Synthesizing Nulling Pattern of Linear Array by

Amplitude Control Using A Wind Driven

Optimizer for Faster Convergence
Santosh Kumar Mahto*, 1, Arvind Choubey1 and Sushmita suman2
1

Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, National Institute

of Technology, Jamshedpur, India, Email: ec51236@nitjsr.ac.in
1

Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, National Institute of

Technology, Jamshedpur, India, Email: achoubey.ece@nitjsr.ac.in
2

Department of Computer Science Engineering, National Institute of Technology,

Jamshedpur, India, Email: sushmita.adm@nitjsr.ac.in

Abstract This paper describes fast, efficient and global optimization method for nulling pattern synthesis of uniformly
placed linear array by controlling the array elements amplitude-only, using wind driven optimization (WDO) algorithm.
The null is placed in the direction of maximum interference by undesired signals to maximize the signal-to-noise
interference ratio. The WDO is a new nature-inspired evolutionary optimization technique based on the movement of air
parcel in the earths atmosphere. It uses a new learning strategy to update the velocity and position of air packets based
on their current pressure values to accelerate the convergence. The pressure function taken into consideration in problem
formulation for the array pattern synthesis are suppressed maximum sidelobe level (SLL), controlling first null
bandwidth (FNBW), null placement in the desired direction, desired null depth level (NDL) and a restricted dynamic
range ratio (DRR). In this paper, WDO technique is used to determine the optimum set of array elements excitation
amplitude-only to achieve the desired radiation pattern. The synthesis results such as radiation pattern and the
convergence curve of initial Chebyshev array with desired nulls (single, multiple and broad) using WDO are
authenticated by bacterial foraging optimization (BFO) as reported in the literature. The convergence curve shows that it
quickly converges in less than 50 iterations compared to 1500 iterations as reported in literature.

Index Terms Array antenna, evolutionary algorithm, wind driven optimization (WDO), linear array design, null
control, interference, sidelobe level (SLL)

1. INTRODUCTION
Presently, electromagnetic and antenna community researchers are interested to design an antenna with larger coverage,
maximum directivity with minimum SLL and null placement in desired direction to control the interference effect. But the single
antenna does not meet this requirement. Hence an array of antennas is used. Array pattern synthesis methods which provide null
steering are of interest in minimizing interference due to the increasing pollution of the electromagnetic environment. Nulling
methods in the array pattern synthesis are used to suppress interference from unwanted signal while receiving the signal from the
desired direction [1-12], [15-16]. It has been extensively studied in the last decade and it is a great area of interest for
researchers, today [1-19]. The null steering can be achieved by various methods such as controlling the position-only [4, 6, 9, 1213, 16, 18], the excitation amplitude-only [1, 3, 11, 15], the phase-only [1, 8] and the complex weight (both the amplitude and
the phase) [7] of array elements. In modern wireless environment, pattern nulling methods become very important to nullify the
unwanted interfering signals for higher quality and better efficiency. These nulling methods have their own advantages and
inherent demerits, and none of them entirely fulfill the desired requirement.
Null steering in an array pattern by controlling the phase of the array elements is an efficient and cost effective method to
minimize the interference effect. This method is inherently nonlinear in nature and cannot be solved by conventional methods.

By considering the phase perturbation to be very small, the nulling equation will become linear. However the symmetrical null
pattern with respect to main beam cannot be obtained. The nulls can be placed symmetrically with respect to main beam by
controlling the position of array elements. If the array is symmetrical then computational time is halved. The drawbacks of the
position control method are non-linearity and non-flexibility in changing the position of array elements. On the other hand, the
nulling pattern synthesis of a linear array by the complex weight control (controlling the amplitude and the phase) is more
efficient because it provides a great freedom to the solution space. Moreover, it is more expensive considering the cost of phase
shifters and variable attenuator for each array element. Also, the time complexity increases as the number of array elements
increases.
The synthesis nulling pattern of a linear array antenna by the amplitude-only control is simple, efficient and most effective
method. This method is linear in nature and cost effective because an array of attenuator is used to adjust the array elements
excitation amplitude. On the other hand, computational time and the number of required attenuators are halved because the array
is symmetrical about its center.
A variety of evolutionary optimization algorithms have emerged, starting with Genetic Algorithm GA [3-4, 19, 25], Neural
Network (NN), Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) [5-7], Tabu Search (TS) [8], Common Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) [9,
12], Differential Evolution (DE) [10, 13], Bacterial foraging optimization (BFO) [14]-[15], Comprehensive Learning Particle
Swarm Optimization (CLPSO) [10], Bees Algorithm (BA) [24] and many others effectively implemented for complex problem
such as Channel equalizer [14], array synthesis [1-19, 25], system identification etc. The recital of these methods outperforms the
classical optimization and the conventional analytical techniques in array geometry synthesis. Among these natures and
biological inspired algorithm, each one has its strength and inherent weakness in solving particular multidimensional and
multimodal problems. This has been mathematically proven by Wolpert et al in [20]. The WDO algorithm was proposed and
implemented to uniformly excite linear array synthesis with maximum SLL suppression by controlling the array element
position-only by Warner et al in [18].
In this paper, we use the WDO algorithm for nulling pattern synthesis of linear array antenna with minimum SLL, and desired
FNBW by controlling the array elements excitation amplitude-only. The single, multiple and broad nulls are imposed in the
initial Chebyshev pattern to minimize the undesired interference effect. The synthesis examples illustrate the versatility and
effectiveness of the WDO algorithm over other evolutionary algorithms. The synthesized radiation pattern is almost same as
reported in literature. However, it takes less than 50 iterations to converge as compared to 1500 iterations in [15]. As far as our
knowledge is concerned, this is the first time WDO algorithm is applied to the linear antenna array synthesis by controlling the
array elements excitation amplitude-only. This paper is organized as follows. The WDO algorithm and the problem formulation
are presented in section 2 and section 3 respectively. The numerical results in section 4 followed by conclusion in section 5.

2. WIND DRIVEN OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM

The Wind Driven Optimization (WDO) algorithm is a new heuristic, iterative and population based global optimization
technique with the potential to implement constraints on the search domain similar to particle based optimization for multidimensional and multi-modal problems. The WDO is inspired by the movement of wind in the earths atmosphere to equalize
horizontal imbalances in the air pressure [21]. The movement of an infinitesimally small air packet is examined by the Newtons
second law. Since air density is directly proportional to temperature, areas with high temperatures have risen warm air and
regions with low temperatures have sinking cold air. Due to variations in air density and air pressures at different locations, the
horizontal differences in the air pressure cause the air to move from high to low pressure regions [22]. The pressure gradient
() over a distance [23] is expressed as,

,
,

(1)

The net force on the air packet is given as

=

(2)

Where and is the air density and acceleration of an air parcel respectively. The correspond to all forces acting on the air
packets. The relation between pressure, density and temperature of the air packet are given as
=

(3)

Where, is pressure, is the universal gas constant and is temperature. The flow chart of WDO algorithm is shown in Fig. 1.
Start

Define the fitness (pressure) function, Boundary

condition and Population size

Initialize initial position, velocity of air parcel

Evaluate pressure value for each air parcel

Update velocity using (9) & check its limit

Update position using (10) & check its limit

Max. Number
of
iterations?

Ye
s
Final Solution

Figure 1. Flow Chart of the WDO algorithm.

No

The pressure gradient force can be considered to be the fundamental force that initiates the motion air parcel, but there are other
forces that can also affect its trajectory and speed. The major forces considered in the equation (2) are
A. Pressure Gradient Force (PGF)
The pressure gradient force can be considered to be the fundamental force that initiates the air parcel. Considering the fact that
air has infinite volume (), the pressure gradient force can be expressed as,
=

(4)

B. Frictional Force ( )
The most obvious force causing the wind motion is the pressure gradient force (PGF). A deterring force that opposes the motion
caused by the pressure gradient is the frictional force ( ), which can be simply written as
=

(5)

Where and are coefficient of friction and the velocity vector of the wind respectively.
C. Gravitational Force (Fg)
The gravitational force is included in the algorithm as a force on all N dimensions directing towards the center of the coordinate
system, considering the center of the earth is same as rectangular coordinate system. The gravitational force can be defined as
=

(6)

Where = gravitational constant.

D. Coriolis force ( )
The Coriolis force ( ), arises due to the rotation in the reference time frame caused by the earths rotation. It is given as
= 2

(7)

These forces are incorporated in equation (2)

= + + 2 +

For simplicity, considering time interval = 1and acceleration =

(8)

. Assuming =1, as the air parcel is infinitesimally

small and dimensionless. The velocity update equation [14] is given as

= 1 +

1
1

(9)

Where represent the rank of the particle in the population based on their pressure value at its location, is a constant that
represents the rotation of earth, and , , & are initial velocity, new velocity, current position and optimum
position respectively.

In equation (9) the first term indicating the air packets continues its present path with its velocity proportionally trim down by
friction force while neglecting the other forces acting on it. The force due to gravity in the second term is proportional to the
constant which continuously pulls the air packet from its present position towards its center. In equation (9) the third term
shows the effect of the pressure gradient. For smaller pressure gradient the air packets with higher ranked will be in a position
closer to the optimum position ( ). The fourth term shows the effect of the Coriolis force.
The velocity of the air packet is updated and then the new updated position is given by equation (10)
= +

(10)

3. PROBLEM FORMULATION
An array of antennas is used to meet the requirement of larger coverage, maximum directivity with minimum SLL and better
signal quality. The linear array geometry is shown in Fig. 2.
y

2.
.. n M

Figure 2. 2M-element symmetric linear array antenna

The far field array factor of an array with an even number of isotropic elements (2M), when the array elements are symmetrically
situated and excited around the center of the linear array can be written as

= 2

cos
=1

2
+

(11)

Where , , and are the wavelength, excitations amplitude, position and phase of the nth element, respectively.
The main objective of linear array antenna synthesis is to find an appropriate set of required element excitation amplitude ( )
while keeping the position and phase as constant. The uniform spacing between the array elements is /2 and phase = 0 then
equation (11) becomes

= 2

cos
=1

(12)

The main objective of this design problem is therefore defined by the minimization of the objective (pressure) function. To
minimize the array factor, the pressure function is given as [18]

1 =
()

(13)

Where and are the element excitation amplitude vector and spatial regions mapped by the angle respectively.
When the power in the main beam increases the corresponding power in the sidelobe decreases and vice-versa. To control the
maximum SLL suppression and nulls at desired location, the pressure function is given as [9]

2 =
=1

| | +

(14)

=1

Where [ , ] are the regions of SLL suppression, = and is the number of regions of SLL suppression. In
equation (14) the first term on the right hand side (RHS) is used to suppress the SLL only and the second term is used for null
control only.
The directivity of array antenna can be increased by controlling the FNBW. The pressure function to control the FNBW is given
as
3 = 0, 1
(15)
Where FNBWC and are calculated and desired first null beamwidth respectively.
Due to the increasing population of electromagnetic environment, it is necessary to minimize the unwanted interference by the
undesired signal, to enhance the performance and quality. By controlling the null depth level (NDL) to a desired value, we can
minimize the interference effect and the pressure function as is given [16]

0,

4 =

(16)

=1

Where is the number of required null directions, is desired NDL in dB, and is direction of the null.
The mutual coupling effect can be minimized by considering the uniform spacing between the array elements and minimizing the
DRR. The pressure function to control the dynamic range ratio (DRR) is given as [7]

5 =

0,

(17)

=1

Where C and are calculated and desired dynamic range ratio respectively. Where is given as

a max
a min

. The

maximum and minimum values of the element amplitudes are denoted by a max and a min .
Generally, the main beam of the array pattern is required to be directed towards desired signal and undesired interference signals
from other directions to be suppressed as much as possible. The main objective is the null control in the desired direction to
minimize the interference effect, by finding the appropriate set of the excitation amplitude of the array elements. The final
pressure function is formulated by combining all individual pressure equation given as
= 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5

(18)

=1

=1

0,

=1

=1

+ 0, 1 +

0,

(19)

Where, , , , and are weight factor, however, by properly selecting the its value the desired radiation pattern can be
obtained. In equation (19), first, second, third, fourth and fifth term signifies the minimization of array factor, maximum SLL
suppression and null placement at desired location, controlling FNBW at a desired value, controlling NDL to desired value and
controlling DRR respectively.

4. NUMERICAL RESULTS
To illustrate the simplicity, flexibility and efficacy of the WDO algorithm over the other existing evolutionary optimization
method for placing single, multiple and broad nulls in the direction of maximum interference by controlling the excitation
amplitude-only, four cases of linear antenna array with 20 isotropic elements have been considered. A uniformly spaced, 30-dB
Chebyshev array pattern with 20 isotropic elements is shown in Fig. 3. The parameters used in WDO algorithm are same as
reported in [18] and mentioned in Table 1. During initialization, the position of air packet is kept proportional to the excitation
amplitude of array elements, which expedites the convergence of WDO algorithm. The position of air packet in the solution
space represents the excitation amplitude of array elements. All the simulation work has been performed using Matlab software.

Figure 3. Normalized pattern of 30-dB Chebyshev array antenna for 20-elements

TABLE 1. The parameter values used in the WDO algorithm [18]
Symbol
Itermax
Dim

Quantity
Max. no. of iteration
No. of array elements
Friction coefficient
Gravitational constant

WDO
500
20
0.1
0.1

Symbol
RT
c
umax

Quantity
Constant
Coriolis constant
Velocity

WDO
2.6
0.4
0.25

In the first case, initial 30-dB Chebyshev array antenna is synthesized by controlling the elements amplitude-only using the
WDO algorithm. In order to minimize the interference effect a prescribed single null is placed at 14o, desired FNBW 8.5o,

desired NDL -60 dB, restricted DRR 5 and the two spatial region of interest for maximum suppressed SLL are [8.8398 , 90 ] and
o

[-8.8398 , -90 ]. Fig.4 shows the radiation pattern obtained by the WDO algorithm along with BFO [15]. The normalized
o

amplitude obtained using this algorithm is given in Table 2. The minimum SLL, NDL, FNBW and DRR are achieved -29.5 dB,
-91dB, 8.98o and 4.85 respectively, when a single null is imposed at 14o as mentioned in Table 3.

Figure 4. Normalized pattern obtained using WDO for the 20-elements Chebyshev array antenna with a prescribed at 14o,
suppress SLL are [8.8938 , 90 ] and [-8.8938 , -90 ], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 8.5o and restricted DRR 5
o

The convergence curve is shown in Fig. 5. It is evident from the graph that the pressure value begins at 2.2 and rapidly converge
to a final value at 1.3334 (approximate) in about 50 iterations as compared to 1500 iterations by BFO [15, Fig.5] to find the
optimum sets of controlling parameters (excitation amplitude-only).

Figure 5. A convergence graph of pressure value vs. no. of iterations using the WDO algorithm
Moreover, the WDO algorithm proves to be an efficient and flexible technique for placing multiple nulls at the desired location
in array pattern synthesis and it is considered in second and third cases. In the second case, double nulls are imposed at 14o and
26o with the spatial region of suppressed SLL [8.9118o, 90o] and [-8.9118o, -90o], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 8.5o and
restricted DRR 6.5. The radiation pattern shown in Fig. 6 is compared with [15, Fig. 9] and [24, Fig. 8] and it achieved the
minimum SLL -28.5 dB while preserving the FNBW of 8.9o and the NDL at 14o and 26o are -87.22 dB and -95.2 dB respectively
as mentioned in Table 3.

In the third case, triple nulls imposed at 14o, 26o and 33o, with the spatial region of suppressed SLL [8.8398o, 90o] and [-8.8398o,
-90o], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 8.5o and restricted DRR 6. The radiation pattern depicted in Fig. 7 is compared with
[15, Fig. 10] and [24, Fig. 9] and it achieves the minimum SLL -29 dB while preserving the FNBW of 8.98o and the NDL at 14o,
26o and 33o are -84.1 dB, -92.2 dB and -107.8 dB respectively. Comparing these results with reported work [15], it can be
concluded that using this algorithm, much lower null depth and SLLs are achieved while preserving array pattern similar to
initial Chebyshev pattern. The radiation pattern as shown in Fig. 6 and Fig.7 depicts the ability of the WDO technique for the
array pattern synthesis with multiple null in order to minimize the unwanted interference effect.

Figure 6. Normalized pattern obtained using WDO & BFO [15] for the 20-element Chebyshev array antenna with nulls
prescribed at 14o & 26o, suppress SLL are [8.9118o, 90o] and [-8.9118o, -90o], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 8.5o and
restricted DRR 6.5.

Figure 7. Normalized pattern obtained using WDO and BFO [15] for the 20-element Chebyshev array antenna with nulls
prescribed at 14o , 26o and 33o, suppress SLL are [8.8938o, 90o] and [-8.8938o, -90o], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 8.5o
and restricted DRR 6.

Figure 8. A convergence graph of the pressure value vs. no. of iterations of the using WDO algorithm for synthesis array with
nulls prescribed at 14o and 26o

The convergence curves for two and three nulls are shown in Fig. 8 and 9 respectively. It is evident from the Fig. 8 that the
pressure values begins at 2.2 and rapidly converge to a final value at 0.3334 (approximate) in about 50 iterations. Also the
convergence curve shown in Fig. 9 shows that the pressure value begins at 2.2 and rapidly converge to a final value at 1.3334
(approximate) in about 50 iterations to find the optimum sets of controlling parameters (excitation amplitude-only).

Figure 9. A convergence graph of the pressure value vs. no. of iterations of the using WDO algorithm for synthesis array with
nulls prescribed at 14o, 26o and 33o
Finally, a broad null located at 30o with =5o in the initial Chebyshev pattern is implemented. The simulated result of
radiation pattern is shown in Fig. 10. It is observed that the minimum SLL while preserving the FNBW to 9.01o is -25.4 dB and
NDL are deeper than -64 dB over the spatial region of interest as compared to [15, Fig. 11] and [24, Fig. 7]. This illustrates the
efficacy of the WDO algorithm to synthesis the array pattern with broad null in the desired direction to minimize the interference
effect.

Figure 10. Normalized patterns of the 20-element Chebyshev array antenna with broad null located at 30o with = 5o ,
suppress SLL are [9.0198o, 90o] and [-9.0198o, -90o], desired NDL -60 dB, desired FNBW 9o and restricted DRR 5 are obtained
using WDO & BFO [15].
The convergence curve is shown in Fig. 11. It is evident from the graph that, the pressure value begins at 2.4 and rapidly
converges to a final value at 0.345 (approximate) in about 50 iterations. After analyzing the above convergence curve it is
concluded that by employing WDO algorithm faster convergence is achieved.

Figure 11. A convergence graph of pressure value vs. no. of iterations obtained using WDO algorithm broad null at 30o.
The normalized array excitation amplitude with respect to its center element is mentioned in Table 2. The synthesis results
illustrated in Fig. 3-11 shows that the WDO can easily obtain the desired nulling pattern as close as possible to initial Chebyshev
pattern by controlling the amplitude of array elements. The optimum value of performance parameter such as the NDL,
maximum SLL suppression, and FNBW shows better results as mention in Table 3. It shows that the WDO outperform the BFO
[15], BEES [24] algorithms and other evolutionary algorithm.
TABLE 2. The normalized amplitude of linear array elements (N=20) obtained using WDO for four different cases.
Initial Chebyshev
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Figure 3
1.00000
0.97010
0.91234
0.83102
0.73147
0.62034
0.50461
0.39104
0.28558
0.32561

Obtained by the WDO

Figure 4
1.000000
0.975530
0.903224
0.816313
0.774391
0.605938
0.464294
0.334412
0.205963
0.245301

Figure 6
1.000000
0.986367
0.974095
0.914915
0.695895
0.606295
0.492867
0.363895
0.225095
0.160957

Figure 7
1.000000
0.965230
0.950903
0.871382
0.724720
0.568423
0.499710
0.387385
0.171099
0.222710

Figure 10
1.000000
1.043963
0.998943
0.916700
0.791017
0.543097
0.550084
0.422996
0.224038
0.21790

TABLE 3. Optimum results using different algorithms for initial 30-dB Chebyshev array (N=20).
Single null placed at 14o
Algorith
m
MSLL
(-dB)
NDL
(-dB)

Double nulls placed at 14o and 26o

BEES
[24]
28

BFO
[15]
28.11

WD
O
29.5

BEES
[24]
-

BFO
[15]
-

109.50

113.56

91

More
than
100

More
than
85

FNBW

8.98o

DRR

3.85

3.89

4.85

4.95

4.97

Triple nulls at 14o, 26o and 33o degree

BEES
[24]
-

BFO
[15]
-

More
than
100

More
than
85

8.8o

6.21

4.70

5.32

WDO
28.5
87.22
at
14o

95.2
at
26o

WDO
29
84.1
at
14o

92.2
at
26o

Broad null at 30o with =

5o
BEES
BFO
WDO
[24]
[15]
25.4
More
than
55

More
than
55

More
than
64dB

8.98o

9.01o

5.844

4.16

4.18

4.79

107.8
at
33o

5. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a new evolutionary computation technique WDO inspired by the movement of air in the earths atmosphere, is
applied to steer nulls in an array pattern by elements excitation amplitude-only control to reduce the interference effect. The
single, multiple and broad nulls place in initial Chebyshev array pattern with design specification such as the suppressing
maximum SLL, the first null bandwidth (FNBW), dynamic range ratio (DRR) and null depth level (NDL) in the directions of
maximum interference. The simulation results illustrate its efficacy over other existing evolutionary algorithm. It shows that the
array pattern is similar to the initial Chebyshev pattern, however, its convergence curve illustrates that it takes less than 50
iterations to converge as compared to 1500 iterations by BFO. Thus the proposed technique outperforms the other techniques in
terms of the convergence rate. This algorithm is substitute to other evolutionary algorithm for the researchers of electromagnetic
and antennas community. The control of the array pattern can further be enhanced by using the WDO algorithm to optimize the
complex weight (both the excitation amplitude and the phase) of the array elements, and exploring other non-linear array
geometries.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are thankful to Prof. Z. Bayraktar for providing the source code of the WDO algorithm. Authors are also thankful to
the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD), New Delhi, India for providing financial assistance and supports to do
the research work.

REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

7.
8.
9.

Steyskal, H., R. A. Shore, and R. L. Haupt, "Methods for null control and their effects on the radiation pattern," IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propagat., Vol. 34, 404-409, 1986.
Er, M. H., "Linear antenna array pattern synthesis with prescribed broad nulls," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., Vol. 38,
1496-1498, 1990.
Liao, W. P. and F. L. Chu, "Array pattern synthesis with null steering using genetic algorithms by controlling only the
current amplitudes," Int. J. Electronics, Vol. 86, 445-457, 1999.
Tennant, A., M. M. Dawoud, and A. P. Anderson, "Array pattern nulling by element position perturbations using a genetic
algorithm," Electronics Letters, Vol. 30, 174-176, 1994.
Karaboga, N., K. Guney, and A. Akdagli, "Null steering of linear antenna arrays by using modified touring ant colony
optimization algorithm," Int. J. RF and Microwave Computer Aided Eng., Vol. 12, 375-383, 2002.
Akdagli, A., K. Guney, and D. Karaboga, "Pattern nulling of linear antenna arrays by controlling only the element positions
with the use of improved touring ant colony optimization algorithm," Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications,
Vol. 16, 1423-1441, 2002.
Karaboga, D., K. Guney, and A. Akdagli, "Antenna array pattern nulling by controlling both the amplitude and the phase
using modified touring ant colony optimisation algorithm," Int. J. Electronics, Vol. 91, 241-251, 2004.
Akdagli, A. and K. Guney, "Null steering of linear antenna arrays by phase perturbations using modified tabu search
algorithm," J. Communications Technology and Electronics, Vol. 49, 37-42, 2004.
Khodier, M. M. and C. G. Christodoulou, "Linear array geometry synthesis with minimum sidelobe level and null control
using particle swarm optimization," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., Vol. 53, 2674-2679, 2005.

10. Yang, S. W., Y. B. Gan, and A. Y. Qing, "Antenna-array pattern nulling using a differential evolution algorithm," Int. J. RF
and Microwave Computer Aided Eng., Vol. 14, 57-63, 2004.
11. Guney, K. and M. Onay, "Amplitude-only pattern nulling of linear antenna arrays with the use of bees algorithm," Progress
In Electromagnetics Research, Vol. 70, 21-36, 2007.
12. Khodier, M. M. and C. G. Christodoulou Linear array geometry synthesis with minimum sidelobe level and null control
using particle swarm optimization", IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 53, no. 8, 2674 -2679, 2005
13. Lin, C. A. Y. Qing, and Q. Y. Feng, "Synthesis of unequally spaced antenna arrays by using differential evolution", IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag, Vol. 58, No. 8, 2553-2561, 2010
14. Majhi, B., G. Panda, and A. Choubey, On the development of a new adaptive channel equalizer using bacterial foraging
optimization technique, IEEE Annual conference, New Delhi, India, 1-6, 2006
15. Guney, K., and S. Basbug, Interference suppression of linear antenna array by amplitude-only control using a bacterial
foraging algorithm, Progress in Electromagnetic Research, Vol. 79, 475-497, 2008
16. Goudos, S. K., V. Moysiadou, T. Samaras, K. Siakavara and J. N. Sahalos "Application of a comprehensive learning
particle swarm optimizer to unequally spaced linear array synthesis with sidelobe level suppression and null control", IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 9, 125 -129, 2010
17. Singh, U., H. Kumar, and T. S. Kamal, "Linear array synthesis using biogeography based optimization", Progress in
Electromagnetic Research M, Vol. 11, 25-36, 2010.
18. Bayraktar, Z., M. Komurcu, J. A. Bossard, and D. H Werner, The wind driven optimization technique and its application
in electromagnetics, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 61, no. 3, 771 -779, 2013
19. Boeringer, D. W. and D. H. Werner, "Particle swarm optimization versus genetic algorithm for phased array
synthesis", IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 52, no. 5, 2745 -2757, 2004
20. Wolpert, D. H. and W. G. Macready "No free lunch theorems for optimization", IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 1, pp.67 82, 1997
21. Ahrens, C. D., Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment, 2003 :Thomsona
Brook/Cole Pressure Gradient, 2012 :Wikipedia [online] Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_gradient
22. Stull, R. B., Meteorology for Scientists and Engineers, 1999 :Brooks Cole
23. Bannon P. R., The Dynamic Atmosphere, A Theoretical Perspective, 2003 :The Pennsylvania State Univ., Dept.
Meteorology, Atmospheric Dynamics
24. Guney, K., and M. Onay, "Amplitude-only pattern nulling of linear antenna arrays with the use of bees algorithm," Progress
In Electromagnetics Research, Vol. 70, 21-36, 2007.
25. Bhargav, A., and N. Gupta, Multiobjective Genetic Optimization of Nonuniform Linear Array With Low Sidelobes and
Beamwidth, IEEE Antennas wireless Propag. Letts., Vol. 12, 1547- 1549, 2013