1536
29, 2022
Limited-Memory Receive Filter Design for Massive
MIMO Radar in Signal-Dependent Interference
Minglong Deng , Ziyang Cheng , Member, IEEE, and Zishu He
Abstract—This letter proposes a limited-memory receive filter
design to maximize the output signal-to-interference-plus-noise
ratio (SINR) of massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
radar. The associated problem is a minimum variance distortionless
response (MVDR) one which can be analytical solved, but the com-
putation of the MVDR solution would be prohibitive in the context
of massive MIMO radar, due to the huge memory consumption.
To this end, we propose a low-complexity algorithm that exploits
a reparameterization method to avoid the significant memory con-
sumption, and solves the resulting problem with several simple
algebraic operations. We show that the memory consumption of the
proposed algorithm depends on the number of interference sources.
Therefore, for the scenario with a large number of interference
sources, we extend the proposed algorithm by the alternating di-
rection method of multipliers (ADMM), which promotes a further
memory reduction. Finally, numerical simulations are conducted
to demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed algorithm.
Index Terms—Massive MIMO radar, SINR maximization, rece-
ive filter design.
I. INTRODUCTION
WIDELY considered design problem in radar is to jointly
A optimize the transmit waveform and the receive filter [1]–
[20]. Based on prior knowledge of target and interference, such
a design problem is usually formulated by maximizing the
signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) subject to some
waveform constraints, and is typically solved by alternately
maximizing the output SINR w.r.t. the transmit waveform and
receive filter, respectively.
Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar, which is an
advanced radar system with multiple transmitters and multiple
receivers, has received considerable attention due to its capa-
bility of transmitting flexible waveforms. Recently, there has
been a growing number of publications focusing on the joint
transmit waveform and receive filter design for MIMO radar
SINR maximization [7]–[20]. For example, in the presence of
signal-dependent interference, [7] formulated the joint design
problem for MIMO radar SINR maximization under energy
Manuscript received 6 May 2022; revised 22 June 2022; accepted 29 June
2022. Date of publication 4 July 2022; date of current version 13 July 2022.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grants 62001084 and 62031007. The associate editor coordinating the
review of this manuscript and approving it for publication was Prof. Jun Liu.
(Corresponding author: Ziyang Cheng.)
The authors are with the School of Information and Communication
Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China
(UESTC), Chengdu 611731, China (e-mail: dengminglong@126.com; zy-
cheng@uestc.edu.cn; zshe@uestc.edu.cn).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/LSP.2022.3188176
1070-9908 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Univ of Defense Tech. Downloaded on February 03,2023 at 07:43:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING LETTERS, VOL.
waveform constraint, of which the optimal and suboptimal solu-
tions were derived for different assumptions regarding the statis-
tical information. In [8], to ensure the pulse compression and am-
biguity property of MIMO radar, the joint design problem with
a constant modulus (CM) constraint as well as a similarity con-
straint was solved by the semi-definite relaxation (SDR) based
algorithms. In [11], the authors extended the CM constraint to the
peak-to-average-power ratio (PAPR) constraint and addressed
the joint design problem by the block successive upper-bound
minimization method of multipliers (BSUM-M) for better SINR
behavior.
It is worth mentioning that to allow for orders of magni-
tude improvement in resolution and processing gain, future
MIMO radar will equip with a very large number of antennas.
Such a system is called massive (or large-scale) MIMO radar
and is getting considerable attention [21]–[26]. Note that to
make such a system practical, algorithms for massive MIMO
radar are required to keep the complexity low. However, the
state-of-the-art methods for joint design will be faced with
enormous challenges in massive MIMO radar context, since
their memory consumption and computational complexity will
grow significantly as the number of antennas/pulses/samples
increases. Consequently, it is of great interest to devise
low-complexity algorithms for massive MIMO radar joint
design.
In this letter, due to page limitation, we only focus on the
problem of receive filter design for massive MIMO radar. The
associated problem in existing work is often solved by the min-
imum variance distortionless response (MVDR) method with
a closed-form solution [27]. However, as already said, in the
context of massive MIMO radar, the computation of this solution
is prohibitive from the perspective of memory consumption
and computational complexity. Therefore, this letter proposes
a limited-memory and low-complexity algorithm for massive
MIMO radar receive filter design. We show that the memory
consumption of the proposed algorithm depends on the num-
ber of interference sources, and then we extend the proposed
algorithm by the alternating direction method of multipliers
(ADMM) [28] for a further memory reduction. Finally, we
present several simulations to demonstrate the efficiency of the
proposed methods.
Notations: The conjugate, transpose, and conjugate transpose
operators are given by (·)∗ , (·)T , and (·)H , respectively. E{·}
stands for the expectation operation, || · ||2 denotes the Frobenius
norm of a matrix, and {·} gets the real part of a complex
variable. The operators vec{·}, tr{·}, and ⊗ represent the vec-
torization operation, trace of a square matrix, and Kronecker
product, respectively. The set of complex number is denoted by
C. The matrices I and 0 stand for the identity matrix and the
matrix with all zero elements, respectively.
DENG et al.: LIMITED-MEMORY RECEIVE FILTER DESIGN FOR MASSIVE MIMO RADAR IN SIGNAL-DEPENDENT INTERFERENCE 1537

II. SIGNAL MODEL III. LIMITED-MEMORY RECEIVE FILTER DESIGN

We consider a narrow-band colocated MIMO radar equipped From (3), to compute the optimal receive filter, we just need
with Nt transmit antennas and Nr receive antennas. The received to find a w satisfying
signal from a cognitive cell under test (CUT) can be expressed
Ξw = A(0, θt )s. (4)
as
To accelerate the computation of w, the following proposition
K
 is necessary.
x = ξt A(0, θt )s + ξk A(k , θk )s + n ∈ CNr L , (1) Proposition 1: (4) is equivalent to
k=1 K

σ2 W + σk2 bk bH H H
k Wck ck = bt ct , (5)
where θt and ξt represents the look direction and the complex k=1
reflection coefficient of target; {θk }, {ξk }, and {k } denote
the look direction, the complex reflection coefficient, and the where W ∈ CNr ×L is the matrix form of w, i.e., w =
range bin relative to the target of the kth signal-dependent vec{W}, bt = ar (θt ), ct = SH a∗t (θt ), bk = ar (θk ), and ck =
interference, and K is the total number of interference sources; JH H ∗
k S at (θk ), k = 1, 2, . . ., K.
s = vec{S} ∈ CNt L is the vector representation of the trans- Proof: See Appendix. 
mit code matrix S ∈ CNt ×L , n ∈ CNr L denotes the noise sig- Proposition 1 implies that the optimal w can be achieved by
nal, and L is the number of samples within a pulse width; solving (5). Note that in contrast to (4), the equivalent repre-
A(, θ) = JT ⊗ ar (θ)aTt (θ) ∈ CNr L×Nt L with ar (θ) ∈ CNr sentation (5) only needs to store and compute several simple
and at (θ) ∈ CNt being the receive and transmit steering vectors, vectors, which is helpful to the reduction of memory. Now, we
and J = JT− is the L × L shift matrix whose (i, j)th element will show how to efficiently solve (5).
equals to 1 if i − j =  and 0 otherwise [9]. Firstly, using variable substitution zk = bH k Wck , k =
We assume ξt , {ξk }, and n are independent Gaussian vari- 1, 2, . . ., K, (5) becomes
ables with zero mean and variance (or covariance matrix) σt2 , K

{σk2 }, and σ 2 INr L , respectively. Moreover, the knowledge of σ2 W + σk2 zk bk cH H
k = b t ct . (6)
interference {θk , σk2 , k } is assumed to be known in this letter, k=1
since it can be obtained by the cognitive technique or previous
scans [2], [18]. From (6), we find that the optimal
Now, let w ∈ CNr L be the linear receive filter. The output  σ2K
1
SINR after receive filtering, i.e., wH x, can be denoted as [8] W= 2
b t cH
t −
k
zk b k c H
k , (7)
σ σ2
k=1
E{|ξt wH A(0, θt )s|2 } wH Σw where the only unknown variable is {zk }. To compute {zk },
SINR =  2  =
 H 
wH Ξw multiplying (6) on the left by bH k and on the right by ck for
E  K H
k=1 ξk w A(k , θk )s + w n k = 1, 2, . . ., K, we obtain K linear equations w.r.t. {zk }, as
 (2) K

where Ξ = K 2 H H 2
k=1 σk A(k , θk )ss A (k , θk ) + σ INr L and σ 2 bH σk2 zk bH H H H
1 Wc1 + 1 b k ck c1 = b 1 b t ct c1
Σ = σt2 A(0, θt )ssH AH (0, θt ). In most existing works, the op- k=1
timal receive filter for SINR maximization is often obtained by K
the MVDR method with the closed-form expression: σ 2 bH
2 Wc2 + σk2 zk bH H H H
2 b k ck c2 = b 2 b t ct c2
k=1
w = ρΞ−1 A(0, θt )s, (3) ...
K

where ρ = 0 is a constant. Note that ρ does not affect the output σ 2 bH σk2 zk bH H H H
K WcK + K b k ck cK = b K b t ct cK (8)
SINR, and thus we set ρ = 1 without loss of generality. Due k=1
to the reliability, the above MVDR solution (3) has been widely
applied to the receive filter design problems for SINR maximiza- which can be concisely written as
tion [7]–[20]. However, the cost of storing matrix Ξ (or A(0, θt )) σ 2 z + Υz = h, (9)
and manipulating its inverse is prohibitive when the number of T
variables is large. In other words, the computation of (3) will face where z = [z1 , z2 , . . ., zK ] , hk = b H H
k bt ct ck denotes
the kth
great challenges in the context of massive MIMO radar. Specif- element of h ∈ CK , and Υ(m, k) = σk bm bk cH
2 H
k cm
is the
ically, the matrix inverse operation of Ξ takes O(Nr3 L3 ) com- (m, k)th element of Υ ∈ C . K×K

plexity and the memory consumption for storing Ξ is O(Nr2 L2 ).
For example, for a MIMO radar with Nr = L = 400, the random
access memory (RAM) needed to store Ξ using double-precision
floating-point format is 2 × 4002 × 4002 × 8 Byte ≈ 382 GB,
which is obviously unacceptable for a regular computer.
Based on the above analysis, this letter seeks to address the
problem of high computational complexity and huge memory
consumption for computing the receive filter of massive MIMO
radar.
From (9), one can obtain that z = (σ 2 IK + Υ)−1 h, and
finally the optimal W is computed by (7).
Algorithm 1 summarizes the main steps of the proposed
limited-memory receive filter design, and Table. I lists the mem-
ory consumption and computational complexity for main vari-
ables involved. Note that for massive MIMO radar, K is much
smaller than Nr L in general. Thus, for a small K, Algorithm 1
has great advantage over the traditional MVDR method in terms
of both memory consumption and computational complexity.

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Univ of Defense Tech. Downloaded on February 03,2023 at 07:43:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1538 IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING LETTERS, VOL. 29, 2022

TABLE I
Algorithm 1: Limited-Memory Receive Filter Deisgn. THE DETAILED MEMORY CONSUMPTION AND COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY
Input: {Nt , Nr , L}, S, σ 2 , {θt , σt2 }, and {θk , σk2 , k }. OF THE LIMITED-MEMORY RECEIVE FILTER DESIGN

1: bt = ar (θt ), ct = SH a∗t (θt ).

2: bk = ar (θk ), ck = JH H ∗
k S at (θk ), k = 1, 2, . . ., K.
H H
3: hk = bk bt ct ck , k = 1, 2, . . ., K.
4: Υ(m, k) = σk2 bH H
m bk ck cm , m, k = 1, 2, . . ., K.
2 −1
5: z = (σ IK + Υ) h.
K σk2
6: W = σ12 bt cH t − k=1 σ 2 zk bk ck .
H

Output: receive filter W.

Since Algorithm 1 needs to store Υ and compute its inverse,

one can find that the problem of huge memory consumption and
high computational complexity still exists in large K case. To
tackle this issue, we propose an efficient algorithm based on the
ADMM method.
Specifically, it is noted that solving (5) is equivalent to solving
following unconstrained problem1
K

min σ 2 tr{WH W} − 2{cH H
t W bt } + σk2 |bH 2
k Wck | .
Fig. 1. The comparison between the proposed method and the traditional
MVDR method.
W
k=1
(10)
Now, we divide the K interference sources into Q groups,
which has a similar structure to (5) and thus can be solved by
where each group has M = K/Q interference sources. Defin-
Algorithm 1 with O(M 2 ) memory consumption and O(M 3 )
ing f (W)  σ 2 tr{WH W} − 2{cH H
t W bt } and fq (W)  complexity. Therefore, for the large K case, we can apply the
qM0 2 H 2
k=(q−1)M +1 σk |bk Wck | , and introducing Q auxiliary vari- consensus ADMM method with an appropriate M (or Q) to
ables Vq = W, q = 1, 2, . . ., Q, problem (10) can be reformu- solve (5), such that the memory consumption to get the receive
lated in a consensus form as filter can be further reduced. Predictably, the lower memory
Q consumption can be achieved by employing a larger Q.

min f0 (W) + fq (Vq ) s.t.Vq = W, q = 1, 2, . . ., Q, Note that the convergence of ADMM is guaranteed when
W,{Vq } the solved problem is convex and two blocks are alternatively
q=1
(11) updated [28]. For multi-block case, the proof of convergence is
which can be addressed with aid of the consensus ADMM frame- still an open problem, and [30] has found that the direct extension
work [28]. By constructing the scaled augmented Lagrangian of of ADMM is not necessarily convergent. Nevertheless, our
(11) and alternately minimizing it w.r.t. the primal variables and numerical experience indicates that the consensus ADMM is
maximizing it w.r.t. the dual variables, the ADMM produces able to find a good solution to problem (10).
following iterations:2
Q IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

W ← arg min f0 (W) + ||W − Vq + Uq ||22 Firstly, we will conduct an experiment to compare the per-
W 2 q=1 formance of the proposed method to that of the traditional
 MVDR method. Specifically, we set the target information θt =
Vq ← arg min fq (Vq ) + ||W − Vq + Uq ||22
Vq 2 10◦ , SNR = σt2 /σ 2 = 20 dB. We consider the interference sec-
U q ← U q + W − Vq , (12) tor Θ = [15◦ , 60◦ ] and uniformly discretize it into K = 100
points, where for the kth interference, k = 0 and INRk =
where  > 0 is the penalty parameter, and Uq ∈ CNr ×L denotes σk2 /σ 2 = 60 dB, k = 1, 2, . . ., K. As for the radar information,
the dual variable regarding constraint Vq = W. Note that the we assume Nt = Nr = L = Ñ and employ the orthogonal lin-
update of W has a closed-form solution, i.e., ear frequency modulation (LFM) transmit waveform [8], i.e.,
  2

1 Q S(n, l) = √1L ej2πn(l−1)/L+jπ(l−1) /L , where S(n, l) denotes

H
W= 2bt ct +  Vq − U q . (13) the (n, l)th entry of S, n = 1, . . ., Nt , l = 1, . . ., L. Moreover,
2σ 2 + Q q=1 all simulations are performed on a standard PC with the i9-9900
For the update of Vq , by the first-order optimal condition, we CPU and 16 GB RAM.
need to solve In Fig. 1, we compare the proposed and traditional MVDR
qM
methods from the perspective of both the operation time (left
 y-axis) and the memory consumption (right y-axis), where the
Vq + 2σk2 bk bH H
k Vq ck ck = (W + Uq ), (14)
number of Ñ ({Nt , Nr , L}) varies from 10 to 4000. As can be
k=(q−1)M +1
seen, since the traditional MVDR method optimizes the receive
1 Problem (10) is convex and its first-order optimal condition is (5).
filter by w = ρΞ−1 A(0, θt )s, it suffers from huge computa-
2 The iteration terminates if the residuals are sufficiently small or the maximum tional burden and memory consumption. For example, when
number of iterations is achieved [29]. Ñ = 100, it takes about 84 s operation time and 3 GB RAM to

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Univ of Defense Tech. Downloaded on February 03,2023 at 07:43:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
DENG et al.: LIMITED-MEMORY RECEIVE FILTER DESIGN FOR MASSIVE MIMO RADAR IN SIGNAL-DEPENDENT INTERFERENCE 1539

and output SINR for different Q, where Q = 1 means that the

receive filter is calculated by Algorithm 1. From the results,
one can observe that the proposed ADMM is able to achieve a
similar SINR value for different Q. The most interesting aspect
of this table is that for the large K case, the ADMM with a
larger Q can promote a significant memory reduction compared
to Algorithm 1 (Q = 1).

Fig. 2. The effect of the number of interference sources K on the performance
of the proposed method. (a) Operation time; (b) RAM consumption.
Fig. 3. The SINR versus the number of ADMM iteration for different Q.
TABLE II
THE OUTPUT SINR AND RAM CONSUMPTION FOR RESULTS IN FIG. 3
V. CONCLUSION
This letter investigates the problem of limited-memory re-
ceive filter design for massive MIMO radar in signal-dependent
interference. To maximize the output SINR, we have devised
a low-complexity algorithm that exploits a reparameterization
method to avoid the significant memory consumption and solves
the resulting problem with several simple algebraic operations.
We show that the memory consumption of the proposed al-
gorithm depends on the number of interference sources, and
for the scenario with a large number of interference sources,
we have proposed a more memory-efficient algorithm based on
the ADMM method. Numerical results have demonstrated that
the proposed algorithm significantly outperforms the MVDR
method in terms of memory consumption and computation time.
Nevertheless, this letter only considers the receive filter design.
A possible future work might concern the joint design of transmit
waveform and receive filter for massive MIMO radar.

get the receiver filter. Moreover, due to memory limitation, we APPENDIX

can not perform the MVDR method as Ñ ≥ 200. In contrast PROOF OF PROPOSITION 1
to the traditional MVDR method, one can observe that the
It is easy to verify that
computational efficiency of the proposed method is considerably
improved, since it only takes a few seconds to find the optimal
A(0, θt )s = vec{ar (θt )aTt (θt )S} = vec{bt cH
t }, (15)
receive filter for Ñ ≤ 1000. The results in Fig. 1 also reveal that
the proposed method can significantly save the RAM consump-
from which we know bt cH t is the matrix form of A(0, θt )s.
tion. As can be seen, the required RAM is less than 1 GB for
Next, observing the left hand side of (4), we have
Ñ = 4000. To evaluate the effect of the number of interference
sources K on the performance of the proposed method, we K

consider different K from 100 to 3200. Fig. 2 presents the Ξw = σk2 A(k , θk )ssH AH (k , θk )w + σ 2 w. (16)
operation time and the RAM consumption of the proposed
k=1
method versus the number of K, respectively. The result shows
that both the operation time and the RAM consumption of the Note that
proposed method are increasing as K increases. As expected,
we find that for a large K, the RAM consumption increases fast A(k , θk )s = vec{ar (θk )aTt (θk )SJk }
due to the O(K 2 ) memory consumption of Υ. = vec{bk cH k }
Since a large K will cause a heavy memory consumption, ∗
in the final example, we will conduct a simulation to illus- = ck ⊗ b k , (17)
trate that the ADMM based method is capable of reducing the
memory consumption when K is large. Specifically, we set then we obtain
Nt = Nr = L = 200 and employ a large K = 10000. To imple-
A(k , θk )ssH AH (k , θk )w = [c∗k ⊗ bk ][cTk ⊗ bH
k ]w
ment the ADMM method, we set the penalty parameter  = 50,
∗ T H
the initial Vq = ar (θt )aTt (θt )S and Uq = 0, and we terminate = [ck ck ⊗ bk bk ]w
the ADMM after 2000 iterations. Moreover, we consider four = vec{bk bH H
k Wck ck }. (18)
different Q, including {2, 4, 10, 20}, to show different levels of
memory reduction. Therefore, equality (4) equals to
Fig. 3 presents the output SINR3 versus the number of ADMM
iteration for different Q. The results show that the ADMM will K

converge after a certain number of iterations, and the speed of vec σ 2 W + σk2 bk bH H
k Wck ck = vec{bt cH
t }, (19)
convergence is related to Q, i.e., a larger Q results in a lower k=1
speed. Next, Table. II lists the corresponding RAM consumption
which is the vector form of (5). Since vectorization is a linear
3 Since the ADMM does not minimize the SINR directly, the SINR is not operation, the equivalence does not change. The proof is com-
increasing monotonically. pleted.

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Univ of Defense Tech. Downloaded on February 03,2023 at 07:43:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1540
REFERENCES
[1] P. Stoica, H. He, and J. Li, “Optimization of the receive filter and transmit
sequence for active sensing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 4,
pp. 1730–1740, Apr. 2012.
[2] A. Aubry, A. DeMaio, A. Farina, and M. Wicks, “Knowledge-aided
(potentially cognitive) transmit signal and receive filter design in signal-
dependent clutter,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 49, no. 1,
pp. 93–117, Jan. 2013.
[3] M. Soltanalian, B. Tang, J. Li, and P. Stoica, “Joint design of the receive
filter and transmit sequence for active sensing,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett.,
vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 423–426, May 2013.
[4] J. Liu, H. Li, and B. Himed, “Joint optimization of transmit and receive
beamforming in active arrays,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 21, no. 1,
pp. 39–42, Jan. 2014.
[5] A. Aubry, A. De Maio, and M. M. Naghsh, “Optimizing radar waveform
and doppler filter bank via generalized fractional programming,” IEEE J.
Sel. Top. Signal Process., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1387–1399, Dec. 2015.
[6] B. Tang, J. Liu, H. Wang, and Y. Hu, “Constrained radar waveform design
for range profiling,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 69, pp. 1924–1937,
2021.
[7] B. Friedlander, “Waveform design for MIMO radars,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 1227–1238, Jul. 2007.
[8] G. Cui, H. Li, and M. Rangaswamy, “MIMO radar waveform design with
constant modulus and similarity constraints,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 343–353, Jan. 2014.
[9] B. Tang and J. Tang, “Joint design of transmit waveforms and receive filters
for MIMO radar space-time adaptive processing,” IEEE Trans. Signal
Process., vol. 64, no. 18, pp. 4707–4722, Sep. 2016.
[10] M. Shaghaghi, R. S. Adve, and G. Shehata, “Training-based adaptive
transmit–receive beamforming for MIMO radars,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 2899–2912, Dec. 2017.
[11] Z. Cheng, Z. He, B. Liao, and M. Fang, “MIMO radar waveform design
with PAPR and similarity constraints,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 968–981, Feb. 2018.
[12] S. Imani, M. M. Nayebi, and S. A. Ghorashi, “Colocated MIMO radar
SINR maximization under ISL and PSL constraints,” IEEE Signal Process.
Lett., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 422–426, Mar. 2018.
[13] L. Wu, P. Babu, and D. P. Palomar, “Transmit waveform/receive filter
design for MIMO radar with multiple waveform constraints,” IEEE Trans.
Signal Process., vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 1526–1540, Mar. 2018.
[14] Z. Cheng, B. Liao, Z. He, J. Li, and J. Xie, “Joint design of the transmit and
receive beamforming in MIMO radar systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.,
vol. 68, no. 8, pp. 7919–7930, Aug. 2019.
[15] X. Yu, K. Alhujaili, G. Cui, and V. Monga, “MIMO radar waveform design
in the presence of multiple targets and practical constraints,” IEEE Trans.
Signal Process., vol. 68, pp. 1974–1989, 2020.
[16] J. Zhou, H. Li, and W. Cui, “Low-complexity joint transmit and receive
beamforming for MIMO radar with multi-targets,” IEEE Signal Process.
Lett., vol. 27, pp. 1410–1414, 2020.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Univ of Defense Tech. Downloaded on February 03,2023 at 07:43:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING LETTERS, VOL. 29, 2022
[17] B. Tang, J. Tuck, and P. Stoica, “Polyphase waveform design for MIMO
radar space time adaptive processing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 68, pp. 2143–2154, 2020.
[18] Z. Li, J. Shi, W. Liu, J. Pan, and B. Li, “Robust joint design of transmit
waveform and receive filter for MIMO-STAP radar under target and clutter
uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1156–1171,
Feb. 2022.
[19] Z. Li, B. Tang, J. Shi, and Q. Zhou, “Maximin joint design of trans-
mit waveform and receive filter bank for MIMO-STAP radar under
target uncertainties,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 29, pp. 179–183,
2022.
[20] M. Deng, Z. Cheng, L. Wu, B. Shankar, and Z. He, “One-bit ADCs/DACs
based MIMO radar: Performance analysis and joint design,” IEEE Trans.
Signal Process., vol. 70, pp. 2609–2624, 2022.
[21] D. Zankl, S. Schuster, R. Feger, and A. Stelzer, “What a blast!: A
massive MIMO radar system for monitoring the surface in steel in-
dustry blast furnaces,” IEEE Microw. Mag., vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 52–69,
Sep.–Oct. 2017.
[22] S. Fortunati, L. Sanguinetti, F. Gini, M. S. Greco, and B. Himed, “Massive
MIMO radar for target detection,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 68,
pp. 859–871, 2020.
[23] A. M. Ahmed, A. A. Ahmad, S. Fortunati, A. Sezgin, M. S. Greco, and F.
Gini, “A reinforcement learning based approach for multitarget detection
in massive MIMO radar,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 57,
no. 5, pp. 2622–2636, Oct. 2021.
[24] F. Lisi, S. Fortunati, M. S. Greco, and F. Gini, “Enhancement of
a state-of-the-art RL-based detection algorithm for massive MIMO
radars,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., to be published, 2022,
doi: 10.1109/TAES.2022.3168033.
[25] B. Li, S. Wang, J. Zhang, X. Cao, and C. Zhao, “Ultra-fast accurate
AoA estimation via automotive Massive-MIMO radar,” IEEE Trans. Veh.
Technol., vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1172–1186, Feb. 2022.
[26] M. Deng, Z. Cheng, and Z. He, “Spectrally compatible waveform de-
sign for large-scale MIMO radar beampattern synthesis with one-bit
DACs,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., to be published, 2022,
doi: 10.1109/TAES.2022.3165766.
[27] J. Capon, “High-resolution frequency-wavenumber spectrum analysis,”
Proc. IEEE, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 1408–1418, Aug. 1969.
[28] S. Boyd, “Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternat-
ing direction method of multipliers,” Found. Trends Mach. Learn., vol. 3,
no. 1, pp. 1–122, 2010.
[29] K. Huang and N. D. Sidiropoulos, “Consensus-ADMM for general
quadratically constrained quadratic programming,” IEEE Trans. Signal
Process., vol. 64, no. 20, pp. 5297–5310, Oct. 2016.
[30] C. Chen, B. He, Y. Ye, and X. Yuan, “The direct extension of ADMM for
multi-block convex minimization problems is not necessarily convergent,”
Math. Program., vol. 155, no. 1, pp. 57–79, 2016.