. 36th IEEE Conf. Decision Contr., Dec. 1997, vol. 5, pp. 5012-5017.
[7] A. N. Bishop, B. Fidan, B. D. O. Anderson, K. Dogancay, P. N. Pathirana, Optimality analysis of sensor-target geometries in passive localization: Part 1–Bearing-only localization, In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks, and Information Processing, Melbourne, Australia, Dec. 2007.
[8] A. N. Bishop, B. D. O. Anderson, B. Fidan, P. N. Pathirana, G. Mao, Bearing-only Localization using Geometrically Constrained Optimization, IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems,vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 308-320, 2009.
[9] M. Gavish, A. J. Weiss, Performance analysis of bearing-only target location algorithms, IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 817-828, 1992.
[10] D. J. Torrieri, Statistical theory of passive location systems, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 183-198, 1984.
[11] W. H. Foy, Position-location solutions by Taylor-series estimation, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 187-194, 1976.
[12] J. Rife, Design of a distributed localization algorithm to process angle-of-arrival measurements, IEEE International Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA), pp. 1-6, May 2015.
[13] J. P. Le Cadre, C. Jauffret, On the convergence of iterative methods for bearings-only tracking, IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 801-818, 1999.
[14] S. C. Nardone, A. G. Lindgren, K. F. Gong, Fundamental properties and performance of conventional bearings-only target motion analysis, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, AC-29, pp.775-787, 1984.
[15] K. Dogancay, Bearings-only target localization using total least squares, Signal Processing, vol. 85, pp. 1695-1710, 2005.
[16] K. Dogancay, G. Ibal, 3D passive localization in the presence of large bearing noise,13th European Signal Processing Conference EUSIPCO2 05 Proceedings, pp.1-4, 2005.
[17] Z. Wang, J. A. Luo, X. P. Zhang, A Novel Location-Penalized Maximum Likelihood Estimator for Bearing-Only Target Localization, IEEE Transactions  on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 6166-6181, December 2012.
[18] M. Fardad, A. Ghorashi, R. Shahbazian, A novel maximum likelihood based estimator for bearing-only target localization, 22nd Iranian Conference on Electrical Engineering (ICEE), pp 1522–1527, May 2014.
[19] Stephen Boyd, Convex Optimization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[20] A. N. Bishop, B. Fidan, B. D. O. Anderson, P. N. Pathirana, K. Dogancay, Optimality analysis of sensor-target geometries in passive localization: Part 2-Time of arrival based  localization, In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks, and Information Processing, Melbourne, Australia, Dec. 2007.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics