Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14

I.

INTRODUCTION

ATR (automatic target recognition) based on


Gabor Filter Approach to Joint high-resolution range profiles (HRRP) is considered
as a highly promising technique. HRRP offers a very
Feature Extraction and Target simple and rapid way to characterize a target via radar
range profiles. HRRP is essentially a one-dimensional
Recognition radar image of the target and is very sensitive to
time-shift and target-aspect variation. A traditional
approach for HRRP is “average template” which
averages the HRRPs in one aspect interval and
makes classification based on the correlation of input
data [1—3]. The modification approaches to average
FENG ZHU
template adopt more information including target
XIAN-DA ZHANG, Senior Member, IEEE aspect and velocity which are gotten or estimated
YA-FENG HU from the radar system [4—6].
Tsinghua University The disadvantages of the above methods are
that their feature extractions to HRRP ignore its
dynamic property, i.e., nonstationarity. The HRRPs
for training the recognition system are sampled
This paper presents a new approach of improving automatic in one aspect interval during the course of the
target recognition (ATR) performance by tuning adaptively the target’s movement, which can be deemed that those
Gabor filter. The Gabor filter adopts the network structure of HRRPs come from the same nonstationary stochastic
two layers, and its input layer constitutes the adaptive nonlinear process. For generalization of the recognition
feature extraction part, whereas the weights between output system, the movement factor should be out of feature
layer and input layer constitute the linear classifier. From the
extraction. As such, the extracted features should be
insenstive to the target’s movement. So, the degree of
statistic property of high-resolution range profile (HRRP), its
nonstationarity is proposed in this paper for measuring
extracted nonstationarity degree of features is tracked to extract
and aiding the stationary feature extraction to HRRPs
the discriminative features of Gabor atoms. Two experimental
in one aspect interval, which includes movement
examples show that the Gabor filter approach with simple factor comparing the above methods.
structure has higher recognition rate in radar target recognition Our aim of the feature extraction is also to extract
from HRRP as compared with several existing methods. some discriminative features from the raw data
collected in data acquisition phase. Such features
are described as a feature vector. The simplest
feature vector of a target signal consists of its linear
expansion coefficients, whereas the most common
linear expansion is the Fourier transform. However,
the Fourier transform can only provide a poor
representation of functions well localized in time.
Recently, there has been an increasing interest in
joint time-frequency analysis as feature extractors of
signals; see, e.g. [7]—[14] and references therein.
Adaptive time-frequency analysis
Manuscript received August 16, 2005; revised June 17 and
December 18, 2006; released for publication December 10, 2007. including wavelet-based filterbanks [15] and
Gabor-expansion-based filterbanks [14, 16] have
IEEE Log No. T-AES/45/1/932000. shown promise for both signal representation and
Refereeing of this contribution was handled by V. C. Chen. classification. Adaptive time-frequency analysis can be
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
regarded as generalization of the 2-D time-frequency
Foundation of China under Grant 60675002, and funded by plane to 3-D time-frequency-scale (TFS) space. As
Basic Research Foundation of Tsinghua National Laboratory for viewed from the signal classification, there is more
Information Science and Technology (TNList). useful information in 3-D TFS space than in the 2-D
Authors’ current addresses: F. Zhu, Ericsson Research, China time-frequency or time-scale plane. When we apply
Radio Research Lab, China; X.-D. Zhang and Y.-F Hu, Dept. of the 3-D TFS space in signal classification, a key
Automation, Tsinghua University, National Laboratory of Tsinghua problem is how to find a set of bases that play the
Information Science and Technology, Beijing 100084, China, most important role in signal classification. Such bases
E-mail: (feng.zhu@ericsson.com).
can be found by LDB (local discriminant bases), DP
(discriminant pursuit) and LDB-DP (combination of
0018-9251/09/$25.00 °
c 2009 IEEE DP and LDB) methods [17].

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009 17

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Recently, Shi and Zhang [18] have proposed
a Gabor atom neural network (GNN) for feature
extraction and signal classification. The GNN has
higher recognition rate and better feature extraction
performance in radar range profiles as compared
with the above DP/LDB methods. However, GNN
consists of the well-known multilayer feedforward
neural network which is the signal classification part
as well as aiding in feature extraction. As a result,
the features extracted by GNN are not obvious and Fig. 1. Gabor filter’s structure with input layer which is
efficient enough. Furthermore, GNN’s classification nonlinear feature extraction part, weights and output layer
performance depends on the LDB initialization, which constituting the linear classification part. In the bottom, signals
reflects its weak ability in finding the discriminative (HRRPs) xi (i = 1, : : : , N) are parallel input to K Gabor atoms
g1 , : : : , gK . − unit indicates inner product of Gabor atom gk and
bases.
input signal xi and outputs Áik = jhgk , xi ij. © unit represents
By using the degree of nonstationarity, the weighted sum of K outputs of input layer, e.g. mth node in output
Gabor filter is proposed in this paper to search for PK
layer, yim = Á w where wkm is connection weight between
k=1 ik km
the discriminative Gabor atom bases and efficient kth Gabor atom node and mth output node, and m = 1, : : : , M.
signal classification from HRRPs, which is adaptive
to suppress the influence of target movement. It
should be noted that the proposed approach is joint where
2

feature extraction and classification for multi signal g(t) = 21=4 e¡¼t (2)
vectors in contrast to the single signal vector’s feature is a prototype of basic functions of the Gabor
extraction [19—20]. As a result, the main contribution transform volume. The shift-parameter u,
of this paper is the adaptive Gabor filter approach for modulation-parameter », and scale-parameter s in
joint feature extractions and classification of multi (1) have the corresponding physical meanings for an
HRRPs. aircraft [18]:
1) the shift-parameter u corresponds to the
II. HRRP FEATURE EXTRACTION IN ISAR aircraft’s key scattering centers such as engine and
inlet ducts;
The performance of a recognition system or
2) the modulation-parameter » is associated with
scheme is closely associated with radar and target. It
the resonance and dispersive mechanisms that are
is important that the design of a recognition system
relevant to the aircraft’s material coatings;
including feature extraction should consider both
3) the scale-parameter s is related to the aircraft’s
the radar and the targets. The radar applied in our
geometric size.
research is ISAR (inverse synthetic aperture radar).
ISAR is the ground-to-air surveillance radar and
can achieve high resolution in range with LFM III. GABOR FILTER FOR RECOGNITION
(linear frequency modulating) technology. The radar
works on a C band with bandwidth of 400 MHz, To determine several optimal basic functions
i.e., the range resolution of the radar range profile is and corresponding Gabor atom transform for signal
about 0.375 m. This single polarization radar’s pulse representation from a 3-D TFS space, we propose a
frequency is 400 Hz and sampling rate is 10 MHz. Gabor filter here, whose structure is shown in Fig. 1.
The electromagnetic scattering property of This is a two-layer filter whose inputs are N signals
a target plays a significant role in the feature (HRRPs) fxi , i = 1, : : : , Ng with xi = [xi (1), : : : , xi (L)]T
extractions from HRRPs. From the viewpoint of where L is the length of signal (the number of range
electromagnetic scattering, the target electromagnetic bin in HRRP), and outputs are fym, m = 1, : : : , Mg.
model corresponds to the Fresnel (optical) region The goal of the Gabor filter is to classify N signals
where the radar wavelength is much shorter than the into P classes of signals using maximum interclass
target size. An HRRP is the phasor sum of the echoes separability. It should be noted that P Gabor filters are
from different scatterers on the target located within a used for classifying P classes of signals because each
resolution cell. Gabor filter distinguishes a class of signal from the
It is shown in [7], [14], [18] that the Gabor atom other classes of signals.
is a good tool for feature extraction of high-resolution Let fgk , k = 1, : : : , Kg be the kth-scaled Gabor atom
radar’s targets. The Gabor atom can be written in a vectors, where gk = [gk (1), : : : , gk (L)]T , and gk (t) is
simple form as follows: defined by
μ ¶ μ ¶
1 t ¡ u j»t 1 t ¡ uk j»k t
gu,»,s (t) = p g e (1) gk (t) = p g e , t = 1, : : : , L (3)
s s sk sk

18 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
where sk , uk , and »k are called the scale, shift, and
modulation parameters of Gabor atom transform,
respectively. The Gabor atoms require adaptive
adjustment until some cost function is minimized
during the learning phase.
The Gabor filter used in this paper has the
following two layers.
1) Input Layer: It has K nodes Á1 , : : : , ÁK called
the Gabor atom nodes. Here, the active function of
each Gabor atom node takes the absolute function,
Fig. 2. Testing scheme adopts P trained Gabor filters for
and Áik denotes the output of the kth Gabor atom node
classifying input test signal x̂. Decision that x̂ belongs to which
corresponding to the input signal vector xi . Thus the class depends on Gabor filter corresponding to maximum output
output Áik is defined as the absolute value of the inner among P Gabor filters.
product of the Gabor atom gk = g(uk , »k , sk ) and input
signal xi , namely,
¯Z μ ¶ ¯ weights and the Gabor atom parameters are adjusted
¯ 1 t ¡ uk ¡j»k t ¯ to minimize the sum of squared error between the
Áik = jhgk , xi ij = ¯¯ p g ¤ e xi (t)dt¯¯
sk sk desired output vector di and actual output yi of the
neural network for all input signal vector xi , i.e.,
(4)
N M
which represents the correlation between the kth 1 XX
Gabor atom gk and ith signal xi . E= (dij ¡ yij )2 = min (6)
2
2) Output Layer: It consists of M nodes y1 , : : : , yM i=1 j=1
that are linear units. The outputs Áik of the kth Gabor which is called the back-propagated error. As done
atom node in the input layer are weighted by wkm
in [18], the parameters of the Gabor atom and the
and then used as the input of the mth node yim in the
neural network’s weights are adjusted simultaneously
output layer when the input layer inputs the signal xi ,
during the training phase. However, such a joint
i.e.,
XK adjustment has two deficiencies: 1) the GNN’s better
yim = Áik wkm , m = 1, : : : , M (5) classification performance depends on the LDB
k=1 initialization [18]; 2) the neural network’s construction
and computation need skill and computation resources
where M is usually set to 1 for convenience, namely,
such as the hidden layer’s function, number of the
the Gabor filter has the only one output node.
nodes, and the corresponding weights’ adjustment.
As shown in Fig. 1, the whole filter is divided
To cope with these deficiencies, this paper
into two parts: the input layer is the nonlinear feature
proposes a new Gabor filter for joint nonlinear
extraction part, whereas the weights and the output
layer constitute the linear classification part. The feature extraction and linear classifying, which has
weights are the Gabor filter’s weights during the better performances than GNN. The basic idea of
training phase and the linear classifier’s weights the new Gabor filter is that the parameters of Gabor
during the testing phase, respectively. atom and the weights of Gabor filter are adjusted
In the training phase, the Gabor filter not only separately.
learns adequate decision functions defined by the In the training phase of target recognition, the
weight coefficients, but also looks for the optimal Gabor filter performs the following two adaptive
parts of the parameters space suitable for a reliable algorithms: 1) the first (atom) algorithm adjusts
categorization of N known input signals x1 , : : : xN to adaptively parameters of the Gabor atom; 2) for any
P classes. In the testing phase, the output ym (m = set of given Gabor atom’s parameters, the second
1, : : : , M) provides the possible class information of (weight) algorithm adjusts adaptively the weights of
signal vector xi = [xi (1), : : : , xi (L)]T where M is set to the Gabor filter. If a given set of the Gabor atom’s
1. Fig. 2 shows the testing scheme which adopts P parameters can make the second algorithm minimize
trained Gabor filters for classifying the input testing some objective function, then output a set of extracted
signal x̂. As a result, the Gabor filter’s classification features; otherwise, stop the second algorithm, and
performance relies mainly on feature extraction which return to Step 1 to get a new set of the Gabor atom’s
is also the key of our research. parameters. Such a process including Steps 1 and 2 is
called one period in the training phase.
IV. DEGREE OF NONSTATIONARITY AND FEATURE It is important to use a measure of features to
EXTRACTION determine continuing of the second (weight) algorithm
or restarting of the first (atom) algorithm. In the LDB
In [18], the method of feature extraction using method [17], this measure is the Fisher’s classifying
GNN is that both the neural network’s two layers separability among the input signals. Here, we use

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 19

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the degree of nonstationarity as the feature’s measure where ±v2 is the variance of v(n) in (8). The excess
for the following reason: In the Gabor filter shown MSE is defined as
in Fig. 1, the real input of the adaptive filter is Áik
in (4) which is the extracted feature, and the weight Jex (n) = J(n) ¡ Jmin : (12)
of the adaptive filter is wkm in (5) which constitutes The above concepts (10)—(12) can be applied in the
the linear classifier in tesing phase. If the nonlinear analysis of stochastic process.
feature extracted is efficient to signal representation In order to provide a clear definition of the “slow”
and classification, the ideal linear classifier exists, and “fast” statistical variations of the model, Macchi
i.e., from the viewpoint of adaptive filter theory, this [22] introduces the following definition of the degree
adaptive filter can track the time-varying process of of nonstationarity:
input signal and obtain the desired results. As such, · ¸1=2
the degree of nonstationarity is better than the Fisher’s Efj! H (n)Á(n)j2 g
®= (13)
classification separability when performing feature Efjv(n)j2 g
extraction due to the well-known nonstationarity of
HRRP from the maneuvering target. where Efj! H (n)Á(n)j2 g is the expectation of the
For convenience, we suppose that the Gabor squared magnitude of the inner product of the process
filter in Fig. 1 has the only one output node, namely, noise !(n) and the input vector Á(n), and Efjv(n)j2 g is
M = 1. The weight of a Gabor filter is a K £ 1 vector, the average power of the measurement noise v(n). The
denoted by w which represents the linear classifier in degree of nonstationarity, ®, bears a useful relation to
the testing phase. the misadjustment ° of the adaptive filter:
The popular time-varying model for a Jex (1)
nonstationary environment is governed by two basic °= ¸ ®2 (14)
Jmin
processes [21].
1) First-Order Markov Process: The unknown where Jex (1) is the steady-state value of the excess
dynamic equations of environment are modeled by MSE in (12) and Jmin is the minimum MSE in (11).
a transversal filter whose tap-weight vector w(n) Regarding (14), we have the following two
undergoes a first-order Markov process: noteworthy remarks.

w(n + 1) = cw(n) + !(n) (7) REMARK 1 For slow statistical variations of the
environment, ® is small. This means that it should be
where c is a fixed parameter of the model and !(n) is possible to build an adaptive filter that can track the
the process noise vector that is white and zero mean. time-varying system.
It is assumed that the value of parameter c is very
close to unity. REMARK 2 When the statistical variations of the
2) Multiple Regression: The desired response, environment are too fast, ® may be greater than unity.
denoted by d(n), is governed by the multiple linear In such a case, the misadjustment produced by the
regression model adaptive filter exceeds 100 percent, which means
that there is no advantage to be gained in building an
d(n) = wH (n)Á(n) + v(n) (8) adaptive filter to solve the tracking problem.

where Á(n) is the input vector and v(n) is the In this paper, we focus mainly on the problem
measurement noise which is assumed to be white with of pattern classification. As a result, the degree of
zero mean and variance ±v2 . But in many applications, nonstationarity in one period is calculated as
the tap-weight vector w(n) does not obey this "P #1=2
N H 2
stochastic process of multiple regression. So, we use n=1 j! (n)Á(n)j
®= PN (15)
another model n=1 jv(n)j
2

d(n) = ŵH (n)Á(n) + e(n) (9) where N is the number of known input signals and
this equation is applied at every N iterations in one
where e(n) is the error that is not the Gaussian white
period of adaptive filter.
noise as v(n), and ŵH (n) is the tap-weight vector that
When (®)2 is used as the step size controlling
does not obey the model (8).
the adaptive Gabor filter (classifier), we have the
Let the mean square error (MSE) at iteration n be
following three important observations.
J(n) = Efje(n)j2 g (10) 1) Since ® is variational in the training phase, it
where Ef¢g represents ensemble-average. From [21], plays a role of a time-varying step size controlling the
we know that the minimum MSE is given by adaptive Gabor filter.
2) A smaller ® implies that the corresponding
Jmin = ±v2 (11) classifier’s performance is better, or vice versa.

20 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3) If ® in (15) keeps decreasing, the training where M is the number of the nodes of the output
of the Gabor filter can bring the ideal classifier. layer. From (5), it follows that
Furthermore, ® is equal to 0 if the whole features
extracted are totally linear separable. @yim
= wkm : (22)
@Áik
Based on the above results, we have the following
principle for feature extraction: If ® increases in Substituting (22) into (21) gives
some period of training, this period should stop and M
the parameter of the Gabor atom should be adjusted @E X
=¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm : (23)
for the new period of training. Moreover, ® can be @Áik
m=1
applied in the learning rate of the Gabor atom’s
parameter, as shown in the next section. Hence, (18)—(20) can be rewritten as

XX N M
V. GABOR FILTER’S TRAINING ALGORITHM AND @E @Á
=¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik (24)
TESTING ALGORITHM @uk @uk
i=1 m=1

The Gabor filter’s training is divided into two @E XX N M



parts: parameter training of the Gabor atom and =¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik (25)
@sk @sk
the weights training of the adaptive filter. The i=1 m=1
Gabor atom’s parameters are adjusted by the delta N M
@E XX @Á
rule according to the back-propagated error in (6), =¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik (26)
while the weights are adjusted by the adaptive @»k @»k
i=1 m=1
filtering algorithm such as least mean square (LMS),
decorrelative least mean square (DLMS) [23], respectively.
recursive least square (RLS), etc. It is assumed that for P classes of signals,
Let ¯k denote one of the kth Gabor atom node’s x1 (L), : : : , xN1 (L) are the observation data vectors of
parameters including the shift-parameter uk , the the first-class signal, and xN1 +1 (L), : : : , xN1 +N2 (L) are the
modulation-parameter »k , and the scale-parameter sk . observation data vectors of the second-class signal,
According to the delta rule, the adjustment of ¯k is whereas xN1 +¢¢¢+NP¡1 +1 (L), : : : , xN (L) are the observation
given by data vectors of the Pth-class signal.
@E In each period of the training cycle, the Gabor
¢¯k = ¡´ (16) parameters are kept invariant while the weights
@¯k
are updated by the adaptive filter’s algorithm to
where ´ is the learning rate defined by reduce the error E. If this period must stop due to
´ = ® 2 ´0 (17) the increase of the degree of nonstationarity ®, the
Gabor parameters should be adjusted by using (16),
with ® and ´0 being the degree of nonstationarity of and the next period of training begins. This process
the extracted feature signals in the last training period is repeated until the error E is settled down to a
and the initial learning rate, respectively. minimum. When convergence is achieved, the Gabor
The partial derivatives of E with respect to the atom nodes represent the optimum parts of the TFS
shift-parameter uk , the scale-parameter »k , and the space in the sense that they are reliable for a linear
modulation-parameter sk of the kth Gabor atom node categorization.
are, respectively, given by For real signals, the Gabor atom is real as well. In
N such a case, (4) can be calculated as
@E X @E @Á
= ik
, (18) ¯Z μ ¶ ¯
@uk @Áik @uk ¯ 1 ¤ t ¡ uk ¯
i=1 ¯
Áik = ¯ p g cos(»k t)xi (t)dt¯¯
sk sk
N
@E X @E @Áik ¯Z p ¯
¯ 42 ¯
= , (19) ¯ 2 2 ¯
@sk @Áik @sk = ¯ p e¡¼(t¡uk ) =sk cos(»k t)xi (t)dt¯ : (27)
i=1 ¯ sk ¯
N
@E X @E @Áik In the discrete-time case, the integral in above
= (20)
@»k @Áik @»k equation can be replaced by the sum, namely,
i=1
¯ L p ¯
where N is the number of the signals used as the ¯X 4 2 ¯
¯ ¡¼(tl ¡uk )2 =sk2 ¯
training samples. Using (6), we have Áik = ¯ p e cos(»k tl )xi (tl )¯ : (28)
¯ sk ¯
l=1
X M
@E @y
=¡ (dim ¡ yim ) im (21) The partial derivatives of Áik with respect to uk , »k ,
@Áik @Áik and sk of the kth Gabor atom node are, respectively,
m=1

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 21

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
given by filter such as LMS, DLMS, RLS. We adopt the
L · p ¸ RLS algorithm here for the following reasons.
@Áik Á X 2 4
2 ¡¼(tl ¡uk )2 =s2 First, the convergence rate of the RLS algorithm is
= ik ¼(t ¡ u k ) p e k cos(» t )x (t )
k l i l
@uk μik sk2 sk typically an order of magnitude faster than that of
l=1
the LMS algorithm. Second, the steady value of the
(29)
L μ ¶ ensemble-average squared error produced by the
@Áik Áik X 1 2 RLS algorithm is much smaller than that of the LMS
= ¡ + ¼(t ¡ uk )2
@sk μik 2sk sk3 algorithm because the RLS algorithm produces zero
l=1
p misadjustment in theory. As a result, the weight vector
4
2 2 2
wm (m = 1, : : : , M) is adjusted by the RLS algorithm as
£ p e¡¼(tl ¡uk ) =sk cos(»k tl )xi (tl ) (30)
sk follows.
L · p ¸ Initialize the algorithm by setting wm (0) =
@Áik Áik X 4
2 ¡¼(tl ¡uk )2 =s2
= ¡tl p e k sin(» t )x (t )
k l i l (31) [1 ¢ ¢ ¢ 1]T , the K £ K matrix Bm (0) = (0:01 £ IK£K )¡1 ,
@»k μik sk
l=1 where Bm is refered as the inverse correlation matrix.
For each instant of time n = 1, 2, : : :, compute
where
p Bm (n ¡ 1)Á(n)
L
X 4
2 ¡¼(t ¡u )2 =s2 km (n) = (37)
μik = p e l k k cos(»k tl )xi (tl ): (32) ¸ + ÁT (n)Bm (n ¡ 1)Á(n)
sk
l=1 em (n) = dm (n) ¡ ym (n) = dm (n) ¡ wTm (n ¡ 1)Á(n)
Using (29)—(31), we can rewrite (24)—(26) as (38)
@E XX N M
Á
=¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik wm (n) = wm (n ¡ 1) + km (n)em (n) (39)
@uk μik
i=1 m=1
Bm (n) = ¸¡1 Bm (n ¡ 1) ¡ ¸¡1 km (n)ÁT (n)Bm (n ¡ 1)

L
2
p
4
2 2 2
¸
£ ¼(t ¡ uk ) p e¡¼(tl ¡uk ) =sk cos(»k tl )xi (tl ) (40)
sk2 sk
l=1 T
where Á(n) = [Án1 , : : : , ÁnK ] is the input vector and ¸
(33) is the forgetting factor.
@E XX N M
Á Given training N samples x1 , : : : , xN and the
=¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik
@sk μik number K of the feature parameter sets, the following
i=1 m=1
training algorithm can extract the pth class target’s K
L μ ¶
X 1 2 feature parameter triples fuk , »k , sk g, k = 1, : : : , K.
£ ¡ + ¼(t ¡ uk )2
2sk sk3 ALGORITHM 1 (Training Algorithm for the pth Class
l=1
p
4
Target)
2 2 2
Step 1 Initialize the Gabor atom parameters uk , »k ,
£ p e¡¼(tl ¡uk ) =sk cos(»k tl )xi (tl ) (34)
sk
sk and the weights W.
Step 2 Calculate the Gabor atom using the
@E XX N M
Á
=¡ (dim ¡ yim )wkm ik initialized Gabor atom parameters (2) and (3).
@»k μik Compute (28) for all Gabor atom nodes, where the
i=1 m=1
desired output di1 = ¢ ¢ ¢ = dim = 1(if xi 2 Âp ) or ¡1 (if
L · p ¸
X 4
2 2 2 xi 2
= Âp ).
£ ¡tl p e¡¼(tl ¡uk ) =sk sin(»k tl )xi (tl ) : (35)
sk Step 3 Input Áik (i = 1, : : : , N, k = 1, : : : , K) into the
l=1
adaptive filter in the Gabor filter periodically, where N
Let Âp denote the pth class signal or target. The is the period.
K £ M weight matrix W in Fig. 1 for classifying the Step 4 Adjust the weights using (37)—(40) in the
pth class of signal from the other classes of signals is RLS algorithm.
given by Step 5 Compute the degree of nonstationarity ® by
2w w ¢¢¢ w 3
11 12 1M (15) for every N iterations, and save the result. If ® is
6w w22 ¢¢¢ w2M 7 the first value calculated in one period of training, go to
6 21 7
W = [w1 w2 ¢ ¢ ¢ wM ] = 6
6 .. .. .. ..
7
7 Step 4; otherwise, continue the following steps.
4 . . . . 5 Step 6 Compare the current ® with the last ®. If
wK1 wK2 ¢¢¢ wKM ® decreases, then perform Step 7; otherwise, adjust
adaptively the Gabor atom’s parameter, save the
(36) weights and go to Step 8.
where the weight vector wm (m = 1, : : : , M) can Step 7 Evaluate the error E in (6). If E is less
be updated by several algorithms of the adaptive than a chosen threshold, then the training phase is

22 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
finished, and go to Step 10; otherwise, return to determined in the training phase, where N = N1 + ¢ ¢ ¢ +
Step 4. Nc , and Ni denotes the number of s 2 −i (the subset of
Step 8 Use the propagated error of the Gabor the feature vectors of the ith class signal). Then, the
atom node to adjust the Gabor atom parameters within-class scatter matrix Sw is a K £ K matrix given
according to (16), (17), and (33)—(35). by [25]
Xc
Step 9 Return to Step 2 to get a new triple of the
Sw = Si (42)
Gabor atom’s parameters, and repeat the above steps.
i=1
Step 10 Save K Gabor atom parameter triples
denoted by fu(p) (p) (p) (p)
k , »k , sk g and the weight matrix W .
where X
Si = (s ¡ mi )(s ¡ mi )T (43)
REMARK When Algorithm 1 is implemented for
s2−i
p = 1, : : : , P in a parallel way, we can extract the
respective feature parameter sets of P classes of and
targets and obtain P trained Gabor filter. 1 X
mi = s: (44)
Ni
Once the feature parameter sets are extracted s2−i

for each class signal or target and P Gabor filters Define a total mean vector
are trained, the following algorithm can be used to c
recognize which class of signal or target is associated 1 X 1 X
mi = s= Ni mi : (45)
with a testing sample. Ni s Ni
i=1
ALGORITHM 2 (Testing Algorithm) Then, the K £ K between-class scatter matrix is
Step 1 Input the pth Gabor atom’s parameter specified by [25]
triples fu(p) (p) (p)
k , »k , sk g and its weight matrix W saved c
X
in Algorithm 1.
Sb = Ni (mi ¡ m)(mi ¡ m)T : (46)
Step 2 Compute the input layer’s outputs Ák =
i=1
jhgk , xij, and set Á = [Á1 , : : : , ÁK ].
Step 3 Calculate the M £ 1 output vector Let Span(U) be the K-dimensional subspace
spanned by the columns of the K £ K matrix U, and
y = WH Á: define the cost or criterion function
Step 4 By checking all outputs ym , m = 1, : : : , M Q T
diag Ub Sb U
close to 1 or ¡1, one makes a decision whether the J(U) = Q T
(47)
testing sample x belongs to the pth class signal (target) diag Uw Sw U

or not. Q
where diag A represents the product of all the
Algorithm 2 can be implemented for p = 1, : : : , P in diagonal elements of the matrix A. We use J as
a parallel way. a measure to evaluate the effectiveness of class
discrimination for given feature vectors and refer to
Span(U) as a measure to evaluate the effectiveness of
VI. EVALUATION OF EFFECTIVENESS OF CLASS class discriminative subspace if
DISCRIMINATION
U = arg max J(U): (48)
In this section, we consider how to evaluate the U2RK£K

effectiveness of class discrimination. Divergence is To solve this nonlinear optimization problem, we


a measure of distance or dissimilarity between two rewrite (47) in the following equivalent form:
classes of signals. It can be used to determine feature
QK K
Y
ranking and to evaluate the effectiveness of class uTi Sb ui uTi Sb ui
discrimination. Let K be the number of triple features, J= QKi=1 T = (49)
i=1 ui Sw ui
uTi Sw ui
namely the number of Gabor atoms in Fig. 1. Let the i=1

extracted features be where ui is the ith column vector of the matrix U.


T Clearly, J is maximized if and only if
si = [Ái1 , Ái2 , : : : , ÁiK ] (41)
where Áik is the absolute value of the inner product of uTi Sb ui
Ji (ui ) = (50)
the Gabor atom gk = g(uk , »k , sk ) and input signal xi . uTi Sw ui
For the c-class problem, as the generalization are maximized for i = 1, : : : , K. The expression
of Fisher’s linear discriminant involving c ¡ 1 (50) is well known in mathematical physics as the
discriminant functions, we consider the projection generalized Rayleigh quotient. It is easy to show that a
of all the K-dimensional feature vectors onto a vector ui that maximizes Ji must satisfy
K-dimensional discriminant space. Suppose we
have a set of K-dimension feature vectors s1 , : : : , sN Sb ui = ¸i Sw ui (51)

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 23

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE I
Parameters of Reduced Scale Aircraft Models and Radar

Aircraft Model Central Frequency (MHz) Bandwidth (MHz) Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Scale

B-52 14640 5280 0.69 0.815 0.17 1:91


Q-6 15656.25 4687.5 0.7 0.435 0.19 1:20
Q-7 15656.25 4687.5 1.048 0.477 0.22 1:15

which is just a generalized eigenvalue problem of the TABLE II


matrix pencil fS, Sw g: Recognition Rate (%) of Seven Different methods For Example 1
The above analysis suggests the following
Training Testing Sets
algorithm for finding the optimum class discriminative Classification Methods Set 1 2 3 4
subspace.
Range Profiles 91.4 89.8 90.8 90.7 91.6
ALGORITHM 3 (Optimum Discriminative Subspace) FFT 78.8 77.5 76.4 77.0 78.5
Step 1 Use (42) and (46) to compute the Gabor Transform 89.2 84.0 85.7 84.4 84.5
within-class matrix Sw and the between-class scatter Wavelet Transform 85.1 85.3 85.1 84.5 84.2
LDB-DP 89.2 88.7 88.6 88.6 89.0
matrix Sb , respectively. GNN (initialized randomly) 91.6 90.7 91.1 91.1 92.0
Step 2 Perform the generalized eigenvalue Gabor filter (initialized 96.3 95.5 95.2 96.1 95.9
decomposition of the matrix pencil fSb , Sw g, giving the randomly)
generalized eigenvalue and eigenvector pair (¸i , ui ) such
that ¸1 ¸ ¸2 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¸ ¸K .
vectors, and use these coefficients as the inputs of the
Step 3 Take Uc¡1 = [u1 , : : : , uc¡1 ] whose column
RBF neural network.
vectors span the (c ¡ 1)-dimensional optimum
4) Wavelet transform method: Select wavelet
discriminative subspace.
transform coefficients of range profiles as feature
Once the K £ (c ¡ 1) matrix Uc¡1 is obtained by vectors, and use them as the inputs of the RBF neural
using Algorithm 3, we can compute the projection network. Here, the Daubechies wavelet is used.
of each given K-dimensional feature vector onto the 5) The LDB-DP method [17]: Use the LDB-DP
(c ¡ 1)-dimensional optimum discriminant subspace, method for feature extraction and linear discriminative
yielding analysis to construct the classifier.
yi = UTc¡1 si , i = 1, : : : , N (52) 6) GNN method with random initialization [18].
7) Gabor filter method with random initialization.
which can provide an intuitional figure of the
divergence of c-class targets on the (c ¡ 1)- EXAMPLE 1 Aircraft Models in Microwave Anechoic
dimensional optimum discriminant subspace. In Chamber: Consider range profiles of three different
the following section on experimental results, this scaled aircraft models collected in a microwave
projection will be computed for the Gabor atom anechoic chamber for classification purposes. The
feature vectors consisting of GNN and Gabor filter original data were measured at stepped-frequency
to compare their discriminative capabilities for aircraft mode. The three models are B-52, Q-6, and Q-7. The
targets. parameters of target models and radar are shown in
Table I. By inverse Fourier transforming the raw data
which is computed according to the reduced scale,
VII. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES 1084 range profiles are obtained, in which 322 range
profiles are from B-52 whereas 311 and 451 profiles
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the Gabor
correspond to Q-6 and Q-7, respectively. The actual
filter in signal classification, we present two numerical
data size of each profile is 101. The aspect angles
examples of radar target recognition in this section. In
of the range profiles change from 0± to 155± (0± is
order to verify the Gabor filter method of this paper,
defined as the head direction) with average interval of
we compare the following seven methods for signal
0:43± , whereas the elevation angles remain constant at
classification.
5± and the SNR is about 25 dB.
1) The range profile method: Use directly original
range profiles as the inputs of the radial basis function The range profile set for each aircraft model is
(RBF) neural networks (classifier) whose hidden layer subdivided into five subsets: one for training and
consists of 25 multivariate Gaussian functions [24]. others for testing. We pick the sets as equally spaced
2) The fast Fourier transform (FFT) method: Use points throughout the original data, i.e., the first subset
the magnitude of the Fourier transform of range consists of the 1st, 6th, 11th, etc. range profiles in the
profiles as the input of the RBF neural network. original set, and the second subsets consists of the
3) Gabor transform method: Choose Gabor 2nd, 7th, 12th, etc. range profiles in the original set.
transform coefficients of range profiles as feature In the learning stage, only the first subset is used for

24 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE III
B-52’s Gabor Atom Parameters u (time shift), » (frequency modulation) and s (scale) of GNN

Number of Features in GNN


Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

u 41.7 42.4 43.2 43.8 44.1 45.7 46.5 47.6 44.1 51.2 54.2 54.3 55.4 57.6 59.7
» 0.270 0.295 0.394 0.393 5.932 5.838 0.391 5.972 5.932 0.311 0.410 5.948 0.039 0.856 5.899
s 48.3 119.2 1.9 67.2 56.9 25.9 86.0 56.9 59.6 53.6 77.2 34.8 25.9 25.4 108.3

TABLE IV
B-52’s Gabor Atom Parameters u (time shift), » (frequency modulation) and s (scale) of Gabor Filter

Number of Features in Gabor Filter

Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

u 32.2 37.1 41.5 42.2 43.2 45.8 46.2 47.4 48.5 51.1 54.6 55.6 56.3 61.1 64.3
» 9.753 9.334 0.213 0.298 0.344 5.891 0.313 5.995 6.070 0.332 0.456 0.470 0.348 0.812 6.469
s 110.1 75.9 48.2 56.9 1.4 25.2 86.9 56.2 107.0 53.6 77.4 25.4 25.8 107.3 43.7

Fig. 3. Training data of B-52. Fig. 5. Training data of Q-7.

Gabor filter are detailed in Table III and Table IV,


separately. The time-shift parameters, denoted by u, of
GNN are in the range from 40 to 60, whereas those
of the Gabor filter are out of that range sometimes.
For example, in Table IV, the first, second, and last
two time-shift parameters are out of the range from
40 to 60. It should be emphasized that the time shift
parameter corresponds to the position of the scatterer.
From Fig. 3, we can intuitively see the positions of
a B-52’s main scatterer are not only limited in the
range bins from 40 to 60 but also out of that range as
the u of the Gabor filter shows. Besides, the Gabor
Fig. 4. Training data of Q-6.
atom parameters of the GNN and the Gabor filter
are very similar in the range bins from 40 to 60. It
can be concluded that the Gabor filter is prior to the
training the Gabor filter. In the testing stage, all five GNN in the features extraction. And the parameters
subsets are used to examine the trained Gabor filter. » and s correspond to the main scatterer’s frequency
It should be noted that the target rotates at a modulation and scale property, respectively. Their
variant speed, and the sampling aspects are not contribution to the classification is shown in the
uniform. The training data of three airplane models following text.
are shown in Figs. 3—5. The recognition rates achieved For further comparing the feature extraction
by the above seven methods are shown in Table II. between the GNN and Gabor filter, the test sets’
For analyzing the recognition results, a B-52’s projection coefficients of the Gabor atom feature
parameters of the trained Gabor atoms from GNN and vectors onto 2-dimensional discriminative planes, of

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 25

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 8. Yak-42 trajectory.

Fig. 6. Projection of GNN on optimum discriminative plane


when recognizing three model aircrafts.

Fig. 9. An-26 trajectory.

Fig. 10. Cessna S/II trajectory.

are divided into several segments. For an illustration,


the An-26’s trajectory is divided into 7 segments in
Fig. 7. Projection of Gabor filter on optimum discriminative Fig. 9. To evaluate the generalization performance of
plane when recognizing three model aircrafts. the above nine methods, the testing data and training
data are selected from the different data segments.
the GNN and the Gabor filter, are shown in Fig. 6 The 2nd and 5th segments of Yak-42, the 5th and 6th
and Fig. 7, respectively. From Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, segments of the An-26, the 6th and 7th segments of
we can see that the projection of GNN onto the the Cessna S/II are selected as the training data; all the
own optimum class of the discriminant plane has rest the data segments are selected as the testing data.
the largest between-class scatter and the smallest As shown in Table V, these measured range profiles
within-class scatter, which coincides with the fact that contain the azimuth variation degree and the elevation
the Gabor filter method has a higher recognition rate variation degree which are measured by the radar. The
than GNN. corresponding maximum target elevation difference
between the training data and the testing data is
EXAMPLE 2 Actual Aircraft in Outfield: In this
about 6± . It should be noted that the aspect angle of
example, range profiles of three kinds of actual
the aircraft is different from the azimuth provided
aeroplanes (Yak-42, An-26, and Cessna S/II)
by the radar. Suppose the airplane’s movement can
measured by an C-band wideband ISAR in the
be divided into two parts including rotating and
outfield, mentioned in Section II, are used, where the
translation. The azimuth is the radar’s absolute rotary
SNR is approximately 23 dB. The geometrical sizes
degree for tracking the airplane whereas the aspect is
(length £ width) of the three aircraft are 36:8 m £
the airplane’s relative rotary degree after its translation
34:88 m, 23:8 m £ 29:2 m, and 14:4 m £ 15:9 m,
compensation. Fig. 11 shows the aspect angle and the
respectively.
azimuth between the airplane and the radar. So, the
The projection of target trajectories onto the aspect angle is an unknown factor to our recognition
ground plane and the position of radar are shown in in the testing phase, which is a big difficulty and can
Figs. 8—10, where the measured data of each target be solved by the following subclass method.

26 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE V
Every Segment’s Variation Degrees of Azimuth and Elevation for 3 Eeroplanes

Yak-42 An-26 Cessna


Segment Azimuth Elevation Azimuth Elevation Azimuth Elevation

1 192.252-174.483 13.340-10.809 185.567-221.355 17.406-22.032 203.761-198.546 16.257-27.182


2 174.407-172.798 10.767-8.870 221.724-260.649 22.032-16.885 198.640-238.960 27.347-27.782
3 172.831-172.406 8.870-7.574 260.848-256.503 16.835-11.111 239.328-266.047 27.717-19.334
4 172.422-174.879 7.574-6.658 256.356-236.523 11.065-9.069 266.205-258.031 19.269-13.842
5 174.889-177.076 6.658-6.012 236.325-225.523 9.069-12.446 257.883-240.685 13.791-12.778
6 177.078-177.709 6.012-5.606 225.646-242.704 12.490-10.859 240.570-251.588 12.807-15.448
7 242.653-235.521 10.820-8.257 251.717-241.428 15.417-12.663

TABLE VI according to the aspect angles. In the training phase


Average Recognition Rate (%) of Seven Different methods For of this experiment, we separated one target into 6
Example 2
subclasses, i.e., there are 18 subclasses for 3 target in
Classification Methods Average Recognition Rate
this experiment. For example, Yak-42 has 6 subclasses
whose range profiles are from [1, 25], [26, 50],
Range Profiles 85.2
[51, 75], [76, 100], [101, 125], and [126, 150]. One
FFT 70.1
Gabor Transform 82.7 subclass corresponds to one Gabor filter, or one GNN
Wavelet Transform 82.3 and another computation unit for training. So, there
LDB-DP 84.2 are 18 Gabor filters, 18 GNN, or 18 neural networks
GNN (initialized randomly) 86.1 for recognition. The testing scheme is shown in the
Gabor filter (initialized randomly) 92.6
Fig. 2.
Shown in Table VI are the average recognition
Every segment has 75 range profiles, so every rates of the above seven methods. For analyzing the
aeroplane has 150 training range profiles. The recognition results, Yak-42’s parameters of the trained
dimensions of range profiles is 256. And the total Gabor atoms from GNN and Gabor filter are detailed
training data of three aeroplanes is 450 range profiles. in Table VII and Table VIII, separately. The time-shift
The range profile is sensitive to the variation of aspect parameter u of GNN lies in the range from 109 to
angle, namely the sample number. Moreover, these 127, whereas those of the Gabor filter are out of that
three aeroplanes have some similar property of range range sometimes. For example, in Table VIII, the first,
profiles, which results in the difficulty of classification and the last three time-shift parameters are out of the
because of the superposition in the feature space. range from 109 to 127. The positions of Yak-42’s
To reduce the influence of the range profile’s main scatterer are not only limited in the range bins
large variation from the aspect angle’s large variation, from 109 to 127, but also out of that range as the
we separate one target class into several subclasses u of Gabor filter shows. Besides, the Gabor atom

TABLE VII
Yak-42’s Gabor Atom Parameters u (time shift), » (frequency modulation) and s (scale) of GNN

Number of Features in GNN


Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

u 109.2 111.2 112.7 113.9 115.6 115.9 116.6 118.4 118.6 119.3 120.3 121.6 123.2 124.7 127.8
» 0.110 0.115 1.331 4.108 0.413 2.573 4.420 5.032 4.848 0.589 3.181 3.093 2.473 1.076 4.729
s 53.0 155.4 161.2 94.8 147.2 115.5 11.2 6.9 80.1 3.2 98.2 174.8 23.7 9.0 156.7

TABLE VIII
Yak-42’s Gabor Atom Parameters u (time shift), » (frequency modulation) and s (scale) of Gabor Filter

Number of Features in Gabor Filter


Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

u 97.1 110.2 111.3 114.0 115.5 116.4 118.4 120.2 121.7 123.2 124.9 129.7 132.6 136.2 141.4
» 5.092 0.217 0.120 4.025 0.432 4.491 5.185 3.315 2.938 2.328 1.132 4.963 1.675 0.341 1.626
s 120.0 53.8 156.1 96.1 147.9 12.4 5.7 98.2 174.7 22.1 9.3 157.2 216.0 48.8 164.1

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 27

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 11. Aspect angle and azimuth between aircraft and radar.

Fig. 14. Recognition rates versus change of number of feature


triples for Example 1.

Fig. 12. Projection of GNN on optimum discriminative plane


when recognizing three aeroplanes.

Fig. 15. Recognition rates versus change of number of feature


triples for Example 2.

coincides with the fact that the Gabor filter method


has a higher recognition rate than GNN.
From Table II and Table VI, we can see that the
recognition rates achieved by the nine methods for
feature extraction are sorted as follows:

FFT < Gabor transform

Fig. 13. Projection of Gabor filter on optimum discriminative ¼ Wavelet transform < LDB-DP
plane when recognizing three aeroplanes.
< Range profiles < GNN < Gabor filter.

parameters of GNN and Gabor filter are very similar As seen, the Gabor filtering has a stronger ability in
in the range bins from 109 to 127. feature extraction than the other listed methods.
For further comparing the feature extraction When implementing the Gabor filter method, it
between GNN and Gabor filter, the testing sets’ is an important and interesting problem to decide
projection coefficients of Gabor atom feature vectors the number of feature triples K. In simulations, we
onto 2-dimensional discriminative planes, of GNN changed K = 5, : : : , 25 and took the output number
and Gabor filter, are shown in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13, M = 1. Figs. 14 and 15 show the corresponding
respectively. From Fig. 12 and Fig. 13, we can see recognition rates versus the number of feature triples
that the projection of GNN on own optimum class for Examples 1 and 2, respectively. From Figs. 14 and
of discriminant plane has the largest between-class 15, we see that when K > 16, the recognition rates are
scatter and the smallest within-class scatter, which higher, and their change is smaller.

28 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS [9] Gaunaurd, S. C., and Strifors, H. C.
Signal analysis by means of time frequency
(Wigner-type) distributions-Applications to sonar and
In this paper, we proposed a Gabor filter approach radar echoes.
for both feature extraction and signal classification. Proceedings of the IEEE, 84 (Sept. 1996), 1231—1248.
The Gabor filter’s input layer constitutes the nonlinear [10] Sayan, G. T., Leblebicioglu, K., and Ince, T.
feature extraction part, whereas the weights between Electromagnetic target classification using time-frequency
the input layer and the output layer constitute the analysis and neural networks.
Microwave Opt. Technol. Lett., 21 (1999), 63—69.
linear classifier for signal classification. The feature
[11] Dickhaus, H., and Heinrich, H.
extraction part and the classification part search for
Classifying biosignals with wavelet networks.
the optimal Gabor atoms and the corresponding IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag., 15 (1996), 103—111.
optimal linear classifier, respectively, so that the [12] Delfs, C., and Jondral, F.
output error of the Gabor filter is minimized. Classification of piano sounds using time-frequency
Importantly, the features are extracted obviously signal analysis.
and efficiently by the degree of nonstationarity in In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference
on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Process, vol. 3, 1997,
order to ensure the classification performance of 2093—2086.
Gabor filter. Numerical results of two types of data [13] Chen, V. C., and Ling, H.
(measured in microwave anechoic chamber and in Joint time-frequency analysis for radar signal and image
outfield, respectively) show that the Gabor filter with processing.
a simple structure has higher recognition rate than IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 16 (Mar. 1999), 81—93.
the other methods, including the existing adaptive [14] Qian, S., and Chen, D.
Joint time-frequency analysis.
time-frequency approaches (LDB-DP and Gabor
Signal Processing Magazine, 16 (Mar. 1999), 52—67.
neural network) in radar target recognition.
[15] Zhang, J., Walter, G. G., Miao, Y., and Lee, W. N. W.
Wavelet neural networks for function learning.
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 43 (June 1995),
REFERENCES
1485—1497.
[1] Hudson, S., and Psaltis, D. [16] Lu, R., and Morris, J. M.
Correlation filters for aircraft identification from radar Gabor expansion for adaptive echo cancellation.
range profiles. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 16 (Mar. 1999), 68—80.
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, [17] Jiang, Q., Goh, S. S., and Lin, Z.
29 (Mar. 1993), 741—748. Local discriminant time-frequency dictionaries.
[2] Li, H. J., and Yang, S. H. Signal Processing, 72 (1999), 47—52.
Using range profiles as feature vectors to identify [18] Shi, Y., and Zhang, X. D.
aerospace objects. A Gabor atom network for signal classification with
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 41 (Mar. application in radar target recognition.
1993), 261—268. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 49 (Dec. 2001),
[3] Zyweck, A., and Bogner, R. E. 2994—3004.
Radar target classification of commercial aircraft. [19] Zhang, Q., and Benveniste, A.
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Wavelet networks.
32 (Feb. 1996), 598—606. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 3 (June 1992),
[4] Williams, R., Westerkamp, J., Gross, D., and Palomino, A. 889—898.
Automatic target recognition of time critical moving [20] Coifman, R., and Wcickerhauser, V.
targets using 1D high range resolution (HRR) radar. Entropy-based algorithms for best basis selection.
IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, (Apr. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 38 (Feb. 1992),
2000), 37—43. 713—718.
[5] Jacobs, S. P., and O’Sullivan, J. A. [21] Haykin, S.
Automatic target recognition using sequences of high Adaptive Filter Theory (4th ed.).
resolution radar range profiles. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002.
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, [22] Macchi, O.
36 (Apr. 2000), 364—382. Optimazation of adaptive identification for time-varying
[6] Copsey, K., and Webb, A. filters.
Bayesian Gamma mixture model approach to radar target IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 31 (1986),
recognition. 283—287.
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, [23] Deherty, J., and Porayath, R.
39 (Oct. 2003), 1201—1206. A robust echo canceler for acoustic environments.
[7] Chen, V. C., and Qian, S. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 44 (1997),
Joint time-frequency transform for radar range-Droppler 389—398.
imaging. [24] Park, J., and Sandberg, I. W.
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Universal approximation using radial-basis-function
34 (Apr. 1998), 486—499. networks.
[8] Abeysekera, S. S., and Boashash, B. Neural Computation, 3 (1991), 246—257.
Methods of signal classification using the images [25] Duda, R. O., and Hart, P. E.
produced by the Wigner-Ville distribution. Pattern Classification.
Pattern Recognition Letters, 12 (1991), 717—729. New York: Wiley, 2001.

ZHU ET AL.: GABOR FILTER APPROACH TO JOINT FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TARGET RECOGNITION 29

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Feng Zhu was born in 1979, in Chongqing, China. In 2007, he got the Ph.D.
degree with the highest honor at Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
He is currently working at Ericsson Research. His research interests include
all aspects of cellular systems (HSPA, HSPA evolution and LTE), in particular,
MIMO and QoS of a cellular system. He holds several patents on radio
communication.

Xian-Da Zhang (SM’93) was born in Jiangxi, China. He received the B.S. degree
in radar engineering from Xidian University, Xi’an, China, in 1969, the M.S.
degree in instrument engineering from Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin,
China, in 1982, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from Tohoku
University, Sendai, Japan, in 1987.
Since 1992, he has been a Professor with the Department of Automation,
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. From August 1990 to August 1991, he
was a postdoctoral researcher with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of California at San Diego. From April 1999 to March
2002, he was with the Key Laboratory for Radar Signal Processing, Xidian
University, Xi’an, China, as a Specially Appointed Professor awarded by the
Ministry of Education of China and the Cheung Kong Scholars Programme.
His current research interests include signal processing and intelligent signal
processing with applications in wireless communications and radar. He has
published over 120 papers including more than 50 IEEE transactions/journal
papers in the areas of signal processing, and authored six books (all in Chinese).
He holds four patents.
Dr. Zhang is the recipient of the 1997 National Natural Science Award of
China.

Ya-Feng Hu was born in 1981, in Jiangsu, China. He received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees in automation from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2003 and
2005, respectively. He got the Ph.D. degree from Tsinghua University in 2008.
Now he joins China National Railway Research & Design Institute of Signal
& Communication, and works as an engineer in the theory and methods of
transportation optimization.

30 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 45, NO. 1 JANUARY 2009

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROURKELA. Downloaded on June 30,2010 at 05:49:51 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.