1 consensus-based distributed least-mean square algorithm using wireless ad hoc networks gonzalo...
Post on 18-Jan-2018
228 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1
Consensus-Based Distributed Least-Mean Square Algorithm Using Wireless Ad Hoc Networks
Gonzalo Mateos, Ioannis Schizas and Georgios B. GiannakisECE Department, University of Minnesota
Acknowledgment: ARL/CTA grant no. DAAD19-01-2-0011
2
Motivation Estimation using ad hoc WSNs raises exciting challenges
Communication constraints Limited power budget Lack of hierarchy / decentralized processing Consensus
Unique features Environment is constantly changing (e.g., WSN topology) Lack of statistical information at sensor-level
Bottom line: algorithms are required to be Resource efficient Simple and flexible Adaptive and robust to changes
Single-hop communications
3
Prior Works Single-shot distributed estimation algorithms
Consensus averaging [Xiao-Boyd ’05, Tsitsiklis-Bertsekas ’86, ’97] Incremental strategies [Rabbat-Nowak etal ’05] Deterministic and random parameter estimation [Schizas etal ’06]
Consensus-based Kalman tracking using ad hoc WSNs MSE optimal filtering and smoothing [Schizas etal ’07] Suboptimal approaches [Olfati-Saber ’05], [Spanos etal ’05]
Distributed adaptive estimation and filtering LMS and RLS learning rules [Lopes-Sayed ’06 ’07]
4
Problem Statement Ad hoc WSN with sensors
Single-hop communications only. Sensor ‘s neighborhood Connectivity information captured in Zero-mean additive (e.g., Rx, quantization) noise
Each sensor , at time instant Acquires a regressor and scalar observation Both zero-mean w.l.o.g and spatially uncorrelated
Least-mean squares (LMS) estimation problem of interest
5
Centralized Approaches If , jointly stationary Wiener solution
If global (cross-) covariance matrices , available Steepest-descent converges avoiding matrix inversion
If (cross-) covariance info. not available or time-varying Low complexity suggests (C-) LMS adaptation
Goal: develop a distributed (D-) LMS algorithm for ad hoc WSNs
6
A Useful Reformulation
Introduce the bridge sensor subset1) For all sensors , such that2) For , there must such that
Consider the convex, constrained optimization
Proposition [Schizas etal’06]: For satisfying 1)-2) and the WSN is connected, then
7
Algorithm Construction Problem of interest
Two key steps in deriving D-LMS1) Resort to the alternating-direction method of multipliers
Gain desired degree of parallelization
2) Apply stochastic approximation ideasCope with unavailability of statistical
information
8
Derivation of Recursions Associated augmented Lagrangian
Alternating-direction method of Lagrange multipliersThree-step iterative update process
Multipliers Dual iteration Local estimates Minimize w.r.t. Bridge variables Minimize w.r.t.
Step 1:Step 2:Step 3:
9
Multiplier Updates Recall the constraints
Use standard method of multipliers type of update
Requires from the bridge neighborhood
10
Local Estimate Updates Given by the local optimization
First order optimality condition
Proposed recursion inspired by Robbins-Monro algorithm
1) is the local prior error2) is a constant step-size
Requires Already acquired bridge variables Updated local multipliers
11
Bridge Variable Updates
Similarly,
Requires from the neighborhood from the neighborhood in a startup phase
12
D-LMS Recap and Operation In the presence of communication noise, for
Simple, fully distributed, only single-hop exchanges needed
Step 1:Step 2:
Step 3:
Sensor
Rxfrom
Tx
toBridge sensor
Txto
Rx
from
Steps 1,2:
Step 3:
13
Further Insights Manipulating the recursions for and yields
Introduce the instantaneous consensus error at sensor
The update of becomes
Superposition of two learning mechanisms Purely local LMS-type of adaptation PI consesus loop tracks the consensus set-point
14
Network-wide information enters through the set-point Expect increased performance with Flexibility
D-LMS ProcessorLocal LMS Algorithm
Sensor j
PI RegulatorTo
Consensus Loop
15
Mean Analysis Independence setting signal assumptions for
(As1) is a zero-mean white random vector , with spectral radius
(As2) Observations obey a linear model where is a zero-mean white noise
(As3) and are statistically independent
Define and
Goal: derive sufficient conditions under which
16
Dynamics of the MeanLemma: Under (As1)-(As3), consider the D-LMS algorithm initialized with .Then for , is given by the second-order recursion with and , where
Equivalent first-order system by state concatenation
17
First-Order Stability ResultProposition: Under (As1)-(As3), the D-LMS algorithm whose positive step-sizes and relevant parameters are chosen such that , achieves consensus in the mean sense i.e.,
Step-size selection based on local information only Local regressor statistics Bridge neighborhood size
18
Simulations node WSN, Regressors: i.i.d.Observations:
D-LMS: ,
True time-varying weight:
19
Loop Tuning Adequately selecting actually does make a difference
Compared figures of merit: MSE (Learning curve): MSD (Normalized estimation error):
20
Concluding Summary Developed a distributed LMS algorithm for general ad hoc WSNs Intuitive sensor-level processing
Local LMS adaptation Tunable PI loop driving local estimate to consensus
Mean analysis under independence assumptions step-size selection rules based on local information
Simulations validate mss convergence and tracking capabilities
Ongoing research Stability and performance analysis under general settings Optimality: selection of bridge sensors, D-RLS. Estimation/Learning performance Vs complexity tradeoff
top related