968 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 39, NO.
I, JULY 1991
Near-Field Multiple Source Localization by
Passive Sensor Array
Yung-DarHuang, Member, IEEE, and Mourad Barkat, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract-A study is presented of the localization of multiple
near-field sources in a spatially white Gaussian noise environ-
ment. First, we use a modiiied two-dimensional (2-D) version of
the multiple signal classification (MUSIC) algorithm to localize
the signal sources; range and bearing. Then, we consider a
global-optimum maximum likelihood searching approach to
localize these sources. It is shown that id the single source
situation, the covariances of both the 2-D MUSIC, estimator
and the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) approach the
Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB) as the number of snapshots
increases to infinity. In the multiple source situation, we observe
that for a high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and a large number
of snapshots, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) of both
localization techniques are relatively small. However, for low
SNR and/or small number of snapshots, the performance of the
MLE is much superior than that of the modified 2-D MUSIC.
I. INTRODUCTION
A N important problem in radar, sonar, radio-astronomy,
oceanography, geophysics and seismology is the local-
ization of radiating/reflecting sources by passive sensor ar-
rays. The estimation of the directions of arrival (DOAs) of
far-field narrow-band sources, with the same center fre-
quency, by an array of sensors with arbitrary locations and
arbitrary directional characteristics has received a great of
attention. Several techniques [13- [101 have been proposed in
the literature to solve this estimation problem. In the above
literature, most of the work done has considered far-field
sources. Very little has been done for near field in which
both range and bearing of sources are unknown parameters.
Rockah and Schultheiss [8] presented an array shape calibra-
tion technique using spectrally disjoint near-field calibrating
sources whose locations are not known a priori. The joint
Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB) on the source locations
and the array shape errors were calculated. It was shown that
the array shape errors can be made arbitrary small by using a
sufficient number of sufficiently strong calibrating sources. In
[9], Rockah et al. also presented the phase calibration tech-
nique of estimation error due to random perturbations in the
phase shifts at the sensors. By using far-field or near-field
calibrating sources, and the calculations of the joint CRLBs
of the estimations of both the source locations and the phase
shifts, the phase calibration can be achieved provided the
number of calibrating sources exceeds a certain minimum.
Manuscript received July 3, 1990; revised March 12, 1991. This work
was supported in part by National Science Foundation Research Award
ECS-8907176.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, State
University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2350.
IEEE Log Number 9100566.
0018-926X~91~0700-0968$01.~
However, in [8] and [9], they did not consider the possible
algorithms to localize near field sources nor did they study
performance characteristics. In [101, Weiss and Friedlander
proposed a self-calibrating algorithm, for simultaneously esti-
mating the DOAs and sensor locations. The technique is
limited to the one-dimensional direction finding problem
only.
Localization of far-field sources in a plane requires that
only the DOAs or bearings of the sources be estimated using
a sensor array. Consequently, two subarrays sited apart in
sufficient distances are needed to obtain the intersections of
the straight lines of DOAs. The use of subarrays requires
some communication between them. Near-field source loca-
tion requires that both the range and the bearing of the
sources be estimated simultaneously. This can be accom-
plished by using one sensor array only, even though the
number of parameters to be estimated is doubled. Hence,
there is no communication load.
In this paper, we present an analysis of multiple source
localization in the near field. Two techniques are considered
and studied. First we use the modified version of the two-di-
mensional (2-D) multiple signal classification (MUSIC) algo-
rithm, then, the maximum likelihood estimator is employed
to determine range and bearing of sources. The root mean
square error (RMSE) evaluations of the two localization
techniques both in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the
sources at the sensor array and the number of snapshots are
performed by computer simulations. In Section II, we formu-
late the problem. In Section III, the modified version of
MUSIC localization is presented. In Section IV, we present
the global-optimum searching technique to compute the exact
maximum likelihood localization. In Section V, we present
the simulation results. A summary and conclusions are given
in Section VI.
11. PROBLEM FORMULATION
In this section, we formulate the problem for the near-field
localization of narrow-band sources. By near field, we mean
that the wavefronts emitted from the signal sources are
spherical and cannot be approximated to simply plane waves
as in the case of far-field sources. In addition, by narrow-
band, we mean that the bandwidths of the signals and of the
system is much smaller than the reciprocal of the propagation
delay of the waves across the array.
Consider D near-field sources at unknown locations and
with arbitrary directional characteristics. The sources are
emitting spherical waves impinging into a sensor array of L
elements, L > D , of arbitrary locations and arbitrary direc-
0 1991 IEEE
 1
HUANG AND BARKAT: NEAR-FIELD MULTIPLE SOURCE LOCALIZATION
I' k t h source
0 0
Fig. 1. Sensor-array geometry in near field.
tional characteristics as shown in Fig. 1. The observed data
sequence at the ith sensor can be expressed, by its complex
envelope, as
D matrix Rx(r, 8) given by
xi(m) = ui(rk,ek)sk(m) + ni(m)
k= 1 R,(r,B) = A ( r , 8 ) R , A H ( r , B )
i = 1,2,.*.,L
m = 1,2;--,M
where M is the number of snapshots. Equation (1) can be
rewritten in vector form or matrix form as
and
x(r,O; m ) = A(r,B)s(m) + n(m)
where
sk(m)is the scalar complex waveform of the kth incoming
signal, a(r,, e,) is the (L x 1) steering vector characterized
by the sensor array and rk and 0, are the unknown range and
the bearing of the kth source with respect to a reference
origin; respectively. n(m) is the ( L x 1) additive complex
noise vector. The noise components are stationary, ergodic
Gaussian with zero mean and covariance matrix u21, and
uncorrelated from the impinging signals, where u 2 is un-
known and I is the identity matrix. The elements in the
steering vector, a(r,, e,), are fully dependent on the geomet-
rical structure of the array and the sources. Thus, the com-
plex response in the ith sensor element to the kth impinging
signal can be expressed as
where j is the unitary complex number, X is the wavelength
of the impinging waves, and Z ; k is the dis@ce from the kth
969
source to the ith sensor defined as
z$ = ri -k d? - 2 r k di COS 8i, (4b)
where
ei, = e; - e, (44
and the radial coordinates of sensor (i) and source ( k ) are
( d i , ei) and (rk, e,), respectively. The coefficients of the
response, cik, are determined by the wavelength, X, the
X radiating patterns of the sources and the directivity patterns
of the sensors. If both sensors and sources are omnidirec-
tional, the coefficients C;k, are independent of the sources
and the sensors. In this case, we can set the coefficients
cik = 1 for i = 1, 2;**, L and k = 1, 2;.., D .
The observation interval between adjacent samples is larger
than the correlatio? time and thus the finite-sampled data
covariance matrix R,(r, 8) is
I M
In (5), ii,(r, e) is the estimate of the true data covariance
(l)
+ u2I (6)
where R, is the signal covariance of the sources. The
problem to be solved is to estimate the number of near-field
sources and their location given the M-s-pled data vector
sequence, { x ( m ) } ,m = 1, 2; M, or R,(r, 8) obtained
e ,
in (5) using two different techniques.
HI. TWO-DIMENSIONAL
MUSIC ALGORITHM
In signal subspace techniques, the number of sources and
their locqtions can be estimated by appropriately processing
(34 the eigenvalues and the eigenvectors of the finite-sampled
data covariance matrix. Since the sample size is finite, the
eigenvalues are all different with probability one. Therefore,
the number of signal sources may be difficult to determine
due to the multiplicity of the smallest eigenvalue by simply
observing the structure of eigenvalues of R,. For a high
SNR, a subjective threshold may be set to determine the
number of sources since the eigenvalues corresponding to the
signals and the eigenvalues corresponding to the noise differ
greatly. When the SNR is moderate or low, and these two
groups of eigenvalues are no longer distinct, the subjective
threshold setting can not be used. The model-selection tech-
niques [l 11, which do not require any subjective threshold
setting, such as rpinimum description length (MDL) and
Akaike information criterion (AIC), can be employed to
estimate the number of sources. Then, the MUSIC algorithm
can be used to determine the locations. In this section, we
modify the conventional 1-D MUSIC algorithm to its 2-D
version to estimate the near-field range and the bearing of the
sources simultaneously.
To determine the numbe! of the sources [ll], we rank
order the eigenvalues U, of R , in descending order to obtain
970 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 39, NO. 7, JULY 1991

The estimated number of sources, b, is then determined as global-optimum searching algorithm can be formed from the
the value for which either the MDL or the AIC criterion is decision function by some matrix manipulation.
- -
minimized. Let U B + ~ U, B + ~ , , u L be the noise eigenvec- Let the hypothesis, (r,, e,), k = 1, 2;.-, L - 1, repre-
tors corresponding to the ( L - b)smaller eigenvalues, ub+ 1 , sent the locations of k sources as
U B + ~ ,* , U=. We construct the noise eigenvector matrix,
U,, from the noise eigenvectors as (rk,Ok) = [(r131) (r232). * * (rkd3k)I. (11)
The steering-vector matrix corresponding to this hypothesis,
( r k , d k ) , is
The near-field steering vector, a(r, e), comprises all possible
near-field steering vectors, that is, A ( r k J , ) = [a(rI,Ol) a ( r 2 , e 2 ). - * a ( r k , e k ) ] . (12)

[
a ( r , e ) = -exp
The conditional joint probability density function of the M
sampled-data vectors given hypothesis (r. e,) is [13]

where T denotes matrix transpose, and zi,i = 1, 2, * * e , L,

is
zi = r2 + d? - 2rdi COS ( e - ei). (9b)
To search for the locations of sources, we construct a 2-D
orthogonality-measure spectrum, u2 is the unknown noise variance. The product L a 2 is the
determinant of the covariance matrix of the array noise
vector. Taking the logarithm of (13a), ignoring the constant
term, we obtain the log-likelihood function to be

where H denotes the complex conjugate transpose. The g ( r k , e k ) = -&flog u 2

peaks of the spectrum, P ( r , e), are the locations of the 1 M

sources, (r,, O k ) , k = 1, 2, * * * , D . Note that the search

procedure is carried in the (r, e ) plane starting from the
origin. Also, the 2-D MUSIC algorithm, like the 1-D ver- To compute the maximum likelihood estimator, we have to
sion, is based on the orthogonality property between the maximize g with respect to all unknown parameters. Even
signal steering vectors, a(r,, ek), and the noise eigenvector though the number of sources is not known, we can use the
of the data covariance matrix, R,. The eigenvalues and the alternating maximization procedure introduced in [131- [151
eigenvectors of the data convariance matrix are not the actual to obtain the log-likelihood function, in terms of the number
ones, but estimates, since the number of snapshots is finite. of sources and their locations, as
Consequently, this spectrum-search technique may suffer an
M
estimation error. Furthermore, if the number of snapshots is
small and/or the SNR of sources is low, the algorithm may g(rk9dk) = C
m= 1
IP.qr,,e,)X(m) I (15a)
lose its resolution capability. Nevertheless, the proposed 2-D
k = 1 , 2 * - -L - 1
MUSIC algorithm has some statistical efficiency. This was
shown by studying the asymptotic relative efficiency. In [12] where is the projection operator onto the space
it was shown that the 1-D MUSIC algorithm attains the spanned by the columns of matrix A@,, e), and given by
CRLB as the number of measurements approaches infinity.
The real parameter vector 8 in [12] is analogous to the 'A(rkrek) = 9 7 9 7 '

location coordinate ( r k , e,) in the plane. Both the estimations (15b)

of range, r , and bearing, 8, satisfy the asymptotic relative
efficiency as the SNR of sources becomes sufficiently high. After some matrix manipulation, (15a) becomes

LKELIHWDESTIMATOR
IV. THEMAXIMUM g(rk 9 = tr [pA(r,,B,)RX] (16)
In this section, we present a global-optimum searching where tr [e] denotes the trace of the matrix in brackets. To
algorithm to compute the exact maximum likelihood estima- maximize the nonlinear log-likelihood function of (15) or
tor of the number of sources and their locations in the near (16), we must find a number of sources, D , at locations (ib,
field by searching the maximum'likelihood estimates of the ek), among a set D which consists of subsets, {(r,, e,)),
number of sources and their locations which can both be k = 1, 2 ; * , , L - 1, such that g(r,, e), is maximum. That
found simultaneously. Based on the available sampled data is,
and the assumed noise statistics, the maximum-likelihood
(17)
decision function is determined. A recursive equation for the
HUANG AND BARKAT: NEAR-FIELD MULTIPLE SOURCE LOCALIZATION 971

2500 -

2000 -
w
p:
22 1500-
r:

Fig. 2. MUSIC localization of single source at (15 m, 65). SNR = 20 dB, number of snapshots = 100.

where arg denotes the argument of, fi and (fb, ab) are found when saturation begins; that is, when
the maximum likelihood estimates of the number of sources
and their locations, respectively. D is determined by a search g(%+19b+,) - g(rg,h) = 0 (20)
procedure as described below. Since the number of sources is is satisfied. Having estimated the number of sources fi, we
not known a priori, the conventional estimation technique now determine the locations of these sources by solving for
[l] and the hill climbing appoach [13] are no longer their range and bearing. Hence (17) becomes
applicable. Consequently, we propose a recursive algorithm
to search for both the number of sources and their locations
and guarantee the global-optimum solution. Using the projec-
tion-matrix decomposition and the projection matrix update The recursive log-likelihood function in (18) is first com-
formula [13], (16) can be written in a recursive form as puted for k = 1 and k = 2_since we initialize g(r,, e,) to be
zero. If (20) is satisfied at D = 1, the algorithm stops and we
g(rk3 = g(rk-l) + tr [ P B ( r ~ - l , ~ ~ - l ) a ( r ~ . B ~ ) R ~say
l that the number of sources is one (D= 1). The estimated
(184 location of this single source, ( rl , 8 I)ML, is then determined
from (21). Note in (18a) that g(r2, 8,) is obtained directly
where from g(rl, 8,). This redyces the computation load greatly. If
B(r, 8,) = I - PA(rk,ek)
7 (18b) (20) is not satisfied for D = 1, we increment k by one and
compute (18) for k = 2 and k = 3. If (20) is satisfied, the
k = l , 2 , . * * , L - 1. algorithm SLOPS. For this case, we say that the number of
PB(rk-l,#k- I)s(rk,Bk) is the projection operator onto the one- sources is D = 2, obtain the locations of sources, (r2, 82)ML
dimensional space generated by the residual (that is, ( r l , flI)MLand ( r , , from (21). Otherwise,
,,
B(r,- 8,- I)a(r k , 0,). This residual is the column vector we increment k by one again aFd continue the procedure
obtained from the projection of the stzering vector a(r,, e,) until we find the searched value D .
onto the ( k - 1)-dimensional space spanned by the columns The procedure of the global-optimum search algorithm
of matrix A(r,- 8,- ,, It can easily be shown that the which estimates the number of the sources and determines
scalar function g(rk, 8,) is a monotonically increasing func- their locations simultaneously can be summarized as follows.
tion of k. Since there are D sources, (18a) saturates when 1. Start from k = 1 with B(ro, e,) = I, PA(ro,Bo) = 0 and
+
k = D 1. In other words, when SNR goes to infinity, g ( t , , e , ) = 0.
l e l compute g(rl, = g(rO, + ~r[PB(ro,f30)a(rI,BI)
g(rD+,* - g(rD, = (19) R,I;
1.2 If g(rl,e,) = g ( r , , e,), exit; If not, compute
for 1 = 1, 2; --, L - D - 1. Since the number of sources
PA(rl,Bl) = P*(ro,O0) + PB(ro,Bo)a(r,,B,);
is not known a priori, we need to determine D,the maxi-
mum likelihood estimate of the number of sources. This is B(rl,el) = I - PA(rl,Bl);
912 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 39, NO. I, JULY 1991

0.2

0 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20

SNR ( d B ) SNR ( d B )
(a) (b)
Fig. 3. (a) Range-RMSE. (b) Bearing-RMSE versus SNR for single source at (15 m, 65'). Number of snapshots = 25, Number
of Monte Carlo runs = 100.

NUMBER OF SNAPSHOTS NUMBER OF SNAPSHOTS

(a) (b)
Fig. 4. (a) Range-RMSE. (b) Bearing-RMSE versus number of snapshots for single source at (15 m, 65"). SNR = 6 dB, Number
of Monte Carlo runs = 100.

Go to Step 2. We note that, instead of computing PA(rk,ek)directly as

2. MAINLOOP: k + k + l given in (15b), we compute P B ( r k - , , e k - I ) a ( T y , e t )where B@,- 1,
2.1 Compute g(r,,b,) by (18a);
' 8,- l)a(rk,e,) is of dimension ( L x 1). This way, the com-
2.2 If (20) is satisfied, go to step 3; If not, compute putational complexity is greatly reduced. The global optimum
- of the maximum likelihood estimator is obtained for both the
,ek) - P A ( r k _ ,,ek-,) + P B ( r k _ , . e k - , ) a ( r l r . e k;) number of sources and their locations. The outlined proce-
dure requires more computation than MUSIC. It should be
Compute B(r,, e,) by (18b); mentioned that this optimum searching procedure is equally
Go back to MAIN LOOP. applicable to both the case of incoherent sources and the case
3. Obtain the maximum likehood estimate (rb, from of coherent sources since the structure of the signal-covari-
(21). ance matrix is not relevant.
HUANG AND BARKAT: NEAR-FIELD MULTIPLE SOURCE LOCALIZATION

Fig. 5. MUSIC localization of two uncorrelated sources at (15 m, 45") and

(30 m, 60").SNR = 20 dB, number of snapshots = 100.

12 - *

10 -
h 8- 'k,,,, y
n
t ,60 ): MUSIC

5 B-
z ?,
W
w - .
v
z W t
6- z
z 4-
4-

2-
2-

I
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
0 5 10 15 20 25
SNR (dB) SNR (dB)
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. (a) Range-RMSE. (b) Bearing-RMSE versus SNR for two uncorrelated sources at (15 m, 45") and (30 m, 60").Number
of snapshots = 100, number of Monte Carlo runs = 100.

V . SIMULATION
RESULTS

The performances of the near-field MUSIC and the maxi-
mum likelihood localization are studied by various examples.
Consider 100 Hz-centered narrow-band acoustic sources at
15 and 30 m, emitting spherical waves into a linear array
with five sonar elements uniformly spaced half a wavelength
apart. Since the far-field distance ( L - 1)*(X/2) is approxi-
mately 116 m, the sources at 15 and 30 m are clearly in the
near field. The signals from the sources are deterministic but
unknown. In each experiment, we perform 100 Monte-Carlo
runs and compute the RMSE's of the estimates.
From Figs. 2-4 we observe that for a single source, the
2-D MUSIC localization is satisfactory for a large number of
914 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 39, NO. 7, JULY 1991

12 bearing of the near-field sources. A modified-version of the

2-D MUSIC algorithm to localize sources was considered
and investigated. A global-optimum searching algorithm for
10
simultaneously computing the exact maximum likelihood esti-
mators of the number of near-field sources and their locations
8
was also proposed. We have shown that both algorithms
h attain a sufficiently good performance in localization when
w
E
0
the SNR is high and/or the number of snapshots is large.
?!-S However, when the SNR is low or moderate and/or the
I2 number of snapshots is small, the global-optimum searching
ET technique is much superior than the 2-D MUSIC. While
4 MUSIC fails when the sources are coherent, the global-opti-
mum searching algorithm still maintains its good perform-
ance as in the case when the sources are uncorrelated. The
2 drawback, however, is the heavy computational load.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
0
IO 102 I 03 The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their con-
NUMBER OF SNAPSHOTS structive comments that led to the enhancement of the quality
(a)
of the paper.

REFERENCES
F. C. Schweppe, Sensor array data processing for multiple signal
sources, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. IT-14, pp. 294-305,
1968.
*\ C. H. Knapp and G. C. Carter, The generalized correlation method
10 - for estimating of time delay, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal
Processing, vol. ASSP-24, pp. 320-327, 1976.
M. Wax and T. Kailath, Optimum localization of multiple sources
-
w
8 - by passive Arrays, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, and Signal
Processing, vol. ASSP-31, pp. 1210-1217, 1983.
K R. 0. Schmidt, Multiple emitter location and signal parameter
w estimation, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-34, pp.
9 6- 276-280, 1986.
w
v1 G. Bienvenu and L. Kopp, Adaptivity to background noise spatial
H coherence for high resolution passive method, in Proc. ICASSP-80,
1980, pp. 307-310.
4- S. S. Reddi, Multiple source location-A digital approach, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. AES-15, pp. 95-105, 1979.
R. Kumaresan and D. W. Tufts, Estimating the angles of arrival of
2- multiple plane waves, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol.
AES-19, pp. 134-139, 1983.
...+.. .r;
Y. Rockah and P. M. Schultheiss, Array shape calibration using
-++ sources in unknown locations- Part 11: Near-field sources and estima-
0 tor implementation, IEEE Trans. Acoustics, Speech, Signal Proc-
101 102 I 03 essing, vol. ASSP-35, pp. 724-735, 1987.
NUMBER OF SNAPSHOTS Y. Rockah, H.Messer, and P. M. Schultheiss, Localization perform-
0) ance of arrays subject to phase errors, IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 24, pp. 402-410, 1988.
Fig. 7. (a) Range-RMSE. (b) Bearing-RMSE versus number of snapshots
A. I . Weiss and B. Friedlander, Array shape calibration using
for two uncorrelated sources at (15 m, 45) and (30 m, 60). SNR = 10 dB, sources in unknown locations-A maximum likelihood approach,
number of Monte Carlo runs = 100. IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Processing. vol. 37, pp.
1958-1966, 1989.
snapshots and a high SNR. The maximum likelihood estima- M. Wax and T. Kailath, Detection of signals by information theo-
retic criteria, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Processing,
tor gives a much better performance than MUSIC for a small vol. ASSP-33, pp. 387-392, 1985.
number of snapshots and/or a low SNR. Also, the range and B. Porat and B. Friedlander, Analysis of the asymptotic relative
the bearing estimates of these two algorithms approach the efficiency of the MUSIC algorithm, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech,
Signal Processing, vol. ASSP-36, pp. 532-544, 1988.
CRLBs as the SNR goes to infinity even when the number of I. Ziskind and M. Wax, Maximum likelihood localization of multi-
snapshots is small. In Figs. 5-7, we show the performance in ple sources by alternating projection, IEEE Trans. Acoust.,
terms of bearing and range of the considered algorithms for Speech, Signal Processing, vol. 36, pp. 1553-1560, 1988.
J. Boheme, Estimating the source parameters by maximum likeli-
two uncorrelated sources. hood estimator and nonlinear regression, in Proc. ICASSP-84,
1984, pp. 7.3.1-7.3.4.
VI. SUMMARYAND CONCLUSION M. Wax, Detection and estimation of superimposed signals, Ph.D.
dissertation, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA, 1985.
In this paper, we presented a study of the near-field Y. D. Huang, Ph.D. dissertation in process, Dept. Elec. Eng., State
localization where we simultaneously estimated the range and Univ. New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY.
HUANG AND BARKAT: NEAR-FIELD MULTIPLE SOURCE LOCALIZATION
Yung-Dsr Huang (S87-M90) was born in
Hualien, Taiwan, on February 5, 1945. He re-
ceived the B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical
engineering from National Taiwan University,
Taipei, Taiwan, in 1967 and 1970, respectively,
and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engi-
neering from the State University of New York,
Stony Brook, NY, in 1981 and 1991, respectively.
He worked with the Telecommunication Labora-
tories, Taiwan, as a Research Engineer from 1971
to 1976. He was an Associate Professor in the
Department of Electronic Engineering, National Taiwan Institute of Technol-
ogy from 1976 tG 1987. He was a Research Assistant and Teaching Assistant
at the Department of Electrical Engineering, State University of New York,
Stony Brook, from 1988 to 1991. His research interests include detection
and estimation, array signal processing, and digital communication tech-
niques.
915
Mound Barkat (S82-M82-SM91) was born in
Constantine, Algeria, on January 6, 1958. He re-
ceived the B.S. degree with honors, magna cum
laude, in 1981, the M.S.degree in 1983, and the
Ph.D. degree in 1987, all in electrical engineering
from Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.
Currently he is an Assistant Professor with the
Department of Electrical Engineering at the State
University of New York, Stony Brook. His current
research includes detection-estimation, detection
with distributed Sensors and data fusion. Dhased
arrays, adaptive antennas, and queueing for distributed networks.
Dr. Barkat is a member of Tau Beta pi and Eta Kappa Nu Honor
Societies, and Sigma Xi the Scientific Research Society. He is the author of
the book, Signal Detection and Estimation (Artech House), May 1991.