1: \documentclass[10pt,conference]{IEEEtran}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{amssymb}
5: \usepackage[dvipdfm]{hyperref}
6: \usepackage{theorem}
7:
8: %\addtolength{\textheight}{1cm}
9: \parindent0em
10: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.17}
11:
12:
13: \newif\ifdraft
14: \newif\iffigures
15:
16: \drafttrue
17: \figurestrue
18:
19:
20: \graphicspath{{./}{/home/jungp/TeX/Figures/}}
21:
22: \input{ieee_environments}
23: \input{notations}
24: %%\include{todo}
25:
26: \begin{document}
27: \title{Weighted Norms of Ambiguity Functions and Wigner Distributions }
28: \author{Peter Jung\\
29: Fraunhofer German-Sino Lab for Mobile Communications (MCI) and the Heinrich-Hertz Institute\\[.1em]
30: \small{jung@hhi.fraunhofer.de}}
31: \maketitle
32: \begin{abstract}
33: In this article new bounds on weighted $p$-norms of ambiguity functions and Wigner functions are
34: derived. Such norms occur frequently in several areas of physics and engineering.
35: In pulse optimization for Weyl--Heisenberg signaling in wide-sense stationary uncorrelated scattering
36: channels for example it is a key step to find the optimal waveforms for a given scattering statistics
37: which is a problem also well known in radar and sonar waveform optimizations.
38: The same situation arises in quantum information processing and optical communication when optimizing
39: pure quantum states for communicating in bosonic quantum channels, i.e. find optimal channel input states
40: maximizing the pure state channel fidelity.
41: Due to the non-convex nature of this problem the optimum and the maximizers itself are in general difficult find,
42: numerically and analytically. Therefore upper bounds on the achievable
43: performance are important which will be provided by this contribution.
44: Based on a result due to E. Lieb \cite{lieb:ambbound}, the main theorem
45: states a new upper bound which is independent of the waveforms and becomes tight only for Gaussian weights
46: and waveforms. A discussion of this particular important case,
47: which tighten recent results on Gaussian quantum fidelity and coherent states, will be given.
48: Another bound is presented for the case where scattering is determined only by some arbitrary region
49: in phase space.
50: \end{abstract}
51: \section{Introduction}
52: Time-frequency representations are an important tool in signal analysis, physics and many other scientific
53: areas. Among them are the Woodward cross ambiguity function $\tilde{\Amb}_{g\gamma}(\tau,\nu)$,
54: which can be defined as ($\overline{\cdot}$ denotes complex conjugate)
55: \begin{equation}
56: \tilde{\Amb}_{g\gamma}(\tau,\nu)=\int g(t-\frac{\tau}{2})\overline{\gamma}(t+\frac{\tau}{2})e^{-i2\pi\nu t}dt
57: \end{equation}
58: and the Wigner distribution $\Wigner_{g\gamma}(\tau,\nu)$
59: \begin{equation}
60: \Wigner_{g\gamma}(\tau,\nu)=\int g(\tau+\frac{t}{2})\overline{\gamma}(\tau-\frac{t}{2})e^{-i2\pi\nu t}dt
61: \end{equation}
62: where the functions $g,\gamma:\Reals\rightarrow\Complexes$ assumed to be in
63: $\Ltwo(\Reals)$\footnote{Which can be relaxed to other spaces by the H\"older inequality}.
64: Both are related by $\Wigner_{g\gamma}(\tau,\nu)=2\tilde{\Amb}_{g\gamma^-}(2\tau,2\nu)$
65: where $\gamma^-(t)=\gamma(-t)$. Hence all results which will presented later on apply on
66: Wigner functions as well.
67: Due to non--commutativity of the shifts in $\tau$ and $\nu$ (in phase space) there exists many definitions
68: of these functions which differ only by phase factors. In considering norms only, the
69: ambiguities due to these phase factors are not important.
70:
71: To be consistent with the previous work in \cite{jung:wssuspulseshaping,jung:isit05}
72: in this article the alternative definition
73: \begin{equation}
74: \Amb_{g\gamma}(x)\defeq\langle g,\Shift_x\gamma\rangle=\int \overline{g}(t)(\Shift_x \gamma)(t)dt
75: \end{equation}
76: is used, where $\Shift_x$ is the time-frequency shift operator given as
77: \begin{equation}
78: (\Shift_x f)(t)\defeq e^{i2\pi x_2 t}f(t-x_1)
79: \end{equation}
80: and $x=(x_1,x_2)\in\Reals^2$.
81:
82: Note that $\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)=e^{i\pi x_1 x_2}\tilde{\Amb}_{\overline{g}\overline{\gamma}}(-x_1,-x_2)$.
83: These operators establish up to phase factors an unitary representation of the Weyl--Heisenberg
84: group on $\Ltwo(\Reals)$ --- the so called Schr\"odinger representation
85: (see for example \cite{folland:harmonics:phasespace}).
86: They equal (again up to phase factors) the so called Weyl operators
87: (Glauber displacement operators), i.e. perform phase space displacements in one dimension.
88:
89: It is an important and in general unsolved (non--convex) problem in many fields of physics and engineering
90: to find normalized function $g$ and $\gamma$ such that the following integral
91: \begin{equation}
92: \int |\langle g,\Shift_{x}\gamma\rangle|^2 \BHScat(x) dx
93: =\int |\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|^2 \BHScat(x) dx
94: \label{eq:ambbound:problemintegral}
95: \end{equation}
96: is maximized where $\BHScat(x)$ could be some probability distribution and $dx$ is the Lebesgue
97: measure on $\Reals^2$. For example in radar and sonar
98: application (\ref{eq:ambbound:problemintegral}) is typically related to
99: the correlation response with some filter $g$ of a
100: transmitted pulse $\gamma$ after passing through
101: a non-stationary scattering environment characterized by some $\BHScat(\cdot)$. This formulation
102: is obtained for so called Weyl--Heisenberg signaling in wide-sense stationary uncorrelated
103: scattering (WSSUS) channels \cite{kozek:thesis,jung:wssuspulseshaping,liu:orthogonalstf,kozek:nofdm1}
104: where $\BHScat(\cdot)$ is called the
105: scattering function.
106:
107: If considering $\gamma$ as
108: a probability wave function in quantum mechanics (\ref{eq:ambbound:problemintegral}) can be considered
109: also as its overlap with some wave function $g$ after several phase space interactions.
110: In quantum information processing (\ref{eq:ambbound:problemintegral}) is typically written as
111: pure state fidelity
112: \begin{equation}
113: (\ref{eq:ambbound:problemintegral})
114: =\Trace\{\Pro_g \int \Shift_{x}\Pro_\gamma \Shift_{x}^* \BHScat(x)dx\}
115: \defeq\Trace\{\Pro_g A(\Pro_\gamma)\}
116: \label{eq:quantum:fidelity}
117: \end{equation}
118: where $\Pro_f\defeq\lVert f\rVert_2^{-2}\langle f,\cdot\rangle f$ is the rank-one projector
119: onto $f$ and $\Trace(\cdot)$ denotes the trace functional.
120: The middle term in \eqref{eq:quantum:fidelity} is the Kraus representation \cite{kraus:states:effects}
121: of a bosonic quantum channel $A(\cdot)$ \cite{holevo:propquantum,hall:gaussiannoise} which maps
122: the input state $\Pro_\gamma$ (rank--one density operator) to the output $A(\Pro_\gamma)$.
123: Minimizing the probability of error
124: $P_e=1-\Trace\{\Pro_g A(\Pro_\gamma)\}$ (see for example \cite{helstrom:quantumdet})
125: for rank--one measurements is then the maximization of the pure state fidelity, i.e.
126: the following optimization problem:
127: \begin{equation}
128: \underset{g,\gamma}{\Maximize}\Trace\{\Pro_g A(\Pro_\gamma)\}
129: \label{eq:ambbound:traceform}
130: \end{equation}
131: For each $\gamma$ the operator $A(\Pro_\gamma)$ is a positive semi--definite trace class
132: (thus compact) operator, hence \eqref{eq:ambbound:traceform} likewise reads
133: \begin{equation}
134: \underset{{\Trace{X}=1,X\geq 0}}{\Maximize}\lambda_{\max}(A(X))
135: \label{eq:ambbound:outputpurity}
136: \end{equation}
137: where the rank--relaxation
138: follows from convexity of the maximal eigenvalue $\lambda_{\max}(\cdot)$ and
139: linear--convexity of $A(\cdot)$ (see for example \cite{jung:wssuspulseshaping,jung:isit05}).
140:
141: In a slightly more general context this paper considers
142: $\lVert|\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r\BHScat\rVert_1$ which directly gives
143: the weighted $r$--norms of ambiguity functions in the form of
144: \begin{equation}
145: \lVert\Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert_{r,\BHScat}=\left(\int |\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|^r \BHScat(x) dx\right)^{1/r}
146: =\lVert|\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r\BHScat\rVert_1^{1/r}
147: \end{equation}
148: where $\BHScat:\Reals^2\rightarrow\RealsPlus$ is now some arbitrary weight function. For $r=2$ the results match then the
149: examples given so far. Note furthermore that this topic is also connected
150: to R\'{e}nyi entropies $H(r)$ of time--frequency representations
151: \begin{equation}
152: H(r)=\frac{1}{1-r}\log{\lVert\Amb_{g\gamma}\BHScat^\frac{1}{r}\rVert_r^r}
153: \end{equation}
154: i.e. a measure of time--frequency information content \cite{baraniuk:renyi}.
155:
156:
157: \section{Main Results}
158:
159: The results are organized in a main theorem presenting the general upper bound to
160: $\lVert|\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r\BHScat\rVert_1$. Then, two special cases
161: are investigated in more detail. The first is dedicated to the overall equality case in the main theorem
162: and important for Gaussian bosonic quantum channels.
163: The second case discusses another application relevant situation motivated by
164: WSSUS pulse shaping in wireless communications.
165: But before starting, the following definitions are needed.
166:
167: \begin{mydefinition}
168: Let $0<p<\infty$. For functions $f:\Reals\rightarrow\Complexes$ and
169: $F:\Reals^2\rightarrow\Complexes$
170: \begin{equation*}
171: \lVert f\rVert_p\defeq\left(\int|f(t)|^pdt\right)^{1/p}\quad
172: \lVert F\rVert_p\defeq\left(\int|F(x)|^pdx\right)^{1/p}
173: \end{equation*}
174: are then the common notion of $p$--norms,
175: where $dt$ and $dx$ are the Lebesgue measure on $\Reals$ and $\Reals^2$.
176: Furthermore for $p=\infty$ is
177: \begin{equation*}
178: \lVert f\rVert_\infty\defeq\esup |f(t)|\quad \lVert F\rVert_\infty\defeq\esup |F(x)|
179: \end{equation*}
180: If $\lVert f\rVert_p$ is finite $f$ is said to be in $\Leb{p}(\Reals)$ (similarly
181: if $\lVert F\rVert_p$ is finite, $F$ is said to be in $\Leb{p}(\Reals^2)$).
182: \end{mydefinition}
183: For discussion of the equality case for the presented bound
184: the formulation ''to be Gaussian'' for functions $f:\Reals\rightarrow\Complexes$ and
185: $F:\Reals^2\rightarrow\Complexes$ is needed.
186: \begin{mydefinition}
187: Functions $f(t)$ and $F(x)$ are said to be ''Gaussian'' if for
188: $a,b,c,C\in\Complexes$, $A\in\Complexes^{2\times2}$ and $B\in\Complexes^{2}$
189: \begin{equation}
190: f(t)=e^{-at^2+bt+c}\quad F(x)=e^{-\langle x,Ax\rangle+\langle B,x\rangle+C}
191: \end{equation}
192: and $\Real{a}>0$ and $A^*A>0$.
193: \label{def:gaussians}
194: \end{mydefinition}
195: Two Gaussians $f(t)$ and $g(t)$ are called {\it matched} if they have the same parameter $a$.
196:
197: The main ingredient for the presented analysis is the following theorem due to E. Lieb \cite{lieb:ambbound} on
198: (unweighted) norms of ambiguity functions.
199: \begin{mytheorem} (E. Lieb)
200: Let $\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)=\langle g,\Shift_{x}\gamma\rangle$ be the cross ambiguity function between
201: functions $g\in\Leb{a}(\Reals)$ and $\gamma\in\Leb{b}(\Reals)$ where $1=\frac{1}{a}+\frac{1}{b}$.
202: If $2<p<\infty$ with $q=\frac{p}{p-1}\leq a\leq p$ and
203: $q\leq b\leq p$, then holds
204: \begin{equation}
205: \lVert\Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert^p_p\leq H(p,a,b)\lVert g\rVert_a^p\lVert\gamma\rVert_b^p
206: \label{eq:lieb:ambleq}
207: \end{equation}
208: where $H(p,a,b)=c^p_q\left(c_{a/q}c_{b/q}c_{p/q}\right)^{p/q}$, $c_p=p^{1/(2p)}q^{-1/(2q)}$.
209: Equality is achieved with $g$ and $\gamma$ being Gaussian if and only if both $a$ and $b>p/(p-1)$.
210: In particular for $a=b=2$
211: \begin{equation}
212: \lVert\Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert^p_p\leq\frac{2}{p}\lVert g\rVert_2^p\lVert\gamma\rVert_2^p
213: \label{eq:lieb:ambleqtwo}
214: \end{equation}
215: \label{thm:lieb:ambleq}
216: \end{mytheorem}
217: Actually Lieb proved also the reversed inequality for $1\leq p<2$. Furthermore, for the
218: case $p=2$ it is well known that equality holds in (\ref{eq:lieb:ambleqtwo}) for all
219: $g$ and $\gamma$. Then the optimal slope (related to entropy)
220: \begin{equation}
221: \frac{1}{p}\int|\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|^p\ln|\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|^p dx
222: \end{equation}
223: at $p=2$ is achieved by matched Gaussians \cite{lieb:ambbound}. For simplifications it is assumed
224: from now that $\lVert g\rVert_2=\lVert\gamma\rVert_2=1$.
225: With the previous preparations the main theorem in this article is now:
226: \begin{mytheorem}
227: Let $\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)=\langle g,\Shift_{x}\gamma\rangle$ be the cross ambiguity function between
228: functions $g,\gamma$ with $\lVert g\rVert_2=\lVert\gamma\rVert_2=1$ and $p,r\in\Reals$. Furthermore
229: let $\BHScat(\cdot)\in\Leb{q}(\Reals^2)$ with $q=\frac{p}{p-1}$. Then
230: \begin{equation}
231: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 \leq \left(\frac{2}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\lVert\BHScat\rVert_{\frac{p}{p-1}}
232: \end{equation}
233: holds for each $p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}$.
234: \label{thm:jung:fidelitybound}
235: \end{mytheorem}
236: \begin{proof}
237: In the first step H\"older's inequality gives
238: \begin{equation}
239: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 \leq \lVert|\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r\rVert_p \rVert\BHScat \rVert_q
240: \label{eq:hoelderapplied}
241: \end{equation}
242: for conjugated indices $p$ and $q$, thus with $1=\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}$.
243: Equality is achieved for $1<p<\infty$ if and only if there exists $\lambda\in\Reals$ such that
244: \begin{equation}
245: |\BHScat(x)|=\lambda|\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|^{r(p-1)}
246: \label{eq:hoelderequality:conditions}
247: \end{equation}
248: for almost every $x$. Similar conclusions for $p=1$ and $p=\infty$ are not considered
249: in this paper.
250: Lieb's inequality in the form of (\ref{eq:lieb:ambleqtwo}) for
251: $\lVert \Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert^{rp}_{rp}$ gives for
252: rhs of (\ref{eq:hoelderapplied})
253: \begin{equation}
254: \begin{split}
255: \lVert|\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r\rVert_p \rVert\BHScat \rVert_q
256: &=\lVert \Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert^r_{rp} \rVert\BHScat \rVert_q\\
257: &=\left(\lVert \Amb_{g\gamma}\rVert^{rp}_{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \rVert\BHScat \rVert_q
258: \leq\left(\frac{2}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\lVert\BHScat\rVert_q
259: \end{split}
260: \label{eq:liebapplied}
261: \end{equation}
262: The latter holds for every $rp\geq2$, thus the case $rp=2$ is now included as already mentioned before.
263: Equality in (\ref{eq:liebapplied}) is achieved if $g$ and $\gamma$ are matched Gaussians. Furthermore if
264: strictly $rp>2$, equality in (\ref{eq:liebapplied})
265: is {\it only} achieved if $g$ and $\gamma$ are matched Gaussians.
266: Replacing $q=\frac{p}{p-1}$ gives the desired result.
267: \end{proof}
268: \vspace*{.5em}
269:
270: Note that apart from the normalization constraint the bound in Thm.\ref{thm:jung:fidelitybound}
271: does not depend anymore on $g$ and $\gamma$. Hence
272: for any given $\BHScat(\cdot)$ the optimal bound
273: can be found by
274: \begin{equation}
275: \min_{\Reals\ni p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}}\left(
276: \left(\frac{2}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\lVert\BHScat\rVert_{\frac{p}{p-1}}
277: \right)
278: \end{equation}
279: In the minimization $p\geq 1$ has to be forced for H\"older's inequality and
280: $p\geq\frac{2}{r}$ for Lieb's inequality.
281: Two special cases are investigated now in more detail which are
282: relevant for application.
283: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
284: % Gaussian case
285: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
286:
287: First the overall equality case in Thm.\ref{thm:jung:fidelitybound}
288: is considered.
289: \begin{mycorollary}
290: Let $\BHScat(x)=\alpha e^{-\alpha\pi (x_1^2+x_2^2)}$ with $\Reals\ni\alpha>0$. Then for each
291: $p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}$ holds
292: \begin{equation}
293: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 \leq
294: \left(\frac{2\alpha}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^\frac{p-1}{p}
295: \end{equation}
296: The best bound is given as
297: \begin{equation}
298: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 \leq
299: \begin{cases}
300: \frac{2\alpha}{2\alpha+r} & \alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}\\
301: \alpha^\frac{r}{2}(1-r/2)^{1-r/2} & \text{else}
302: \end{cases}
303: \label{eq:ambbound:gaus:best}
304: \end{equation}
305: For $\alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}$ equality is achieved at $p=\frac{2\alpha}{r}+1$
306: if and only if $g$ and $\gamma$ are matched Gaussian, i.e. then
307: \begin{equation}
308: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1
309: =\frac{2\alpha}{2\alpha+r}
310: \end{equation}
311: holds.
312: \label{cor:ambbound:gaussian}
313: \end{mycorollary}
314:
315: \begin{proof}
316: The moments of $\Leb{1}$--normalized two--dimensional Gaussians
317: are given as
318: \begin{equation}
319: \lVert\BHScat\rVert_s=\left(\frac{1}{s}\right)^{\frac{1}{s}}\alpha^{\frac{s-1}{s}}
320: \end{equation}
321: According to Thm.\ref{thm:jung:fidelitybound} the upper bound
322: \begin{equation}
323: \begin{split}
324: f(p)
325: &\defeq\left(\frac{2}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\lVert\BHScat\rVert_{\frac{p}{p-1}}
326: ={\left(\frac{2\alpha}{rp}\right)}^{\frac{1}{p}}{\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)}^{\frac{p-1}{p}}
327: \end{split}
328: \end{equation}
329: holds for each $p\geq\max\{1,2/r\}$.
330: The optimal (minimal) bound is attained as some point $p_{\min}$ which can be obtained as
331: \begin{equation}
332: \min_{\Reals\ni p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}}f(p)=f(p_{\min})
333: \end{equation}
334: The first derivative $f'$ of $f$ at point $p$ is
335: \begin{equation}
336: f'(p)=\frac{f(p)}{p^2}\ln(\frac{r(p-1)}{2\alpha})
337: \end{equation}
338: Thus $f'(p_{\min})=0$ gives only one stationary point $p_{\min}$
339: \begin{equation}
340: \frac{r(p_{\min}-1)}{2\alpha}=1\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad p_{\min}=\frac{2\alpha}{r}+1> 1
341: \end{equation}
342: Due to $f(p)/p^2>0$ and strict monotonicity of $\ln(\cdot)$ follows easily that
343: \mbox{$f'(p_{\min}+\epsilon)>0>f'(p_{\min}-\epsilon)$} for all $\epsilon>0$, hence
344: $f$ attains a minimum at $p_{\min}$.
345: The constraint $p_{\min}\geq 1$ is strictly fulfilled for every allowed $\alpha$ and $r$, hence
346: the solution is feasible ($p_{\min}\geq\frac{2}{r}$) if $\alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}$.
347: Then the optimal (minimal) bound is
348: \begin{equation}
349: f(p_{\min})=\frac{2\alpha}{2\alpha+r}
350: \end{equation}
351: For the infeasible case instead, i.e. for $0<\alpha<\frac{2-r}{2}$, follows that minimal bound is attained
352: at the boundary point $p=\frac{2}{r}$. Thus $f(2/r)=\alpha^\frac{r}{2}(1-r/2)^{1-r/2}$.
353: Summarizing,
354: \begin{equation}
355: \min_{\Reals\ni p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}}f(p)=
356: \begin{cases}
357: \frac{2\alpha}{2\alpha+r} & \alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}\\
358: \alpha^\frac{r}{2}(1-r/2)^{1-r/2} & \text{else}
359: \end{cases}
360: \end{equation}
361: is the best possible upper bound.
362:
363: It remains to investigate the conditions for equality.
364: Lieb's inequality is fulfilled with equality if strictly $p_{\min}>\frac{2}{r}$ and
365: $g,\gamma$ are matched Gaussians. In this case follows
366: \begin{equation}
367: \Amb_{g\gamma}(x)=e^{-\frac{\pi}{2}(ax_1^2+\frac{1}{\alpha}x_2^2)+\langle B,x\rangle+C}
368: \end{equation}
369: for some $B\in\Complexes^2$, $a,C\in\Complexes$ and $\Real{a}>0$, thus $\Amb_{g\gamma}(\cdot)$ is
370: a two--dimensional Gaussian. Next, to have equality in (\ref{eq:hoelderapplied}) $p>1$ and
371: equation (\ref{eq:hoelderequality:conditions}), which is in this case
372: \begin{equation}
373: \begin{split}
374: |\Amb_{g\gamma}(x)|
375: &=e^{\Real{-\frac{\pi}{2}(ax_1^2+\frac{1}{\alpha}x_2^2)+\langle B,x\rangle+C}} \\
376: &=\lambda\alpha e^{-\frac{\alpha\pi}{r(p-1)}|x|^2}
377: =\lambda|\BHScat(x)|^\frac{1}{r(p-1)}
378: \end{split}
379: \end{equation}
380: have to be fulfilled for almost every $x$.
381: Thus, it follows that $\Real{B}=(0,0)$, $\lambda\alpha e^{-\Real{C}}=1$,
382: $\Real{a}=1$ and -- most important -- again $p=\frac{2\alpha}{r}+1$.
383: But, this is obviously also the minimum if $\alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}$, hence in this
384: and only this case equality is achieved.
385: \end{proof}
386: \vspace*{.5em}
387: It is remarkable that the sharp ''if and only if'' conclusion for Gaussians
388: holds now for $\alpha\geq\frac{2-r}{2}$. Lieb's inequality alone needs
389: $\alpha>\frac{2-r}{2}$ but in conjuction with H\"older's inequality this is relaxed.
390: The results are illustrated in Fig.\ref{fig:ambbound:gaus}.
391: Furthermore note that for $r=2$ every $p_{\min}$ is feasible.
392:
393: This result is important for so called bosonic Gaussian quantum channels
394: \cite{holevo:propquantum,hall:gaussiannoise}, i.e.
395: $\BHScat(\cdot)$ is a two--dimensional Gaussian.
396: In other words, according to (\ref{eq:quantum:fidelity}) and $\BHScat(\cdot)$ as in
397: Corollary \ref{cor:ambbound:gaussian}, the solution of the Gaussian fidelity problem
398: \cite{arxiv:0409063,jung:isit05} is
399: \begin{equation}
400: \begin{split}
401: \max_{g,\gamma}\Trace\{\Pro_g A(\Pro_\gamma)\}
402: &=\max_{\Trace{X}=1,X>0}\lambda_{\max}(A(X))\\
403: &=\frac{\alpha}{\alpha+1}
404: \end{split}
405: \end{equation}
406: with Gaussian $g$ and $\gamma$ as already found in \cite{arxiv:0409063} using a different approach.
407: But now this states the strong proposition that maximum fidelity is achieved {\it only} by coherent states.
408: \begin{figure}[h]
409: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{gaus_minbound.eps}
410: \caption{{\it Norm bounds for Gaussian weights:} Both functions in (\ref{eq:ambbound:gaus:best})
411: separately and the combined version are shown for $r=1$ and $r=1.9$.}
412: \label{fig:ambbound:gaus}
413: \end{figure}
414:
415: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
416: % Support case
417: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
418: In radar and sonar applications and also for wireless communications the following upper bound is important.
419: It is related to the case where scattering occurs with constant power in some region of
420: phase space (in this context also called time--frequency plane).
421: For example in wireless communications typically only the maximal dispersions in time
422: and frequency (maximum delay spread and maximum Doppler spread) are assumed and/or known for some
423: pulse shape optimization. Those situations are covered by the following result:
424: \begin{mycorollary}
425: Let $U\subset\Reals^2$ a Borel set, $|U|<\infty$
426: and $\BHScat(x)=\frac{1}{|U|}\chi_U(x)$ its $\Leb{1}$--normalized characteristic function.
427: Then for each $p\geq\max\{1,\frac{2}{r}\}$ holds
428: \begin{equation}
429: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 <
430: \left(\frac{2}{rp|U|}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}
431: \end{equation}
432: It is not possible to achieve equality. The sharpest bound is
433: \begin{equation}
434: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^r \BHScat \rVert_1 <
435: \begin{cases}
436: e^{-\frac{r|U|}{2e}} & |U|\leq 2e/r^*\\
437: \left(\frac{2}{r^*|U|}\right)^{r/r^*} & \text{else}
438: \end{cases}
439: \label{eq:ambbound:supp:best}
440: \end{equation}
441: where $r^*=\max\{r,2\}$.
442: \end{mycorollary}
443:
444: \begin{proof}
445: The proof is straightforward by observing that
446: \begin{equation}
447: \lVert\BHScat\rVert_s=\lVert\frac{1}{|U|}\chi_U\rVert_s=|U|^\frac{1-s}{s}
448: \end{equation}
449: According to Thm.\ref{thm:jung:fidelitybound} follows
450: \begin{equation}
451: \begin{split}
452: f(p)
453: &\defeq\left(\frac{2}{rp}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\lVert\BHScat\rVert_{\frac{p}{p-1}}
454: ={\left(\frac{2}{rp|U|}\right)}^{\frac{1}{p}}=e^{-\frac{1}{p}\ln\frac{rp|U|}{2}}
455: \end{split}
456: \end{equation}
457:
458: Equality is not possible because Thm.\ref{thm:jung:fidelitybound} requires $\BHScat$ to be Gaussian
459: for equality.
460: The optimal version is obtained by minimizing the function $f(p)$ under the constraint $p\geq\max\{1,2/r\}$.
461: The first derivative $f'$ of $f$ at point $p$ is
462: \begin{equation}
463: f'(p)=\frac{f(p)}{p^2}(-\ln(\frac{2}{rp|U|})-1)
464: \end{equation}
465: Thus $f'(p_{\min})=0$ gives the only point $p_{\min}=\frac{2e}{r|U|}$.
466: The function $f(p)$ is log-convex on $p\in(0,\frac{2e^{3/2}}{r|U|}]\defeq I$. That
467: is $h(p)=\ln f(p)=-(\ln\frac{rp|U|}{2})/p$ is convex on $I$, because
468: \begin{equation}
469: \begin{split}
470: h'(p) &=\frac{1}{p^2}(\ln\frac{rp|U|}{2}-1) \\
471: h''(p)&=\frac{1}{p^3}(-2\ln\frac{rp|U|}{2}+3)
472: \end{split}
473: \end{equation}
474: shows, that $h''(p)\geq 0$ for all $p\in I$. Hence $f(p)$ is convex on $I$.
475: Obviously
476: $p_{\min}\in I$, hence this point is in the convexity interval and therefore must be
477: the minimum of $f$.
478: Further, this value is also feasible if still $p_{\min}\geq\max\{1,2/r\}=r^*/r$
479: where $r^*=\max\{r,2\}$, i.e.
480: \begin{equation}
481: |U|< \frac{2e}{r^*}
482: \end{equation}
483: has to be
484: fulfilled. Then the desired result is $f(p_{\min})=e^{-\frac{r|U|}{2e}}$.
485: If $p_{\min}<r^*/r$, i.e. is infeasible, the
486: minimum is attained at the boundary, i.e. at $p=r^*/r$. Thus
487: \begin{equation}
488: f(r^*/r)=\left(\frac{2}{r^*|U|}\right)^{r/r^*}
489: \end{equation}
490: \end{proof}
491: \vspace*{.5em}
492: The results are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:ambbound:supp} for $r=1,2,3$.
493: For the interesting case $r=2$ the result further simplifies to
494: \begin{equation}
495: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^2 \BHScat \rVert_1 <
496: \begin{cases}
497: e^{-\frac{|U|}{e}} & |U|\leq e\\
498: |U|^{-1} & \text{else}
499: \end{cases}
500: \end{equation}
501: \begin{figure}[h]
502: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{supp_minbound.eps}
503: \caption{{\it Norm bounds for $\frac{1}{|U|}\chi_{U}$ weights:} Both functions in (\ref{eq:ambbound:supp:best})
504: separately and the combined version are shown for $r=1,2,3$.}
505: \label{fig:ambbound:supp}
506: \end{figure}
507: \emph{Example:} When using the WSSUS model \cite{bello:wssus} for doubly--dispersive
508: mobile communication channels one typically assumes
509: time--frequency scattering with shape
510: \begin{equation}
511: U=\{(x_1,x_2)\,|\, 0\leq x_1\leq\tau_d\,,\, |x_2|\leq B_d\}
512: \end{equation}
513: with $2B_d\tau_d\ll 1< e$, where $B_d$ denotes maximum Doppler bandwidth $B_d$
514: and $\tau_d$ is maximum delay spread.
515: Then \eqref{eq:ambbound:supp:best} predicts, that
516: the best (mean) correlation response ($r=2$) in using filter $g$ at the
517: receiver and $\gamma$ at the transmitter is bounded above by
518: \begin{equation}
519: \lVert |\Amb_{g\gamma}|^2 \BHScat \rVert_1 < e^{-\frac{2B_d\tau_d}{e}}
520: \end{equation}
521:
522: \section{Conclusions}
523: In this contribution new bounds on weighted norms of ambiguity functions and
524: Wigner distributions are presented which only depend on the shape of the weight function.
525: Further the important equality case is discussed which is attained only by Gaussian weights
526: and wave functions. The results are important in the field of waveform optimization for
527: non--stationary environments as needed for example in WSSUS channels. This channel model is
528: frequently used in radar and sonar applications and -- of course -- in wireless communications.
529: Furthermore these norms are needed in quantum information processing for bosonic quantum channels
530: because they provide insights on achievable fidelities in those quantum channels.
531: In the special case of the Gaussian quantum channel they provide also the optimum input states,
532: i.e. {\it only} coherent states achieve this optimal fidelity as frequently conjectured.
533: Hence, in the mentioned fields the results establish limits on achievable performance.
534:
535: \section{Acknowledgments}
536: I would like to thank Igor Bjelakovic for many useful discussions.
537:
538:
539:
540: \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
541: \bibliography{references}
542: \end{document}
543: