electronics

Article
Linear Antenna Array Pattern Synthesis Using Multi-Verse
Optimization Algorithm
Anoop Raghuvanshi 1,2 , Abhinav Sharma 1, *, Abhishek Kumar Awasthi 3 , Rahul Singhal 1 , Abhishek Sharma 4 ,
Sew Sun Tiang 5 , Chin Hong Wong 6,7 and Wei Hong Lim 5, *

1 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies,
Dehradun 248007, India; [email protected] (A.R.); [email protected] (R.S.)
2 Department of ECE, Birla Institute of Applied Sciences, Bhimtal 263136, India
3 Paras Antidrone Technologies Private Limited, Navi Mumbai 400706, India;
[email protected]
4 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Graphic Era Deemed to be University,
Dehradun 248002, India; [email protected]
5 Faculty of Engineering, Technology and Built Environment, UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia;
[email protected]
6 Maynooth International Engineering College, Maynooth University, W23 A3HY Maynooth, Ireland;
[email protected]
7 Maynooth International Engineering College, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, China
* Correspondence: [email protected] (A.S.); [email protected] (W.H.L.)

Abstract: The design of an effective antenna array is a major challenge encountered in most commu-
nication systems. A much-needed requirement is obtaining a directional and high-gain radiation
pattern. This study deals with the design of a linear antenna array that radiates with reduced peak-
side lobe levels (PSLL), decreases side-lobe average power with and without the first null beamwidth
(FNBW) constraint, places deep nulls in the desired direction, and minimizes the close-in-side lobe
levels (CSLL). The nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm multi-verse optimization (MVO) is ex-
plored with other state-of-the-art algorithms to optimize the parameters of the antenna array. MVO
is a global search method that is less prone to being stuck in the local optimal solution, providing
Citation: Raghuvanshi, A.; Sharma,
a better alternative for beam-pattern synthesis. Eleven design examples have been demonstrated,
A.; Awasthi, A.K.; Singhal, R.; Sharma,
which optimizes the amplitude and position of antenna array elements. The simulation results
A.; Tiang, S.S.; Wong, C.H.; Lim, W.H.
illustrate that MVO outperforms other algorithms in all the design examples and greatly enhances the
Linear Antenna Array Pattern
Synthesis Using Multi-Verse radiation characteristics, thus promoting industrial innovation in antenna array design. In addition,
Optimization Algorithm. Electronics the MVO algorithm’s performance was validated using the Wilcoxon non-parametric test.
2024, 13, 3356. https://doi.org/
10.3390/electronics13173356 Keywords: linear antenna array; pattern synthesis; metaheuristic; MVO; PSLL; CSLL; side lobe
average power; FNBW; Wilcoxon
Academic Editors: Yiming Liu,
Zhi Zhang and Yue Meng

Received: 2 July 2024

Revised: 19 August 2024 1. Introduction
Accepted: 21 August 2024
The antenna has a significant impact on any communication system. Specifically, it is
Published: 23 August 2024
required that the antenna has sufficient gain and high directivity for effective communica-
tion between the transmitter and receiver end. To attain this, the single-element antenna
requires considerable adjustment. Hence, a better option is to use an antenna array [1–3].
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
An array of antennas is used to enhance the signal-to-interference plus noise ratio (SINR),
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. boost overall gain, provide beam control, cancel out interference, measure the direction of
This article is an open access article the arrival of incoming signals [4], and play a vital role in next-generation communication
distributed under the terms and systems. Antenna array elements can be arranged in different ways, i.e., linear, circular,
conditions of the Creative Commons planar, and concentric rings [5]. Moreover, in modern wireless communication systems,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// reflect array, transmit array, metasurface, and conformal array antennas play a significant
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ role in achieving desired radiation characteristics. Conformal array antennas [6,7] are
4.0/). designed to conform to specific shapes and are helpful in aerodynamics and healthcare

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13173356 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 2 of 20

applications. The reflect array antenna consists of reflecting elements that can electronically
steer the beam in the desired direction. Metasurface antennas utilize engineering surfaces
with sub-wavelength structures, which can be useful in the Internet of Things (IoT) and
fifth-generation communication systems. However, due to the simplicity of design and the
numerous benefits of linear antenna arrays in several military and commercial applications,
this research is focused on linear antenna arrays [8–11].
The procedure to ascertain the parameters of the antenna array to acquire desired
radiation characteristics is referred to as pattern synthesis. Antenna array synthesis aims to
create an array’s physical layout with a radiation pattern that closely resembles the intended
pattern [12,13]. Over the last two decades, researchers have proposed several methods to
optimize the parameters of antenna arrays to obtain desired radiation characteristics [14–17].
The goal of the most common synthesis technique is to reduce the SLL while maintaining
the main beam’s gain [18]. However, the research is also concentrated towards overcoming
the impact of interference and jamming signals [19]. The spacing and amplitude of the
antenna elements can be optimized to retain the main beam’s gain and suppress the SLL
for different antenna geometries [20].
Generally, the antenna array has many radiating elements. Therefore, there is always a
possibility that one or more of the elements fails [10]. The SLL is increased when an antenna
element fails, destroying the antenna array’s symmetry and perhaps disrupting the field
strength throughout the array. It is not feasible to replace the faulty array element in certain
circumstances, such as in a space station or on a battlefield. Nonetheless, it is feasible that
the radiation pattern of an antenna array is retained using pattern synthesis with minimum
quality deterioration and avoiding the need to replace the defective element [21,22].
Although SLL reduction, null positioning, and narrow beamwidth are desired radia-
tion characteristics, the coupling effect between the antenna elements must be considered
as it affects the antenna array’s performance. In [23], the author proposed a robust beam-
pattern-synthesis method that combines the compensation method with a constraint on
magnitude response to mitigate the mutual coupling effect. In [24], the authors proposed
a novel strategy where the refinement of joint-element rotation/phase optimization for
pattern synthesis of linear and planar antenna arrays is outlined. However, conventional
derivative-based techniques [25–28] are applied to solve such non-linear problems of the
antenna design, but sometimes they are computationally complex and have a probability
of getting trapped in a local optimum solution. Therefore, researchers have been motivated
to explore metaheuristic algorithms [29–32] for pattern synthesis of different antenna array
geometries over the last few years. In [33], the author explored fungi kingdom expansion
for optimizing the radiation pattern of the antenna array and achieved a 100% success
rate in different designs in comparison to other metaheuristic algorithms. In [34], the
author utilized a social network optimization algorithm for the design of a shaped beam
reflectarray and validated the optimized results through a full-wave approach. Moreover,
these algorithms also find wide applications in radio frequency (RF) and microwave to
enhance the system performance. In [35], the authors explored Bayesian optimization
for setting the parameters of the power amplifiers, whereas in [36], the authors proposed
a multi-objective digital predistortion technique for minimizing the RF power of power
amplifiers. In [37], an efficient surrogate modelling and optimization technique was utilized
for generating the efficient design of the microwave filters, whereas in [38], the author
solved the multi-objective optimization problem of multi-layer microwave dielectric filters
with the help of an artificial bee colony algorithm.
In this paper, the MVO algorithm [3] has been explored to optimize the current
amplitude and interelement spacing between the array elements to attain a wide range
of radiation characteristics. However, the MVO algorithm has not been utilized in linear
antenna array-pattern synthesis to suppress the PSLL, minimize the side-lobe average
power, and place deeper nulls in the desired direction while maintaining the FNBW and
CSLL minimization.
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 20

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 power, and place deeper nulls in the desired direction while maintaining the FNBW and 3 of 20
CSLL minimization.
The paper is structured as: Section 2 outlines the design equations of the linear an-
tenna array. Section
The paper 3 highlights
is structured as:the mathematical
Section 2 outlines layout of the
the design nature-inspired
equations MVO
of the linear al-
antenna
gorithm. Section 4 highlights the simulation results, and Section 5 provides closing
array. Section 3 highlights the mathematical layout of the nature-inspired MVO algorithm. re-
marks and4avenues
Section for the
highlights future work. results, and Section 5 provides closing remarks and
simulation
avenues for future work.
2. Design Equation of a Linear Antenna Array
2. In
Design Equation
this section, of a Linear
a linear Antenna
antenna array Array
with 2N isotropic elements is outlined and
shown In in this
Figure 1. The
section, elements
a linear of the
antenna arrays
array withare
2Nplaced symmetrically
isotropic with symmetry
elements is outlined and shown
along the x-axis.
in Figure 1. TheThe array factor
elements of theofarrays
the antenna arraysymmetrically
are placed in the azimuthalwithplane is mathe-
symmetry along
the x-axis.
matically The array
defined as: factor of the antenna array in the azimuthal plane is mathematically
defined as:
𝐴𝐹 𝜃 2 ∑ N 𝐼 cos 𝑘𝑥 cos 𝜃 Ø
AF (θ ) = 2∑n=1 In cos{kxn cos (θ ) + n }
(1)
(1)
where,
where,
𝐼 : Excitation amplitude
In : Excitation amplitude
Ø Ø: Phase of nth element
n : Phase of nth element
𝑥 :xPosition of nth element in the array
n : Position of nth element in the array
k: k: is the
2π wave number
λ is the wave number
𝜃: Azimuthal
θ: Azimuthal angle
angle
𝜆: Wavelength
λ: Wavelength
TheTheequation
equation of of
thethe
array factor
array hashas
factor three steering
three parameters,
steering parameters, which
whichmay maybe be
ad-ad-
justed to improve
justed to improve thethe
antenna array’s
antenna radiation
array’s pattern.
radiation These
pattern. Theseparameters
parameters areare
thethe
current
current
amplitude,
amplitude, position
position between
between thethe antenna
antenna elements
elements andand
thethe phase
phase of the
of the excitation
excitation current.
current.

Figure
Figure 1. Linear
1. Linear antenna
antenna array
array with
with 2N2N number
number of elements
of elements placed
placed along
along thethe x-axis.
x-axis.

In In current
current amplitude
amplitude optimization,
optimization, thethe inter-element
inter-element spacing
spacing between
between thethe antenna
antenna
elements is kept as half the wavelength, i.e., λ/2, and the phase of the individual
elements is kept as half the wavelength, i.e., λ/2, and the phase of the individual elements elements
is zero,
is zero, i.e.,i.e.,
Ø Ø=n 0.
= 0. Keeping
Keeping these
these values,
values, thethe array
array factor
factor of of Equation
Equation (1)(1)
is is modified
modified as:as:
N
𝐴𝐹 (θ ) =22∑∑n=𝐼1 Icos
AF𝜃 n cos𝑘𝑥
{kxcos
n cos𝜃
(θ )}
 
cos 2π ×cos
𝐴𝐹(θ𝜃) = 22 ∑N 𝐼I cos λ 𝜃
AF ∑ n =1 n λ 2
cos ( θ )

AF (𝜃θ ) =22∑
𝐴𝐹
∑n=1𝐼 Incos
cos𝜋
{π ×cos
cos𝜃(θ )}
N (2) (2)
In In
position optimization
position optimizationof theof array elements,
the array the elements
elements, must have
the elements mustconstant am-
have constant
plitude and phase excitation, i.e., 𝐼 = 1 and Ø = 0. Considering these values, the array
amplitude and phase excitation, i.e., In = 1 and Øn = 0. Considering these values, the array
factor of of
factor Equation (1)(1)
Equation is changed
is changed as:as:
𝐴𝐹 𝜃 2 ∑ N cos 𝑘𝑥 cos 𝜃 (3)
AF (θ ) = 2∑n=1 cos{kxn cos(θ )} (3)
Antenna element placement plays a significant role because the elements interele-
ment spacing
Antenna affects the placement
element antenna array’s
plays aradiation pattern.
significant Mutual
role because thecoupling
elementseffects will
interelement
spacing affects the antenna array’s radiation pattern. Mutual coupling effects will occur
while placing the elements too close, whereas grating lobes arise when the elements are
positioned too far apart. Therefore, mutual coupling and grating lobes can be avoided if
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 4 of 20

the antenna elements are spaced apart with spacing lies between quarter wavelength and
half wavelength, which can be mathematically stated as:

λ λ
< | x n +1 − x n | < (4)
4 2
where xn and xn+1 is the position of the nth and (n + 1)th antenna elements from the origin.

3. Multiverse Optimization Algorithm

The MVO algorithm is a population-based metaheuristic algorithm introduced by
Mirjalili in 2014 and is inspired by the theories of cosmology. Multiverse is a popular theory
of multiple universes where there is an interaction and possibly even collision between
several entities of the universe such as white, black, and wormholes. The cyclic model
of the multiverse theory postulates that collisions between parallel universes cause large
bangs and white holes. Moreover, black holes act entirely differently from white holes, and
their extraordinarily strong gravitational pull draws everything, even a beam of light. The
holes that join disparate regions of a universe together are known as wormholes. According
to the multiverse idea, wormholes function as time/space tunnels that allow items to travel
between any two points in a universe immediately.
MVO algorithm is modelled on this stated concept where the entities are exchanged
among the universe with the help of black and white hole tunnels and randomly between
the universe through wormholes. White and black holes allow the algorithm to explore
new solutions in the search space with local optima avoidance. In contrast, movement
through the hole maintains a balance between the exploration and exploitation phases of
the algorithm. The two adaptive parameters, wormhole existence probability (WEP), and
travelling distance rate (TDR) emphasize exploitation and allow the algorithm to discover
the optimal solution around the best solution. Thus, the MVO algorithm has few tuning
parameters and, therefore, provides an appropriate balance to exploration and exploitation,
especially in complex and high-dimensional space, in comparison to other optimization
algorithms. The algorithm can also handle multiple objectives through weighted sum,
Pareto front, or by incorporating constraints into the optimization problem. Moreover, the
algorithm’s performance is influenced by the number of variables, which can be maintained
either by increasing the number of universes and iterations or by hybridizing the algorithm
with other local search techniques. However, it increases the computational complexity of
the algorithm. The flow chart of the MVO algorithm is presented in Figure 2.
The mathematical model of the MVO algorithm is outlined as follows:
Step 1: Initialize the population of universes (M) in the search space:

y11 y21 · · · y1o

 

· · · y2o 
 1
y22

 y2
 
M=
 .. .. .. ..  (5)
. . . .

 
y1s y2s · · · yos

where o represents the number of parameters and s denotes the number of universes.
Step 2: Initialize WEP and TDR.
Step 3: Evaluate the fitness (inflation rate) of all the universe, normalize it, sort it based
on their inflation rate, and identify the best universe.
Step 4: The universe exchange objects through white/black hole tunnel (exploration),
and the white holes are selected through a roulette wheel mechanism, which is defined
based on the following equation:
(
ybl rn1 < N ( Ma)
yba = (6)
yba rn1 ≥ N ( Ma)
 Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 5 of 20

𝑦 𝑟𝑛1 < 𝑁 𝑀𝑎
where yba is the bth parameter of the 𝑦 ath
= universe, Ma is the ath universe, N ( Ma) is the (6)
𝑦 𝑟𝑛1 𝑁 𝑀𝑎
normalized rate of inflation of the ath universe, and rn1 is the any number between [0, 1],
b is the𝑦bthis
ywhere the bth parameter
parameter of the lth of the ath universe, 𝑀𝑎 is the ath universe, 𝑁 𝑀𝑎 is the
universe.
l
normalized rate objects
Step 5: The of inflation of the ath universe,
are transferred randomlyand 𝑟𝑛1 isconsidering
without the any number between
the inflation [0,
rate
1], 𝑦 isathe
between bth parameter
universe and theofbest
the lth universe.
universe through wormholes (exploitation) and are
defined Step
as:5: The objects are transferred randomly without considering the inflation rate
between a universe
 ( and the best universe through wormholes (exploitation) and are de-
fined as:  Yb + TDR × ((ub − lb ) × rn4 + lb ) rn3 < 1/2
rn2 < WEP


b
ya = Yb − TDR × ((ub − lb ) × rn4 + lb ) rn3 ≥ 1/2 (7)
𝑌 𝑇𝐷𝑅 𝑢 − 𝑙 𝑟𝑛4 𝑙 𝑟𝑛3 < 1/2
𝑟𝑛2 < 𝑊𝐸𝑃


𝑦 =y a 𝑌 − 𝑇𝐷𝑅
 b
𝑢 −𝑙 𝑟𝑛4 𝑙 𝑟𝑛3 1/2 rn2 ≥ WEP (7)
𝑦 𝑟𝑛2 𝑊𝐸𝑃
where Yb is the bth parameter of the best universe, lb is the lower bound of the bth variable,
b is the𝑌upper 𝑙 parameter
uwhere is thebound
bth parameter
of the bthofvariable, b is the bth
the bestyuniverse, is the lower bound
of the ath of the bth vari-
universe, and
a
rn2, 𝑢 rn4
able,rn3, is the
are upper bound between
any numbers of the bth[0,variable,
1]. 𝑦 is the bth parameter of the ath uni-
verse, and
Step 6: 𝑟𝑛2,
Update 𝑟𝑛3,WEP
𝑟𝑛4andare TDR
any numbers
as follows: between [0, 1].
Step 6: Update WEP and TDR as follows:
max − min

WEP = min + l × 𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (8)
𝑊𝐸𝑃 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑙 L (8)
𝐿
where
wheremin minand andmaxmax are
are the
the minimum
minimum andand the the maximum
maximum values, while l𝑙 and
values, while and L𝐿 are
arethe
the
present iteration and the total number of iterations.
present iteration and the total number of iterations.

l 1/p
𝑙
𝑇𝐷𝑅
TDR = 1=−1 −1/p (9)
(9)
L𝐿
wherep𝑝signifies
where signifiesthe exploitation
the exploitation accuracy
accuracyover the
over course
the course ofof
iterations.
iterations.
Step
Step7:7:Reinitialize
Reinitializethe
theuniverses
universesthat thatgo
gobeyond
beyondthethesearch
searchspace.
space.
Step
Step8:8:Go
GototoStep
Step33 until
until the
the termination
terminationcriteria
criteriaare
aresatisfied,
satisfied,which
whichisiseither
eitherthe
thetotal
total
number
numberofofiterations
iterationsororthe
theminimum
minimumerror errorbetween
betweenthethetwo
twoconsecutive
consecutiveinflation
inflationrates.
rates.
Step
Step9:9:The
Thebest
bestuniverse
universerepresents
representsthe
theglobal
globaloptimum
optimumsolution.
solution.

Figure2.2.Flowchart
Figure Flowchartof
ofthe
themultiverse-optimization
multiverse-optimizationalgorithm.
algorithm.
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 6 of 20

4. Results and Discussion

This section discusses simulation results for the pattern synthesis of the linear antenna
array using the MVO algorithm. The MVO algorithm is explored to estimate the antenna
array elements’ current amplitude and interelement spacing to achieve desired radiation
characteristics. This research aims to minimize PSLL, reduce CSLL, and minimize side-lobe
average power along with null placement in the desired direction with and without any
constraint on beam width. To support this, 11 design examples are presented, of which six
examples optimize the amplitude and five optimize the position of antenna elements.
The simulations are performed in MATLAB R2023a software on an i5 processor
with 16 GB of RAM and are executed 15 times to obtain the optimum solution. MVO
is a population-based iterative optimization algorithm. Therefore, 40 search agents are
considered, which optimizes the solution under 1000 iterations. Design examples AA
to AE demonstrate the optimization of the amplitude of antenna elements, while design
example of PA to PE illustrates the optimization of the position of antenna elements using
the MVO algorithm.

4.1. Excitation Current Amplitude Optimization

Excitation current amplitude (In ) is the critical parameter in controlling the radiation
characteristics of the phased array antennas. The amplitudes of the antenna array are
optimized considering the uniform phase, i.e., Øn = 0, and uniform spacing, i.e., λ/2.
The array factor of Equation (2) is modified with these two conditions and is considered
for attaining all the desired objectives. Design examples AA, AB1, and AB2 optimize the
current amplitudes of the antenna array for PSLL and side-lobe average power reduction,
while AC minimizes the side lobes along with the placement of deep nulls in the intended
direction. CSLL is minimized in the design example AD, and the side lobe’s average power,
along with the first null beamwidth constraint, is considered in the design example AE.

4.1.1. Peak Side-Lobe Level Minimization

The radiation pattern of an antenna has a desired main lobe and an undesired minor
lobe, which exist in almost all antenna systems. One of the prime constraints in any antenna
array design is that it radiates maximum power in its main lobe and less power in the side
lobes. Therefore, the essential requirement of an antenna array is to suppress the peak
side-lobe levels. The fitness function to achieve this objective is described in Equation (10),
where θ represents the side-lobe region.
  
20log| AF (θ )|
f itness = min max (10)
max | AF (θ )|

The design example AA has 2N = 14 elements placed linearly where the side lobes are
minimized in the region θ = [0◦ , 76◦ ] and θ = [104◦ , 180◦ ]. The fitness function is simulated
by applying four different optimization algorithms: Ant Lion optimization (ALO), Dung
Beetle algorithm (DBO), Whale optimization algorithm (WOA), and MVO algorithm for the
sake of PSLL minimization. Table 1 shows the optimized values of the excitation current
amplitudes for the right half side of the 14-element linear antenna array using different
optimization algorithms, and Figures 3 and 4 present the array pattern in decibels (dB)
against the azimuthal angle and the distribution of currents against the array elements. The
MVO algorithm provides the PSLL of −38 dB, which is 24.84 dB down as compared to the
uniform array, 12.12 dB down as compared to the ALO algorithm, and 17.58 dB down as
compared to the DBO algorithm, which can also be observed in Table 2. For antenna array
amplitude optimization, the computation time taken by respective ALO, DBO, WOA, and
MVO algorithms is 13 s, 7.48 s, 11.75 s, and 7 s.
 ALO 1.0000 0.9476 0.8490 0.7158 0.5630 0.4070 0.4059
DBO 1.0000 0.9462 0.8447 0.7105 0.5557 0.4024 0.4024
WOA 1.0000 0.9452 0.8432 0.7072 0.5532 0.3982 0.3982
MVO
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 1.0000 0.9202 0.7758 0.5949 0.4066 0.2415 0.1342
7 of 20
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 7 of 20

Table 1. Positive half-side values of optimized current amplitude for design example AA.
Table 1. Positive half-side values of optimized current amplitude for design example AA.
Method Normalized Excitation Current Amplitudes
Method
ALO 1.0000 0.9476Normalized
0.8490 Excitation
0.7158Current Amplitudes
0.5630 0.4070 0.4059
ALO
DBO 1.0000
1.0000 0.9476
0.9462 0.8490
0.8447 0.7158
0.7105 0.5630
0.5557 0.4070
0.4024 0.4059
0.4024
DBO 1.0000 0.9462 0.8447 0.7105 0.5557 0.4024 0.4024
WOA 1.0000 0.9452 0.8432 0.7072 0.5532 0.3982 0.3982
WOA 1.0000 0.9452 0.8432 0.7072 0.5532 0.3982 0.3982
MVO
MVO 1.0000
1.0000 0.9202
0.9202 0.7758
0.7758 0.5949
0.5949 0.4066
0.4066 0.2415
0.2415 0.1342
0.1342

Figure 3. Array pattern of design example AA.

Table 2. Peak SLL for design example AA.

Method Peak SLL (dB)

Uniform Array −13.16
ALO −25.88
DBO −20.42
WOA −30.94
MVO −38.00
Figure
Figure3.3.Array
Arraypattern
patternof
ofdesign
designexample
exampleAA.
AA.

Table 2. Peak SLL for design example AA.

Method Peak SLL (dB)

Uniform Array −13.16
ALO −25.88
DBO −20.42
WOA −30.94
MVO −38.00

Figure 4. 4.
Figure Distribution ofof
Distribution currents inin
currents 1414
element LAA
element ofof
LAA design example
design AA.
example AA.

4.1.2.
TableSide-Lobe Average-Power
2. Peak SLL Minimization
for design example AA. without FNBW Constraint
One of the choices is to suppress the total average power of the side lobes to enhance
Method Peak SLL (dB)
the power level of the main beam. For this, an objective that minimizes the side-lobe av-
erage power of aUniform Arraylinear antenna array is presented in−13.16
20-element design examples AB1
ALO −25.88
and AB2. The fitness function formulated to meet this design objective of side-lobe aver-
DBO −20.42
age-power minimizationWOAis mathematically defined in Equation − (11), where 𝜃 and 𝜃
30.94
MVO −38.00
Figure 4. Distribution of currents in 14 element LAA of design example AA.
4.1.2. Side-Lobe Average-Power Minimization without FNBW Constraint
4.1.2. Side-Lobe Average-Power Minimization without FNBW Constraint
One of the choices is to suppress the total average power of the side lobes to enhance
One of level
the power the choices
of theismain
to suppress
beam. theFortotal
this,average powerthat
an objective of the side lobes
minimizes to side-lobe
the enhance
the powerpower
average level of athe main beam.
20-element Forantenna
linear this, an array
objective that minimizes
is presented in designtheexamples
side-lobe AB1
av-
erage power
and AB2. Theoffitness
a 20-element
function linear antenna
formulated array
to meet is design
this presented in design
objective examples
of side-lobe AB1
average-
and AB2.
power The fitness function
minimization formulated
is mathematically to meet
defined in this design(11),
Equation objective
whereof θliside-lobe aver-
and θui are the
minimum and maximum limits of the region where the SLL is reduced and ∆θ i = [θui − θli ]
age-power minimization is mathematically defined in Equation (11), where 𝜃 and 𝜃
Electronics 2024,13,
Electronics 2024, 13,3356
x FOR PEER REVIEW 88 of 20
of 20

is
arethe difference
the minimum between them. Forlimits
and maximum the design
of the example AB1, the
region where the values
SLL is of the sideand
reduced lobes
∆𝜃for=
one half of the antenna array are considered as = 0 ◦ and θ = 82 ◦ , and for the other
𝜃 − 𝜃 is the difference between them. For the design example AB1, the values of the
θ li1 ui1
half, ◦ and θ
θli2 =of98the 180◦ . are considered as 𝜃 = 0° and 𝜃
side the values
lobes are half
for one ui2 = array
antenna = 82° ,
and for the other half, the values are 𝜃 = 98Z° θand 𝜃 = 180° .
1 ui
f itness = ∑i | AF (θ )|2 dθ (11)
𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = ∑∆θ i θli |𝐴𝐹 𝜃 | 𝑑𝜃 (11)
∆

The
The current
current amplitudes
amplitudes for
for design
design example
example AB1
AB1 are
are shown
shown in
in Table
Table 3,
3, and
and the
the array
array
pattern is presented in Figure 5. Compared to the other cutting-edge optimization
pattern is presented in Figure 5. Compared to the other cutting-edge optimization algo- algo-
rithms,
rithms, MVO obtains lower side lobes, and the average power of the side lobe region is
MVO obtains lower side lobes, and the average power of the side lobe region is
minimized
minimized toto aa greater
greater extent.
extent.
Table 3. Positive
Table 3. Positive half-optimized
half-optimized current
current amplitudes
amplitudes for
for design
design example
exampleAB1.
AB1.
Method
Method OptimizedExcitation
Optimized Excitation Current
CurrentAmplitudes
Amplitudes
ALO
ALO 1.0000
1.0000 0.9692
0.9692 0.9145 0.8302
0.9145 0.8302 0.7410
0.7410 0.6196
0.6196 0.5217
0.5217 0.3835
0.3835 0.3376
0.3376 0.3374
0.3374
DBO
DBO 1.0000
1.0000 0.9710
0.9710 0.9137 0.8300 0.7353 0.6202 0.5086 0.3451 0.3451
0.9137 0.8300 0.7353 0.6202 0.5086 0.3451 0.3451 0.3451 0.3451
MVO 1.0000 0.9660 0.9038 0.8135 0.7095 0.5850 0.4722 0.3428 0.2637 0.2055
MVO 1.0000 0.9660 0.9038 0.8135 0.7095 0.5850 0.4722 0.3428 0.2637 0.2055

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Array
Array pattern
pattern for
for design
design example
example AB1.
AB1.

The peak
The peak SLL
SLL of of the
the uniform
uniformlinear
linearantenna
antennaarray
arrayof ofdesign
designAB1AB1isisatat−−13.18 which
13.18 dB, which
is −31.49dB
is now reduced to −31.49 dBbybyusing
usingthetheMVO
MVOalgorithm.
algorithm.Hence,
Hence,there
thereis is
a reduction
a reductionof
18.51
of dBdB
18.51 in in
thethe
first SLL,
first SLL,and similarly,
and in in
similarly, thethe
other
otherminor lobes,
minor there
lobes, is aissignificant
there re-
a significant
reduction
duction ofofside
sidelobes
lobesby bythe
theMVO
MVOalgorithm
algorithmcompared
compared to to ALO
ALO and
and DBO algorithms.
algorithms. This
reduction
reduction in the
the side
side lobe
lobe levels
levels of
of design
design AB1
AB1 isis tabulated
tabulated inin Table
Table 4.4. The
The amplitude
amplitude ofof
the
the antenna
antenna elements has a unity value at the center of the array, array, and
and itit decreases
decreases asas one
one
reaches
reaches the
theedge
edgeofofthethearray element
array elementfor for
both halves
both of the
halves of20-element linearlinear
the 20-element antenna array.
antenna
array.
Table 4. Positive half-side lobe levels of a 20-element LAA for design example AB1.
Table 4. Positive half-side lobe levels of a 20-element LAA for design example AB1.
Method Side Lobe Level (dB)
Method
Uniform array −13.18 −17.76 −20.43 −Side 22.54Lobe Level−(dB)
−23.63 24.84 −25.33 −25.77 −26.01
Uniform
ALOarray −13.18
−29.33 −17.76
−28.00 −20.43
−28.00 −22.54
−28.48 −23.63
−29.04 −24.84
−29.34 −25.33
−29.85 −25.77
−30.99 −26.01
−33.56
DBO
ALO − 31.14 − 29.16 − 27.94 − 27.14 − 27.14 − 28.08 −
−29.33 −28.00 −28.00 −28.48 −29.04 −29.34 −29.85 −30.99 −33.56 29.44 − 31.75 −34.75
MVO −31.49 −32.66 −33.17 −33.54 −34.11 −34.46 −35.01 −36.12 −38.65
DBO −31.14 −29.16 −27.94 −27.14 −27.14 −28.08 −29.44 −31.75 −34.75
MVO −31.49 −32.66 −33.17 −33.54 −34.11 −34.46 −35.01 −36.12 −38.65
The design example AB2 is presented for synthesizing a 32-element linear antenna
arrayThe
for design
side-lobe average-power
example minimization
AB2 is presented with amplitude
for synthesizing optimization.
a 32-element linear For
antenna this
design, the side lobes are placed at = 0 ◦, θ = 82 ◦, θ = 98 ◦ and θ = 180 ◦ . The
array for side-lobe average-power minimization
θ li1 ui1 with amplitude
li2 optimization.
ui2 For this
fitness
design,function
the sideoflobes
Equation (11) isat
are placed 𝜃 = 0° ,using
optimized 𝜃 MVO = 82° ,and = 98°algorithms.
𝜃 other and 𝜃 =The °
180fitness
. The
function presented
fitness function in Equation
of Equation (11)(11) has been using
is optimized considered
MVOfor andoptimization usingThe
other algorithms. MVO and
fitness
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 99 of
of2020

other algorithms. The obtained values of the optimized current amplitude are outlined
function presented in Equation (11) has been considered for optimization using MVO and
in Table 5, based on how the array pattern is drawn and is shown in Figure 6. An MVO-
other algorithms. The obtained values of the optimized current amplitude are outlined in
optimized antenna array offers the highest reduction for all the side lobes compared to
Tableapplied
other 5, basedalgorithms,
on how thewhich
array ispattern is drawn
also shown and is6.shown
in Table Hence,inthe
Figure 6. An MVO
proposed MVO-
algorithm efficiently optimizes the current amplitude of the large size antenna arrays into
optimized antenna array offers the highest reduction for all the side lobes compared
other applied
comparison algorithms,
to other appliedwhich is also shown
optimization in Table 6. Hence, the proposed MVO al-
algorithms.
gorithm efficiently optimizes the current amplitude of the large size antenna arrays in
comparison
Table tohalf-optimized
5. Positive other appliedcurrent
optimization algorithms.
amplitudes for design example AB2.

Table 5. Positive half-optimized current

Method amplitudes
Optimized for design
Excitation example
Current AB2.
Amplitudes

Method 0.5276 0.5588 Optimized

0.6187 0.6944
Excitation0.7832 0.8636 0.9393
Current Amplitudes 0.9767
ALO
1.0000
0.5276 0.9695
0.5588 0.9257
0.6187 0.8190
0.6944 0.7335
0.7832 0.5615
0.8636 0.5183
0.9393 0.5183
0.9767
ALO
1.0000
0.7382 0.9695
0.7382 0.9257 0.7382
0.7382 0.8190 0.7382
0.7335 0.8817
0.5615 0.5183
0.9614 0.5183
0.9753
DBO
0.7382
1.0000 0.7382
0.9661 0.7382
0.9305 0.7382
0.7382 0.7382
0.7382 0.8817
0.7382 0.9614
0.7382 0.9753
0.7382
DBO
1.0000
0.6503 0.9661
0.6784 0.9305
0.7296 0.7382
0.7914 0.7382
0.8596 0.7382
0.9175 0.7382
0.9741 0.7382
0.9915
WOA 0.6503 0.6784 0.7296 0.7914 0.8596 0.9175 0.9741 0.9915
WOA 1.0000 0.9547 0.8967 0.7799 0.6918 0.5197 0.4501 0.4501
1.0000 0.9547 0.8967 0.7799 0.6918 0.5197 0.4501 0.4501
1.0000 0.9846 0.9557 0.9115 0.8565 0.7892 0.7159 0.6335
MVO 1.0000 0.9846 0.9557 0.9115 0.8565 0.7892 0.7159 0.6335
MVO 0.5500 0.4636 0.3837 0.3016 0.2346 0.1654 0.1258 0.1001
0.5500 0.4636 0.3837 0.3016 0.2346 0.1654 0.1258 0.1001

Figure6.6.Array
Figure Arraypattern
patternfor
fordesign
designexample
exampleAB2.
AB2.

Table 6. PSLL of a 32 element LAA for design example AB2.

Table 6. PSLL of a 32 element LAA for design example AB2.
Method Side Lobe Level (dB)
Method Side Lobe Level (dB)
Uniform
−13.48
Uniform array −13.48 −17.80 −20.78 −22.71 −24.32 −25.76 −26.79 −27.59
−17.80 −20.78 −22.71 −24.32 −25.76 −26.79 −27.59 −28.20
−28.20 −−28.86
28.86 −−29.29
29.29 −−29.61
29.61 −−29.88
29.88 −−30.02 −30.09
30.02 − 30.09
array
ALO −10.35 −28.50 −29.06 −29.42 −29.68 −29.82 −30.06 −30.22 −30.54 −30.69 −31.05 −31.71 −32.28 −33.43 −36.03
ALODBO −10.35 −28.50
−11.85 −29.06
−23.16 −29.42
−26.55 −29.68
−21.49 −24.19−29.82
−25.59−30.06
−25.64 −30.22
−30.89 −30.54
−31.71 −−30.69
29.41 −−31.05
30.81 −−31.71
29.01 −−32.28
28.33 −−33.43 −36.03
31.61 − 32.96
DBOWOA −11.85 −23.16 −26.55 −21.49 −24.19 −25.59 −25.64 −30.89 −31.71 −29.41 −30.81 −29.01 −28.33 −31.61
−11.88 −30.09 −31.33 −31.83 −31.57 −31.97 −32.09 −32.30 −32.29 −32.25 −32.45 −33.00 −33.49 −34.45 −37.41 −32.96
WOAMVO −11.88 −34.63 −42.16
−30.09 −42.46
−31.33 −42.63
−31.83 −42.80−31.97
−31.57 −42.91−32.09
−42.90 −32.30
−43.32 −32.29
−43.92 −−32.25
43.94 −−32.45
44.22 −−33.00
44.52 −−33.49
45.38 −−34.45
46.23 − 49.02
−37.41
MVO −34.63 −42.16 −42.46 −42.63 −42.80 −42.91 −42.90 −43.32 −43.92 −43.94 −44.22 −44.52 −45.38 −46.23 −49.02
4.1.3. Side-Lobe Average-Power Minimization, along with Null Placement
4.1.3.
InSide-Lobe Average-Power
many situations, side-lobeMinimization,
average-poweralong with NullisPlacement
minimization required along with null
In many
positioning situations,
in the direction side-lobe average-power
of the interfering sources. minimization
To incorporateisthis,
required
a design along
examplewith
ACnullofpositioning
a 20-element in linear
the direction
antennaofarray
the interfering
is formulatedsources.
with To
theincorporate this, defined
fitness function a design
inexample
Equation AC(12),
of awhere
20-element linear
θk is the antenna
angle of thearray is formulated
interfering with the
source where thefitness function
nulls have to
bedefined in Equation
positioned. The side(12), where
lobes 𝜃 is theofangle
for one-half of the interfering
the antenna source where
array are considered as θthe
li1 = 0 ◦
nulls
have to be positioned. The side lobes for one-half of the antenna array are considered as
𝜃 = 0° and 𝜃 = 82° . For the other half, these values are 𝜃 = 98° and 𝜃 = 180° .
° ° ° °
The nulls are intended at 64 , 76 , 104 , and 116 .
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 10 of 20

Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20

and θui1 = 82◦ . For the other half, these values are θli2 = 98◦ and θui2 = 180◦ . The nulls are
intended at 64◦ , 76◦ , 104◦ , and 116◦ .

1
Z θ
ui
f itness =∑
𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = i∑∆θ ||𝐴𝐹
AF (𝜃 𝑑𝜃+ ∑
θ )||2 dθ | AF (𝜃θk )|| 2
∑ k|𝐴𝐹 (12)
(12)
∆i θli

The
The array pattern obtained
array pattern obtainedfor fordesign
designexample
example AC AC is illustrated
is illustrated in Figure
in Figure 7. It7.displays
It dis-
plays that
that the the side-lobe
side-lobe average average
powerpower
obtained obtained
by theby
MVOthe MVO algorithm
algorithm has a minimum
has a minimum value
value compared
compared to theto
ALOthe and
ALODBO and algorithms,
DBO algorithms, and
and the the desired
desired deeperdeeper
nulls nulls
were were
obtained.ob-
tained. The side-lobe
The side-lobe levels forlevels for the
the right right
half of thehalfdesign
of theAC
design AC are tabulated
are tabulated in Table in
7. Table 7. On
On average,
average, a nearly
a nearly 13.58 13.58 dB reduction
dB reduction was observed was observed for the average
for the side-lobe side-lobepower
average power
with with a
a maximum
maximum of 16.6 dB and a minimum of 10.2 dB. Table 8 presents
of 16.6 dB and a minimum of 10.2 dB. Table 8 presents the null depth of ALO, DBO, the null depth of ALO,
and
°◦ ° °◦ °
DBO,
MVO and MVO algorithms
algorithms ◦ ◦
at 64 , 76 at 64 ,,76
, 104 and , 104 The 116
116 , .and . The simulation
simulation result showsresult shows
that the MVO that
the MVO algorithm
algorithm achieves SLL
achieves minimum minimum
and placesSLL deep
and places
nulls indeep nulls in the
the intended intended
direction direc-
compared
tion compared
to the ALO andtoDBO the ALO and DBO algorithms.
algorithms.

Figure 7. Array pattern for design example AC.

Figure 7. Array pattern for design example AC.
Table 7. Positive half-side lobe levels of a 20-element LAA for design example AC.
Table 7. Positive half-side lobe levels of a 20-element LAA for design example AC.
Method Side-Lobe Level (dB)
Method Side-Lobe Level (dB)
Uniform array
Uniform array −13.18
−13.18 −17.76
−17.76 −20.43
−20.43 −22.54 −23.63
−22.54 −23.63 −24.84
−24.84 −25.33
−25.33 −25.77
−25.77 −26.01
−26.01
ALO −26.80 −36.18 −27.45 −37.38 −28.69 −29.56 −30.39 −31.81 −34.55
ALO
DBO
−26.80
−30.72 −36.18
−39.41 −27.45
−26.83 −37.38
−35.07 −28.69
−25.82 −29.56
−27.18 −30.39
−29.57 −31.81
33.26
−34.55
−38.22
DBO
MVO −30.72
−29.78 −39.41
−37.57 −26.83
−33.27 −35.07
−42.67 −25.82
−34.81 −27.18
−35.10 −29.57
−35.62 33.26
−36.73 −38.22
−39.21
MVO −29.78 −37.57 −33.27 −42.67 −34.81 −35.10 −35.62 −36.73 −39.21
Table 8. Null depth of a 20-element LAA for design example AC.
Table 8. Null depth of a 20-element LAA for design example AC.
Required Nulls at 64◦ 76◦ 104◦ 116◦
Required
Method
Nulls at 𝟔𝟒° 𝟕𝟔°
Null Depth (dB)
𝟏𝟎𝟒° 𝟏𝟏𝟔°
Method Null Depth (dB)
ALO −66.90 −66.90 −66.90 −66.90
ALO
DBO −67.30 −66.90 −66.90
−72.20 −66.90
−72.20 −−66.90
67.30
MVODBO −100.50−67.30 −72.20
−95.41 −72.20
−95.41 −−67.30
100.50
MVO −100.50 −95.41 −95.41 −100.50
4.1.4. Close-In Side-Lobe Level Minimization
4.1.4. The
Close-In Side-Lobe
close-in Level
side lobe, i.e.,Minimization
the first lobe adjacent to the main lobe, is minimized by
The close-in
optimizing side function
the fitness lobe, i.e.,formulated
the first lobe adjacent (13),
in Equation to the mainθ AS
where lobe, is minimized
is the total regionbyof
optimizing theand
the side lobes fitness
θ NS function formulated
is the region of close in Equation
side lobes. α(13), α2 are 𝜃
1 andwhere is the total
the weights thatregion
add a
greater
of degree
the side lobesofand 𝜃 isonthe
freedom theregion
level of
of side-lobe lobes. 𝛼 Design
close sidereduction. and 𝛼 example AD presents
are the weights that
10 elements
add a greaterofdegree
a linearofantenna
freedomarray forlevel
on the close-in-side-lobe level reduction.
of side-lobe reduction. Design example AD
presents 10 elements of a linear antenna array for close-in-side-lobe level reduction.
f itness = (α1 max {20log| AF (θ AS )|} + α2 max {20log| AF (θ NS )|}) (13)
𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝛼 𝑚𝑎𝑥 20 log|𝐴𝐹 𝜃 | 𝛼 𝑚𝑎𝑥 20 log|𝐴𝐹 𝜃 | (13)
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 20

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 11 of 20

where 𝜃 is considered as 0° , 76° and [ 104° , 180° ], while 𝜃 is considered as

° ° ° °
69 , 76 and [104 , 111 ]. The optimum
◦ ◦ value◦ of the
◦ weights 𝛼 and
where θ AS is considered as [0 , 76 ] and [104 , 180 ], while θ NS is considered 𝛼 are 1as
and[692,
◦ , re-
76◦ ]
spectively. ◦ ◦
and [104 , 111 ]. The optimum value of the weights α1 and α2 are 1 and 2, respectively.
The
Theamplitude
amplitudeofofthetheexcitation
excitationcurrent
currentobtained
obtainedby bythe
theMVO
MVOalgorithm
algorithmforforone-half
one-half
ofofthe 10-element linear antenna array is outlined in Table
the 10-element linear antenna array is outlined in Table 9. 9.

Table
Table9.9.Positive
Positivehalf
halfvalues
valuesofofoptimized
optimizedexcitation
excitationcurrent
currentamplitudes
amplitudesfor
fordesign
designexample
exampleAD.
AD.
Method
Method
Optimized Excitation Current Amplitudes
Optimized Excitation Current Amplitudes
ALO 1.0000 0.6787 0.5111 0.5111 0.5111
ALO 1.0000 0.6787 0.5111 0.5111 0.5111
DADA 1.0000
1.0000 0.6787
0.6787 0.5111
0.5111 0.5111
0.5111 0.5111
0.5111
MVO
MVO 1.0000
1.0000 0.6788
0.6788 0.5111
0.5111 0.5111
0.5111 0.5111
0.5111

Figure 8 illustrates the array pattern of design example AD for close-in side-lobe level
Figure 8 illustrates the array pattern of design example AD for close-in side-lobe level
reduction. The simulation result shows that the CSLL of the uniform array is −12.97 dB
reduction. The simulation result shows that the CSLL of the uniform array is −12.97 dB
and reduced to −30.19 dB using the MVO algorithm. Hence, a reduction of 17.22 dB is
and reduced to −30.19 dB using the MVO algorithm. Hence, a reduction of 17.22 dB is
obtained
obtainedininthe
thedesign
designexample
exampleAD.
AD.

Figure
Figure8.8.Array
Arraypattern
patternfor
fordesign
designexample
exampleAD.
AD.

4.1.5.Side-Lobe
4.1.5. Side-LobeLevel LevelMinimization
Minimizationwith withFNBW
FNBWConstraint
Constraint
AnAneffective
effectiveantenna
antennaarray arraysystem
systemshould
shouldhave
havea aradiation
radiationpattern
patternwith
withminimum
minimum
SLL and narrow beamwidth. However, both parameters are
SLL and narrow beamwidth. However, both parameters are interrelated. Therefore, interrelated. Therefore, design
de-
example AE minimizes the side lobes with the constraint on the
sign example AE minimizes the side lobes with the constraint on the first null beamwidth. first null beamwidth.
Sincethe
Since themain
mainlobelobeisispredominantly
predominantlyfocused focusedononthetherequired
requiredsignal,
signal,the
thenull
nullconstraint
constraint
is imposed to enhance the quality of the signal with a reduced noise
is imposed to enhance the quality of the signal with a reduced noise level. Similarly, the level. Similarly, the
system has better spatial resolution and can differentiate closely
system has better spatial resolution and can differentiate closely spaced sources. To spaced sources. To achieve
this objective,
achieve the fitness
this objective, the function of Equation
fitness function (14) is optimized
of Equation using theusing
(14) is optimized MVOthe algorithm.
MVO
This design example is considered for a 20-element linear antenna
algorithm. This design example is considered for a 20-element linear antenna array. array. The array pattern
The
is shown
array patternin Figure
is shown9, indicating
in Figure 9, that the average
indicating thatpower of the power
the average side lobes is reduced
of the while
side lobes is
the beamwidth remains constant using the MVO algorithm compared to ALO and WOA.
reduced while the beamwidth remains constant using the MVO algorithm compared to
However, the beamwidth tolerance of ±5% is considered in this design example. Table 10
ALO and WOA. However, the beamwidth tolerance of 5% is considered in this design
presents the PSLL and FNBW of conventional, ALO, WOA, and MVO-optimized linear
example. Table 10 presents the PSLL and FNBW of conventional, ALO, WOA, and MVO-
antenna arrays. The simulation results illustrate that MVO presents comparable results
optimized linear antenna arrays. The simulation results illustrate that MVO presents com-
among other algorithms.
parable results among other algorithms.
1
Z θ
ui
∑ = C1 × |𝐴𝐹 |
 
𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝐶f itness ∑i ∆θ i θ 𝐶| AF(θ𝐹𝑁𝐵𝑊
𝜃 𝑑𝜃 )|2 dθ + C2 × FNBW− 𝐹𝑁𝐵𝑊 𝐼 =1
Computed − FNBW ( In = 1) (14) (14)
∆
li
where 𝐶 and 𝐶 are the weighting coefficient, and FNBW represents the first null beam-
where C1 and C2 are the weighting coefficient, and FNBW represents the first null beamwidth.
width. 𝐹𝑁𝐵𝑊 is the computed FNBW, and 𝐹𝑁𝐵𝑊 𝐼 = 1 is the FNBW for uni-
FNBW Computed is the computed FNBW, and FNBW ( In = 1) is the FNBW for uniform exci-
form excitation current (𝐼 = 1) and uniform inter-element distance between the elements.
tation current (In = 1) and uniform inter-element distance between the elements.
Electronics
Electronics2024,
2024,13,
13,x3356
FOR PEER REVIEW 1212ofof20
20

Figure
Figure9.9.Array
Arraypattern
patternfor
fordesign
designexample
exampleAE.
AE.

Table
Table10.
10.PSLL
PSLLand
andFNBW
FNBWfor
fordesign
designexample
exampleAE.
AE.
Method
Method PSLLPSLL
(dB) (dB) FNBW (Degree)
FNBW (Degree)
ULA
ULA
−13.22
−13.22
11.48
11.48
ALO
ALO −15.28
−15.28 12.10
12.10
SWOA
SWOA −13.29
−13.29 11.50
11.50
MVO
MVO −20.00
−20.00 13.70
13.70

4.2.Element-Position
4.2. Element-PositionOptimization
Optimization
Theinterelement
The interelementspacing
spacingor orposition
positionof ofthe
theantenna
antennaelements
elementsalters
altersthe
thedirectional
directional
characteristicofofthe
characteristic theantenna
antennasystem.
system.ItItdecides
decidesthetheside-lobe
side-lobelevels,
levels,null
nullplacement,
placement,andand
the antenna array’s return loss. Therefore, the position is considered one
the antenna array’s return loss. Therefore, the position is considered one of the prime pa- of the prime
parameters
rameters for improving
for improving radiation
radiation characteristics.
characteristics. This section
This section presents
presents five antenna
five antenna design
design examples
examples PA to PEPA forto PE for optimization
position position optimization
of the array of the arrayfor
element element for PSLL mini-
PSLL minimization,
mization,average-power
side-lobe side-lobe average-power
minimization minimization with andnull
with and without without null placement,
placement, CSLL
CSLL minimi-
minimization, and side-lobe reduction with the first null beamwidth
zation, and side-lobe reduction with the first null beamwidth constraint. constraint.
The positions (𝑥xn ) of
Thepositions ofthe
thearray
arrayelements
elementsare areoptimized
optimizedconsidering
considering the uniform
the uniformcurrent
cur-
amplitudes
rent amplitudes I = 1 and phase
n 𝐼 = 1 and phase Ø =
n Ø = 0. The array factor used to achieve this objectiveis
0. The array factor used to achieve this objective
isoutlined
outlinedininEquation
Equation(3).
(3).
4.2.1. Peak-Side Lobe-Level Minimization
4.2.1. Peak-Side Lobe-Level Minimization
In the design example PA, peak-side lobe levels are minimized by optimizing the
In the design example PA, peak-side lobe levels are minimized by optimizing the
position of the 10-element linear antenna array. The fitness function formulated for this
position of the 10-element linear antenna array. The fitness function formulated for this
design example is presented in Equation (10). This design focuses on suppressing the level
design example is presented in Equation (10). This design focuses on suppressing the level
of the side lobes in the region θ = [0◦ , 76◦ ] and θ = [104◦ , 180◦ ].
of the side lobes in the region 𝜃 = 0° , 76° and 𝜃 = 104° , 180° ].
Table 11 shows the position of array elements obtained using the MVO algorithm, and
Table 11 shows the position of array elements obtained using the MVO algorithm,
Figure 10 depicts their array patterns. The simulation’s outcome illustrates that the PSLL
and Figure 10 depicts their array patterns. The simulation’s outcome illustrates that the
is decreased to −22.03 dB using the MVO algorithm, which is 9.07 dB less than the peak
PSLL is decreased to −22.03 dB using the MVO algorithm, which is 9.07 dB less than the
value of the uniform linear antenna array and is presented in Table 12.
peak value of the uniform linear antenna array and is presented in Table 12.
Table 11. Positive half values of optimized positions for design example PA.
Table 11. Positive half values of optimized positions for design example PA.
Method Optimized Element Positions
Method Optimized Element Positions
ALO
ALO 0.2431λλ
0.2431 0.3761λλ
0.3761 0.8391λλ
0.8391 1.1664λλ
1.1664 1.7552λλ
1.7552
BWOA
BWOA 0.2049λλ
0.2049 0.4078λλ
0.4078 0.8285λλ
0.8285 1.1692λλ
1.1692 1.7498λλ
1.7498
MVO
MVO 0.2416
0.2416λλ 0.3774
0.3774λλ 0.8387
0.8387λλ 1.1667
1.1667λλ 1.7552
1.7552λλ
 Table 12. Peak SLL for design example PA.
Method Peak SLL (dB)
Method Peak SLL (dB)
Uniform Array −12.96
Uniform Array −12.96
ALO −22.03
ALO −22.03
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 BWOA −21.90 13 of 20
BWOA −21.90
MVO −22.03
MVO −22.03

Figure 10.
Figure10. Array pattern
Arraypattern
10.Array patternfor design
for example
designexample PA.
examplePA.
PA.
Figure for design
4.2.2. Side-Lobe Average-Power
12. Peak SLL
TableSide-Lobe
Minimization
for design example PA.
without FNBW Constraint
4.2.2. Average-Power Minimization without FNBW Constraint
Design example PB optimizes the positions of a 20-element linear antenna array to
Design exampleMethodPB optimizes the positions of a 20-element Peaklinear antenna array to
SLL (dB)
minimize the average power of the side lobes. The fitness function formulated to meet this
minimize the average power of the side lobes. The fitness function formulated to meet this
design objective Uniform
is mentioned
Array in Equation (11). In this design example, −12.96 the side-lobe re-
design objective is mentioned in Equation (11). In this design example, the side-lobe re-
gions are considered ALO as 𝜃 = 0°° , 𝜃 = 82°° , 𝜃 = 98°° , and 𝜃 −22.03 = 180°° . The array pat-
gions are consideredBWOA as 𝜃 = 0 , 𝜃 = 82 , 𝜃 = 98 , and 𝜃 −=21.90 180 . The array pat-
tern obtained for this design is shown in Figure 11, which is optimized using the DA and
tern obtained for thisMVO design is shown in Figure 11, which is optimized −22.03using the DA and
MVO algorithms. Table 13 summarizes the values of the side lobes, and around 6.13 dB of
MVO algorithms. Table 13 summarizes the values of the side lobes, and around 6.13 dB of
the average power is minimized with a highest difference of 9.25 dB and a lowest differ-
the average
4.2.2. power is minimized with a highest difference of 9.25 dB and a lowest differ-
ence ofSide-Lobe
4.23 dB. Average-Power Minimization without FNBW Constraint
ence of 4.23 dB.
Design example PB optimizes the positions of a 20-element linear antenna array to
Table 13. Positive
minimize half-sidepower
the average lobe levels for side
of the design example
lobes. ThePB.
fitness function formulated to meet
Table 13. Positive half-side lobe levels for design example PB.
this design objective is mentioned in Equation (11). In this design example, the side-lobe
Method Side-Lobe Level
◦ , and(dB)
regions are considered as θli1 = 0◦ , θui1 = 82
Method ◦, θ
li2 = 98
Side-Lobe Level θui2 = 180◦ . The array pattern
(dB)
Uniform
obtained array −13.18 −17.76 −20.43 −22.54 −23.63 −24.84 −25.33 −25.77
Uniform for this design
array −13.18is shown
−17.76in Figure
−20.4311,−22.54
which is−23.63
optimized using −25.33
−24.84 the DA and MVO
−25.77
DA
algorithms. −29.00 −26.32 −23.66 −24.14 −23.15 −25.90 −27.58 −33.23
DA Table 13 summarizes
−29.00 −26.32the−23.66
values of the side
−24.14 lobes, −25.90
−23.15 and around 6.13 dB
−27.58 of the
−33.23
MVO
average power is −22.43 −24.22
minimized with a −25.86difference
highest −27.90 of−27.86
9.25 dB −29.15
and a −31.49
lowest −33.66 of
difference
MVO −22.43 −24.22 −25.86 −27.90 −27.86 −29.15 −31.49 −33.66
4.23 dB.

Figure 11. Array pattern for design example PB.

Figure
Figure11.
11.Array
Arraypattern
patternfor design
for designexample
examplePB.
PB.

Table 13. Positive half-side lobe levels for design example PB.

Method Side-Lobe Level (dB)

Uniform array −13.18 −17.76 −20.43 −22.54 −23.63 −24.84 −25.33 −25.77
DA −29.00 −26.32 −23.66 −24.14 −23.15 −25.90 −27.58 −33.23
MVO −22.43 −24.22 −25.86 −27.90 −27.86 −29.15 −31.49 −33.66
 4.2.3. Side-Lobe Average-Power Minimization along with Null Placement
The side-lobe average-power reduction, along with the null placement of a 20-ele-
ment linear antenna array, is presented in design example PC. The fitness function for this
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 multi-objective function is mentioned in Equation (12), and the side-lobe region is 𝜃 =
14 of 20
0° , 𝜃 = 82° , 𝜃 = 98° , and 𝜃 = 180° . The direction of the required nulls is
64° , 76° , 104° , and 116° . Figure 12 presents the array pattern obtained by optimizing the
separation of array elements depicted in Table 14 using the dragonfly algorithm (DA),
4.2.3.widow
black Side-Lobe Average-Power
optimization algorithmMinimization
(BWOA), and MVO alongalgorithm.
with NullTables
Placement
15 and 16 pre-
sent the Thesideside-lobe average-power
lobe levels and null depth reduction, alongall
obtained using with theoptimization
three null placement of a 20-element
algorithms.
On average,
linear the highest
antenna power
array, is reduction
presented is attained
in design using PC.
example the MVO algorithm,
The fitness alongfor
function with
this multi-
objective function is mentioned in Equation (12), and the side-lobe region is θli1 = 0◦ ,
the placement of deep nulls in the intended directions. Null depth of −70 dB and −78.11
dB is effectively
θui1 = 98◦ , and
= 82◦ , θli2 achieved by the
θui2MVO ◦ . The direction
= 180algorithm, which isofbetter than the DA
the required and
nulls 64◦ , 76◦ , 104◦ ,
is BWOA
algorithm. ◦ DA provides the comparative null depth in comparison to the MVO
and 116 . Figure 12 presents the array pattern obtained by optimizing the separation of algorithm
atarray
two null directions,
elements but MVO
depicted presents
in Table 14 an overall
using theconsistent
dragonflynull depth at all
algorithm fourblack
(DA), loca- widow
tions.
optimization algorithm (BWOA), and MVO algorithm. Tables 15 and 16 present the side
lobe levels and null depth obtained using all three optimization algorithms. On average, the
Table 14. Positive half values of optimized positions for design example PC.
highest power reduction is attained using the MVO algorithm, along with the placement of
Method Optimizeddirections.
deep nulls in the intended Element Positions
Null depth of −70 dB and −78.11 dB is effectively
DA 0.1981 λ 0.4491 λachieved
0.8871 λ 1.0608
by the MVO λ algorithm,
1.7637 λ 1.5673
whichλ is 2.6363
better λthan2.2811 λ and
the DA 3.3262 λ 4.0654
BWOA λ
algorithm. DA
BWOA 0.1914 λ 0.5624 λprovides
1.0050 λthe 1.4021 λ 1.7423
comparative λ depth
null 2.2011inλ comparison
2.5647 λ 3.0549 λ MVO
to the 3.5021algorithm
λ 4.1257at λ two null
MVO 0.2450 λ 0.4220 λdirections,
0.6867 λ but 1.2885
MVOλ presents
1.2363 λan 1.8103
overallλ consistent
3.2044 λ null
2.1556 λ at
depth 2.5591 λ 3.9534
all four λ
locations.

Figure
Figure12.12.
Array pattern
Array for design
pattern example
for design PC. PC.
example

Table 15. Positive half-side lobe levels for design example PC.
Table 14. Positive half values of optimized positions for design example PC.
Method Side-Lobe Level (dB)
Method Uniform array −13.18 Optimized Element
−17.76 −20.43 Positions
−22.54 −23.63 −24.84 −25.33 −25.77 −26.01
DA 0.1981 λ 0.4491 λ DA λ
0.8871 −23.88
1.0608 λ−31.22 −23.65
1.7637 λ −23.37
1.5673 λ −22.71 −24.87
2.6363 λ −27.68λ −31.46
2.2811 3.3262−35.92
λ 4.0654 λ
BWOA −15.51 −22.37 −25.53 −24.67 −34.55 −23.90 −32.29 −25.43 −27.98
BWOA 0.1914 λ 0.5624 λ 1.0050 λ 1.4021 λ 1.7423 λ 2.2011 λ 2.5647 λ 3.0549 λ 3.5021 λ 4.1257 λ
MVO −25.69 −28.64 −26.72 −22.06 −23.61 −25.14 −28.52 −32.74 −36.28
MVO 0.2450 λ 0.4220 λ 0.6867 λ 1.2885 λ 1.2363 λ 1.8103 λ 3.2044 λ 2.1556 λ 2.5591 λ 3.9534 λ
Table 16. Null depth for design example PC.
15. Positive
TableRequired half-side
Nulls at lobe levels
𝟔𝟒for
° design example
𝟕𝟔° PC. 𝟏𝟎𝟒° 𝟏𝟏𝟔°
Method Null Depth (dB)
Method Side-Lobe Level (dB)
DA −63.88 −78.48 −78.48 −63.88
Uniform array −13.18 −17.76 −20.43 −22.54 −23.63 −24.84 −25.33 −25.77 −26.01
BWOA −66.33 −63.57 −63.57 −66.33
DA −23.88 −31.22 −23.65 −23.37 −22.71 −24.87 −27.68 −31.46 −35.92
BWOA −15.51 −22.37 −25.53 −24.67 −34.55 −23.90 −32.29 −25.43 −27.98
MVO −25.69 −28.64 −26.72 −22.06 −23.61 −25.14 −28.52 −32.74 −36.28

Table 16. Null depth for design example PC.

Required Nulls at 64◦ 76◦ 104◦ 116◦

Method Null Depth (dB)
DA −63.88 −78.48 −78.48 −63.88
BWOA −66.33 −63.57 −63.57 −66.33
MVO −70.00 −78.11 −78.11 −70.00
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 20

Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 15 of 20

MVO −70.00 −78.11 −78.11 −70.00

4.2.4.Close-In
4.2.4. Close-InSide-Lobe
Side-LobeLevel
LevelMinimization
Minimization
Designexample
Design example PDPD considers
considers a 10-element
a 10-element linear
linear antenna
antenna arrayarray to optimize
to optimize the
the po-
position
sition of the
of the elements
elements for for reducing
reducing thethe level
level of of
thethe adjacent
adjacent side
side lobes.
lobes. TheThe fitnessfunction
fitness function
forthis
for this design
design example
example is outlined
is outlined in Equation
in Equation (13).(13).
TableTable 17 presents
17 presents the optimized
the optimized loca-
location
tion of array
of array elements
elements obtainedobtained using
using the MVOthe algorithm,
MVO algorithm, and Figure
and Figure 13 shows 13 the
shows the
array
pattern. The simulation’s outcome shows that the CSLL is reduced to −45.79 dB by theby
array pattern. The simulation’s outcome shows that the CSLL is reduced to − 45.79 dB
the MVO
MVO algorithm.
algorithm. Hence,Hence, it presents
it presents a suppression
a suppression of 32.82
of 32.82 dB. dB.

Table17.
Table Positivehalf
17.Positive halfvalues
valuesofofoptimized
optimizedpositions
positionsfor
fordesign
designexample
examplePD.
PD.

Method
Method Optimized
OptimizedElement
Element Positions
Positions
ALO
ALO 0.2335 λ
0.2335 λ 0.3781 λ
0.3781 λ 0.8873 λ
0.8873 λ 1.4405
1.4405λλ 2.1128
2.1128λλ
MVO
MVO 0.1747 λ
0.1747 λ 0.4199
0.4199 λ
λ 0.8252
0.8252λλ 1.4921
1.4921λλ 2.0605
2.0605λλ

Figure
Figure13.
13.Array
Arraypattern
patternfor
fordesign
designexample
examplePD.
PD.

4.2.5.Side-Lobe
4.2.5. Side-LobeLevel
LevelMinimization
Minimizationwith withFNBW
FNBWConstraint
Constraint
Designexample
Design examplePE PEpresents
presentsa a20-element
20-elementlinear
linearantenna
antennaarray
arrayfor
foroptimizing
optimizingthe the
positionof
position ofantenna
antenna elements
elements toto suppress
suppressthetheaverage
averageside-lobe
side-lobe power,
power,while the the
while beamwidth
beam-
remains
width unchanged.
remains The fitness
unchanged. function
The fitness of Equation
function (14) is
of Equation optimized
(14) usingusing
is optimized DA, DA,
DBO,
BWOA, and MVO algorithms, and the optimized positions are
DBO, BWOA, and MVO algorithms, and the optimized positions are presented in Tablepresented in Table 18.
Figure 14 shows the array pattern of this design, and the result depicts
18. Figure 14 shows the array pattern of this design, and the result depicts that the SLL isthat the SLL
is reduced
reduced whilewhile the beamwidth
the beamwidth remainsremains unchanged.
unchanged. Table 19Table 19 presents
presents the PSLLtheandPSLL
FNBW and
FNBW of conventional, DA, DBO, BWOA, and MVO algorithms for
of conventional, DA, DBO, BWOA, and MVO algorithms for the linear antenna array. The the linear antenna
array. Theoutcome
simulation simulation outcome
illustrates illustrates
that that MVO
MVO presents presents results
comparable comparable
among results
otheramong
algo-
other
rithms. algorithms.

Table18.
Table Positivehalf
18.Positive halfvalues
valuesofofoptimized
optimizedpositions
positionsfor
fordesign
designexample
examplePE.
PE.

Method
Method Optimized
OptimizedElement
Element Positions
Positions
DA
DA 0.2365
0.2365 λ
λ 0.7500
0.7500 λ
λ 1.2500
1.2500 λ
λ 1.7500 λ
1.7500 λ 2.2500 λ
2.2500 λ 2.7500
2.7500λλ 3.2202
3.2202λλ 3.7500
3.7500λλ 4.2500
4.2500λλ 4.7500
4.7500λλ
DBO
DBO 0.2439 λ
0.2439 λ 0.7500 λ
0.7500 λ 1.2500 λ
1.2500 λ 1.7500
1.7500λλ 2.2500
2.2500λλ 2.7500
2.7500λλ 3.2364
3.2364λλ 3.7500
3.7500λλ 4.2157
4.2157λλ 4.7500
4.7500λλ
BWOA 0.2456 λ 0.7500 λ 1.2500 λ 1.7500 λ 2.2500 λ 2.7500 λ 3.2500 λ 3.7500 λ 4.2079 λ 4.7500 λ
BWOA 0.2456 λ 0.7500 λ 1.2500 λ 1.7500 λ 2.2500 λ 2.7500 λ 3.2500 λ 3.7500 λ 4.2079 λ 4.7500 λ
MVO 0.2427 λ 0.7496 λ 1.2493 λ 1.7500 λ 2.2473 λ 2.7500 λ 3.2402 λ 3.7500 λ 4.2161 λ 4.7500 λ
MVO 0.2427 λ 0.7496 λ 1.2493 λ 1.7500 λ 2.2473 λ 2.7500 λ 3.2402 λ 3.7500 λ 4.2161 λ 4.7500 λ
Electronics 2024, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 2

Electronics
Electronics2024,
2024,13,
13,x3356
FOR PEER REVIEW 1616ofof20
20

Figure 14. Array pattern for design example PE.

Table14.
Figure
Figure 19.Array
14. PSLLpattern
Array and FNBW
patternfor for example
fordesign
designdesign example
examplePE.
PE. PE.

Method
Table 19. PSLL and FNBW for design example PSLL
PE. FNBW
Table 19. PSLL and FNBW for design example PE.
Uniform Array −13.20 11.40
Method PSLL FNBW
DA
Method −13.25
PSLL FNBW 11.60
Uniform Array −13.20 11.40
DBO
Uniform
DA
Array
−13.25
−13.15
−13.20 11.40 11.50
11.60
DA
BWOA −13.25 11.60 11.40
DBO DBO −13.15−13.12
−13.15 11.50
11.50
BWOAMVO
BWOA −13.12−13.21
−13.12 11.40 11.60
11.40
MVO
MVO −13.21−13.21 11.60
11.60
4.3. Validation of Results Using Full-Wave Approach
4.3.Validation
4.3. ValidationofofResults
The full-waveResults UsingFull-Wave
Using
analysisFull-Wave Approach
Approach
of two design examples AA and PA has been conducted in th
Thefull-wave
The
EM-simulator full-wave CSTanalysis
analysis ofof
microwavetwotwo design
design
studio. examples
examples
A AAAA andand
half-wavelengthPA PAhas has been
beendipole
wire conducted
conducted in the
is used in the rad
as
the EM-simulator
EM-simulator
ator, and theCST CST microwave
microwave
optimized studio.
studio.
current A half-wavelength
A half-wavelength
amplitude of Table 1wire wire
wasdipole dipole
obtainedis used is used
as the
using as the
radi- optimi
different
radiator,
ator, and andoptimized
the the optimized
currentcurrent amplitude
amplitude of Tableof1 Table
was 1 was obtained
obtained using using different
different optimi-
zation algorithms for a 14-element array and has been considered for obtaining the radia
optimization
zation algorithms algorithms for a 14-element
for a 14-element array andarray and considered
has been has been considered
for obtaining forthe
obtaining
radia-
tion pattern.pattern.
the radiation
Similarly, for design example PA 10, 10,thethe
element linear array with uniform
tion pattern. Similarly, Similarly,
for designfor designPA
example example
10, thePAelement element
linear arraylinear
witharray with
uniform
excitation
uniform and optimized
excitation position of antenna
and optimized element outlined in Table 1111hashasbeen ut
excitation and optimized position ofposition
antennaofelement
antenna element
outlined inoutlined
Table 11inhas Table
been uti-
lized
beento
lized to
utilizedobtain desired
obtaintodesired radiation
obtain radiation
desired radiation characteristics.
characteristics.
characteristics. The simulation
The simulation
The simulation results
results results suggest
suggestsuggest thatthat ther
that there
is a very
isthere
a very close
is aclose
very agreement
close agreement
agreement between
between between the
theresults
the resultsresults obtained
obtained
obtained using
using using
the thethe full-wave
full-wave
full-wave approach,
approach,
approach, and an
and
the the results
results werewere obtained
obtained using
using MATLAB
MATLAB software.
software. Figures
Figures 15
the results were obtained using MATLAB software. Figures 15 and 16 show the array pat- and
15 and16 show
16 the
show array
the array pat
pattern
tern
tern of of ofdesign
design design example
example
example AA AAAA
and and PA
PAwere
andwere
PA were obtained
obtained
obtained usingusing the the
using
the full-wave
full-wave full-wave approach.
approach. approach.

Figure 15. Array pattern of design example AA obtained using full-wave approach.

Figure15.15.Array
Figure Array pattern
pattern of design
of design example
example AA obtained
AA obtained using full-wave
using full-wave approach.
approach.
Electronics
Electronics2024,
2024,13,
13,x3356
FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 2
17 of 20

Figure16.
Figure 16.Array
Array pattern
pattern of design
of design example
example PA obtained
PA obtained using full-wave
using full-wave approach.
approach.

4.4.
4.4.Statistical
StatisticalValidation
Validation
This section deals with the statistical evaluation of the MVO algorithm for all 11 design
This section deals with the statistical evaluation of the MVO algorithm for all 11 de
examples. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test is applied to analyze the robustness of the MVO
sign examples.
algorithm The
over other Wilcoxon
applied rank-sum
metaheuristic test is applied
optimization to analyze
algorithms the robustness
for 15 independent run of th
MVO The
values. algorithm overlevel
significance otherforapplied
the rank metaheuristic optimization
sum test is 5%. The amplitude andalgorithms for 15 inde
position opti-
pendenttest
mization runresults
values. The
of all thesignificance levelare
design examples forsummarized
the rank sum test is205%.
in Tables andThe
21. amplitude
The re- and
position
sult showsoptimization test results
that the MVO algorithm of all the produces
continuously design examples +
greater R are summarized
values − in Tables 2
than R values
for
andall21.
theThe
antenna array-pattern
result shows thatsynthesis
the MVO design examples.
algorithm Thus, the proposed
continuously produces MVO algo-R+ value
greater
rithm
than consistently
R− values for outperforms other cutting-edge
all the antenna array-pattern metaheuristic optimization
synthesis design algorithms
examples. Thus, the pro
(ALO, DA, DBO, WOA, and BWOA) that are explored for antenna array-pattern
posed MVO algorithm consistently outperforms other cutting-edge metaheuristic synthesis. optimi
This demonstrates the great potential of the suggested algorithm as a valid and effective
zation algorithms (ALO, DA, DBO, WOA, and BWOA) that are explored for antenna ar
tool for dealing with the difficulties associated with antenna array-pattern generation.
ray-pattern synthesis. This demonstrates the great potential of the suggested algorithm a
a valid
Table and effective
20. Wilcoxon tool
rank-sum testfor
fordealing withexamples
all the design the difficulties associated
of amplitude with antenna array
optimization.
pattern generation.
Design Example Algorithm R+ R− Result
Table 20. Wilcoxon rank-sum testALO
MVO vs. for all the design
742examples of 258
amplitude optimization.
+
AA MVO vs. DBO 646 354 +
Design Example Algorithm
MVO vs. WOA R742
+ 258 R− + Result
MVO
MVOvs.vs. ALO
ALO 742
851 149 258 + +
AB1
AA MVO vs.
MVO vs. DBO DBO 533
646 467 354 + +
MVO vs.
MVO vs. WOA ALO 868
742 132 258 + +
AB2 MVO vs. DBO 808 192 +
MVO vs.
MVO vs. WOAALO 851
867 133 149 + +
AB1
MVO
MVOvs.vs. DBO
ALO 533
751 249 467 + +
AC
MVO
MVOvs.vs. ALO
DBO 868
751 249 132 + +
AB2 MVO
MVOvs.vs. DBO
ALO 808
979 21 192 + +
AD
MVO vs. WOA 930 70 +
MVO vs. WOA 867 133 +
MVO vs. ALO 999 1 +
AE MVO vs. ALO 751 249 +
AC MVO vs. DA 966 34 +
MVO vs. DBO 751 249 +
MVO vs. ALO 979 21
Wilcoxon rank-sum test for all the design examples of position optimization.
Table 21. AD +
MVO vs. WOA 930 70 +
Design Example Algorithm R+ R− Result
MVO vs. ALO 999 1 +
AE MVO vs. ALO 999 1 +
PA MVO
MVO vs.vs.BWOA
DA 966
964 36 34 + +

Table 21. Wilcoxon rank-sum test for all the design examples of position optimization.

Design Example Algorithm R+ R− Result

MVO vs. ALO 999 1 +
PA
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 18 of 20

Table 21. Cont.

Design Example Algorithm R+ R− Result

PB MVO vs. DA 661 339 +
MVO vs. DA 901 99 +
PC
MVO vs. BWOA 659 341 +
MVO vs. DA 717 283 +
PD MVO vs. DBO 990 10 +
MVO vs. BWOA 953 47 +
PE MVO vs. ALO 950 50 +

5. Conclusions
This paper explores the MVO algorithm for improving the far-field radiation char-
acteristics of the linear antenna array. The MVO algorithm has a good exploration and
exploitation capability and has few tuning parameters. Therefore, it is an ideal choice for
solving complex optimization problems of electromagnetic and antenna communities. In
the first section of the paper, the MVO algorithm is explored in design examples AA-AE
for optimizing the amplitudes of the antenna array for suppressing the PSLL and reduc-
ing the side-lobe average power with and without the first null beamwidth constraint
while positioning the deep nulls in the intended directions and decreases the CSLL. The
simulation results illustrate that in amplitude optimization in the 14-element array, the
PSLL is minimized by 24.84 dB compared to the uniform linear array and outperforms
other optimization algorithms. Similarly, side-lobe average power is minimized in 20- and
32-element arrays, and deep nulls −100.5 dB, −95.41 dB, −95.41 dB, and −100.5 dB are
placed at 64◦ , 76◦ , 104◦ , and 116◦ . The CSLL is decreased in a 10-element array by 17.22 dB
in comparison to a uniform linear array, and the side-lobe average power is minimized in a
20-element array while maintaining the FNBW with a tolerance of ±5%.
In the second section, the interelement spacing between the antenna elements is
optimized in design examples PA-PE using the MVO algorithm to achieve desired radiation
characteristics. The simulation result shows that in a 10-element array, PSLL is reduced
by 9.07 dB in comparison to the uniform linear array. The side-lobe average power is
minimized for a 20-element linear antenna array with the placement of deep nulls −70 dB,
−78.11 dB, −78.11 dB, and −70.00 dB at 64◦ , 76◦ , 104◦ , and 116◦ . In the design example PD
for a 10-element array, the CSLL was suppressed by 32.82 dB. In the design example PE for
a 20-element array, the side lobe average power is minimized while maintaining the FNBW
at a tolerance of ±5%.
The optimized values of amplitude and position for design examples AA and PA
obtained using optimization algorithms have also been validated by the full-wave approach,
and it is found that there is a very close proximity between the MATLAB and EM simulation
results. The performance of the MVO algorithm for all the design examples is also analyzed
using the Wilcoxon rank test over 15 independent runs. The result demonstrates that the
MVO algorithm excels over all other algorithms and is suitable for antenna array-pattern
synthesis. As a scope of future work, the MVO algorithm can be explored for the pattern
synthesis of complex array geometries such as planar arrays, volumetric arrays, concentric
circular arrays, and conformal arrays.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.R., A.S. (Abhinav Sharma), R.S. and S.S.T.; Method-
ology, A.S. (Abhinav Sharma), A.S. (Abhishek Sharma), A.K.A. and C.H.W.; simulation, A.R., A.S.
(Abhishek Sharma) and W.H.L.; writing—original draft, A.R., A.S. (Abhinav Sharma) and A.K.A.;
writing—review and editing, A.R., A.S. (Abhinav Sharma), A.S. (Abhishek Sharma) and C.H.W.;
visualization, R.S., A.K.A., S.S.T. and A.S. (Abhinav Sharma); supervision, A.S. (Abhinav Sharma)
and A.K.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 19 of 20

Funding: The study was funded by the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education through the Funda-
mental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS/1/2024/TK07/UCSI/02/1) and UCSI University Research
through the Excellence & Innovation Grant (REIG-FETBE-2022/038).
Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: Author Abhishek Kumar Awasthi was employed by the company Paras
Antidrone Technologies Private Limited. The remaining authors declare that the research was
conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
potential conflict of interest.

References
1. Teruel, O.G.; Iglesias, E.R. Ant colony optimization in thinned array synthesis with minimum sidelobe level. IEEE Antennas Wirel.
Propag. Lett. 2006, 5, 349–352. [CrossRef]
2. Sharma, A. Antenna array pattern synthesis using metaheuristic algorithm: A review. IETE Tech. Rev. 2022, 40, 90–115. [CrossRef]
3. Mirjalili, S.; Mirjalili, S.M.; Hatamlou, A. Multi-verse optimizer: A nature-inspired algorithm for global optimization. Neural
Comput. Appl. 2016, 27, 495–513. [CrossRef]
4. Sharma, A.; Mathur, S. Performance analysis of adaptive array signal processing algorithms. IETE Tech. Rev. 2016, 33, 472–491.
[CrossRef]
5. Saxena, P.; Kothari, A. Ant lion optimization algorithm to control side lobe level and null depths in linear antenna arrays. AEU-Int.
J. Electron. Commun. 2016, 70, 1339–1349. [CrossRef]
6. Beccaria, M.; Pirinoli, P.; Yang, F. Preliminary results on conformal transmitarray antennas. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE
International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation & USNC/URSI National Radio Science Meeting, Boston, MA, USA, 8–13
July 2018; pp. 265–266.
7. Liu, Z.Q.; Zhang, Y.S.; Qian, Z.; Han, Z.P.; Ni, W. A novel broad beamwidth conformal antenna on unmanned aerial vehicle. IEEE
Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 2012, 11, 196–199. [CrossRef]
8. Pavani, T.; Padmavathi, K.; Kumari, C.U.; Ushasree, A. Design of array antennas via atom search optimization. Mater. Today Proc.
2023, 80, 2051–2054. [CrossRef]
9. Grewal, N.S.; Rattan, M.; Patterh, M.S. A linear antenna array failure correction using improved bat algorithm. Int. J. RF Microw.
Comput.-Aided Eng. 2017, 27, 7.
10. Das, A.; Mandal, D.; Ghoshal, S.; Kar, R. An efficient side lobe reduction technique considering mutual coupling effect in linear
array antenna using bat algorithm. Swarm Evol. Comput. 2017, 35, 26–40. [CrossRef]
11. Wang, A.; Li, X.; Xu, Y. BA-based low-PSLL beampattern synthesis in the presence of array errors. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 9371–9379.
[CrossRef]
12. Almagboul, M.; Shu, F.; Qian, Y.; Zhou, X.; Wang, J.; Hu, J. Atom search optimization algorithm based hybrid antenna array
receive beamforming to control sidelobe level and steering the null. AEU-Int. J. Electron. Commun. 2019, 111, 152854. [CrossRef]
13. Liu, L.; Wang, A.; Sun, G.; Zheng, T.; Yu, C. An improved biogeography-based optimization approach for beam pattern
optimizations of linear and circular antenna arrays. Int. J. Numer. Model. Electron. Netw. Devices Fields 2021, 34, e2910. [CrossRef]
14. Han, L.; Yanheng, L.; Sun, G.; Wang, A.; Liang, S. Beam pattern synthesis based on improved biogeography-based optimization
for reducing sidelobe level. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2017, 60, 161–174.
15. Guney, K.; Onay, M. Bees algorithm for interference suppression of linear antenna arrays by controlling the phase-only and both
the amplitude and phase. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37, 3129–3135. [CrossRef]
16. Li, X.; Yin, M. Optimal synthesis of linear antenna array with composite differential evolution algorithm. Sci. Iran. 2012, 19,
1780–1787. [CrossRef]
17. Zhang, R.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, J.; Li, Q. Pattern synthesis of linear antenna array using improved differential evolution algorithm with
sps framework. Sensors 2020, 20, 5158. [CrossRef]
18. Rao, A.P.; Sarma, N. Synthesis of reconfigurable antenna array using differential evolution algorithm. IETE J. Res. 2017, 63,
428–434. [CrossRef]
19. Chakravarthy, V.; Chowdary, P.; Panda, G.; Anguera, J.; Andlijar, A.; Majhi, B. On the linear antenna array synthesis techniques
for sum and difference patterns using flower pollination algorithm. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2018, 43, 3965–3977. [CrossRef]
20. Ram, G.; Panduro, M.A.; Reyna, A.; Kar, R.; Mandal, D. Pattern synthesis and broad nulling optimization of STMLAA with EM
simulation. Int. J. Numer. Model. Electron. Netw. Devices Fields 2018, 31, e2322. [CrossRef]
21. Saxena, P.; Kothari, A. Linear antenna array optimization using flower pollination algorithm. SpringerPlus 2016, 5, 306. [CrossRef]
22. Zhao, K.; Liu, Y.; Hu, K. Optimal pattern synthesis of linear array antennas using the nonlinear chaotic grey wolf algorithm.
Electronics 2023, 12, 4087. [CrossRef]
23. Zhang, T.; Ser, W. Robust beampattern synthesis for antenna arrays with mutual coupling effect. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.
2011, 59, 2889–2895. [CrossRef]
24. Liu, Y.; Li, M.; Haupt, R.L.; Guo, Y.J. Synthesizing shaped power patterns for linear and planar antenna arrays including mutual
coupling by refined joint rotation/phase optimization. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2020, 68, 4648–4657. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2024, 13, 3356 20 of 20

25. Zeng, S.; Yang, X.; Li, C.; Zhao, F. Fast descent search algorithm for shaped-beam synthesis with the desired field phases as design
variables. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2023, 71, 3070–3079. [CrossRef]
26. Wang, Z.; Sun, G.; Tong, J.; Ji, Y. Pattern synthesis for sparse linear arrays via atomic norm minimization. IEEE Antennas Wirel.
Propag. Lett. 2021, 20, 2215–2219. [CrossRef]
27. Hua, D.; Li, W.T.; Shi, X.W. Pattern synthesis for large planar antenna arrays using a modified alternating projection method.
Prog. Electromagn. Res. 2014, 37, 149–160. [CrossRef]
28. Wang, Y.; He, X.; Wang, J.; Berezin, S.; Mathis, W. Antenna array pattern synthesis via coordinate descent method. J. Electromagn.
Anal. Appl. 2015, 7, 168–177. [CrossRef]
29. Akdagli, A.A.; Guney, K.; Karaboga, D. Touring ant colony optimization algorithm for shaped-beam pattern synthesis of linear
antenna. Electromagnetics 2006, 26, 615–628. [CrossRef]
30. Bera, R.; Cheruvu, S.; Kundu, K.; Upadhyay, P.; Mandal, D. Array antenna pattern synthesis using improved particle swarm
optimization (IPSO) algorithm. ECTI Trans. Electr. Eng. Electron. Commun. 2023, 21, 249806. [CrossRef]
31. Subhashini, K.R.; Satapathy, J.K. Development of an enhanced ant lion optimization algorithm and its application in antenna
array synthesis. Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 59, 153–173. [CrossRef]
32. Saxena, P.; Kothari, A. Optimal pattern synthesis of linear antenna array using grey wolf optimization algorithm. Int. J. Antennas
Propag. 2016, 2016, 1205970. [CrossRef]
33. Alnahwi, F.M.; Al-Yasir, Y.I.A.; Sattar, D.; Ali, R.S.; See, C.H.; Abd-Alhameed, R.A. A new optimization algorithm based on the
fungi Kingdom expansion behavior for antenna applications. Electronics 2021, 10, 2057. [CrossRef]
34. Beccaria, M.; Niccolai, A.; Zich, R.E.; Pirinoli, P. Shaped-beam reflect array design by means of social network optimization (Sno).
Electronics 2021, 10, 744. [CrossRef]
35. Mengozzi, M.; Gibiino, G.P.; Angelotti, A.M.; Santarelli, A.; Florian, C.; Colantonio, P. Automatic Optimization of Input Split and
Bias Voltage in Digitally Controlled Dual-Input Doherty RF Pas. Energies 2022, 15, 4892. [CrossRef]
36. Mengozzi, M.; Gibiino, G.P.; Angelotti, A.M.; Florian, C.; Santarelli, A. GaN power amplifier digital predistortion by multi-
objective optimization for maximum RF output power. Electronics 2021, 10, 244. [CrossRef]
37. Yu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Cheng, Q.S.; Liu, B.; Wang, Y.; Guo, C.; Ye, T.T. State-of-the-Art: AI-Assisted Surrogate Modeling and
Optimization for Microwave Filters. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 2022, 70, 4635–4651. [CrossRef]
38. Toktas, A. Multi-objective design of multilayer microwave dielectric filters using artificial bee colony algorithm. In Nature-Inspired
Metaheuristic Algorithms for Engineering Optimization Applications; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 357–372.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.