4.7 Article

Deep Learning Aided Two-Stage Multi-Finger Beam Training in Millimeter-Wave Communication

期刊

IEEE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS LETTERS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 26-30

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/LWC.2022.3215999

关键词

Training; Millimeter wave communication; Feature extraction; Array signal processing; Discrete Fourier transforms; Deep learning; Convolutional neural networks; Beam training; deep learning; convolutional neural network; millimeter-wave communications

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This letter proposes a deep learning aided two-stage multi-finger beam training algorithm (DL-TSMBT) for beam alignment in millimeter-wave communications. The algorithm utilizes a coarse scanning strategy to gather initial measurements, which are then processed by a customized convolutional neural network for feature extraction and beam selection. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of DL-TSMBT, outperforming traditional beam training methods and a data-driven wide-beam training baseline in terms of misalignment probability and achievable spectrum efficiency.
Agile and reliable alignment of transceiver beams is crucial to support high transmission rate in millimeter-wave (mmWave) communications. In this letter, a deep learning aided two-stage multi-finger beam training (DL-TSMBT) algorithm is proposed for beam alignment purpose. In the first stage, a multi-finger beam based coarse scanning strategy is proposed to take a limited number of initial measurements, which are then fed into a customized convolutional neural network for feature extraction and candidate beam selection. In the second stage, the candidate beams are further trained to refine the beam selection. Numerical results validate the effectiveness of the DL-TSMBT proposed and show that DL-TSMBT outperforms several state-of-the-art traditional beam training baselines and a data-driven wide-beam training baseline, both in terms of misalignment probability and achievable spectrum efficiency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据