Abstract
In this paper, we focus on optimal precoding for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer in multiple-input multiple-output broadcasting systems. A utility function, which is a nonnegative weighted sum of the achievable data rate and the received energy, is designed to effectively allocate the available power. Then, the problem of optimal precoding is formulated as a utility maximization problem, and a closed-form solution is provided. In order to clearly illustrate the rate-utility tradeoff, a two-tier optimization structure is adopted, and the corresponding two-tier optimization algorithm, for which the outer-tier optimization is accomplished by the golden section search method, is also provided. Our results indicate that the maximum information transmission and the energy transfer must be well balanced in order to maximize the total payoff, and the method employed by this paper can obtain the unique precoding matrix for the optimal operating point.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ghadimi, N., & Ojaroudi, M. (2014). A novel design of low power rectenna for wireless sensor and RFID applications. Wireless Personal Communications, 78(2), 1177–1186.
Zhang, R., & Ho, C. K. (2013). MIMO broadcasting for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer. IEEE Transactions Wireless Communications, 12(5), 1989–2001.
Huang, K., & Larsson, E. (2013). Simultaneous information and power transfer for broadband wireless systems. IEEE Transactions Signal Processing, 61(23), 5972–5986.
Chalise, B. K., Ma, W.-K., Zhang, Y. D., Suraweera, H. A., & Amin, M. G. (2013). Optimum performance boundaries of OSTBC based AF-MIMO relay system with energy harvesting receiver. IEEE Transactions Signal Processing, 61(17), 4199–4213.
Liu, L., Zhang, R., & Chua, K.-C. (2014). Secrecy wireless information and power transfer with MISO beamforming. IEEE Transactions Signal Processing, 62(7), 1850–1863.
Shi, Q., Liu, L., Xu, W., & Zhang, R. (2014). Joint transmit beamforming and receive power splitting for MISO SWIPT systems. IEEE Transactions Wireless Communications, 13(6), 3269–3280.
Xu, J., Liu, L., & Zhang, R. (2014). Multiuser MISO beamforming for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer. IEEE Transactions Signal Processing, 62(18), 4798–4810.
Xiang, Z., & Tao, M. (2012). Robust beamforming for wireless information and power transmission. IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, 1(4), 372–375.
Boyd, S., & Vandenberghe, L. (2004). Convex optimization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Grant, M., & Boyd, S. CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming [Online]. Available: http://stanford.edu/~boyd/cvx
Heath, M. T. (2001). Scientific computing: An introductory survey. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Tse, D., & Viswanath, P. (2005). Fundamentals of wireless communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, R., Liang, Y. C., & Cui, S. (2010). Dynamic resource allocation in cognitive radio networks. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 27(3), 102–114.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have helped us to improve the quality of this paper. This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 61201218 and 61201241, and by the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant No. BK2012056, and the Project funded by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under Grant Nos. 2013M532207 and 2014T70966. The authors also thank to Prof. Shi Jin for his valuable discussion.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1: Proof of Theorem 1
Proof
The Lagrangian of the utility maximization problem (4) can be written as
where \(\mu \ge 0\) is the dual variable.
Then, the Lagrange dual function of the problem (4) is defined as
The dual problem of the problem (4) is defined as
Since the original optimization problem (4) can be solved equivalently by solving the dual problem (14), we can first maximized the Lagrangian to obtain the dual function with fixed \(\mu \ge 0\), and then find the optimal dual solution \(\mu ^*\) to minimize the dual function. The transmit covariance \({\mathbf{Q}}^*\) that maximize the Lagrangian to obtain \(g(\mu ^*)\) is thus the optimal solution of the problem (4).
Conversely, we can also first find \(\mu ^*\) that minimize the Lagrangian, and then find \(\mathbf{Q}^*\) by solving the following problem
where the constant term has been discarded.
Since the objective function in (15) must be bounded, it is shown as follows that the matrix \({\mathbf{A}}\triangleq \mu ^* {\mathbf{I}} - \zeta {{\mathbf{G}}^H}{\mathbf{G}}\) must be positive definite. Otherwise, suppose that \({\mathbf{A}}\) is not positive definite, then we can choose some \(\mathbf{Q}=\alpha {\mathbf{w}} {\mathbf{w}}^H, \alpha >0\), such that \(\mathrm{{tr}}({\mathbf{A}}{{\mathbf{Q}}})<0\). Then, with \(\alpha \rightarrow +\infty \), the optimal value in (15) will be unbounded, and this contradicts to the optimality of \(\mu ^*\).
Then we can define \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}} = {\mathbf{A}^{1/2}}\mathbf{Q}{\mathbf{A}^{1/2}}\), and the problem (13) is then reformulated in terms of \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}\) as
According to [13], the above problem (16) is equivalent to the standard point-to-point MIMO channel capacity optimization problem subject to a single sum-power constraint, and its optimal solution can be expressed as
where \(\mathbf{V}\) is obtained from the reduced SVD of \({\mathbf{H}}{\mathbf{A}}^{ - 1/2}=\mathbf{U}\varLambda ^{1/2} \mathbf{V}^H\), with \(\mathbf{U}\in {\mathbb {C}}^{N_s \times M}\), \(\mathbf{V}\in {\mathbb {C}}^{N_r \times M}\), \(\varLambda ={\text {diag}}(\lambda _1, \lambda _2,\cdots , \lambda _M)\), \(M=\min (N_s, N_r)\), and \(\lambda _1\ge \lambda _2\ge \cdots \ge \lambda _M\ge 0\); \(\varSigma ={\text {diag}}(\sigma _1, \sigma _2, \cdots , \sigma _M)\) is obtained by the standard water-filling algorithm, that is
Thus, we can immediately get the optimal solution for the problem (4), which has the following forms
Hence, the proof of Theorem 1 is completed. \(\square \)
Appendix 2: Proof of Theorem 2
Proof
Denote \(\beta =2^t-1\), the Lagrangian of the inner-tier optimization problem (10) is given by
where \(\lambda \ge 0\) and \(\mu \ge 0\) are the dual variables, and the constant term has been discarded.
Then the Lagrange dual function of the problem (10) is defined as
The dual problem of the problem (10) is written as
Since the problem (10) can can be solved equivalently by solving the problem (22), we can first maximized the Lagrangian to obtain the dual function with fixed \(\lambda \ge 0\) and \(\mu \ge 0\), and then find the optimal dual solutions \(\lambda ^*\) and \(\mu ^*\) to minimize the dual function. The transmit covariance \(\mathbf{Q}^*\) that maximize the Lagrangian to obtain \(g(\lambda ^*, \mu ^*)\) is thus the optimal solution of the problem (10).
Conversely, we can also first find \((\lambda ^*, \mu ^*)\) that minimize the Lagrangian, and then find \(\mathbf{Q}^*\) by solving the following problem
where the constant term has been discarded.
Since the objective function in (14) must be bounded, it is shown as follows that the matrix \(\mathbf{B}={\mu ^*}{\mathbf{I}} - {\lambda ^*}\widehat{\mathbf{H}}\) must be positive definite. Otherwise, suppose that \(\mathbf{B}\) is not positive definite, then we can choose some \(\mathbf{Q}=\alpha {\mathbf{w}} {\mathbf{w}}^H, \alpha >0\), such that \(\mathrm{{tr}}({\mathbf{B}}{{\mathbf{Q}}})<0\). Then, with \(\alpha \rightarrow +\infty \), the optimal value in (23) will be unbounded, this contradicts to the optimality of \((\lambda ^*,\mu ^*)\).
Let \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}={\mathbf{B}}^{1/2}{{\mathbf{Q}}}{\mathbf{B}}^{1/2}\), then, the problem (23) can be rewritten as
Now we can argue that the optimal solution of (24) is always rank-one. Otherwise, suppose that the optimal solution \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^*\) is not rank-one, the rank of it is assumed to be \(r (2 \le r \le M)\), and we have
denotes the eigen-decomposition of \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}\), where \(\lambda _1 \ge \lambda _2 \ge \cdots \ge \lambda _r > 0\) are the eigenvalues and \(\mathbf{q}_1,\mathbf{q}_2,\cdots ,\mathbf{q}_r \in {\mathbb {C}}^M\) are the associating eigenvectors. Then we can choose another
where
Thus, compared to \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^*\), \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^\star \) can make the objective function in (24) larger, which presents a contradiction to the optimality of \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^*\). Then, we can conclude that \(\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^*\) is always rank-one.
Since \({{\mathbf{Q}}}^*={\mathbf{B}}^{-1/2}\widehat{\mathbf{Q}}^*{\mathbf{B}}^{-1/2}\), we can legitimately argue that the optimal solution \(\mathbf{Q}^*\) for the problem (10) is also rank-one, which completes the proof of Theorem 2. \(\square \)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fang, B., Qian, Z., Shao, W. et al. Utility-Based Optimal Precoding for SWIPT in MIMO Broadcasting Systems. Wireless Pers Commun 87, 939–952 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-015-3003-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-015-3003-0