Adaptive Sampling For Linear State Estimation
Date: March 01 - March 01, 2012
When a sensor has continuous measurements but sends occasional messages over a data network to a supervisor which estimates the state, the available packet rate fixes the achievable quality of state estimation. When such rate limits turn stringent, the sensor’s messaging policy should be designed anew. What are good causal messaging policies? What should message packets contain? What is the lowest possible distortion in a causal estimate at the supervisor? Is Delta sampling better than periodic sampling? We answer these questions for a Markov state process under an idealized model of the network and the assumption of perfect state measurements at the sensor. If the state is a scalar or a vector of low dimension, then we can ignore sample quantization. If in addition, we can ignore jitter in the transmission delays over the network, then our search for efficient messaging policies simplifies. First, each message packet should contain the value of the state at that time. Thus a bound on the number of data packets becomes a bound on the number of state samples. Second, the remaining choice in messaging is entirely about the times when samples are taken. For a scalar, linear diffusion process, we study the problem of choosing the causal sampling times that will give the lowest aggregate squared error distortion. We stick to finite horizons and impose a hard upper bound N on the number of allowed samples. We cast the design as a problem of choosing an optimal sequence of stopping times. We reduce this to a nested sequence of problems, each asking for a single optimal stopping time. Under an unproven but natural assumption about the least-square estimate at the supervisor, each of these single stopping problems are of standard form. The optimal stopping times are random times when the estimation error exceeds designed envelopes. For the case where the state is a Brownian motion, we give analytically: the shape of the optimal sampling envelopes, the shape of the envelopes under optimal Delta sampling, and their performances. Surprisingly, we find that Delta sampling performs badly. Hence, when the rate constraint is a hard limit on the number of samples over a finite horizon, we should not use Delta sampling.