0 Suka0 Tidak suka

1 tayangan12 halamanWDO method

Sep 09, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

WDO method

© All Rights Reserved

1 tayangan

WDO method

© All Rights Reserved

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 1

and its Application in Electromagnetics

Zikri Bayraktar, Member, IEEE, Muge Komurcu,

Jeremy A. Bossard, Member, IEEE and Douglas H. Werner, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—A new type of nature-inspired global optimization algorithm possesses strengths and weaknesses, there is no

methodology based on atmospheric motion is introduced. The single method within the family of nature-inspired numerical

proposed Wind Driven Optimization (WDO) technique is a optimization algorithms that stands out as the best for solving

population based iterative heuristic global optimization algorithm

all types of problems, a fact which was mathematically proven

for multi-dimensional and multi-modal problems with the

potential to implement constraints on the search domain. At its by Wolpert et al. in [8].

core, a population of infinitesimally small air parcels navigates Synthesis and optimization problems in electromagnetics

over an N-dimensional search space following Newton's second have long utilized these nature-inspired techniques to varying

law of motion, which is also used to describe the motion of air degrees of success. Application areas within the field of

parcels within the earth's atmosphere. Compared to similar electromagnetics are very broad, ranging from antenna design

particle based algorithms, WDO employs additional terms in the

to metamaterial synthesis. For example, a considerable body of

velocity update equation (e.g. gravitation and Coriolis forces),

providing robustness and extra degrees of freedom to fine tune. work has been devoted to the design optimization of individual

Along with the theory and terminology of WDO, a numerical antenna elements [1,9-15] from simple wire antennas to

study for tuning the WDO parameters is presented. WDO is complex printed antenna elements for a variety of applications

further applied to three electromagnetics optimization problems, including GPS, WiFi, mobile phones, vehicular, shipboard,

including the synthesis of a linear antenna array, a double-sided aircraft and satellite systems. Antenna arrays [16-25] have also

artificial magnetic conductor for WiFi applications, and an

been the target of nature-inspired optimization techniques for

E-shaped microstrip patch antenna. These examples suggest that

WDO can, in some cases, out-perform other well-known element thinning, side lobe reduction, radiation pattern

techniques such as Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Genetic synthesis, coupling reduction, as well as ultra-wideband

Algorithm (GA) or Differential Evolution (DE) and that WDO is performance. In addition to array synthesis techniques,

well-suited for problems with both discrete and application of these algorithms to inverse scattering problems

continuous-valued parameters. [26], non-linear media [27], and metamaterials is noteworthy.

Examples of metamaterial and related structures that have been

Index Terms—Wind driven optimization, linear antenna

arrays, artificial magnetic conductor, microstrip patch antenna, successfully optimized include absorbers [28-29], frequency

particle swarm optimization, genetic algorithms, differential selective surfaces [30-31], electromagnetic bandgap surfaces

evolution. [32-33], and many more applications covering a wide range of

frequencies [34-37]. Building on the successful record of the

existing nature-inspired optimization algorithms, this paper

I. INTRODUCTION introduces and utilizes an entirely new optimization method

which we call Wind Driven Optimization (WDO).

N ATURE is a wonderful source of inspiration for

developing optimization techniques that can tackle

difficult problems in science and engineering. Since the early

In essence, WDO is a population based iterative heuristic

global optimization technique for multi-dimensional and

1970s, various nature-inspired optimization algorithms have multi-modal problems with the potential to implement

emerged starting with the Genetic Algorithm (GA) [1], some of constraints on the search domain similar to PSO, although this

which have proven to be very efficient global optimization potential is not explicitly demonstrated in this manuscript. The

methods. Along with the GA, Particle Swarm Optimization inspiration for WDO comes from atmospheric motion in which

(PSO) [2], Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) [3], Differential the trajectory of an infinitesimally small air parcel can be

Evolution (DE) [4,5], Clonal Selection Algorithm described via Newton's second law of motion. The remainder of

(CLONALG) [6], Covariance Matrix Adaptation Evolutionary this paper is structured as follows. In Section II, the WDO

Strategy (CMA-ES) [7] and many others have been proposed technique will be described in detail along with the underlying

physical equations of atmospheric motion, and in Section III a

parameter study will be conducted to aid in tuning the WDO

algorithm. Following this, several optimization examples are

The authors are with the with the Computational Electromagnetics and

Antennas Research Lab (CEARL), Department of Electrical Engineering, The

presented, including a linear antenna array optimization

Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), University Park, PA, 16802 USA comparing WDO with PSO in Section IV, the design of a

(e-mail: dhw@psu.edu).

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 2

double-sided artificial magnetic conductor (DSAMC) in motion and governed by the equations of continuum mechanics

Section V, and an E-shaped microstrip patch antenna in Section [44], [45]. On the other hand, the Lagrangian description

VI. Final remarks and conclusions are given in Section VII. represents the atmosphere as a collection of many infinitesimal

fluid parcels [45], [46], which can be described via Newton's

II. THE WIND DRIVEN OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUE second law of motion. In the derivation of the equations for

The inspiration for WDO comes from the earth's atmosphere, WDO, the Lagrangian description is preferred due to the fact

where wind blows in an attempt to equalize horizontal that it simplifies the numerical algorithm and reduces the

imbalances in the air pressure [38]. The term "wind" actually computational overhead in the WDO scheme during the

refers to horizontal air motion, particularly in the lowest layer optimization of process. Further simplification is made to the

of the earth's atmosphere called the troposphere. The Lagrangian description in which the air parcel is assumed to be

troposphere extends from the surface of the earth's crust up to a cuboid in a rectangular coordinate system. In the WDO

approximately 18 km in altitude, where the thickness may vary abstraction, an air parcel is considered to be dimensionless, so

based on latitude [39]. Due to the earth's gravitational field, g, that the WDO implementation is not complicated by separate

the mass of the atmosphere applies a force on the earth's crust, coordinates for each corner of the cuboid. In addition, the

where the air pressure can simply be defined by the force different faces of the cuboid could experience different

exerted per unit area [40]. The troposphere layer contains more pressure values, causing the cuboid to deform, in which case

than 75% of the atmosphere's mass, and most weather any sheering, twisting or stretching would have to be taken into

activities, such as wind, occur within it. The radiation from the account. Including such details in the model would add

sun that reaches earth causes heating both on the surface of the unneeded computational burden to the WDO implementation.

earth and in the atmosphere itself. However, the amount of Thus, in the implementation of the WDO scheme, the air

localized heating varies depending on various factors such as parcels are assumed to be dimensionless and weightless, which

latitude, the amount of cloud coverage in the region and simplifies the equations while preserving the accuracy of the

whether the area is a body of water or soil. In addition, the physical interpretation.

spherical shape of the earth allows for the illumination of only In the abstraction of the wind, it is also assumed that the

half of the earth’s surface at any given time, resulting in a daily atmosphere is homogenous and that a hydrostatic balance

fluctuation of the amount of energy falling on a particular exists. Utilizing the fact that the equations derived in

location. Due to variations in solar energy reaching different atmospheric dynamics are in a rectangular coordinate system

locations on the earth’s surface, the temperature can fluctuate and considering that the horizontal movement of air is stronger

significantly among regions. Areas with high temperatures compared to its vertical movement, the wind can be treated as a

have rising warm air, and regions with low temperatures have horizontal motion only, which is due entirely to the horizontal

sinking cold air, which causes the air density to decrease in high pressure variation [38]. On the other hand, the WDO algorithm

temperature areas and to increase in low temperature areas. will operate on an N-dimensional search space, so the three

Since temperature differences lead to variations in air density dimensional atmospheric dynamic equations must be

and air pressure at different locations, horizontal differences in re-mapped to handle multi-dimensional optimization problems.

air pressure cause the air to move from high pressure regions to This can only be achieved through certain assumptions and

low pressure regions [41]. This movement is due to the simplifications.

pressure gradient, , which can be calculated as the pressure The starting point for calculating an air parcel's trajectory is

change over a distance [42] and is expressed in a rectangular Newton’s second law of motion, which provides accurate

coordinate system as results when applied to the analysis of atmospheric motion in

the Lagrangian description [40], [41], [45]. It states that the

total force applied on an air parcel causes it to accelerate with

(1)

an acceleration a in the same direction as the applied total force

according to

More specifically, the wind blows in the direction from a

high-pressure zone to a low-pressure zone at a velocity , (3)

proportional to the pressure gradient force [38], [43]. Thus, a

negative sign is utilized in the equation below to indicate the where ρ is the air density for an infinitesimally small air parcel

descending direction in the gradient. Considering the fact that and Fi represents all the individual forces acting on the air

the air has finite mass and finite volume (δV), the pressure parcel. To relate the air pressure to the air parcel's density and

gradient force (FPG) can be expressed as temperature, the ideal gas law can be utilized and is given by

(2) P = ρ R T, (4)

Atmospheric motion is traditionally represented by one of where P is the pressure, R is the universal gas constant and T is

two distinct models: the Lagrangian and Euler descriptions the temperature.

[44]. In the Euler description, air is treated as a fluid system The pressure gradient force can be considered to be the

and is considered to be a continuum, which is described by fluid fundamental force that initiates the air parcel’s motion, but

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 3

there are other forces that can also affect its trajectory and N-dimensional WDO implementation, and the turbulent drag

speed. A total of four major forces can be included in (3) that force is assumed to be a part of the friction force [45]. It is

either cause the wind to move in a certain direction at a certain crucial to understand that the WDO implementation is not an

velocity or that deflect it from its existing path. The most attempt to exactly duplicate atmospheric motion, but, rather, it

observable force causing the air to move is the pressure is an attempt to use the inspiration provided by nature in the

gradient force (FPG) defined in (2). Another force is the friction abstraction and invention of an efficient numerical optimization

force (FF), which simply acts to oppose the motion started by algorithm that is fundamentally based on the physical equations

the pressure gradient force. The exact description of the friction of atmospheric motion.

force in the atmosphere is very complex but is here simplified The forces described above can be entered into the

to right-hand side of Newton's second law of motion given in (3),

(5) which leads to

the wind.

In our physical three-dimensional atmosphere, the

where the acceleration term in (3) is rewritten as ,

gravitational force (FG) is a vertical force directed toward the

and a time step is assumed for simplicity. For an

earth's surface. However, if the center of the earth is considered

infinitesimally small, dimensionless air parcel, we set δV=1,

to be the center of the rectangular coordinate system, then we

which simplifies (8) to

can claim that the gravitational force simply pulls the air

parcels towards the origin of the coordinate system in all three

Ω . (9)

dimensions, which is also more easily mapped to

N-dimensional space. For this reason, the gravitational force is

Utilizing the ideal gas law from (4), the density ρ can be written

included in the algorithm as a force on all N dimensions and is

in terms of the pressure, the temperature and the universal gas

directed towards the center of the coordinate system. In its

constant and inserted into (9) yielding

simplest form, the gravitational force (FG) can be defined as

[46]

(10)

(6)

where Pcur represents the pressure value for an individual parcel

The earth’s rotation causes the reference frame to rotate at its current location. Dividing both sides of (10) by (Pcur / RT)

giving rise to the Coriolis force (FC), which was named after results in

the French scientist Gaspard Coriolis [47]. The Coriolis force

causes the deflection of the wind from its existing path in our (11)

atmosphere [41], where the amount of deflection experienced

by the air parcel depends on the direction of the rotation of the

earth, the latitude (which hemisphere) and the air parcel's speed At this point, it should be clear that the change in velocity

in the atmosphere. In the N-dimensional WDO abstraction, the and position can be computed from Newton's second law of

Coriolis force is implemented as the motion in one dimension motion. In the WDO, each air parcel's velocity and position are

that affects the velocity in another dimension. For example, if updated at every iteration as its exploration of the search space

two-dimensional motion is considered in the XY plane, then the progresses. Thus, the change in velocity, , can be written as

velocity vector of an air parcel has two components, one in the , where ucur is the velocity at the current

x-direction and one in the y-direction. In WDO, the Coriolis iteration and unew is the velocity in the next iteration. The

force is implemented in such a way that the speed in the friction force in (5) is computed using the current velocity

x-direction is influenced by the speed in the y-direction and value, ucur, allowing (11) to be rewritten as

vice versa. In N-dimensional space, this is randomized so that at

each iteration, the motion in a particular dimension will be (12)

influenced by the motion in another randomly chosen

dimension. The Coriolis force is defined by [44]

In (12), two quantities, g and , remain that are not written

in terms of velocity or position vectors. Since the gravitational

(7) force is defined as the force pulling an air parcel from its

current location towards the center of the coordinate system, it

where Ω represents the rotation of the earth and u is the velocity can be illustrated for a single dimension as shown in Fig. 1 (a).

vector of the wind. In the WDO implementation, the vector g can be written as g =

While these four forces are the major contributors to the |g| (0 - xcur).

motion of the wind, there are other forces that are not included

in the implementation of the WDO. For example, advection

along with the centrifugal force are ignored in the

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 4

form of the velocity update utilized in WDO. The first term in

(a) (b)

(15) states that if there are no other forces acting on the air

Fig. 1. (a) Illustration of the gravitational force (FG) in a one dimensional parcel, then it would continue on its current path with its

search space where the dimension spans in the range of [-1, 1] and the center of velocity proportionally reduced by friction. The friction

the coordinate system is defined at zero. (b) Illustration of the pressure gradient

force (FPG) in one dimensional search space, where xcur represents the location

coefficient term could be fixed to a constant value, or one could

of an air parcel at the current iteration and the xopt represents the optimum implement an adaptive friction coefficient, which could vary

pressure location found throughout the optimization. depending on the velocity of the air parcel. The second term

states that gravity constantly pulls the air parcel from its current

location towards the center of the coordinate system at a

The second term is the pressure gradient, , which is magnitude proportional to the constant g. This term becomes

defined as the force moving an air parcel from its current particularly beneficial if the air parcels get stuck at the

location toward an optimum pressure point, as seen in Fig. 1 boundaries. The third term in (15) implies that the higher

(b). In our implementation, the magnitude of the pressure ranked air parcels will most likely be at a location closer to the

gradient is the pressure difference between the current location xopt and, hence, the effect of the pressure gradient would be

of an air parcel Pcur and the optimum pressure found so far by smaller. The last term allows the velocity direction to be altered

the population Popt, while the pressure gradient is directed from by other dimensions, with a larger influence on higher ranked

the current location xcur to the optimum location xopt. Similar to air parcels. As can be clearly seen in (15), there are multiple

the gravitational field, the pressure gradient force can be coefficients that must be chosen prior to starting an

expressed simply as . optimization, namely: α, g, RT, and c. A numerical study is

Updating (12) with the new equations for the gravitational field carried out in the following section to establish the optimum

and pressure gradient gives values or value ranges for these parameters. At each iteration,

the velocity and the position of all air parcels need to be

updated. Once the new velocity is calculated according to (15),

the position can be updated by utilizing the following equation,

(13)

(16)

The Coriolis force is represented by the cross product of the

earth's rotation vector and the velocity vector of the air parcel where xcur is the current position of the air parcel in the search

( ) in (13). As described previously, the influence of the space, xnew is the new position for the next iteration, and a time

Coriolis force is replaced by the velocity influence from step of is assumed. A population of air parcels starts at

another randomly chosen dimension of the same air parcel, random positions in the search space with random velocities.

, and all other coefficients are combined into a single Utilizing (15) and (16), each air parcel’s velocity and position

term c, i.e. , thus simplifying the Coriolis force are adjusted at every iteration as the parcels move toward an

contribution in (13), which leads to optimum pressure location and, hence, the optimum solution at

the end of the last iteration. In this manner, WDO offers a

simple yet highly effective way to solve complex optimization

problems.

(14) For each dimension, WDO allows the air parcels to travel

only within the bounds of [-1, 1]. In the literature, there have

been various boundary conditions proposed for particle-based

A potential pitfall in implementing the above form of the optimizers [48], whereas in WDO, if an air parcel tries to travel

velocity update equation is that the pressure values are outside of these bounds in any dimension, its position in that

explicitly used. In cases where the pressure value is extremely particular dimension is set to the boundary value. The

high, the updated velocities would also become impractically gravitational force eventually pulls any air parcels that are stuck

large, diminishing the performance of the WDO. Instead of at the boundaries back into the search space. It also should be

using the actual pressure values, one can use a ranking-based noted that the updated velocities of the air parcels are limited to

approach, where the population of air parcels are ranked in a maximum value per iteration. The main reason for this is to

descending order based on their pressure values such that (14) prevent air parcels from taking large steps and overlooking

can be rewritten as, certain regions in the search space. If the velocity magnitude

exceeds the specified maximum in any dimension, then the

velocity in that dimension is limited according to

(15)

(17)

where i represents the ranking among all air parcels. In this

scheme, the best solution has the lowest pressure with rank 1

where the direction of motion is preserved but the magnitude is

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 5

limited to be no more than |umax| at any dimension, and clarity, the terminology used for the WDO is summarized in

represents the adjusted velocity after it is limited to the Table I.

maximum speed.

TABLE I.

TERMINOLOGY USED IN THE WIND DRIVEN OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM

Terminology Description

An individual member, whose coordinate values represent a

Air Parcel

candidate solution to the optimization problem at hand.

A group comprised of a predetermined number of diverse air

Population

parcels.

The coordinates of an air parcel, which are mapped to the

Position

dimensions of the optimization problem at hand.

Velocity The amount of position displacement per iteration.

A number assigned to air parcels, which establishes how

well an air parcel meets the desired design performance.

Pressure

Analogies can be made with fitness, cost, or penalty

functions.

Sorting of the air parcels at each iteration based on their

Ranking

pressure values.

other nature-inspired optimization algorithms, all of which are

population-based iterative methods aiming to improve the best

Fig. 2. Flowchart showing the Wind Driven Optimization implementation. A candidate solution over time. Pressure in WDO is analogous to

sample Matlab/Octave code is also provided in the Appendix. fitness, or cost, in the GA, where the purpose of the pressure

function is to evaluate the performance of the candidate

The implementation of WDO is illustrated in Fig. 2. As seen solutions.

in the flowchart, the algorithm starts with the initialization The position and velocity update rules in WDO are similar to

stage, where all parameters related to the WDO as well as the those in PSO, where PSO is based on a swarm of particles that

other parameters related to the optimization problem have to be share information about the search space facilitating

defined. Also, one must define a pressure function (analogous convergence to an optimum solution. PSO utilizes the

to a fitness function in a GA) and establish parameter abstraction of artificial intelligence behind a swarm of insects

boundaries. Once the optimization problem is set up, the in search of food, so the terms within the PSO update equations

population of air parcels are randomly distributed over the do not have strong physical meaning. By contrast, the WDO

N-dimensional search space and assigned random velocities. technique is highly correlated with the actual physical

The next step is to evaluate the pressure (fitness) values of each equations describing the trajectory of an air parcel in our

air parcel at its current position. Once the pressure values have atmosphere. Additional terms such as the gravitational pull

been evaluated, the population is ranked based on their within the velocity update equation in WDO can provide

pressure, and the velocity update is applied according to (15) advantages over PSO, where particles occasionally attempt to

along with the restrictions given in (17). The positions for the fly out of and sometimes get stuck at the boundaries, preventing

next iteration are updated by utilizing (16), and the boundaries their positions from changing for many iterations. This can

are checked to prevent any air parcel from exiting the search sometimes significantly hinder the ability of the PSO algorithm

space. Once all the updates are carried out, the parcel pressures to efficiently explore the entire search space, thereby resulting

at the new locations are evaluated. This procedure continues in a slower convergence speed. The gravitational pull in WDO

until the maximum number of iterations is reached. Finally, the provides a favorable contribution, which prevents air parcels

best pressure location at the end of the last iteration is recorded from remaining trapped at the boundary for long periods of

as the optimization result and, hence, the best candidate time and pulls them back into the search space. Another

solution to the problem. One could also choose to implement an difference from PSO is that in PSO a dimension of a given

alternative type of stopping criteria depending on the time particle is only influenced by the same dimension of another

constraints to solve the problem or the computational burden to population member, which happens to be the global best

calculate the EM solution. One example of a custom stopping particle. In contrast, the Coriolis force in WDO introduces a

criterion would be a user-defined threshold for stopping stochastic effect from other dimensions, providing robustness

execution of the WDO once it is achieved by the optimum to the motion of the parcel. The additional terms in (15), such as

pressure. A sample Matlab/Octave code is listed in the the gravitational pull and Coriolis effect provide potential

Appendix that provides a reference implementation of the benefits that can be gained by fine-tuning the WDO coefficients

WDO algorithm. for different optimization topologies.

So far, the theory behind WDO, the operators of the The next section carries out a numerical study on the

algorithm, and the implemented constraints, such as the coefficients of the WDO utilizing four different test functions

boundaries and velocity restrictions, have been discussed. For to determine the optimum values or value ranges for the

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 6

parameters α, g, RT, and c. This parameter study allows us to gravitational force coefficient, g, should only vary in the range

tune the WDO so that it performs efficiently on a variety of [0, 1]. On the other hand, RT and c can accommodate a wider

different search topologies. range of values, so we allow them to vary in the ranges [0, 5]

during the numerical study. For each test function, all

III. NUMERICAL PARAMETER STUDY combinations of the following sets of coefficient values were

The optimum performance of the WDO can be achieved by utilized in 10 WDO trials with different random seeds for each

properly selecting the values for the coefficients α, g, RT, and c trial:

that are utilized in the velocity update equation (15). Since all

α = [0.01; 0.03; 0.05; 0.07; 0.09; 0.11; 0.2; 0.3; 0.4; 0.5; 0.6; 0.7; 0.8; 0.9]

optimization problems differ from each other in terms of the g = [0.01; 0.03; 0.05; 0.07; 0.09; 0.11; 0.2; 0.3; 0.4; 0.5; 0.6; 0.7; 0.8; 0.9]

location of the optimum point, total number of global optimums RT = [0.01; 0.05; 0.1; 0.3; 0.5; 0.7; 0.8; 0.9; 1.0; 1.3; 1.6; 2.0; 2.3; 2.6; 3.0;

and boundary values, the optimum WDO coefficient choices 3.3; 3.6; 4.0; 4.3; 4.6; 5.0]

c = [0.01; 0.05; 0.1; 0.3; 0.5; 0.7; 0.8; 0.9; 1.0; 1.3; 1.6; 2.0; 2.3; 2.6; 3.0; 3.3;

may vary from problem to problem. In order to determine the 3.6; 4.0; 4.3; 4.6; 5.0]

best parameter combinations, four different benchmark

functions, namely the Sphere, Rotated Hyper-Ellipsoid, Ackley

and Rastrigin functions, are utilized in this study [49]. The

description and properties of each function are provided in

Table II for N-dimensions.

TABLE II.

N-DIMENSION MODIFIED TEST FUNCTIONS USED IN THE NUMERICAL

PARAMETER STUDY OF THE WDO ALGORITHM. THE GLOBAL BEST POSITION

VECTOR OF EACH FUNCTION IS REPRESENTED BY X*, AND OPTIMUM VALUES

ARE INDICATED BY F(X*).

Function Name Description and Properties

,

Sphere

Rotated ,

Hyper-Ellipsoid (a)

Ackley

,

,

Rastrigin

(b)

Each test function is defined in different ranges as shown in Fig. 3. Average best pressure values obtained when varying RT and c

coefficients while fixing α and g. Results are shown for the (a) modified

Table II, and the total number of dimensions is chosen to be Sphere, and (b) modified Rotated Hyper-Ellipsoid test functions.

N=5 for the numerical study. It should be noted that a modified

version of the conventional benchmark functions [49] are

utilized in which the global best locations, x*, are altered. For every trial, a population of 30 air parcels was optimized for

Unmodified, all of the test functions have a global best location a maximum of 500 iterations, and umax was chosen to be 0.3.

at the coordinate system center, which could be misleading for Based on physical intuition and (15), one can start with the

the WDO parameter study due to fact that the gravitational assumption that the gravitational force would be much smaller

force could dominate over time, and all air parcels would compared to the other forces acting on the air parcel, so we can

converge to the solution prematurely. Such a scenario would set g = 0.1. Also, considering that the velocity will be limited

not provide useful information in determining the optimal by umax = 0.3, we could target the first term coefficient, i.e.

coefficient values. The air parcels in WDO were allowed to (1-α), to have a contribution of no more than 0.3. Thus, we can

travel in the range of [-1, 1] and then scaled up to the minimum conveniently set α = 0.8. By strategically choosing these

and maximum boundary values based on the optimization values, we can study the variations of RT and c as shown in Fig.

problem limits. 3.

From (15) we note that the friction coefficient, α, and the In Fig. 3, we can see a trench in the parameter space, which

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 7

indicates the lowest pressure values for unimodal test functions, utilize the above study to strategically choose and tune the

as low as 10-5, can be attained for parameter value ranges of 1.0 parameter values for the problem at hand. New users of the

< RT < 2.0 and 0.05 < c < 3.6. While these sets of parameter WDO are also encouraged to utilize the parameter settings

values seem to allow WDO to work efficiently on unimodal provided in the following sections, where multiple EM

problem spaces, a different set of values are needed for the problems are efficiently optimized.

multi-modal problems. This time, values of RT = 1.0 and c = 0.7 In the following sections, WDO will be applied to three

are selected from the range above in order to study the variation different electromagnetic optimization problems. The first

of α and g for the modified Ackley and modified Rastrigin example is a linear antenna array synthesis problem, which

multi-modal test functions. In Fig. 4 (a), we can see a trench in provides an opportunity to compare WDO with PSO. The

the parameter space, where the lowest pressure is achieved for second example of a double-sided artificial magnetic conductor

α =0.8 and g = 0.6, whereas in Fig. 4 (b), the lowest pressure (DSAMC) demonstrates that WDO can efficiently handle

values, as low as 10-5, are attained for α = 0.8 or 0.9 and g = 0.7. problems with discrete-valued parameters where GA typically

excels [50]. The final example consists of the optimization of a

dual-band E-shaped microstrip patch antenna. These

implementation examples serve to demonstrate the

effectiveness and utility of WDO for solving complex

electromagnetic design problems.

Linear antenna array synthesis has been studied extensively

in the literature utilizing various optimization methods [51-53],

targeting sidelobe suppression, null placement, array thinning,

or custom radiation pattern shaping.

(a)

x-axis, where the array is symmetric with respect to the origin.

optimum element layout of a linear antenna array that provides

the best suppression of the sidelobe levels (SLL) in the

radiation pattern. For the radiating elements, isotropic sources

(b) are assumed, which are symmetrically positioned along the

Fig. 4. Average best pressure values obtained when varying α and g coefficients x-axis as seen in Fig. 5. We note that the identical synthesis

while fixing RT and c. Results are shown for the (a) modified Ackley, and (b) problem was addressed in [51] using PSO and in [54] using the

modified Rastrigin functions.

Comprehensive Learning PSO (CLPSO), where CLPSO was

shown to outperform PSO. For a fair comparison between PSO,

TABLE III.

CLPSO and WDO, a uniform amplitude excitation (ai = 1) with

SUGGESTED PARAMETER RANGES BASED ON THE NUMERICAL STUDY OF no phase differences (φ i= 0) is assumed in the array factor

UNIMODAL AND MULTI-MODAL TEST FUNCTIONS calculations based on

α g c RT

Range [0.8,0.9] [0.6,0.7] [0.05,3.6] [1.0,2.0]

(18)

where ai, di and φi represent the amplitude, the location of the ith

These two studies reveal that the WDO can operate

antenna element and the excitation phase, respectively, and k is

efficiently using wide ranges of parameter values as

the free-space wavenumber. For uniform excitation and zero

summarized in Table III, but different problem topologies may

phase, (18) simplifies to

require unique WDO parameter settings for optimum

performance. Unfortunately, for real world optimization

problems, it would not be possible to choose a single set of (19)

parameters that will work efficiently in every case, but one can

WDO was used to find the optimum locations for 2M = 10

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 8

array. Since the main radiation beam is directed at broadside

(φ=90°), only the following angular ranges of φ=[0°, 80°] and

φ=[100°, 180°] were optimized to minimize the SLL.

According to [51], the velocity vector of the PSO quickly

approaches zero in about 400 iterations and remains at zero

until the optimization is terminated at 1000 iterations,

indicating that the PSO lost its exploration ability over time.

The additional terms in (15), such as the gravitational pull,

provide the WDO the added benefit of preventing the velocity

vector from becoming zero too quickly, which would prevent

the population from further exploring the parameter space. The

WDO ran with a population size of 40 air parcels for a

maximum of 1000 iterations, where the following coefficient

values were chosen: α=0.1, g=0.1, RT=2.6, and c=0.4, and umax

= 0.25. The air parcel dimensions represent the antenna

Fig. 6. Array factor comparison between the uniformly-spaced, WDO-based,

separations, with an allowed range of [0, λ0]. The pressure PSO-based [51], and CLPSO-based designs [54]. The WDO design performs

function minimizing the array factor is given by better than the uniformly-spaced array as well as the PSO design and also

matches the performance of the CLPSO design.

(20)

The dimensions of the WDO synthesized design are listed in V. DOUBLE-SIDED ARTIFICIAL MAGNETIC CONDUCTOR

Table IV along with those of the PSO optimized array, the SYNTHESIS

CLPSO optimized array, and a conventional uniformly spaced Artificial magnetic conducting (AMC) ground planes are

antenna array with λ0/2 spacing. The array factor calculations widely utilized in low profile antenna applications. The

for the array dimensions listed in Table IV are shown in Fig. 6. majority of the papers published on this topic are focused on

The WDO synthesized linear antenna array has a uniform single-sided AMC surfaces, i.e. the structures are typically

sidelobe level distribution that was achieved by minimizing the backed by a PEC and only exhibit the AMC property on one

pressure function, which resulted in a maximum SLL of -19.05 side [55-57]. Erentok et al. introduced the concept of a

dB as seen in Fig. 6. The conventional, uniformly spaced array volumetric AMC design without PEC backplanes in [58], while

provides a maximum SLL of -12.96 dB, whereas the PSO and the theory of planar double-sided artificial magnetic conducting

CLPSO optimized arrays provides -17.41 dB and -19.07 dB, (DSAMC) surfaces was later presented in [50], followed by a

respectively. These results demonstrate that WDO is capable of system example offered in [59]. A DSAMC is a thin

outperforming PSO and matches the performance of the more metallo-dielectric engineered surface, consisting of two doubly

sophisticated CLPSO, when applied to some antenna array periodic frequency selective surface (FSS) type screens printed

radiation pattern synthesis problems. on either side of a thin dielectric slab. Either surface of this thin

slab can be optimized for a specific response. For instance, one

side can be designed to have an AMC condition, while the other

TABLE IV. could be optimized for an AEC (Artificial Electric Conducting)

ELEMENT LOCATIONS OF THE 10-ELEMENT LINEAR ANTENNA ARRAY FOR

response. For the optimization example here, a commercially

DIFFERENT ARRAY GEOMETRIES, WHERE THE DISTANCES ARE NORMALIZED

WITH RESPECT TO THE FREE-SPACE WAVELENGTH available dielectric, Rogers High Frequency LaminateTM RT

1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6010, with a dielectric permittivity of εr = 10.2 -j0.0253 and a

Conventional ± 0.2500 ± 0.7500 ± 1.2500 ± 1.7500 ± 2.2500 thickness of 2.54 mm is utilized. The WDO is linked with a

PSO ± 0.2515 ± 0.5550 ± 1.0650 ± 1.5000 ± 2.1100 full-wave Periodic Finite Element Boundary Integral (PFEBI)

CLPSO ± 0.2515 ± 0.711 ± 1.208 ± 1.8350 ± 2.5585 solver that can calculate the scattering from either side of the

WDO ± 0.2233 ± 0.7197 ± 1.2221 ± 1.8591 ± 2.5936

surface. The optimization goals are to achieve an AMC

response from the top surface of the DSAMC at 2.4 GHz, and

an AMC response from the bottom surface at 5.2 GHz, both of

which are WIFI frequencies. This WIFI separator was first

introduced in [60], where a Genetic Algorithm (GA) was

utilized to optimize the structure. These goals were

incorporated into the following Pressure function

(21)

should be unity and in phase with the incident wave at 2.4 GHz

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 9

should be unity and in phase with the incident wave at 5.2GHz.

Since the thickness, unit cell dimensions and dielectric

permittivity are all predetermined, the WDO was given the task

of optimizing the unit cell geometry of the top and bottom FSS

screens analogous to the GA example reported in [60]. The

square unit cell dimensions are set to be 1.18 cm on a side, and

the unit cells are pixilated into 17x17 grids, where the bottom

(a) (b)

row and right-most column of pixels are forced to be metal in Fig. 8. Illustration of the reflection phase both from the top surface (S11) and the

order to ease fabrication of the WIFI separator. The pixilated bottom surface (S22). (a) At 2.4 GHz, the top surface provides an in-phase

FSS screen geometries are periodic in two dimensions, and the reflection, i.e. AMC band, such that a highly reflective top surface is achieved.

(b) At 5.2 GHz, the bottom surface provides an in-phase reflection, i.e. AMC

remaining 16x16 pixel grid to be optimized is forced to have band, and a highly reflective bottom surface is achieved.

four-fold symmetry such that the WDO optimizes only one

quarter of the unit cells as illustrated in Fig. 7. Each row forms

an 8 bit binary number that is represented by one dimension in

the WDO with a range of [0, 28-1]. Since there are a total of 8

rows to be optimized for each screen, this constitutes an

optimization problem with N=16 dimensions.

(a) (b)

Fig. 9. Illustration of the reflection and transmission magnitudes both from the

top surface (S11) and the bottom surface (S22). (a) At 2.4 GHz, the top surface

provides an AMC band. The reflection (|S11|) and transmission (|S12|)

magnitudes from top surface are shown indicating a high reflection. (b) At 5.2

GHz, the bottom surface provides an AMC band, where the reflection (|S22|)

and transmission (|S21|) magnitudes indicate high reflectivity.

(a) (b)

Fig. 7. WDO optimized unit cell geometries. (a) Top FSS geometry shown with As a final demonstration of its utility, the WDO is given the

four-fold symmetry targeting the low frequency response. (b) Bottom FSS task of optimizing a dual-band E-shaped patch antenna

geometry shown with four-fold symmetry targeting the high frequency targeting operating frequencies of 5.0 GHz and 5.5 GHz. The

response. The bottom row and right column of each unit cell is forced to contain

metallic pixels for ease of fabrication of the WIFI separator. same optimization problem is tackled in [61], where

Differential Evolution (DE) and a more sophisticated version of

A population of 25 air parcels was optimized for 500 DE, i.e. Self-adaptive Differential Evolution (SADE) are

iterations as in [60], where the following values were used for utilized. Microstrip patch antennas are extensively employed

the coefficients: α = 0.4, g = 0.2, c = 0.2, RT = 3, and umax = 0.3. in wireless telecommunication systems, aircrafts, and satellites

The optimized FSS unit cell geometries are illustrated in Fig. 7, due to their inherit advantages such as low profile, ease of

where the white and black shaded pixels represent the metal fabrication, low weight, and low cost. In its simplest form, the

and the absence of metal, respectively. At 2.4 GHz, the top E-shaped patch antenna is formed by two identical slots cut

surface behaves as an AMC, where the reflection phase is from a rectangular microstrip patch on a finite sized ground

as seen in Fig. 8 (a), while the reflection and plane.

transmission magnitudes are |S11| = -1.031 dB and |S12| = -25.08

dB, respectively, as seen in Fig. 9 (a). At 5.2 GHz, the bottom

surface behaves as an AMC, where the reflection phase is

as seen in Fig. 8 (b), and the reflection and

transmission magnitudes are |S22| = -0.4897 dB and |S21| =

-27.64 dB, respectively, as seen in Fig. 9 (b). While this

optimization problem is better suited for binary-coded

algorithms such as a GA [60], this result shows that the WDO

can also easily handle discrete-valued optimization problems

that have been efficiently solved by GA [60].

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 10

RT = 3, and umax = 0.3. The dimensions of the final optimized

design are provided in Table VI. The S11 of the optimized

E-shaped patch antenna is illustrated in Fig. 11, showing that

S11 values of -31 dB or lower are achieved at 5.0 GHz and 5.5

GHz, matching the performance of the DE result in [61].

TABLE VI.

THE DIMENSIONS OF THE FINAL OPTIMIZED E-PATCH ANTENNA

W L Ws Ls Ps Px

mm 24.36 21.79 4.87 18.02 3.75 3.85

is shown in Fig. 10, where a rectangular patch with two

identical slots cut from the right side is placed on a 60 mm x 60 Fig. 11. S11 of the optimized E-shaped microstrip patch antenna design

mm finite ground plane, with a 5.5 mm thick air substrate. The computed with FEKO.

patch is centered at the middle of the ground plane, and the feed

location, Px, is selected by the optimization algorithm.

Moreover, the dimensions of the rectangular patch given by W VII. CONCLUSIONS

and L are both optimized. The two identical stubs cut from the In this paper, we introduced Wind Driven Optimization

rectangular patch have a length of Ls and width of Ws and are (WDO), a new type of nature-inspired global optimization

centered at a distance of Ps from the feed position. This gives a algorithm based on the motion of air parcels in the wind. The

total of 6 parameters to be determined by the optimization equations for implementing the WDO were derived from the

algorithms to find the best configuration for the E-shaped patch theory governing the motion of the wind and discussed in detail

antenna targeting minimization of the S11 at 5.0 GHz and 5.5 along with a numerical study using unimodal and multi-modal

GHz. The optimization goals are incorporated into the pressure test functions to determine the best ranges for the WDO

function defined in (22), where the minimization of the parameters. To illustrate the simplicity and robustness of the

pressure produces a lower S11 (dB). WDO, several electromagnetics optimization problems were

presented, including the synthesis of a linear antenna array that

(22) was compared with PSO and CLPSO, a double-sided artificial

magnetic conducting surface that was compared with GA, and

For fast evaluation of the candidate antenna designs, the an E-shaped microstrip patch antenna, where a DE comparison

WDO is linked with the Method of Moments (MoM) solver is presented. These examples demonstrate that the WDO is

used in the commercially available FEKO software to obtain effective at optimizing problems with both discrete- and

S11 (dB) at both optimization frequencies, which are then used real-valued parameters and that it offers a competitive

in the pressure calculations. This optimization constitutes an alternative to the popular PSO, GA and DE optimizers, which

N=6 dimensional problem, where all dimensions are shown in are widely used in electromagnetics.

Fig. 10 and the corresponding ranges are listed in Table V.

TABLE V. APPENDIX

MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM ALLOWED LIMITS FOR EACH OF THE OPTIMIZATION

PARAMETERS %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

W L Ws Ls Ps Px % Sample Matlab / Octave Code for the Wind Driven Optimization.

% Optimization of the Sphere Function in the range of [-5, 5].

Min 10mm 10mm 0.5mm 0.5mm -L/2 Ws/2

% by Zikri Bayraktar - zikribayraktar@gmail.com.

Max 50mm 30mm W/2 L L/2 W/2 – Ws/2 % Penn State University - May 2011.

%-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

For this design example, the WDO was allowed to run for tic; clear; close all; clc; format long g;

delete('output.txt'); delete('pressure.txt'); delete('position.txt');

100 iterations with a population size of 20 air parcels, and the

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 11

fid=fopen('output.txt','a');

% Updating the global best:

% WDO parameters: better = minpres < globalpres;

param.popsize = 20; % population size. if better

param.npar = 5; % Dimension of the problem. globalpres = minpres % initialize global minimum

param.maxit = 500; % Maximum number of iterations. globalpos = minpos;

param.RT = 3; % RT coefficient. end

param.g = 0.2; % gravitational constant. % Keep a record of the progress:

param.alp = 0.4; % constants in the update equation. keepglob(ij) = globalpres;

param.c = 0.4; % coriolis effect. save position.txt pos -ascii -tabs;

maxV = 0.3; % maximum allowed speed. end

dimMin = -5; % Lower dimension boundary. %Save values to the final file.

dimMax= 5; % Upper dimension boundary. pressure = transpose(keepglob);

%------------------------------------------------------------------- save pressure.txt pressure -ascii -tabs;

% Initializing population: Position and Velocity : %END

% random population in [-1, 1]:

pos = 2*(rand(param.popsize,param.npar)-0.5);

% random velocity:

REFERENCES

vel = maxV * 2 * (rand(param.popsize,param.npar)-0.5); [1] R. L. Haupt, and D. H. Werner, Genetic Algorithms in Electromagnetics,

%------------------------------------------------------------------- Wiley-IEEE Press, Hoboken, New Jersey, April 2007.

% Evaluate initial population: (Sphere Function) [2] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, Particle Swarm Optimization, Proc. Ninth

for K=1:param.popsize, Int. Conf. on Neural Networks, vol. 4, pp. 1942-1948, Nov. 1995.

x = (dimMax - dimMin) * pos(K,:) + dimMin; [3] M. Dorigo, and T. Stutzle, Ant Colony Optimization, MIT Press,

pres(K,:) = sum (x.^2); Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2004.

end [4] K. Price, R. M. Storn, and J. A. Lampinen, Differential Evolution: A

%------------------------------------------------------------------ Practical Approach to Global Optimization, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,

% Finding best air parcel in the initial population : 2005.

[globalpres,indx] = min(pres); [5] P. Rocca, G. Oliveri, and A. Massa, “Differential evolution as applied to

globalpos = pos(indx,:); electromagnetics,” IEEE Antennas Propagat. Mag., vol. 53, pp. 38-49,

minpres(1) = min(pres); % min pressure Feb. 2011.

%----------------------------------------------------------------- [6] L. N. de Castro, and F. J. Von Zuben, "Learning and optimization using

% Rank the air parcels : the clonal selection principle," IEEE Trans. on Evol. Comput., vol. 6, no.

[sorted_pres rank_ind] = sort(pres); 3, pp. 239-251, Jun. 2002.

% Sort the air parcels: [7] N. Hansen, S. D. Müller, and P. Koumoutsakos, “Reducing the time

pos = pos(rank_ind,:); complexity of the derandomized evolution strategy with covariance

keepglob(1) = globalpres; matrix adaptation (CMA-ES),” Evolutionary Computation, vol. 11, no. 1,

%---------------------------------------------------------------------- pp. 1–18, 2003.

% Start iterations : [8] D. H. Wolpert and W. G. Macready, “No free lunch theorems for

iter = 1; % iteration counter optimization,” IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 1, pp. 67-82, 1997.

for ij = 2:param.maxit, [9] Z. Bayraktar, P. L. Werner, and D. H. Werner, "The design of miniature

% Update the velocity: three-element stochastic Yagi-Uda arrays using particle swarm

for i=1:param.popsize optimization," IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 5, no. 1, pp.

% choose random dimensions: 22-26, Dec. 2006.

a = randperm(param.npar); [10] M. D. Gregory, Z. Bayraktar, and D. H. Werner, "Fast optimization of

% choose velocity based on random dimension: electromagnetic design problems using the covariance matrix adaptation

velot(i,:) = vel(i,a); evolutionary strategy," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 59, no. 4,

vel(i,:) = (1-param.alp)*vel(i,:)-(param.g*pos(i,:))+ ... pp. 1275-1285, April 2011.

abs(1-1/i)*((globalpos-pos(i,:)).*param.RT)+ ... [11] B. Tian, Z. Li, and C. Wang, "Boresight gain optimization of an UWB

(param.c*velot(i,:)/i); monopole antenna using FDTD and genetic algorithm," IEEE Int. Conf.

end Ultra-Wideband (ICUWB), vol. 1, pp. 1-4, 20-23 Sept. 2010.

[12] E. E. Altshuler, "Design of a vehicular antenna for GPS/Iridium using a

% Check velocity: genetic algorithm," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 48, no. 6, pp.

vel = min(vel, maxV); 968-972, Jun. 2000.

vel = max(vel, -maxV); [13] T. G. Spence, and D. H. Werner, "A novel miniature

% Update air parcel positions: broadband/multiband antenna based on an end-loaded planar open-sleeve

pos = pos + vel; dipole," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 54, no. 12, pp. 3614-3620,

pos = min(pos, 1.0); Dec. 2006.

pos = max(pos, -1.0); [14] M. Benedetti, R. Azaro, and A. Massa, “Memory enhanced PSO-based

% Evaluate population: (Pressure) optimization approach for smart antennas control in complex interference

for K=1:param.popsize, scenarios,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 56, pp. 1939-1947, Jul.

x = (dimMax - dimMin) * pos(K,:) + dimMin; 2008.

pres(K,:) = sum (x.^2); [15] L. Lizzi, F. Viani, R. Azaro, and A. Massa, “A PSO-driven spline-based

end shaping approach for ultra-wideband (UWB) antenna synthesis,” IEEE

Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 56, pp. 2613-2621, Aug. 2008.

%---------------------------------------------------- [16] D. W. Boeringer, and D. H. Werner, "Efficiency-constrained particle

% Finding best particle in population swarm optimization of a modified Bernstein polynomial for conformal

[minpres,indx] = min(pres); array excitation amplitude synthesis," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.,

minpos = pos(indx,:); % min location for this iteration vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 2662-2673, Aug. 2005.

%---------------------------------------------------- [17] M. D. Gregory, D. H. Werner and P. L. Werner, "Nature-inspired

% Rank the air parcels: techniques for the synthesis of aperiodic ultra-wideband phased arrays"

[sorted_pres rank_ind] = sort(pres); Proc. of the 2010 IEEE Int. Symp. on Phased Array Systems &

% Sort the air parcels position, velocity and pressure: Technology, Boston, MA, Oct. 12 -16, 2010.

pos = pos(rank_ind,:); [18] M. G. Bray, D. H. Werner, D. W. Boeringer, and D. W. Machuga,

vel = vel(rank_ind,:); "Optimization of thinned aperiodic linear phased arrays using genetic

pres = sorted_pres;

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, Manuscript ID AP1202-0125.R1 12

algorithms to reduce grating lobes during scanning," IEEE Trans. [40] H. Riehl, Introduction to the Atmosphere, McGraw Hill, 1978.

Antennas Propagat., vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 1732-1742, Dec. 2002. [41] C. D. Ahrens, Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate,

[19] D. W. Boeringer, and D. H. Werner, "Particle swarm optimization versus and the Environment, 7th ed., Thomson–Brook/Cole, 2003.

genetic algorithm for phased array synthesis," IEEE Trans. Antennas [42] Wikipedia. (January 30, 2012). Pressure Gradient. [Online]. Available:

Propagat., vol. 52, no. 3, pp.771-779, Mar. 2004. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_gradient

[20] W.-C. Weng, F. Yang, and A. Z. Elsherbeni, "Linear antenna array [43] J. M. Wallace and P. V. Hobbs, Atmospheric Science: An Introductory

synthesis using Taguchi's method: A novel optimization technique in Survey, 2nd ed., Elsevier, 2006.

electromagnetics," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. [44] M. L. Salby, Fundamentals of Atmospheric Physics, Academic Press,

723-730, Mar. 2007. 1995.

[21] Z. Bayraktar, D. H. Werner and P. L. Werner, "Miniature meander-line [45] R. B. Stull, Meteorology for Scientists and Engineers, 2nd ed., Brooks

dipole antenna arrays designed via an orthogonal array initialized hybrid Cole, 1999.

particle swarm optimizer," IEEE Antennas Propagat. Mag., vol. 53, no. 3, [46] P. R. Bannon, The Dynamic Atmosphere, A Theoretical Perspective.

pp. 42-59, Jun. 2011. Class notes for Intro. Atmospheric Dynamics, Department of

[22] S. Caorsi, A. Lommi, A. Massa, and M. Pastorino, “Peak sidelobe level Meteorology, The Pennsylvania State University, 2003.

reduction with a hybrid approach based on a GAs and difference sets,” [47] Wikipedia. (January 30, 2012). Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis. [Online].

IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 52, pp. 1116-1121, Apr. 2004. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaspard-Gustave_Coriolis

[23] G. Oliveri, F. Caramanica, and A. Massa, “Hybrid ADS-based techniques [48] J. Robinson, and Y. Rahmat-Samii, "Particle swarm optimization in

for radio astronomy array design,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. electromagnetics," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 52, no. 2, pp.

59, pp. 1817-1827, Jun. 2011. 397-407, Feb. 2004.

[24] L. Poli, P. Rocca, L. Manica, and A. Massa, “Handling sideband [49] X. Yao, Y. Liu, and G. Lin, "Evolutionary programming made faster,"

radiations in time-modulated arrays through particle swarm IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 82 - 102, July 1999.

optimization,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 58, pp. 1408-1411, [50] Z. Bayraktar, J. A. Bossard and D. H. Werner, "AMC metamaterials for

Apr. 2010. low-profile antennas mounted on or embedded in composite platforms,"

[25] G. Oliveri, F. Caramanica, C. Fontanari, and A. Massa, “Rectangular Proc. of the 2008 IEEE Int. Symp. on Antennas and Propag., Honolulu,

thinned arrays based on McFarland difference sets,” IEEE Trans. Hawaii, USA, pp. 1305 - 1308, Jun. 10-15, 2007.

Antennas Propagat., vol. 59, pp. 1546-1552, May 2011. [51] M. M. Khodier, and C. G. Christodoulou, "Linear array geometry

[26] P. Rocca, M. Benedetti, D. Franceschini, and A. Massa, “Evolutionary synthesis with minimum sidelobe level and null control using particle

optimization as applied to inverse problems,” Inverse Problems, vol. 25, swarm optimization," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 53, no. 8, pp.

doi: 10.1088/0266-5611/25/12/123003, Dec. 2009. 2674-2679, Aug. 2005.

[27] S. Caorsi, A. Massa, and M. Pastorino, “Genetic algorithms as applied to [52] K.-K. Yan, and Y. Lu, "Sidelobe reduction in array-pattern synthesis

the computation of electromagnetic scattering by weakly nonlinear using genetic algorithm," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 45, no. 7,

dielectric cylinders,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 47, pp. pp. 1117-1122, Jul. 1997.

1421-1428, Sept. 1999. [53] C. Lin, A. Qing, and Q. Feng, "Synthesis of unequally spaced antenna

[28] E. Michielssen, J.-M Sajer, S. Ranjithan, and R. Mittra, "Design of arrays by using differential evolution," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.,

lightweight, broad-band microwave absorbers using genetic algorithms," vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 2553-2561.

IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech., vol. 41, no. 6/7, pp. 1024-1031, [54] S. K. Goudos, V. Moysiadou, T. Samaras, K. Siakavara, and J. N.

Jun./Jul. 1993. Sahalos, “Application of a comprehensive learning particle swarm

[29] S. Cui, and D. S. Weile, "Application of a parallel particle swarm optimizer to unequally spaced linear array synthesis with sidelobe level

optimization scheme to the design of electromagnetic absorbers," IEEE suppression and null control,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 9,

Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 3616-3624, Nov. 2005. pp. 125-129, 2010.

[30] J. A. Bossard, X. Liang, L. Li, S. Yun, D. H. Werner, D. Weiner, T. S. [55] M. E. de Cos, F. Las Heras, and M. Franco, "Design of planar artificial

Mayer, P. F. Cristman, A. Diaz, and I. C. Khoo, "Tunable frequency magnetic conductor ground plane using frequency-selective surfaces for

selective surfaces and negative-zero-positive index metamaterials based frequencies below 1 GHz," IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 8,

on liquid crystals," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 56, no. 5, pp. pp.951-954, 2009.

1308-1320, May 2008. [56] D. J. Kern, D. H. Werner, A. Monorchio, L. Lanuzza, and M. J. Wilhelm,

[31] S. Genovesi, R. Mittra, A. Monorchio, and G. Manara, "Particle swarm "The design synthesis of multi-band artificial magnetic conductors using

optimization for the design of frequency selective surfaces," IEEE high impedance frequency selective surfaces," IEEE Trans. Antennas

Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 277-279, Dec. 2006. Propagat., Special Issue on Artificial Magnetic Conductors, Soft/Hard

[32] L. Akhoondzadeh-Asl, D. J. Kern, P. S. Hall, and D. H. Werner, Surfaces, and other Complex Surfaces, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 8-17, Jan. 2005.

"Wideband dipoles on electromagnetic bandgap ground planes," IEEE [57] D. Sievenpiper, L. Zhang, R. F. J. Broas, N. G. Alexopolous, and E.

Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 2426-2434, Sept. 2007. Yablonovitch, "High-impedance electromagnetic surfaces with a

[33] L. Zhifang, Y. E. Erdemli, J. L. Volakis, and P. Y. Papalambros, "Design forbidden frequency band," IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech., vol. 47,

optimization of conformal antennas by integrating stochastic algorithms no.11, pp. 2059-2074, Nov. 1999.

with the hybrid finite-element method," IEEE Trans. Antennas [58] A. Erentok, P. L. Luljak, and R. W. Ziolkowski, "Characterization of a

Propagat., vol. 50, no.5, pp. 676-684, May 2002. volumetric metamaterial realization of an artificial magnetic conductor

[34] E. Lier, D. H. Werner, C. P. Scarborough, Q. Wu and J. A. Bossard, "An for antenna applications," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 53, no.

octave-bandwidth negligible-loss radiofrequency metamaterial," Nature 1, pp. 160-172, Jan. 2005.

Materials, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 216-222, March 2011. [59] Z. Bayraktar, M. Gregory, and D. H. Werner, "Composite planar

[35] J. Z. Jiang, S. Yun, F. Toor, D. H. Werner and T. S. Mayer, "Conformal double-sided AMC surfaces for MIMO applications," Proc. of the IEEE

dual-band near-perfectly absorbing mid-infrared metamaterial coating," Int. Symp. on Antennas and Propagat. and USNC/URSI National Radio

ACS Nano, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 4641-4647, April 2011. Science Meeting, Charleston, SC, USA, June 1-5, 2009.

[36] S. Yun, J. A. Bossard, T. S. Mayer, and D. H. Werner, "Angle and [60] Z. Bayraktar, M. D. Gregory, X. Wang, and D. H. Werner, “A versatile

polarization tolerant midinfrared dielectric filter designed by genetic design strategy for thin composite planar double-sided high-impedance

algorithm optimization," Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 96, no. 22, pp. surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 60, no. 6, pp.

223101/1-3, 2010. 2770-2780, June 2012.

[37] Z. H. Jiang, J. A. Bossard, X. Wang, and D. H. Werner, "Genetic [61] S. K. Goudos, K. Siakavara, T. Samaras, E. E. Vafiadis, and J. N. Sahalos,

algorithm synthesis of impedance-matched infrared ZIMs with wide FOV “Self-adaptive differential evolution applied to real-valued antenna and

using a generalized inversion algorithm," Proc. of the 2010 IEEE Int. microwave design problems,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 59,

Symp. on Antennas and Propag. and USNC/URSI National Radio Science no. 4, pp. 1286-1298, April 2011.

Meeting, Toronto, Canada, July 11-17, 2010.

[38] R. D. Thompson, Atmospheric Processes and Systems, Routledge, New

York, 1998.

[39] NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. (January 30, 2012). The Layer's of

Earth's Atmosphere. [Online]. Available:

http://airs.jpl.nasa.gov/maps/satellite_feed/atmosphere_layers/

Copyright (c) 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.

## Lebih dari sekadar dokumen.

Temukan segala yang ditawarkan Scribd, termasuk buku dan buku audio dari penerbit-penerbit terkemuka.

Batalkan kapan saja.