arXiv:1701.05677v1 [math.OC] 20 Jan 2017

Pre-print version
of
”RVP-FLMS : A Robust Variable Power Fractional LMS Algorithm”
by
Jawwad Ahmad, Muhammad Usman, Shujaat Khan, Imran Naseem and
Hassan Jamil Syed
submitted to
IEEE International Conference on Control System, Computing and
Engineering (ICCSCE). IEEE, 2016.

RVP-FLMS : A Robust Variable Power Fractional
LMS Algorithm
Jawwad Ahmad∗, Muhammad Usman∗, Shujaat Khan∗† , Imran Naseem‡ and Hassan Jamil Syed§
∗ Faculty

of Engineering Science and Technology (FEST),
Iqra University, Defence View,
Karachi-75500, Pakistan.
Email: {jawwad, musman, shujaat}@iqra.edu.pk
† Department

of Bio and Brain Engineering,
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST),
335 Gwahangno, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea.
Email: shujaat@kaist.ac.kr
‡ College

of Engineering,
Karachi Institute of Economics and Technology,
Korangi Creek, Karachi 75190, Pakistan.
Email: imrannaseem@pafkiet.edu.pk
§ Faculty

of Computer Science and Information Technology,
University of Malaya, Malaysia.
Email: shjamil@siswa.um.edu.my

Abstract—In this paper, we propose an adaptive framework
for the variable power of the fractional least mean square
(FLMS) algorithm. The proposed algorithm named as robust
variable power FLMS (RVP-FLMS) dynamically adapts the
fractional power of the FLMS to achieve high convergence rate
with low steady state error. For the evaluation purpose, the
problems of system identification and channel equalization are
considered. The experiments clearly show that the proposed
approach achieves better convergence rate and lower steady-state
error compared to the FLMS. The MATLAB code for the related
simulation is available online at https://goo.gl/dGTGmP.
Index Terms— Least mean square (LMS), fractional
plant identification, channel equalization, fractional LMS
robust variable power FLMS (RVP-FLMS), robust variable
(RVSS), high convergence, low steady state error, adaptive

calculus,
(FLMS),
step size
filter.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The conventional integer value integration and differentiation is undoubtedly a fundamental tool of calculus being
utilized by professionals to determine the solution of numerous
problems in various fields. On the contrary fractional order
calculus (FOC) deals with the derivative and integral calculated with the fractional power. Derivative with the fractional
power is certainly a paradox which introduced a new aspect
in mathematics. Though the concepts of FOC were developed
earlier in the 16th century by Liouville, Reimann and Leibniz
[1], tendency of its utilization in generic areas became notable
in the past decade. With the maturation of theoretical and prac-

tical operators of FOC, researchers have shown an inclination
towards the implementation of FOC to observe the solution of
the problems that were solved using the traditional calculus
[2].
For the problem of path tracking in autonomous vehicles
FOC was used in [3]. FOC was used in [4] to give an
experimental proof of a theoretical model proposed for the
pulse propagation through porous medium. FOC has turned
out to be a convenient tool in the applications of viscoelasticity
[5], image processing [6], edge detection [7], control systems
and many others [8]. Implementation of FOC in the field of
signal processing has been suggested and opted by a number
of researchers. In this context, the utilization of FOC in least
mean square (LMS) adaptive filtering is being particularly
focused.
FOC based least mean square algorithm was proposed in
[9] as FLMS. The algorithm was implemented on system
identification problem and the results were compared with
LMS. Several variants of FLMS algorithm have been proposed showing better performance [10], [11], [12]. In this
paper a contemporary modification of the FLMS algorithm is
proposed. The proposal is to use a variable fractional power
rather than a fixed one, the concept of which is inspired by
variable learning rate least mean square algorithm (RVSSLMS) [13]. The objective is to use variable power of the
fractional derivative. The proposed algorithm is evaluated on
the problem of equalization and plant identification, the results

of which are compared with the conventional LMS. The rest
of the paper is structured as follows: A brief literature review
of modified least mean algorithms is discussed in section
II. The details of proposed algorithm is discussed in section
III followed by the experimental setup in section IV. The
conclusion of the paper is drawn in section V.
II. L EAST M EAN S QUARE
Least mean square algorithm is an adaptive filter that
belongs to the group of stochastic gradient methods. LMS has
been extensively adopted to counter a number of problems in
the area of signal processing. A considerable amount of work
is done towards the mitigation of the drawbacks in LMS.
Researchers have used several techniques to optimize the
performance of LMS [10], [14], [15], [16], [17]. The theory of
FOC was applied to the LMS algorithm and a fractional least
mean square (FLMS) was proposed in [17]. The algorithm was
tested for the estimation of input nonlinear control autoregressive (INCAR) models and the output resulted in better convergence rates when compared to volterra least mean square
(VLMS) and kernel least mean square (KLMS). The modified
fractional least mean square (MFLMS) was proposed in [11].
The algorithm was designed to improve the computational
complexity involved in FLMS due to the complex gamma
function. MFLMS has therefore shown improved results compared to the LMS and FLMS. In another work [12] the
adaptive weight gain parameters are incorporated. Gradientbased approach is implemented on variable learning scheme
that changed the nature of the order of fractional derivative in
MFLMS from fixed to adaptive. They proposed adaptive stepsize modified fractional least mean square (AMFLMS) and
presented improvement by comparing their algorithm with the
LMS, FLMS and MFLMS.
In this research we propose to utilize the concept of robust
variable step size (RVSS) [13] for the variable fractional power
of FLMS algorithm. The proposed scheme is robust and computationally less expensive. For the performance evaluation we
consider the problem of system identification and equalization.
The results are compared with the FLMS algorithm.
III. P ROPOSED RVP FLMS
In [9] the weight update equation for FLMS is given as :

wk (n + 1) = wk (n) − µ

∂J(n)
− µf
∂wk



∂
∂wk

th

v

1
1
e(n)2 = (d(n) − y(n))2
2
2



∂
∂wk

v

∂J(n)
∂J(n) ∂e(n) ∂y(n)
=
∂wk
∂e
∂y ∂wk

J(n) are

(3)


v
v
∂
∂J(n) ∂e(n)
∂
J(n) =
y(n)
∂wk
∂e
∂y
∂wk
solving equation (3) result in equation (5)


(4)

∂J(n)
= −e(n)x(n)
(5)
∂wk
Using the Rieman-Lioville fractional derivative method
1 d
(D f )(t) = ( )n
Γ dt
v

Zt

(t − τ )n − v − 1f (τ )dτ

(6)

0

Γ(1 + α)
(t − a)α − v
Γ(1 + α + v)
equation (4) result in equation (8)
Dv (t − a)α =

(7)

v
(1−v)
w
(n)
∂
(8)
J(n) = −e(n)x(n) k
∂wk
Γ(2 − v)
Using equation (5) and (8) the weight update equation (1)
becomes :


wk (n + 1) = wk (n) + µe(n)x(n)
wk1−v (n)
(9)
Γ(2 − v)
For time varying fractional power the v can be replaced by
v(n) :
+ µf e(n)x(n)

wk (n + 1) = wk (n) + µe(n)x(n)
1−v(n)

wk
(n)
(10)
Γ(2 − v(n))
The update rule for the time varying fractional power v
using the RVSS-LMS based method is defined as [13] :
+ µf e(n)x(n)

v(n + 1) = βv(n) + γp2 (n)

(11)

where (0 < β < 1), (γ > 0), p(n) is the average error
energy correlation and v(n + 1) is set to vmin or vmax
J(n)

(1)
p(n) = αp(n − 1) + (1 − α)e(n)e(n − 1)

th

where wk (n) is the weight of the k tap at n iteration,
J(n) is the cost function defined in equation (2), v is the
fractional power of derivative, µ and µf are the step sizes.
J(n) =

∂J(n)
and
According to chain rule
∂wk
defined as :

(2)

where e(n) is the instantaneous error between the desired
output d(n) and the estimated output y(n) at nth iteration.

(12)

The positive constant α (0 < α < 1) is a weighting
parameter that governs the averaging time constant. It is in
actual the forgetting factor. The limits on v(n + 1) is given
by:

vmax if v(n + 1) > vmax

vmin if v(n + 1) < vmin
(13)
v(n + 1) =

v(n + 1)
otherwise
where vmax > vmin > 0.

A. System Identification
To estimate the mathematical model of a system, the system
identification method is used. Literature including [9], [14],
[17], [18], [19] show that the adaptive techniques produce
good performance in the application of system identification.
To assess the performance of the proposed RVP-FLMS, we
consider a linear system, shown in Figure 1:

FLMS (10dB)
RVP−FLMS (10dB)

MSE (dB)

0

−5

−10
0

10

20

30

40

50
60
Iterations

70

80

90

100

5
FLMS (20dB)
RVP−FLMS (20dB)

0
MSE (dB)

IV. S IMULATION S ETUP AND R ESULTS
For the evaluation of the proposed method the problem of
system identification and equalization are considered.

−5
−10
−15
−20
0

y(t) = a1 x(t) + a2 x(t − 1) + a3 x(t − 2) + n(t)

Equation (14) shows the mathematical model of the system,
where x(t) is the input and y(t) is the output of the system, the
disturbance model n(t) is assumed to be N (0, σd2 ), ai s depicts
the polynomial coefficients representing number of zeros in
the system. For the experiment, x(t) is taken to be a binary
phase shift keying (BPSK) modulated 500 randomly generated
samples. In Figure 1, the impulse response of the system is
p(t) while ŷ(t) is approximate output, p̂(t) is the approximate
impulse response and b(t) is the error of estimation. The simulation parameters selected for the experiments are: a1 = 0.9,
a2 = 0.3, a3 = −0.1. The experiments are performed on two
noise levels with the SNR values of 10 dB and 20 dB.
There are 3 number of taps for the model structure. The
weights values were initialised to zero. For the FLMS and
RVP-FLMS value of the µ and µf was set to 1 × 10−4 and
the initial value of the fractional power v is taken to be 0.5.
For the proposed RVP-FLMS the values of α, β and γ are all
set to 0.9, 0.99, and 0.9 respectively. The value of vmax and
vmin are chosen to be 0.5 and 1 respectively.
The experiment are performed on two noise levels the mean
square error (MSE) curves are shown in Figure 2. For the
SNR values of 10 dB and 20 dB the RVP-FLMS shows the
best performance. The MSE of −10.44 dB and −20.20 dB is
achieved in around 45 and 50 iterations respectively. Whereas
the FLMS converges to the MSE value of −10.43 dB and
−20.17 dB in around 80 and 90 iterations respectively.
To compare the time complexity of the suggested method
with FLMS, we investigated the training time for 100 iterations. The proposed method utilizes 1.85 seconds whereas the

Fig. 1. System identification using adaptive learning algorithm.

10

(14)

20

30

40

50
60
Iterations

70

80

90

100

Fig. 2. Mean square error (MSE) curve for system identification problem

FLMS takes 1.57 seconds. The experiment clearly shows that
the proposed robust approach dynamically adapts the learning
rate to achieve the minimum steady state error in lesser number
of iteration.
B. Equalization
The equalizer is used to nullify the effect of noise and
distortion caused by the channel. Adaptive learning techniques
show good results in this context [20], [21], [22], [23]. To
evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed RVP-FLMS, we
consider a linear filter, shown in Figure 3:

Fig. 3. Equalization using adaptive learning algorithm.

q(t)

=

a1 y(t) + a2 y(t − 1) + a3 y(t − 2) (15)

Equation (15) shows the mathematical model of the linear
filter, where y(t) is the input and q(t) is the output of the filter.
ai s depicts the polynomial coefficients which are actually
the number of zeros in the system. For the purpose of this
experiment the same plant defined in section (IV-A) is used.
In Figure 3, the impulse response of the filter is p(t)
while the disturbance model n(t) is supposed to be N (0, σd2 ).
ŷ(t) is the approximate input, x(t) is the approximate noisy
output and e(t) is the error of estimation. The experiments are
performed on two noise levels with the SNR values of 10 dB
and 20 dB.
In the equalizer structure, 3 number of taps were chosen.
The weights values were initialised to zero. For the FLMS and

5

MSE (dB)

FLMS (10dB)
RVP−FLMS (10dB)
0

−5

−10
0

10

20

30

40

50
60
Iterations

70

80

90

100

5
FLMS (20dB)
RVP−FLMS (20dB)

MSE (dB)

0
−5
−10
−15
−20
0

10

20

30

40

50
60
Iterations

70

80

90

100

Fig. 4. Mean square error (MSE) curve for equalization problem

RVP-FLMS value of the µ and µf was set to 1 × 10−4 and
the initial value of the fractional power v is taken to be 0.5.
For the proposed RVP-FLMS the values of α, β and γ are all
set to 0.9, 0.99, and 0.9 respectively. The value of vmax and
vmin are chosen to be 0.5 and 1 respectively.
The experiment are performed on two noise levels the mean
square error (MSE) curves are shown in Figure 4. For the
SNR values of 10 dB and 20 dB the RVP-FLMS shows the
best performance. The MSE of −9.96 dB and −16.33 dB is
achieved in around 40 and 50 iterations respectively. Whereas
the FLMS converges to the MSE value of −9.58 dB and
−16.28 dB in around 70 and 90 iterations respectively.
To compare the time complexity of the suggested method
with FLMS, we investigated the training time for 100 iterations. The suggested method requires 1.92 seconds whereas the
FLMS takes 1.63 seconds. The experiment clearly shows that
the proposed robust approach dynamically adapts the learning
rate to achieve the minimum steady state error in lesser number
of iteration.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this research an adaptive least mean square algorithm
based on fractional derivative is proposed. In particular, the
fractional power of the FLMS is made variable using the
concept of robust variable step size. The performance of the
proposed approach is evaluated on system identification and
equalization problems. The results of the proposed algorithm
are compared to the FLMS. The proposed algorithm attains
better convergence rate and steady-state error and is therefore
found to be superior to the FLMS algorithm.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The research is partially supported by the National ICT
R&D Fund (http://www.ictrdf.org.pk)
R EFERENCES
[1] J. Liouville, Mémoire sur le changement de la variable indépendante,
dans le calcul des différentielles a indices quelconques, 1835.

[2] R. E. Gutiérrez, J. M. Rosário, and J. Tenreiro Machado, “Fractional order calculus: basic concepts and engineering applications,” Mathematical
Problems in Engineering, vol. 2010, 2010.
[3] J. I. Suárez, B. M. Vinagre, A. Calderón, C. Monje, and Y. Chen, “Using
fractional calculus for lateral and longitudinal control of autonomous
vehicles,” in International Conference on Computer Aided Systems
Theory. Springer, 2003, pp. 337–348.
[4] Z. Fellah, C. Depollier, and M. Fellah, “Application of fractional calculus
to the sound waves propagation in rigid porous materials: validation via
ultrasonic measurements,” Acta Acustica united with Acustica, vol. 88,
no. 1, pp. 34–39, 2002.
[5] E. Soczkiewicz, “Application of fractional calculus in the theory of
viscoelasticity,” Molecular and Quantum Acoustics, vol. 23, pp. 397–
404, 2002.
[6] B. Mathieu, P. Melchior, A. Oustaloup, and C. Ceyral, “Fractional
differentiation for edge detection,” Signal Processing, vol. 83, no. 11,
pp. 2421–2432, 2003.
[7] L. Debnath, “Recent applications of fractional calculus to science and
engineering,” International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical
Sciences, vol. 2003, no. 54, pp. 3413–3442, 2003.
[8] M. Dalir and M. Bashour, “Applications of fractional calculus,” Applied
Mathematical Sciences, vol. 4, no. 21, pp. 1021–1032, 2010.
[9] R. M. A. Zahoor and I. M. Qureshi, “A modified least mean square
algorithm using fractional derivative and its application to system
identification,” European Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 35, no. 1,
pp. 14–21, 2009.
[10] Y. Tan, Z. He, and B. Tian, “A novel generalization of modified lms
algorithm to fractional order,” Signal Processing Letters, IEEE, vol. 22,
no. 9, pp. 1244–1248, 2015.
[11] B. Shoaib, I. M. Qureshi, Ihsanulhaq, and Shafqatullah, “A modified
fractional least mean square algorithm for chaotic and nonstationary
time series prediction,” Chinese Physics B, vol. 23, no. 3, p. 030502,
2014.
[12] B. Shoaib, I. M. Qureshi, Shafqatullah, and Ihsanulhaq, “Adaptive stepsize modified fractional least mean square algorithm for chaotic time
series prediction,” Chinese Physics B, vol. 23, no. 5, p. 050503, 2014.
[13] T. Aboulnasr and K. Mayyas, “A robust variable step-size lms-type
algorithm: analysis and simulations,” IEEE Transactions on signal
processing, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 631–639, 1997.
[14] M. A. Z. Raja and N. I. Chaudhary, “Two-stage fractional least mean
square identification algorithm for parameter estimation of carma systems,” Signal Processing, vol. 107, pp. 327–339, 2015.
[15] A. Khalili, A. Rastegarnia, and S. Sanei, “Quantized augmented complex
least-mean square algorithm: Derivation and performance analysis,”
Signal Processing, vol. 121, pp. 54–59, 2016.
[16] A. Khalili, A. Rastegarnia, W. M. Bazzi, and Z. Yang, “Derivation
and analysis of incremental augmented complex least mean square
algorithm,” Signal Processing, IET, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 312–319, 2015.
[17] N. I. Chaudhary, M. A. Z. Raja, J. A. Khan, and M. S. Aslam,
“Identification of input nonlinear control autoregressive systems using
fractional signal processing approach,” The Scientific World Journal, vol.
2013, 2013.
[18] S. Ciochin, C. Paleologu, and J. Benesty, “An optimized {NLMS}
algorithm for system identification,” Signal Processing, vol. 118, pp.
115 – 121, 2016.
[19] S. Khan, I. Naseem, R. Togneri, and M. Bennamoun, “A novel adaptive
kernel for the rbf neural networks,” Circuits, Systems, and Signal
Processing, pp. 1–15, 2016.
[20] S. Chen, B. Mulgrew, and P. M. Grant, “A clustering technique for
digital communications channel equalization using radial basis function
networks,” IEEE Transactions on neural networks, vol. 4, no. 4, pp.
570–590, 1993.
[21] M. V. Clark, “Adaptive frequency-domain equalization and diversity
combining for broadband wireless communications,” IEEE Journal on
Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1385–1395, 1998.
[22] S. Liu, G. Shen, and H. Tian, “A 60-ghz rof system employing variable
step size lms equalizer with fast convergence speed,” in Optical Fiber
Communication Conference. Optical Society of America, 2016, pp.
Th2A–18.
[23] S. Soni and A. Agarwal, “Analysis and synthesis of adaptive equalization
techniques under various modulation techniques,” in Recent Developments in Control, Automation and Power Engineering (RDCAPE), 2015
International Conference on. IEEE, 2015, pp. 102–106.

