Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
ICT Express 8 (2022) 161–165
www.elsevier.com/locate/icte

Null broadened–deepened array antenna beamforming for GNSS jamming

mitigation in moving platforms
Omid Sharifi-Tehrania , Mohamad F. Sabahib ,∗, M.R. Danaeec
a Imam Hussein Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran
b Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
c Electrical Engineering Department, Imam Hussein Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran

Received 15 January 2021; received in revised form 29 May 2021; accepted 12 July 2021
Available online 29 July 2021

Abstract
Steering vector and covariance matrix estimation mismatch along with moving jammer/platform, can affect the performance of null-steering
beamformer. In this paper, by utilizing null-widening, null-deepening and diagonal loading shrinkage in space–time adaptive processing
(STAP) structure, two methods for nullifying GNSS (global navigation satellite system) jamming/interference in cruise moving platforms
are introduced. The enhanced performance of the proposed methods is investigated through numerical simulations. The results indicate
improvement in the number of acquired GNSS satellites, in heavy jamming (GNSS denied) scenario, by reconstructing and acquiring at least
87% of satellites.
⃝c 2021 The Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences (KICS). Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Keywords: Array antenna; GNSS jamming mitigation; Matrix shrinkage; Wide–deep nullifying

1. Introduction complexity [6]. Another problem occurs when the jamming

Adaptive beamforming is widely used in radar, sonar,
electronic warfare (EW), communications and navigation ap-
plications [1,2]. There are different methods for adaptive
beamforming including standard Capon beamformer (SCB)
or minimum variance distortion-less response (MVDR), mini-
mum power distortion-less response (MPDR), linear constraint
minimum variance (LCMV), linear constraint minimum power
(LCMP) and eigenvector decomposition (EVD) beamformer
but their performance degrades when mismatch occurs in
steering vector (SV) and covariance matrix estimation. This
occurs because true covariance matrix calculation is hard in
practice and thus, sample covariance matrix (SCM) is used
instead of true one [1,3]. To overcome this challenge, methods
such as diagonal loading (DL) [4], diagonal un-loading and
some others have been proposed [5]. Also, methods utilizing
eigen-decomposition process suffer from huge computational
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: omidsht@gmail.com (O. Sharifi-Tehrani),
sabahi@eng.ui.ac.ir (M.F. Sabahi), mrdanaee@alum.sharif.edu
(M.R. Danaee).
Peer review under responsibility of The Korean Institute of Communica-
tions and Information Sciences (KICS).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icte.2021.07.002
2405-9595/⃝ c 2021 The Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences (KICS). Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
environment is dynamic. If either jammer or platform is
moving fast, the null or main-lobe of the array antenna may
fall out of the targeted angle/direction and thus, leads to
performance deterioration [7]. To solve this problem, a method
called null-widening or null-broadening [8] has been proposed
to make the null in the desired angle wider; however, it suffers
from shallow depth [1,9]. In this letter, by utilizing space–
time adaptive processing (STAP), we design low complexity
algorithms to overcome some issues including the movement
of jammer/platform, shallow depth in null-broadening, and
mismatches in steering vector and covariance matrix esti-
mation. To this end, we use artificial jamming sources as
uncertainty sets in the region around the desired DoA along
with DL shrinkage. Thus, we achieve wider non-shallow nulls
in unwanted-signal directions along with appropriate main-
lobe in direction of interested signal. Also, mismatches in
covariance matrix and steering vector estimation are com-
pensated. The results indicate improvement in the number of
acquired GNSS satellites, in heavy jamming (GNSS denied)
scenario, by reconstructing and acquiring at least 87% of
satellites. The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the
signal model is presented and the problem is formulated. In
O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi and M.R. Danaee ICT Express 8 (2022) 161–165

Section 3, the proposed null widening–deepening methods are Table 1

described. In Section 4, simulation results and discussion are Steps of S3DBNSM algorithm.
provided, and finally, the paper is concluded in Section 5. Step Operation
†
Step 1 Calculate R̂x according to (7)
2. Problem formulation Step 2 Calculate Asynth = Aθ1 , . . . , Aθ L , a (θ0 )
[ ]

Step 3 Set c = [0, 0, 0, . . . , 1]1×(L+(2K

T
A uniform linear array (ULA) with M antennas (array (
+1)L+1)
)−1 ( )
( )−1
sensors) placed at distance d from each other is considered. H † † −1
Step 4 Obtain w S3D B N S M = Asynth R̂x Asynth R̂x Asynth c
The M × 1 array observation vector at the kth snapshot can be
written as x(k) = x S O I (k) + x J (k) + x N oise (k), where x S O I (k)
= a(θ0 )s(k), x J (k) = A J (k) and x N oise (k) are the signal of 3. The proposed methods
interest (SOI), jamming (interference) signals and noise com-
In this section we propose two methods for nullifying and
ponents, respectively. These signals are assumed statistically
beam steering, to be utilized in moving platforms (with cruise
independent. s(k) is the SOI waveform at time instant k and
moving profile) and GNSS jamming/interference mitigation
a(θ0 ) describes the array steering
[ j2π dsinθ
] θ0
vector related to SOI with
j2π(M−1)dsinθ T applications.
being its DoA and a(θ ) = 1, e l ,...,e l and
l is the wavelength. Let J (k) = [j1 (k), j2 (k), . . . , j L (k)] be the 3.1. Shrinkage Synthetic Source Deepened–Broadened Null
matrix of L jamming waveforms and A = [a(θ1 ), a(θ2 ), . . . , Steered Main-lobe (S3DBNSM)
a(θ L )] is the array steering matrix corresponding to jamming
signals, where ji (k) is the vector of received interference signal In this method, the DoAs of jamming signals, denoted by
from the ith source at the k–th snapshot and θi is the DoA of θ1 , . . . , θ L are firstly estimated. Note that the DoA of the
the ith jamming source. The array beamformer output can be SOI (i.e. θ0 ) is assumed to be known approximately (SOI is
written as y(k) = w H x(k), where w ∈ C M×1 is the beamformer usually arrived from the sky in GNSS applications [11,12]
complex weights (tapering) vector and (.) H represents the and jamming platform could be either airborne or ground-
Hermitian transpose operator. The MVDR is calculated by based [1,9]). Now, we try to widen the nulls of antenna pattern
solving the following optimization problem (e.g. using the in direction of interference sources. This is done by consid-
Lagrange multiplier) [10]: ering the uncertainty interval around each θi and assuming
2K + 1 virtual jamming sources with equidistant DoAs in
min w H Rx w s.t. w H a (θ0 ) = 1 (1) [θi − ϕ2 , θi + ϕ2 ]. The extended synthetic array steering matrix
w
is then defined as
where Rx is the covariance matrix. In practice, Rx is usually
Asynth = Aθ1 , . . . , Aθ L , a (θ0 )
[ ]
hard to calculate and is replaced by the sample covariance (5)
matrix (SCM) where
N ϕ) (K − 1) ϕ
[ ( ( ) (
Aθi = a θi − , a θi − . . . a θi
∑
−1 H
R̂x = N x(k)x (k) (2) 2 2K
ϕ ) ϕ ) (K − 1) ϕ ϕ)
( ( ) ( ]
k=1
− , a (θi ) , a θi + , . . . a θi + , a θi + (6)
2K 2K 2K 2
where N is the number of snapshots. The solution of (1) is
obtained as [10]: To make the proposed method robust against the covariance
matrix mismatch, we use DL shrinkage. To this end, firstly
R̂x−1 a(θ0 ) the SCM is calculated using (2) and then, the reconstructed
w= (3) †
a H (θ0 ) R̂x−1 a(θ0 ) covariance matrix R̂x is calculated using (7)–(9) [10]:
To have more robustness against DoA error and covariance R̂x† = α I + β R̂x (7)
matrix mismatch, the SCM is usually modified (compensated) 1
with diagonal loading and thus, (3) is modified as [10]: tr ( R̂x ) N1 tr 2 ( R̂x )
α= M
 2 (8)
( R̂x + γ I )−1 a (θ0 ) 1
tr 2 ( R̂x ) +  R̂x − 1
tr ( R̂ )I
 
x 
w= (4) N M
a H (θ0 ) ( R̂x + γ I )−1 a (θ0 )  2
 R̂x − M1 tr ( R̂x )I 
 
where γ denotes the diagonal loading factor and I is the β=  2 (9)
identity matrix. Different methods are introduced to determine 1
tr 2 ( R̂ ) +  R̂ − 1
tr ( R̂ )I

x x x
γ [10]. In GNSS jamming mitigation applications for fast N M
 
moving platforms, the conventional methods may fail or lead where tr (.) denotes trace of the matrix and ∥.∥ is the Frobenius
to performance degradation. This can be attributed to the fact norm of the matrix. To calculate the beamformer weight
that the fast movements of platform (for example unmanned vector, the proposed method is inspired by the LCMV al-
aerial vehicle (UAV), jet fighter and helicopter) make the gorithm [13]. The S3DBNSM is summarized in Table 1. As
†
null of beamformer to be far from the targeted angle. In the we will see, using R̂x along with the proposed null widening
following section, we provide solutions to broaden the null technique, results in superior performance.
while preventing the null depth from being shallow, along with It is worth noting that a (θ0 ), in the last column of Asynth
robustness to covariance matrix mismatch. in (5), is taken into account to ensure that the SOI signal is
162
O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi and M.R. Danaee ICT Express 8 (2022) 161–165

Table 2
Steps of S3DWBNSM algorithm.
Step Operation
Set A′ = Aθ1 , . . . , Aθ L and r1 (k)= the signal
[ ]
Step 1
received by the first (reference) antenna at time
instant k.
Step 2 Obtain the augmented signal vector as
L K ( )
∑ ∑ jϕ
x Aug (k) = x (k) + r1 (k) a θi +
2K
i=1 j=−K , j̸=0

Step 3 Calculate the projection matrix as

( H )−1 H
†
P = A′ A′ A′ A′ and obtain R̂x by using x Aug
as input.
† H
Step 4 Obtain Rmod = P R̂x P H and c = 1
M A′ a (θ0 )
Step 5 Obtain the weight vector as
( H )−1
−1 −1
w S3W D B N S M = A′ Rmod A′ Rmod A′ c
Fig. 1. Array antenna directivity (polar pattern), using different beamforming
methods (first simulation scenario).
received with minimal distortion. It is reflected by setting the
last element of c to 1, in step 3 of the S3DBNSM algorithm. modulation in central frequency of 1.225 GHz are considered.
The DoAs of UWS are θ1 = 0◦ , θ2 = −45◦ . The Interference
3.2. S3D waveform BNSM (S3DWBNSM) to noise ratio (INR) for each interference source is 10 dB,
SNR is 0 dB and the results are obtained by averaging 10000
In this method, the virtual jamming signal waveforms are independent Monte-Carlo simulation trials and utilizing 1000
created from the samples received by the first antenna (refer- snapshots. The error in DoA estimation (look direction error)
enced antenna) during the observation time (N snapshots) and is considered as a uniform random variable between −2◦ and
augmented to x(k) to obtain x Aug (k). This virtual information +2◦ . For the proposed methods, ϕ and K are assumed 0.7◦
enables us to have a more accurate estimate of covariance and 2, respectively. The comparison is performed with the
matrix. Moreover, to ensure having deep nulls in directions of following methods: MVDR [15], EVD [3], GLC [10], VL [16],
interference sources, we modify this virtual signal by increas- BRR [17], Blind [18] and CMT [7]. For the BRR method,
ing the proportion of interference in the signal [14]. To this the following settings are considered: rm = 0.001yb , δm =
end, we project x Aug (k) onto the interference subspace and 0.01 and ε = 0.01. For the CMT method, ∆ is assumed
obtain a modified version of covariance matrix. The method is 10. The directivity results of array antenna using different
summarized in Table 2. beamforming methods are depicted in Figs. 1, 2 and Table 3.
Note that the vector c reflects the constraints in LCMV As it can be seen, the proposed S3DBNSM method pro-
algorithm. Thus, an appropriate definition of c is performed in vides wide-null with more than 80 dB attenuation for UWS
step 4 of Table 2, to make the SOI signal remains undistorted. arrived at −45◦ , as well as a wide-null with −30 dB depth
for UWS arrived at 0◦ . Also, a main-lobe with 10 dB gain
4. Simulation results and discussion for SOI arrived at 50◦ is provided. The S3WDBNSM method
provides wide-null with –50 dB depth for UWS arrived at
In this section we investigate the performance of our pro-
posed methods by comparing the simulation results with some
existing methods. Simulations provided here are based on the
following assumptions: signals received by the array antenna
are plane waves. Jamming signals come from the point sources
and are placed in far-field. Transmission medium is isotropic
and uniform. Jamming, signal and noise are independent.
Noise is zero-mean additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN)
with 0 dB power and antenna coupling effects are ignored. The
moving platform is assumed to be a ground-based or airborne
platform with fixed velocity and cruise flight profile. It is worth
noting that since the relative radial velocities between the
platform and the satellites are not high, the Doppler frequency
is small enough that it can be ignored without any destruc-
tive effect. Now, consider a ULA with 10 omni-directional
sensors. The SOI is assumed to be a GNSS signal with Fig. 2. Array antenna directivity (rectangular pattern), using different
DoA equal to +50◦ and frequency equal to 1.225 GHz. Two beamforming methods (first simulation scenario).
jamming/interference unwanted signals (UWS) with QPSK
163
O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi and M.R. Danaee ICT Express 8 (2022) 161–165

Table 3
Array antenna directivity (dB) for different methods.
Angle/Method S3DB NSM S3WD BNSM MVDR EVD GLC VL BRR CMT BLIND
−45◦ <−85 −51 <−100 <−100 −14 −14 −28 <−100 <−100
0◦ −29 −22 7.5 7.5 9 8 8 8 11
50◦ 9 0 −1.5 −9.5 9 8 9 9 −10

Fig. 3.a. Acquired PRNs in the absence of jamming (clear condition).

Fig. 4. Average number of acquired satellites for different algorithms.

Table 4
GNSS IF dataset specification.
Parameter Value
Satellite GPS L1
Signal sampling frequency 16 367 600 Hz
Intermediate frequency 4 130 400 Hz
Sample type One signed byte (int8)
Fig. 3.b. Acquired PRNs in the presence of jamming and without spatial
PRNs 22, 3, 19, 14, 18, 11, 32, 6
filtering.

−45◦ , wide-null with near −22 dB depth for UWS arrived
at 0◦ and main-lobe with near 0 dB gain for SOI arrived at
50◦ . By comparing with other methods, it is concluded that the
proposed methods outperform the others in providing wider
non-shallow nulls in direction of unwanted signals. Also, an
appropriate main-lobe for undistorted pass of SOI is provided.
The gain of main-lobe in S3WDBNSM method is lower than
some other methods but it is still non-negative. This behavior
in nulls and main lobe creation is because other methods
are mainly designed to either provide good main-lobe in SOI
angle, or good narrow nulls in UWS angles, but not both.
The proposed methods try to handle both (appropriate main-
lobe for undistorted pass of SOI, wide non-shallow nulls in
direction of UWS), and provide a trade-off solution.
To investigate the performance of the proposed algorithms
in real GPS application scenario, the second simulation is
carried out with real GPS IF (intermediate frequency) signal
dataset. The scenario assumptions are the same as previous
simulation except that the INR for each interference source
is 36 dB (i.e. totally 39 dB INR). The specification of the
IF dataset is provided in Table 3.1 Eight satellites with 8
pseudorandom noise (PRN) codes are considered in Table 4.
A software-defined radio (SDR) receiver, named SoftGNSS
1 For the details of GPS real dataset refer to: http://gfix.dk/matlab-gnss-
sdr-book/gnss-signal-records/.
164
v3.0,2 is used to acquire the GPS satellites from the processed
received signals [19]. Note that the INR is such that none of 8
PRNs are acquired, without any spatial/temporal filtering (see
Fig. 3).
The performance of different methods is compared in
Fig. 4. As can be seen, the proposed methods considerably out-
perform the others in averaged number of acquired satellites,
by reconstructing and acquiring at least 87% of satellites. This
is because of nullifying the unwanted signals as well as undis-
torted passing of SOI, simultaneously. For the third dynamic
scenario simulation, SOI is assumed to be a sine CW signal
with DoA equal to −80◦ and frequency equal to 1.225 GHz.
Two QPSK modulated interference signals with DoAs equal
to 0◦ and 60◦ at 1.225 GHz are considered. The INR for each
interference source is 30 dB and the SNR is 10 dB. Other
settings are the same as first scenario. The directivity results of
array antenna with different methods are depicted in Fig. 5 and
Table 5. To have a better illustration, Fig. 6 depicts directivity
of S3DBNSM algorithm in the frequency–angle plane. As it
can be seen, the proposed methods outperform the others in
providing wider non-shallow nulls in direction of unwanted
signals. Also, an appropriate main-lobe for undistorted pass
of SOI is provided. The gain of main-lobe in S3WDBNSM
method is lower than some other methods but it is still non-
negative. As mentioned before, this behavior in nulls and main
2 For more details, please refer to: http://gfix.dk/.
O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi and M.R. Danaee
Table 5
Array antenna directivity (dB) for different methods (third simulation scenario).
Angle/Method S3DB NSM S3WD BNSM
60◦ −90 −46
0◦ −30 −19
−80◦ 11 4.5
Fig. 5. Array antenna directivity using different beamforming methods (third
simulation scenario).
Fig. 6. Array antenna directivity for S3DBNSM method.
lobe creation is because other methods are mainly designed to
either provide good main-lobe in SOI angle, or good narrow
nulls in UWS angles, but not both. The proposed methods
try to handle both (appropriate main-lobe for undistorted pass
of SOI, wide non-shallow nulls in direction of UWS), and
provide a trade-off solution.
5. Conclusion
Two new methods were proposed for GNSS jamming/
interference mitigation in heavy jamming (GNSS denied) sce-
narios by utilizing null-widening, null-deepening and diagonal
loading shrinkage in STAP structure. The idea was to make
the algorithms robust to SCM estimation mismatch, DoA
estimation error and movement of either platform or threat
source. Using the SCM compensation, null-widening and null-
deepening, the proposed methods provide better performance
compared to the existing methods in the number of acquired
GNSS satellites. The future works will be focused on fur-
ther improving the DL algorithm and considering a uniform
circular array to counter the spoofing threat.
ICT Express 8 (2022) 161–165
MVDR EVD GLC VL BRR CMT BLIND
<−100 <−100 −2 <−100 −10 −3 <−100
11 10 8.5 9 9 8.5 9
−20.5 −3.5 8.5 7 8 8.5 −6
References
[1] S. Mohammadzadeh, O. Kukrer, Robust adaptive beamforming for fast
moving interference based on the covariance matrix reconstruction,
IET Signal Process. 13 (4) (2019) 486–493.
[2] Z. Liu, S. Zhao, G. Zhang, B. Jiao, Robust adaptive beamforming for
sidelobe canceller with null widening, IEEE Sens. J. 19 (23) (2019)
11213–11220.
[3] S. Daneshmand, GNSS Interference Mitigation using Antenna Array
Processing (Ph.D. Thesis), University of Calgary, 2013.
[4] X. Yang, B. Jalal, Q. Liu, Direction-of-arrival estimation method based
on least-squares by reconstructing covariance matrix with automatic
diagonal loading, Electron. Lett. 56 (18) (2020) 961–963.
[5] J. Qian, Z. He, T. Liu, N. Huang, Robust beamforming based on
steering vector and covariance matrix estimation, Circuits Syst. Signal
Process. 37 (10) (2018) 4665–4682.
[6] B. Jalal, X. Yang, X. Wu, T. Long, T.K. Sarkar, Efficient direction-of-
arrival estimation method based on variable-step-size LMS algorithm,
IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 18 (8) (2019) 1576–1580.
[7] W. Li, Y. Zhao, Q. Ye, B. Yang, Adaptive antenna null broadening
beamforming against array calibration error based on adaptive variable
diagonal loading, Int. J. Antennas Propag. 2017 (2017) 1–9.
[8] Z. Liu, S. Zhao, G. Zhang, Flexible robust adaptive beamforming
method with multiple separately widened nulls, Electron. Lett. 56 (18)
(2020) 957–959.
[9] L. Zhang, L. Huang, B. Li, M. Huang, J. Yin, W. Bao, Fast-moving
jamming suppression for UAV navigation: A minimum dispersion dis-
tortionless response beamforming approach, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
68 (8) (2019) 7815–7827.
[10] L. Gan, Z. Yi, Automatic computation of diagonal loading factor for
robust adaptive beamforming based on Gaussian distribution, AEU-Int.
J. Electron. Commun. 67 (7) (2013) 570–573.
[11] O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi, M.R. Danee, Low-complexity frame-
work for GNSS jamming and spoofing detection on moving platforms,
IET Radar Sonar Navig. 14 (12) (2020) 2027–2038.
[12] O. Sharifi-Tehrani, M.F. Sabahi, M.R. Danee, GNSS jamming detec-
tion of UAV ground control station using random matrix theory, ICT
Express 7 (2) (2021) 239–243.
[13] Y. Gong, L. Wang, R. Yao, Z. Zhang, A robust method to suppress
jamming for GNSS array antenna based on reconstruction of sample
covariance matrix, Int. J. Antennas Propag. 2017 (2017) 1–12.
[14] H. Wang, Q. Chang, Y. Xu, An anti-jamming null-steering control
technique based on double projection in dynamic scenes for GNSS
receivers, Sensors 19 (7) (2019) 1661.
[15] Y. Xiao, J. Yin, H. Qi, H. Yin, G. Hua, MVDR Algorithm based on
estimated diagonal loading for beamforming, Math. Probl. Eng. 2017
(2017) 1–7.
[16] J. Zhuang, Q. Ye, Q. Tan, A.H. Ali, Low-complexity variable load-
ing for robust adaptive beamforming, Electron. Lett. 52 (5) (2016)
338–340.
[17] C. Wu, Y. Guo, Y. Na, X. Wang, Q. Fu, Y. Yan, Robust beamforming
using beam-to-reference weighting diagonal loading and Bayesian
framework, Electron. Lett. 51 (22) (2015) 1772–1774.
[18] H. Sedighy, Null steering GPS array in the presence of mutual
coupling, Iran. J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 14 (2) (2018) 116–123.
[19] Borre Kai, et al., A Software-Defined GPS and Galileo Receiver:
A Single-Frequency Approach, Springer Science & Business Media,
2007.
165