1 / 55

Source Localization on a budget

Source Localization on a budget. Volkan Cevher volkan@rice.edu Rice University. Petros. Rich. Anna. Martin. Lance. Localization Problem. Goal: Localize targets by fusing measurements from a network of sensors.

klevy
Download Presentation

Source Localization on a budget

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. Source Localization on a budget Volkan Cevher volkan@rice.edu Rice University Petros Rich Anna Martin Lance

  2. Localization Problem • Goal: Localize targetsby fusing measurementsfrom a network of sensors [Cevher, Duarte, Baraniuk; EUSIPCO 2007| Model and Zibulevsky; SP 2006| Cevher et al.; ICASSP 2006| Malioutov, Cetin, and Willsky; IEEE TSP, 2005| Chen et al.; Proc. of IEEE 2003]

  3. Localization Problem • Goal: Localize targetsby fusing measurementsfrom a network of sensors • collect time signal data • communicate signals across the network • solve an optimizationproblem

  4. Digital Revolution • Goal: Localize targetsby fusing measurementsfrom a network of sensors • collect time signal data • communicate signals across the network • solve an optimizationproblem <>

  5. Digital Data Acquisition Foundation: Shannon/Nyquist sampling theorem • “if you sample densely enough (at the Nyquist rate), you can perfectly reconstruct the original analog data” time space

  6. Major Trends in Sensing higher resolution / denser sampling large numbers of sensors increasing # of modalities / mobility

  7. Problems of the Current Paradigm • Goal: Localize targetsby fusing measurementsfrom a network of sensors • collect time signal data • requires potentiallyhigh-rate (Nyquist)sampling • communicate signals across the network • potentially largecommunicationburden • solve an optimizationproblem • e.g., MLE Need compression

  8. Approaches • Do nothing / Ignore be content with the existing approaches • generalizes well • robust

  9. Approaches • Finite Rate of Innovation Sketching / Streaming Compressive Sensing [Vetterli, Marziliano, Blu; Blu, Dragotti, Vetterli, Marziliano, Coulot; Gilbert, Indyk, Strauss, Cormode, Muthukrishnan; Donoho; Candes, Romberg, Tao; Candes, Tao]

  10. Approaches • Finite Rate of Innovation Sketching / Streaming Compressive Sensing PARSITY

  11. Agenda • A short review of compressive sensing • Localization via dimensionality reduction • Experimental results • A broader view of localization • Conclusions

  12. A Short Review of Compressive Sensing Theory

  13. Compressive Sensing 101 • Goal: Recover a sparse or compressible signal from measurements • Problem: Randomprojection not full rank • Solution: Exploit the sparsity / compressibilitygeometry of acquired signal

  14. Compressive Sensing 101 • Goal: Recover a sparse or compressible signal from measurements • Problem: Randomprojection not full rankbut satisfies Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) • Solution: Exploit the sparsity / compressibility geometry of acquired signal • iid Gaussian • iid Bernoulli • …

  15. Compressive Sensing 101 • Goal: Recover a sparse or compressible signal from measurements • Problem: Randomprojection not full rankbut satisfies Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) • Solution: Exploit the sparsity / compressibility geometry of acquired signal via convex optimization or greedy algorithm • iid Gaussian • iid Bernoulli • …

  16. Concise Signal Structure • Sparse signal: only K out of N coordinates nonzero • model: union of K-dimensional subspaces aligned w/ coordinate axes sorted index

  17. Concise Signal Structure • Sparse signal: only K out of N coordinates nonzero • model: union of K-dimensional subspaces • Compressible signal: sorted coordinates decay rapidly to zero well-approximated by a K-sparse signal (simply by thresholding) power-lawdecay sorted index

  18. Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) K-planes • Preserve the structure of sparse/compressible signals • RIP of order 2K implies: for all K-sparse x1 and x2

  19. Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) K-planes • Preserve the structure of sparse/compressible signals • Random subGaussian (iid Gaussian, Bernoulli) matrix has the RIP with high probability if

  20. Recovery Algorithms • Goal: given recover • and convex optimization formulations • basis pursuit, Dantzig selector, Lasso, … • Greedy algorithms • orthogonal matching pursuit, iterative thresholding (IT), compressive sensing matching pursuit (CoSaMP) • at their core: iterative sparse approximation

  21. Performance of Recovery • Using methods, IT, CoSaMP • Sparse signals • noise-free measurements: exact recovery • noisy measurements: stable recovery • Compressible signals • recovery as good as K-sparse approximation CS recoveryerror (METRIC) noise signal K-termapprox error

  22. Universality • Random measurements can be used for signals sparse in any basis

  23. Universality • Random measurements can be used for signals sparse in any basis

  24. Universality • Random measurements can be used for signals sparse in any basis sparsecoefficient vector nonzero entries

  25. Signal recovery is not always required.ELVIS:Enhanced Localization via Incoherence and Sparsity (Back to Localization)

  26. An Important Detail • Solve two entangled problems for localization • estimate source locations • estimate source signals

  27. Today • Instead, solve one localization problem • estimate source locations by exploiting random projections of observed signals • estimate source signals

  28. ELVIS • Instead, solve one localization problem • estimate source locations by exploiting random projections of observed signals • estimate source signals • Bayesian model order selection & MAP estimation in a decentralized sparse approximation framework that leverages • source sparsity • incoherence of sources • spatial sparsity of sources [VC, Boufounos, Baraniuk, Gilbert, Strauss; IPSN’09]

  29. Problem Setup • Discretize space into a localization grid withN grid points • fixes localization resolution • P sensors do not have tobe on grid points

  30. Localization as Sparse Approximation localizationgrid local localizationdictionary actual sensormeasurements truetargetlocation

  31. Multiple Targets localizationgrid actual sensormeasurements 2 truetargetlocations

  32. Local Dictionaries • Sample sparse / compressible signal using CS • Fourier sampling [Gilbert, Strauss] • Calculate at sensor i using measurements • for all grid positionsn=1,…,N: assume that target is at grid position n • for all sensors j=1,…,P: use Green’s function to estimate signal sensor j would measure if target was at position n

  33. Valid Dictionaries • S.A. works when columns of are mutual incoherent • True when target signal has fast-decaying autocorrelation • Extends to multiple targets with small cross-correlation

  34. Typical Correlation Functions Toyota Prius ACF: Toyota Prius CCF: Rodeo vs. Prius Isuzu Rodeo ACF: Isuzu Rodeo CCF: Rodeo vs. Camaro Chevy Camaro ACF: Chevy Camaro CCF: Camaro vs. Prius

  35. An Important Issue Need to send across the network localizationgrid actual sensormeasurements

  36. Enter Compressive Sensing • Sparse localization vector <> acquire and transmit compressive measurementsof the actual observations without losing information

  37. So Far… • Use random projections of observed signals two ways: • create local sensor dictionaries that sparsify source locations • create intersensor communication messages (K targets on N-dim grid) populated using recovered signals random iid

  38. ELVIS Highlights • Use random projections of observed signals two ways: • create local sensor dictionaries that sparsify source locations sample at source sparsity • create intersensor communication messages communicate at spatial sparsity robust to (i) quantization (1-bit quantization–paper) (ii) packet drops No Signal Reconstruction ELVIS Dictionary

  39. ELVIS Highlights • Use random projections of observed signals two ways: • create local sensor dictionaries that sparsify source locations sample at source sparsity • create intersensor communication messages communicate at spatial sparsity robust to (i) quantization (1-bit quantization–paper) (ii) packet drops • Provable greedy estimation for ELVIS dictionaries Bearing pursuit – computationally efficient reconstruction No Signal Reconstruction

  40. Experiments

  41. Field Data Results 5 vehicle convoy >100 × sub-Nyquist

  42. Sensing System Problems • Common theme so far… sensors > representations > metrics > “do our best” • Purpose of deployment • Multi-objective: sensing, lifetime, connectivity, coverage, reliability, etc…

  43. Competition among Objectives • Common theme so far… sensors > representations > metrics > “do our best” • Purpose of deployment • Multi-objective: sensing, lifetime, connectivity, coverage, reliability, etc… • Limited resources > conflicts in objectives

  44. Diversity of Objectives • Multiple objectives • localization area • lifetime time • connectivity probability • coverage area • reliability probability • Unifying framework • utility

  45. Optimality • Pareto efficiency • Economics / optimization literature • Pareto Frontier • a fundamental limit for achievable utilities

  46. Pareto Frontiers for Localization • Mathematical framework for multi objective design best sensors portfolio • Elements of the design • constant budget > optimization polytope • sensor dictionary • random deployment • communications [VC, Kaplan; IPSN’09, TOSN’09]

  47. Pareto Frontiers for Localization • Mathematical framework for multi objective design • Elements of the design • constant budget • sensor dictionary > measurement type (bearing or range) and error, sensor reliability, field-of- view, sensing range, and mobility … … $10 $30 $200 $1M $5M

  48. Pareto Frontiers for Localization • Mathematical framework for multi objective design • Elements of the design • constant budget • sensor dictionary • random deployment > optimize expected / worst case utilities • communications

More Related