2018
DOI: 10.1155/2018/9434360
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Compressive Sensing-Based Bistatic MIMO Radar Imaging Method in the Presence of Array Errors

Abstract: A robust transmit-receive angle imaging method for bistatic MIMO radar based on compressed sensing is proposed. A new imaging model with array gain and phase error is established. The array gain error and phase error were modeled as a random interference for observation matrix by mathematical derivation. A constraint of observation matrix error is constructed in optimization problem of sparse recovery to reduce the effect of the interference of observation matrix. Then, the iterative algorithm of the optimizat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(6 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It can be seen in Figure 4 that the iterative method [15] and Lasso method work slightly better than the constrained optimization method [14] and the proposed method achieves much better performance than the iterative method [15] and Lasso method. Simulations show that the MSEs of the constrained optimization method [14], the iterative method [15], the Lasso method, and the proposed method are 14.93, 11.07, 12.40, and 4.78, respectively. Figure 5 shows the MSE and PRC of the four methods, where the error parameter ε changes from 0.2 to 0.8 with the interval 0.02.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…It can be seen in Figure 4 that the iterative method [15] and Lasso method work slightly better than the constrained optimization method [14] and the proposed method achieves much better performance than the iterative method [15] and Lasso method. Simulations show that the MSEs of the constrained optimization method [14], the iterative method [15], the Lasso method, and the proposed method are 14.93, 11.07, 12.40, and 4.78, respectively. Figure 5 shows the MSE and PRC of the four methods, where the error parameter ε changes from 0.2 to 0.8 with the interval 0.02.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In this section, we examine the performance of the proposed method in comparison with that of the Lasso method and the methods proposed in [14] and [15]. We use the mean square error (MSE) and performance recovery coefficient (PRC) with the following definitions to evaluate the reconstruction quality:…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations