granular materials consisting of macroscopic particles or grains can exhibit behavior reminiscent of conventional phases of matter .
sand , for instance , can flow like a liquid under some conditions .
dilute granular systems , or _
gases _ , have been extensively studied both experimentally and theoretically , in large part as simple model systems exhibiting nonequilibrium and dissipative behavior .
these systems are intrinsically dissipative and out of equilibrium , even though it is tempting to apply such equilibrium notions as temperature . since the collisions in such a gas are inelastic , it is necessary to supply energy , or to drive them in order to maintain a gas - like steady state . otherwise , _
inelastic collapse _ can occur , in which all motion ceases after only a finite time@xcite . in principle , it is possible to heat or drive the system uniformly throughout the container ( _ uniform heating _ ) , as has been done in simulations@xcite , and as is assumed in analytic theories@xcite . in experiments , however , one usually drives a granular gas by shaking or vibrating the walls of the container .
such _ boundary heating _ means that the energy is inserted in a spatially inhomogeneous way@xcite . as a consequence ,
the gas will develop a gradient in density and mean kinetic energy .    even for uniform heating , however , significant deviations from equilibrium gases , e.g. , in density correlations , are observed@xcite .
it is often assumed that in the bulk , where the boundaries are far away and spatial gradients are small on the scale of the mean free path of the particles , both heating methods should give the same behavior . here
, we show that there are striking differences in the behavior of granular gases heated uniformly or through the boundary .
there has been much interest recently in another aspect of these non - equilibrium gases : namely , the velocity distributions .
this is in part because they deviate from the gaussian distributions that one would expect if the collisions were elastic .
it has been suggested that the velocity distributions can be described by a sort - of _ stretched _ gaussian , of the form @xmath6 $ ] , where @xmath7 is sometimes called the granular temperature .
rouyer and menon @xcite have reported such a distribution with exponent @xmath8 over the whole observed range of velocities , which was unaffected by changes in amplitude and frequency of driving .
this observation was particularly intriguing , given the theoretical predictions obtained before by van noije and ernst @xcite .
they developed a kinetic theory that predicts a high - velocity tail described by a distribution with an exponent @xmath9 .
unfortunately , results for velocity distributions are never unambiguous . both in simulation and experiment , different setups and driving mechanisms
usually give different behavior of the velocity distribution . for a setup where particles on a horizontal plate were driven in the vertical direction , olafsen and
urbach @xcite found a crossover from exponential to gaussian distributions as the amplitude of the driving was increased .
the result of rouyer and menon @xcite was obtained for a different configuration where particles were confined between two vertical plates and driven in the vertical direction .
although the exponent @xmath8 they find is reminiscent of theoretical results obtained by van noije and ernst @xcite , both results are actually inconsistent in that the exponent @xmath9 can only describe the high - velocity tail of the distribution .
such a high - velocity tail was actually obtained by moon et al .
@xcite . using a simulation with a variation on uniform heating
they find a velocity distribution that has an exponent of @xmath10 for low velocities , but crosses over to an exponent of @xmath8 for the high - velocity tail .
the results of rouyer and menon are also limited in the sense that they were obtained for almost elastic particles with @xmath11 .
blair and kudrolli @xcite use a different setup where particles move along an inclined plane .
friction with the plane during collisions reduces the coefficient of restitution to @xmath12 .
they find the distribution with exponent @xmath8 only in the very dilute case .
otherwise , the distributions deviate strongly from both gaussian and the distribution obtained by rouyer and menon .
it is interesting to notice that for the denser case blair and kudrolli find a distribution with a crossover much like the type observed by moon et al .    at present
there is no agreement on what the velocity distribution of a granular gas looks like exactly nor is it clear what causes the velocity distributions to deviate from a gaussian .
puglisi et al .
@xcite have suggested that the deviations are caused by the spatial correlations in the gas .
they propose that for a region of uniform density the velocity distribution of the gas actually is gaussian , with a density dependent width .
the spatial correlations cause density fluctuations and they claim that the non - gaussian distributions arise as an average over the velocity distributions over these regions of different density .
it is true that an average over gaussian distributions with different widths in general yields a stretched gaussian , but experiments performed by olafsen and urbach @xcite showed that this does not happen in granular gases .
they find that even within small windows of uniform density the velocity distributions remained non - gaussian . here
, we show that non - gaussian behavior arises even in a simple model with no spatial degrees of freedom .
we study behavior of the velocity distributions of the granular gas as a function of @xmath1 , the area fraction , and @xmath0 , the coefficient of restitution . specifically , we consider the effect on the velocity distribution of driving the gas by heating uniformly , as is assumed in theory and many prior simulations , and by heating through a boundary , as is done in most experiments .
we will show that there exists clear qualitative difference between the velocity distributions for uniform and boundary heating .
furthermore , we will show that there is no evidence for a universal velocity distribution with a constant exponent @xmath8 .
we demonstrate instead that a family of distributions showing apparent exponents covering a wide range of values @xmath13 is expected , depending on both material and experimental conditions .
furthermore , we show that the velocity distribution is governed primarily by the relative importance of collisions to heating , _
i.e. _ , the way in which energy flows through the system of particles .
specifically , we introduce a new parameter @xmath2 , which measures the ratio between mean numbers of heating events @xmath14 and mean number of collisions @xmath15 experienced by a typical particle .
these theoretical observations can explain both the observed non - gaussian behavior , as well as the ambiguities in the experimental and theoretical literature on dissipative gases to date .
we also demonstrate that the behavior of the velocity distributions can be captured quantitatively by a simple model that takes only @xmath0 and @xmath3 into account , with no spatial degrees of freedom .
we use an event - driven algorithm to simulate @xmath16 particles of radius @xmath17 moving in a two - dimensional box .
particles gain energy by heating and lose energy through inelastic collisions .
when two particles @xmath18 and @xmath19 collide their final velocities depend on their initial velocities in the following way : @xmath20 where @xmath21 is the coefficient of restitution and @xmath22 is the unit vector connecting the centers of particles @xmath18 and @xmath19 .    for uniform heating we adapted an one - dimensional algorithm described in @xcite .
when heating uniformly , each individual particle is heated by adding a random amount to the velocity of each particle during a time step @xmath23 : @xmath24 where @xmath25 is a vector whose components are uniformly distributed between @xmath26 and @xmath27 and @xmath28 is proportional to the heating rate .
after heating the system is transferred to the center - of - mass frame .
particles move in a box with sides @xmath29 .
we use periodic boundary conditions to simulate bulk behavior .
the time step @xmath23 is chosen in such a way that on average the number of collisions per time step is less than one .
it should be noted that this heating mechanism is significantly different from the spatially homogeneous heating used in some experiments @xcite . in the experiment
all particles feel the same forcing , so the motion of the neighboring particles is strongly correlated in space and time . in uniform heating however , all particles
are independently driven by a stochastic source and as a consequence correlations are very weak .    when heating through the boundaries , particles gain velocity upon collision with the boundary .
for simplicity , we assume that the collision with the boundary is elastic . in that case , a collision occurs by reflecting @xmath30 , the component of the velocity perpendicular to the boundary .
heating occurs by adding a random amount of velocity to @xmath30 .
then after collision with the boundary one has : @xmath31 particles move in a circular box of radius @xmath32 .
a symmetrical container has the advantage that it allows us to examine density and granular temperature gradients along a single coordinate @xmath17 , the distance from the center of the box , as in the one - dimensional case @xcite .
we start the simulation by distributing the particles uniformly over the box .
when using boundary heating , we give each particle a small , uniformly distributed velocity to enable particles to reach the boundary
. then particles are heated and we allow the system to reach a steady state before taking data . for both uniform heating and boundary heating , data is taken periodically every time step @xmath23 . for uniform heating
, data is taken when the particles are heated , so @xmath23 equals the time between heating events .
one of the first striking differences between uniform heating and boundary heating is clustering .
when heating through the boundary , a stable liquid - like cluster surrounded by a hot gaseous state will form for low coefficients of restitution @xmath0 or high area fraction @xmath1 .
this occurs as particles are compressed in the center of the box by the pressure of particles moving in from the boundary .
as the cluster grows in size , it can no longer be destroyed by the impact of high velocity particles and the cluster remains stable .
a typical example is shown in fig .
[ fig : cluster ] .
we do not find these clusters when heating uniformly .
this is because all particles are heated all the time , which prevents the collapse to a cluster . in experiments that find clusters in homogeneously driven systems
@xcite this is different , because here the driven motion of neighboring particles is highly correlated .
the formation of a cluster spoils measurement of the velocity distribution because the system is no longer in a pure gas - like state . to avoid values of @xmath1 and
@xmath0 corresponding to the formation of clusters in our simulation , we constructed a phase diagram .
we did this by counting for every particle the number @xmath33 of neighbors with their center within a distance @xmath34 from that particle .
when the gas is in a hexagonal close packed state @xmath35 .
we obtained the distribution @xmath36 for different values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 .
an example for @xmath37 and @xmath38 is shown in figure [ fig : densityhist ] .    ,
@xmath39 and @xmath40 .
the circles indicate the current positions of the particles , while the lines indicate the direction and magnitude of their velocity . ]     of a given particle for @xmath37 , @xmath38 and @xmath41(@xmath42 ) , @xmath43(@xmath44 ) , @xmath45(@xmath46 ) , @xmath47(@xmath48 ) and @xmath49(@xmath50 ) . on average @xmath51 for @xmath38 . ]    for @xmath52 the distribution corresponds to a state with the particles uniformly distributed over the box and the peak of the distribution at the mean value @xmath53 .
for @xmath41 the distribution becomes bimodal , with a broad peak at high @xmath33 corresponding to the densely - packed cluster and a peak at @xmath54 corresponding to the surrounding dilute gas .
the distribution shows a continuous transition for @xmath0 in between , which makes it hard to pinpoint an exact value of @xmath0 for which the gas enters the clustered state .
still , by looking at the shape of the distributions , it can be argued that the transition occurs somewhere between @xmath55 and @xmath56 .
this was repeated for different values of @xmath1 , which allowed us to determine a sort of phase diagram .
specifically , we determined the limit of a pure gas - like phase , and all results presented below were obtained in this state .    .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
data for both figures is taken for @xmath37 and for @xmath59 and @xmath60(@xmath42 ) , @xmath61(@xmath44 ) , @xmath62(@xmath46 ) , @xmath63(@xmath48 ) , @xmath64(@xmath50 ) .
a gaussian is shown as a solid line with slope @xmath65 and the distribution obtained by rouyer and menon is shown as the dashed line with slope @xmath66 . ]    .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
the dashed lines have slope @xmath65 and @xmath66 .
data for both figures is taken for @xmath37 and for @xmath67 and @xmath38(@xmath42 ) , @xmath68(@xmath44 ) , @xmath69(@xmath46 ) , @xmath70(@xmath48 ) . ]     as a function of distance @xmath17 to the center of the box .
data taken for @xmath37 , @xmath59 and @xmath52(@xmath42 ) , @xmath45(@xmath44 ) , @xmath71(@xmath46 ) , @xmath61(@xmath48 ) , @xmath72(@xmath50 ) and @xmath62(@xmath73 ) .
( b ) the mean kinetic energy @xmath74 per particle as a function of @xmath17 , for the same values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 .
the dashed lines indicate the concentric rings , within which the velocity distributions were separately calculated . ]
the velocity distributions @xmath75 for uniform heating are shown in figs .  [
fig : uniform_phi ] and [ fig : uniform_eta ] . the velocity component @xmath76
is scaled by @xmath77 and the maximum of the distribution @xmath78 is scaled to be unity . for a broad range of the parameters @xmath1 and @xmath0 the velocity distributions are very close to gaussian .
for @xmath60 the velocity distributions can be fitted by a distribution with @xmath10 .
this decreases only slightly for @xmath79 , which can be fitted by a distribution with @xmath80 .
values of @xmath81 are found to be independent of @xmath1 .
these exponents are constant over the entire observed range of velocities and we see no high - velocity tails with @xmath8 for the range of @xmath1 and @xmath0 we examined .     as a function of distance @xmath17 to the center of the box .
data taken for @xmath37 , @xmath52 and @xmath38(@xmath42 ) , @xmath68(@xmath44 ) , @xmath69(@xmath46 ) and @xmath70(@xmath48 ) .
( b ) the mean kinetic energy @xmath82 per particle as a function of @xmath17 , for the same values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 . note that even for the dilute case @xmath83 the mean kinetic energy profile is not constant , but drops at the boundary of the box .
the profile only becomes constant after a certain distance into the container , that corresponds to the mean free path of particles leaving the boundary . ]     and [ fig : profile_eta ] , _ i.e. _ , for @xmath84(@xmath42 ) , @xmath85(@xmath44 ) , @xmath86(@xmath46 ) , @xmath87(@xmath48 ) and @xmath88(@xmath50 ) , where @xmath17 is distance to the center . data were taken for @xmath37 , @xmath39 and @xmath60 .
( a ) @xmath89 .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 . ]    for boundary heating the gas develops a gradient in both density and mean kinetic energy as shown in figures [ fig : profile_phi ] and [ fig : profile_eta ] .
ideally , we want to measure velocity distributions in a region where the gradient is small . to this end
we divided the box in five rings of width @xmath63 .
these rings are indicated in figures [ fig : profile_phi ] and [ fig : profile_eta ] . only for values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 close to the clustering state ,
does the density within a ring vary by more than @xmath90 .
the velocity distributions @xmath75 for particles within the different rings are shown in figure [ fig : boundaryexample ] .
figure [ fig : boundaryexample](a ) shows @xmath75 with the velocity component @xmath76 scaled by @xmath77 and the maximum of the distribution scaled to be unity .
all distributions seem to have the same shape .
this is remarkable , since naively one would expect the dynamics of the particles to be different for the different rings . in the center
the density is high and particles have many collisions , causing strong spatial correlations . along the boundary
the gas is dilute . here
, many particles have experienced recent collisions with the boundary , and spatial correlations should be much weaker .
it is has been suggested that these correlations cause the velocity distributions to deviate from gaussian .
but contrary to the expectations , within the container the shape of the distributions seems to be determined by the granular temperature @xmath91 only .
this is a feature that is observed for all values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 , even close to the cluster state .
figure [ fig : boundaryexample](b ) shows the behavior of the exponent @xmath81 .
this behavior is very different from the case of uniform heating . for uniform heating @xmath81
has the same value over the entire observed range of velocities . for boundary heating , on the other hand
, @xmath81 has a constant value @xmath92 over the low - velocity range but crosses over to different value @xmath93 when above a critical velocity @xmath94 . for the two innermost rings @xmath95 and @xmath96 . for the third ring @xmath97 and
the outer ring has @xmath8 . for the outer two rings the velocity distributions actually undergo two crossovers .
first it crosses over to @xmath98 and then the exponent increases again to @xmath99 . in figure
[ fig : boundary2 ] we show the effect of a change in @xmath1 and @xmath0 on the shape of the velocity distributions . here
we focus on the velocity distribution as measured in the ring with @xmath100 .
this has the advantage of good statistics , but for values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 close to a cluster , we might see effects due to the density gradient in the gas .
as shown in figure [ fig : boundary2](a ) the exponent @xmath97 except for @xmath101 , where @xmath102 . for @xmath52
there is no crossover in the observed range of velocities . in the other distributions one
does observe a crossover and the point where it occurs shifts down to lower velocities as @xmath0 is decreased .
it is clear that the distribution for velocities above the crossover can not be described by a single exponent .
for low enough @xmath0 , the distribution seems to approach a constant exponent for high velocities .
this exponent decreases from @xmath103 for @xmath41 to @xmath96 for @xmath101 . in figure
[ fig : boundary2](b ) @xmath97 for @xmath83 and @xmath59 , @xmath104 for @xmath105 and @xmath95 for @xmath39 .
for every @xmath1 does one observe a crossover and the velocity at which the crossover occurs shifts only a bit as @xmath1 is varied .
the distributions approach a constant exponent for high velocities .
this exponent goes down from @xmath106 for @xmath83 to @xmath96 for @xmath39 . in general , the deviations from gaussian become more pronounced as dissipation increases , i.e. as @xmath1 increases or as @xmath0 decreases .
\}$ ] versus @xmath58 for @xmath37 , @xmath59 and @xmath52(@xmath42 ) , @xmath45(@xmath44 ) , @xmath71(@xmath46 ) , @xmath61(@xmath48 ) , @xmath72(@xmath50 ) and @xmath62(@xmath107 ) .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 for @xmath37 , @xmath41 and @xmath83(@xmath42 ) , @xmath69(@xmath44 ) , @xmath108(@xmath46 ) and @xmath68(@xmath48 ) . ]    to test whether the velocity distributions we find here are only observed for this specific driving mechanism of heating through a circular boundary , we constructed different systems that drive through boundaries in a different way .
for instance , we constructed a box with periodic boundary conditions that includes a small circular region around the center . within this circular region particles are uniformly driven but outside of the region they are not heated at all . for particles within the circular region
we observe velocity distributions that are gaussian . on the other hand ,
for particles outside of the circular region we observe the same non - gaussian velocity distributions as seen in the case of a circular boundary .    for uniform heating the distribution of velocities of particles that are heated
is gaussian , because the velocities undergo a random walk .
this is not the case for the particles heated at the boundary . to see if velocity distributions are sensitive to the precise way of heating at the boundary , we changed our heating algorithm so that , when a particle hits a boundary , it s new velocity is drawn from a gaussian distribution
this has a modest effect on the far end of the high - velocity tail , but leaves all major differences between uniform and boundary heating intact .     for different values of @xmath16 .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
data is taken for @xmath39 , @xmath60 and @xmath109(@xmath42 ) , @xmath110(@xmath44 ) , @xmath111(@xmath46 ) , @xmath112(@xmath48 ) and @xmath113(@xmath50 ) . ]
finally , we studied the behavior of the velocity distribution for different particle numbers @xmath16 .
figure [ fig : diffn](a ) shows that , as @xmath16 increases , the velocity distributions fall off more rapidly , but the high - velocity tails grow longer .
this is shown more clearly in figure [ fig : diffn](b ) . for the high - velocity tail
we find @xmath114 for @xmath109 decreasing to @xmath115 for @xmath116 .
the crossover shifts to lower velocity and becomes sharper as @xmath16 is increased . as we will demonstrate in more detail below , for boundary heating
there is no thermodynamic limit . instead of approaching a limiting velocity distribution as @xmath16
is increased , we find that the shape of the velocity distribution depends not only on @xmath0 and @xmath1 , but also on @xmath16 .
\}$ ] versus @xmath117 for @xmath37 , @xmath39 and @xmath52 ( @xmath42 ) , @xmath118 , @xmath39 and @xmath52 ( @xmath44 ) , @xmath37 , @xmath39 and @xmath60 ( @xmath46 ) , @xmath37 , @xmath119 and @xmath52 ( @xmath48 ) .
the solid lines correspond to the fit as made by rouyer and menon and has an exponent @xmath120 .
the range of the solid lines corresponds to half the range used by rouyer and menon in their fit , but contains about 80@xmath121 of their data points ]    .
[ fig : rouyer ]    for their experiments rouyer and menon used @xmath16 particles with @xmath122 , where @xmath123 and @xmath124 @xcite . in figure
[ fig : rouyer ] we plotted the velocity distribution for @xmath52 , @xmath39 and several values of @xmath16 .
the solid black lines indicated the fit with @xmath120 as made in @xcite .
this line clearly coincides with the high - velocity tail of the velocity distribution found by simulation .
this suggests that it is possible that instead of a universal distribution with @xmath8 , they only observed a part of a more complex velocity distribution , with two exponents and a crossover . for higher @xmath1
the high - velocity tails have exponents that are smaller than the @xmath8 observed for @xmath39 .     for different values of @xmath23 .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath117 .
data is taken for @xmath37 , @xmath59 , @xmath101 and @xmath125(@xmath42 ) , @xmath108(@xmath44 ) , @xmath68(@xmath46 ) , @xmath126(@xmath48 ) , @xmath127(@xmath50 ) , @xmath128(@xmath129 ) and @xmath130(@xmath73 ) . ]
the main difference between uniform and boundary heating is that in the first case heating takes place homogeneously throughout the box , whereas in the latter case energy is injected inhomogeneously at the boundaries .
this is not the direct cause for the difference in velocity distributions .
this is demonstrated by the occurrence of non - gaussian velocity distributions in a system studied by moon et .
they study a uniformly driven gas , but nevertheless find velocity distributions with a clear crossover .
the main difference is the way they implement uniform heating .
every time @xmath23 , they select at random two particles and add to these particles a random but opposite velocity to conserve the total momentum . on average heating is spatially homogeneous and in the limit of very small @xmath23 the behavior of both their and our uniform heating algorithm is the same . for small enough @xmath23 the number of collisions between heating events is smaller than one and the heating dominates over the dissipative behavior of the gas .
when @xmath23 becomes larger , many collisions might happen between two heating events .
apperently this changes the velocity distributions . in figure [ fig:2point ]
we show the velocity distribution for @xmath37 , @xmath59 and @xmath101 .
the gas is heated using the two - point heating algorithm described above , varying the time between heatings , @xmath23 .
for @xmath125 the distribution has a exponent @xmath114 that is constant approximately over the observed range .
when @xmath23 is reduced a clear crossover develops . the behavior of the velocity distribution for velocities higher than the crossover velocity is more complicated than in boundary heating
there is also a sharp kink at the high - velocity end , that we have been unable to explain so far .
this can explain the differences between velocity distributions for uniform and boundary heating . when heating uniformly all the particles are heated every timestep @xmath23 , while only a few collisions occur in that time .
the system is dominated by heating and we see a velocity distribution with a constant exponent over the entire observed velocity range . if we are heating through a boundary , there are many collisions in the dense region in the center of the box , but only a few particles escape to the boundary to get heated . in this case
, the system is dominated by dissipation and we see in general a velocity distribution that strongly deviates from a gaussian . this difference between uniform and boundary heating
can be quantified by the ratio @xmath2 , where @xmath14 and @xmath15 are the mean number of heatings and the number of collisions a particle has experienced , respectively . for a uniformly heated gas of @xmath37 , @xmath59 and @xmath101
we find that @xmath131 .
for the same parameters but heating through the boundary we find @xmath132 . for again the same parameters but using two - point heating with @xmath133 we find @xmath134 .
we tested the effect of changing @xmath3 on velocity distributions obtained with boundary heating . when increasing the number of particles @xmath16 or the area fraction @xmath1 , the average number of collisions increases .
one can show in a mean field approximation that @xmath135 .
the average distance a particle travels between collisions is given by @xmath136 .
the average distance a particles travels between heatings @xmath137 is given by the dimensions of the container .
for a box of area @xmath138 the average distance between boundaries is given by @xmath139 .
finally , we know @xmath140 .
our simulation obeys this approximation very well . in fig .
[ fig : collapse ] we show velocity distributions for @xmath60 and different combinations of @xmath16 and @xmath1 .
we measure the heating - dissipation ratio @xmath3 in the simulation and show velocity distributions with the same @xmath3 on top of each other . for @xmath141 and @xmath142
we find excellent collapse for different @xmath16 and @xmath1 , even when we scale the system by a factor @xmath143 . for @xmath144 , where spatial correlations become very strong ,
we still find reasonable collapse .
as we increase @xmath3 we observe the usual pattern , where a crossover appears in a distribution that was initially close to a gaussian .
this means that the velocity distributions are almost exclusively controlled by two parameters ; the coefficient of restitution @xmath0 , which is a material parameters , and the heating - dissipation ratio @xmath3 , which depends on experimental conditions .    .
distributions with the same @xmath3 are shown on top of each other .
( a ) @xmath141 and we show @xmath109 and @xmath145(@xmath42 ) , @xmath146 and @xmath147(@xmath44 ) , @xmath148 and @xmath149(@xmath150 ) .
( b ) @xmath142 and we show @xmath109 and @xmath151(@xmath42 ) , @xmath146 and @xmath152(@xmath44 ) , @xmath153 and @xmath59(@xmath150 ) .
( c ) @xmath144 and we show @xmath109 and @xmath154(@xmath42 ) , @xmath146 and @xmath155(@xmath44 ) , @xmath153 and @xmath38(@xmath150 ) .
inset : heating - dissipation ratio @xmath3 for @xmath148(@xmath42 ) , @xmath153(@xmath44 ) , @xmath146(@xmath150 ) and @xmath109(@xmath156 ) for several values of @xmath1 .
the line is a fit of the form @xmath157 . ]
to study the dependence of the velocity distributions on the ratio @xmath3 we constructed a model of the inelastic gas inspired by work done by ulam @xcite on elastic gases .
ulam rederived the maxwell - bolzmann distribution for the velocities of particles in a perfect gas using the following very simple model : he considered @xmath16 particles with random initial velocities . at every time step a pair of particles was selected and the velocities of the particles were changed as if they had collided elastically .
ulam found that , regardless of the initial velocities , the system quickly evolved to a state where on average all energy was distributed equally over all particles and the deviation of the velocities of the particles around the average velocity of the system was given by the maxwell - bolzmann distribution .
this approximation of random collisions is only justified when the gas is sufficiently dilute .
the same approximation can also be made for the granular gas by replacing the elastic collisions between particles with inelastic collisions .
since the gas cools down without any further energy input , heating has to be included as well .
this allows us to study the dissipative behavior of the granular gas while neglecting all spatial correlations that develop in the more detailed simulations described before .
in particularly we can study the effect on the velocity distributions of changing the fraction @xmath2 described in the previous section by varying the ratio of heatings and collisions .
we adapted ulam s procedure in order to model a two - dimensional granular gas consisting of @xmath16 particles .
equation [ eqn : inelas ] can be cast into the following form : @xmath158 where @xmath159 and @xmath159 are the velocities of particles @xmath18 and @xmath19 , @xmath0 is the coefficient of restitution and @xmath160 is the angle between the separation vector @xmath161 and a reference axis .
collisions in our model occur by selecting at random particles @xmath18 and @xmath19 and an uniformly distributed impact parameter @xmath162 .
we then use the above collision rule with @xmath163 , where @xmath164 is the velocity in the center - of - mass frame and @xmath165 is a unit vector along the reference axis .
we discard values of @xmath160 corresponding to @xmath166 as these represent unphysical collisions .
we heat the gas by selecting a random particle @xmath18 and adding a random amount of velocity according to equation [ eqn : uniheat ] . to prevent the velocities from running away , we subtract the center - of - mass velocity after heating . in a single time step ,
we have let @xmath167 particles collide and we heat @xmath168 particles .
this gives us @xmath169 .
when we use inelastic instead of elastic collisions and drive the system , we find that the gas heats up until it reaches a steady state , where on average the energy lost in collisions is compensated by the heat inserted into the system through our driving mechanism . as @xmath168 is chosen increasingly bigger in comparison to @xmath170 , the granular temperature @xmath171 of the gas increases accordingly .     and @xmath101 .
( a ) @xmath78 .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
data is for different values of @xmath172 : @xmath173 ( @xmath42 ) , @xmath174 ( @xmath44 ) , @xmath175 ( @xmath46 ) , @xmath176 ( @xmath48 ) , @xmath177 ( @xmath50 ) , @xmath178 ( @xmath129 ) and @xmath179 ( @xmath73 ) . ]    in figure [ fig : diff_f ] we plotted the result for an inelastic gas with @xmath101 .
we varied the number of heatings and the number of collisions in a single time step from @xmath180 and @xmath181 to @xmath182 and @xmath183 .
as @xmath3 is lowered , the velocity distributions develop a crossover and for @xmath184 the distributions are strongly non - gaussian , similar to the velocity distributions obtained for @xmath185 in two - point heating . in figure [ fig : diffeta ] we keep @xmath186 fixed and vary @xmath0 .
we see that the crossover point shifts down as @xmath0 is lowered and that the kink in the velocity distribution shifts down .     and @xmath186 . ( a ) @xmath78 .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
data is for @xmath52 ( @xmath42 ) , @xmath71 ( @xmath44 ) , @xmath72 ( @xmath46 ) , @xmath187 ( @xmath48 ) and @xmath64 ( @xmath50 ) . ]
we also compared velocity distributions found in the model with those acquired by simulation . to this end we measured @xmath3 in simulations using different ways of heating . for a uniformly heated gas of @xmath37 , @xmath59 and @xmath101 we found @xmath131 . for the same parameters but heating through the boundary we found @xmath132 . for two - point heating with @xmath133 we found @xmath134 .
we ran the model with the corresponding set of parameters and measured velocity distributions .
the results are shown in figure [ fig : fcompare ] .
the velocity distributions agree qualitatively , but especially for the case of q=0.08 there is considerable quantitative difference .
still , the model is able to generate non - gaussian velocity distributions , while neglecting all spatial correlations .
this suggests that the non - gaussian behavior of the velocity distributions is not caused by spatial fluctuations and correlations in the gas .
instead it is the flow of energy through the system , mediated by the inelastic collisions , that determines the shape of the velocity distribution .
this also means that there is no a priori difference between inhomogeneous and homogeneous heating : the difference in the shape of the velocity distribution , particularly the occurrence of the crossover , is only a consequence of the fact that in inhomogeneous heating in general the number of collisions between particles exceeds the number of particles being heated .    ,
@xmath59 and @xmath101 .
( a ) @xmath78 for @xmath131 ( solid ) , @xmath132 ( dashed ) and @xmath134 ( dotted ) .
results on the bottom are obtained for simulation , results on the top for the model .
( b ) @xmath57\}$ ] versus @xmath58 .
the symbols shown are velocity distributions acquired by simulation for @xmath131 ( @xmath42 ) , @xmath188 ( @xmath44 ) , @xmath189 ( @xmath46 ) .
the lines show the velocity distributions found in the model for the same values of @xmath3 ( solid , dotted , dashed ) . ]
due to the idealized nature of our system , it is not possible to do a direct comparison between our simulation and experiments . in the experiment of rouyer and menon
the driving is through the boundary , but there are some significant differences between their heating mechanism and the one we use in simulations with boundary heating . due to gravity and the geometry of the setup
the injection of energy in the experiment of rouyer and menon is mainly in the vertical direction .
this energy is transferred into the horizontal direction by collisions between particles .
another difference is that in the experiment the frequency of driving is relatively low . because of this the dynamics of the gas close to the driving boundary is strongly dependend on the phase of the driving cycle .
in fact , it has been shown in simulation that for a system similar to the experiment by rouyer and menon , a shockwave propagates up through the gas @xcite . at a certain distance from the boundary
the time dependence has decayed away and the gas enters a steady state .
it is in this steady state that the velocity distributions are measured .
it is not yet established how this time dependence and the occurence of a shock wave influences the velocity distributions in the steady state . a priori it is not clear if it is possible to compare velocity distributions in systems with a strong time - dependence , like the experiments , with those that have no time dependence , as is the case in our simulations .
there are , however , reasons to assume this is possible .
the velocity distributions in the experiment of rouyer and menon are measured only in the direction orthogonal to the driving direction .
simulations @xcite show that the effect of the shock in the direction orthogonal to the shock are usually relatively weak and decay rapidly in height . in the steady state ,
influence of the shock is absent in the orthogonal direction , even while it still may be apparent in the direction perpendicular to the driving direction .
so , if we only look at velocity distributions in the orthogonal direction and in the steady state , a comparison between the experiment and our simulations is be valid .
it is also not clear how in the experiments the dynamics of the gas shape the velocity distribution and whether it is controlled by the parameter @xmath3 .
we speculate that in the steady state the system behaves in fact like a one dimensional inelastic gas .
fast upward moving particles inject energy in the orthogonal direction when colliding with particles in the steady state , effectively functioning as a heat source . in this picture
the mean number of collisions between fast upwards moving particles and particles in the steady state would be @xmath14 , the average number of heatings , and collisions between the particles in the steady state mutually would be @xmath15 , the average number of collisions . one way of changing the shape of the velocity distribution would be changing the fraction of particles in the steady state .
more particles in the steady state would lower @xmath14 and increase @xmath15 leading to more non - gaussian velocity distributions .
the above considerations not only apply to the experiment of rouyer and menon but to most of the other experiments as well . in the experiments of blair and kudrolli and those of olafsen and urbach velocity distributions
are measured orthogonal to the driving direction . in both cases
it is not so much the collisions with the bottom plate that drive the gas in the ortogonal directions , but mainly collisions between fast upward moving particles with particles that have low velocities in the orthogonal directions .
it is in these experiments rather than those of rouyer and menon that we find a similar dependence on @xmath0 and @xmath3 as we describe in this article .    in the setup of olafsen and urbach
@xcite velocity distributions go from non - gaussian to gaussian when a rough plate is used instead of a flat plate . on a flat plate , energy
is only injected in the in - plane directions by off - angle collisions between neighboring particles . with a rough plate ,
energy is injected directly into the directions parallel to the plate every time a particle collides with the plate , effectively increasing the number of heatings over collisions .
baxter and olafsen @xcite observe the same behavior in a system where a layer of heavy particles is inserted between the other layer of particles and a flat bottom plate .
particles from the upper layer have off - angle collisions with the layer of heavy particles , injecting energy in the in - plane directions every cycle .
particles in the upper layer show gaussian velocity distributions , whereas particles in the lower layer have non - gaussian velocity distributions .
most convincing is the experiment by blair and kudrollli @xcite . here
the number of collisions is increased by adding more particles . as a result
, their velocity distributions develop the same crossover we see both in our simulations and model . the reason why these transitions are not visible in the experiment by rouyer and menon as they increase number of particles ,
is that in the first case the effective coefficient of restitution is much lower , @xmath190 , due to friction with the inclined plane .
again , one of the main problems considering the velocity distributions in granular gases is that different setups and experiments usually find different velocity distributions . as we have shown in this section
, our finding of the controlling parameter @xmath3 could ultimately explain these seemingly inconsistent results .
we compared the velocity distributions of a granular gas that was driven by uniform heating and by heating through the boundary .
although it is usually assumed that uniform heating yields the same behavior as boundary heating when the boundary is far away and the spatial gradients are small , we find that there are clear qualitative differences .
when driven through the boundary , for instance , the gas can form coexisting cool liquid - like clusters surrounded by a hot gaseous state for certain values of @xmath1 and @xmath0 .
such clusters do not occur in our simulations with uniform heating .
the difference between uniform heating and boundary heating also extends to the velocity distributions . for uniform heating ,
we find velocity distributions that are close to gaussian over the observed range of velocities and for a wide range of @xmath1 and @xmath0 .
when heating through the boundaries , on the other hand , we find that velocity distributions are stretched gaussians that usually cross over from one exponent @xmath81 to another for the high - velocity tail .
for the high - velocity tail we find that the exponent @xmath81 varies over a wide range . for strong dissipation
this tail can not be described by a single exponent .
this means that there is no universal velocity distribution with @xmath8 , as was proposed by rouyer and menon . instead
, the velocity distribution found by rouyer and menon may be just one out of the many distributions described here .
the apparent universality may be due to the use of a narrow range of parameters ( nearly elastic particles were used with @xmath11 and vary @xmath191 ) .
we find that varying @xmath1 only has a minor effect on the shape of the distribution when @xmath0 is so close to the elastic limit . for low @xmath0 ,
we instead find velocity distributions that look much like the distributions found by blair and kudrolli for gases with @xmath190 .
furthermore , we demonstrate that the distribution of velocities for dissipative gases , while not universal in form , depends only on two parameters : the coefficient of restitution @xmath0 ( a material parameter ) and @xmath2 , the average ratio of heatings and collisions in the gas ( a function of experimental conditions ) .
we find that velocity distributions range from gaussian for @xmath4 , where heating dominates dissipation , to strongly non - gaussian for @xmath184 , where the dynamics of the gas is dominated by the dissipative collisions between particles .
the differences in distributions we find between uniform and boundary heating can then be understood as different limits of @xmath3 , for @xmath4 and @xmath5 respectively .
we can control the parameter @xmath3 more easily using two - point heating and here we observe the transistion form gaussian to strongly non - gaussian behavior directly as we change @xmath3 .
furthermore , a simple model of a driven , inelastic gas without spatial degrees of freedom reproduces the entire family of velocity distributions we find in simulation , as we vary @xmath0 and @xmath3 .
this means that the velocity distributions are non - gaussian not because of spatial correlations .
rather , it is the cascade of energy from a few high - energy particles to the slow - moving bulk of the gas that is the key determinant of the non - gaussian velocity distributions .
these observations should aid in the construction of a kinetic theory of dissipative gases .
99 s. mcnamara , w.r .
young , phys .
e 50 , r28 ( 1994 ) t. zhou , l.p .
kadanoff , phys .
e 54 , 623 ( 1996 ) d.r.m .
williams , f.c .
mackintosh , phys .
e , 54 , r9 s.j .
moon , m.d .
shattuck , j.b .
swift , phys .
e 64 , 031303 ( 2001 ) t.p.c .
van noije , m.h .
ernst , granular matter 1 , 57 ( 1998 ) y.s .
du , h. li , l.p .
kadanoff , phys .
74 , 1268 ( 1995 ) f. rouyer , n. menon , phys .
85 , 3676 ( 2000 ) a. kudrolli and j. henry , phys .
e 62 , r1489 ( 2000 ) ; d.l .
blair and a. kudrolli , phys .
e 64 , 051301 ( 2001 ) w. losert , d.g.w .
cooper , j. delour , a. kudrolli and j.p .
gollub , chaos 9 , 682 ( 1999 ) s. luding , e. clment , a. blumen , j. raichenbach , j. duran , phys .
e 49 , 1634 ( 1994 ) j.s .
olafsen and j.s .
urbach , phys .
e 60 , r2468 ( 1999 ) ; j.s . olafsen and j.s .
urbach , phys .
81 , 4369 ( 1998 ) ; a. prevost , d. a. egolf , j. s. urbach , phys .
89 , 084301 ( 2002 ) ; g. w. baxter , j. s. olafsen , nature 425 , 680 ( 2003 ) a. puglisi , v. loreto , u. m. b. marconi , a. petri and a. vulpiani , phys .
lett 81 , 3848 ( 1998 ) s. ulam , adv .
math . 1 , 7 ( 1980 ) j. bougie , s. j. moon , j. b. swift , h. l. swinney , phys .
e 66 , 051301 ( 2002 )


multi - user mimo ( mu - mimo ) is a key building block of the next generation wireless communication system . in a mu - mimo downlink system , a base station ( bs ) equipped with multiple antennas
simultaneously transmits data to a group of multiple antenna users .
the multi - user interference , which is the major performance limiting factor of mu - mimo systems , must be managed intelligently using the physical layer techniques such as beamforming . in general , there are two major objectives in the beamformer design problem .
one is to maximize a system utility ( e.g. , throughput ) under some power constraint , while the other one is to minimize the system transmission power subject to qos requirements @xcite .
although both formulations are justifiable and well - studied , the latter is more appropriate for scenarios where the users need a guaranteed qos level .    although the qos - constrained power minimization ( qcpm ) problem is globally solvable in polynomial time for miso system @xcite , this problem is highly non - convex and difficult to solve in mimo systems . in fact
, it has been shown that when the bss and the users are equipped with more than two antennas , the problem becomes np - hard @xcite .
therefore , many algorithms have been proposed to solve this problem approximately .
for example , the references @xcite and @xcite propose algorithms based on interference nulling , which can completely eliminate the inter - user interference . in these algorithms ,
the search space of transmit and receive beamformers is limited to zero forcing transceivers , leading to simple but suboptimal solutions .
in addition , such interference nulling based methods require that the number of transmit antennas is no less than the total number of active users , which is impractical in many scenarios .
another approach for solving the mu - mimo downlink qcpm problem is based on the iterative optimization methods @xcite .
references @xcite provide iterative algorithms that update the transmit beamformers , receive beamformers , and transmit powers by switching between the downlink and the dual uplink channels .
central to these methods is the notion of uplink - downlink duality ( udd ) theory @xcite , which guarantees that a set of target sinr levels is achievable in the downlink channel if and only if the same set of sinr levels is achievable in the corresponding dual uplink channel .
we refer to such algorithms as udd algorithms .
the udd algorithm was first proposed in @xcite for the multi - antenna case , where the _ receive _ ( resp .
transmit ) beamformer update is followed immediately by the _ transmit _
receive ) power update .
the udd algorithm of @xcite differs from that of @xcite in the order of updating transmit / receive beamformers and powers . in the udd algorithm of @xcite , the _ transmit _ ( resp .
receive ) power is updated exactly after the _ transmit _ ( resp .
receive ) beamformer .
importantly , it is shown in @xcite that the udd algorithm monotonically decreases the total power consumption while satisfying the qos constraints
. however , the algorithms in @xcite can only apply to the _ single stream case_. in @xcite the udd algorithm has been generalized to the multiple stream case under the assumption of no joint detection at the receivers ( i.e. , _ inter - stream _ interference is considered ) .
notice that , to the best of our knowledge , it is still not known whether the udd algorithm converges to a kkt solution .
different from the previous works , the references @xcite and @xcite have proposed an iterative algorithm named mmse - socp , which aims to solve the qcpm problem directly .
the algorithm consists of the following two key steps : 1 ) fixing the transmit power , update the receive beamformers using mmse receiver , and 2 ) fixing the receive beamformers , update the transmit beamformers by solving the power minimization problem with respect to the transmit beamformers .
the authors show that the total transmit power monotonically decreases and thus converges .
however , the convergence of the mmse - socp iterates to a kkt solution is not known .
nevertheless , the authors of @xcite and @xcite observe that the mmse - socp algorithm always generates a sequence that converges to a unique solution , irrespective of the initial point ( or at least with high probability , see @xcite ) .
hence , a conjecture has been made in @xcite , stating that the mmse - socp algorithm probably reaches a local optimum solution of the qcpm problem    in this paper , we settle the convergence issue related to the mmse - socp and the udd algorithm .
we show that both algorithms converge globally to the set of kkt solutions , regardless of the number of streams intended for each user .
we start by analyzing the kkt conditions of the qcpm problem of the single stream case . based on the analysis
, we propose a novel iterative algorithm called mmse - dual algorithm , which is essentially equivalent to the mmse - socp algorithm , but with the added benefits of having almost closed form updates and a lower complexity . through the mmse - dual algorithm , we reveal some connections between the udd algorithm@xcite and the mmse - socp algorithm @xcite .
more importantly we prove that both the mmse - dual algorithm and the udd algorithm monotonically converge to the set of kkt solutions of the qcpm problem .
in addition , we extend the algorithms to the multiple stream case and prove that they can also reach a kkt point of the qcpm problem under some mild conditions .
as will be seen later , the mmse - dual algorithm has a lower complexity than the udd algorithm if the number of streams is greater than the number of transmit antennas .
moreover , although both algorithms require feasible initialization , it is easier for the mmse - dual algorithm to obtain a feasible initialization ( see remark [ rem : feasibility ] in section iv ) .
the remainder of this paper is organized as follows . in section
ii we give the formulation of the qcpm problem and provide a brief review of the existing algorithms . in section iii
we propose the mmse - dual algorithm which reveals the relation between the mmse - socp and the udd algorithm .
then , we state the convergence results of the three algorithms in section iv and extend the algorithms to the multiple stream case in section v. finally , section vi presents some simulation results and section vii concludes the paper .    _ notations _ : throughout this paper , we use uppercase bold letters for matrices , lowercase bold letters for column vectors , and regular letters for scalars . the superscript @xmath0 is used to denote the hermitian transpose of a matrix . for a complex number @xmath1 , @xmath2 and
@xmath3 denote its phase angle and imaginary part , respectively . for a function @xmath4
, @xmath5 denotes its gradient with respect to the variable @xmath6 . for a matrix @xmath7
, @xmath8 indicates that @xmath7 is a positive semidefinite matrix .
@xmath9 denotes the identity matrix of an appropriate size . the circularly symmetric complex gaussian distribution is represented by @xmath10 , where @xmath11 is the mean and @xmath12 is the variance of the distribution .
the notations @xmath13 and @xmath14 represent the trace and the determinant operator , respectively .
consider a multi - user mimo downlink system with @xmath15 users , where the bs is equipped with @xmath16 antennas and each user  @xmath17 is equipped with @xmath18 antennas .
let us use @xmath19 to denote the set of all users .
assume for now that the bs transmits the single stream @xmath20 to the intended receiver  @xmath17 with no multiplexing ( the multiple stream case will be considered in section vi ) .
let us also assume that the bs utilizes the transmit beamformer  @xmath21 to send the data stream @xmath20 to user @xmath17 . on the other side
, user @xmath17 utilizes the receive beamformer  @xmath22 to estimate its transmitted data stream .
the estimated data stream @xmath23 can be mathematically expressed as@xmath24 where @xmath25 denotes the channel matrix from the bs to the receiver  @xmath17 ; @xmath26 is the additive white gaussian noise ( awgn ) with distribution @xmath27
. the data streams @xmath20 s are i.i.d . and independent of the noise level ; and have distribution @xmath28 .
we are interested in designing the transmit and receive beamformers to minimize the transmit power while the users qos requirements are satisfied .
let us consider the signal - to - interference - plus - noise ratio ( sinr ) as the qos measure .
the sinr of user @xmath17 is given by : @xmath29    mathematically , the qcpm problem can be written as @xmath30 where @xmath31 is the intended sinr level of user  @xmath17 ; the set of all transmit beamformers ( resp .
receive beamformers ) is denoted by @xmath32 ( resp .
@xmath33 ) . throughout the paper , we assume that problem ( p1 ) is feasible and @xmath34 for all @xmath17 .      in this subsection , we briefly review the existing mmse - socp algorithm @xcite and the udd algorithm @xcite .
the mmse - socp algorithm alternates between the following two steps :    * fixing all the transmit beamformers , update the receive beamformers using the mmse receiver , i.e. , @xmath35 * fixing all the receive beamformers , update the transmit beamformers by solving @xmath36 which can be transformed to a second - order cone program ( socp ) @xcite . the above socp has @xmath37 unknowns and can be efficiently solved via interior - point algorithm ; each iteration of the interior - point algorithm has computational complexity of @xmath38@xcite .
let @xmath39 and @xmath40 denote the normalized beamformer , i.e. , @xmath41 and @xmath42 with @xmath43 .
we refer @xmath44 and @xmath45 as the normalized beamformers , @xmath46 and @xmath47 as the power consumption . using these notations ,
the downlink channel model can be rewritten as @xmath48    the udd algorithm is established by introducing a _ virtual _ uplink channel , which can be constructed through the following three steps : 1 ) reverse the directions of all links ; 2 ) replace the channel matrices by their conjugated transposed version ( i.e. , @xmath49 @xmath50 ) ; 3 ) exchange the role of transmit beamformer and receive beamformer .
mathematically , the virtual uplink channel model can be represented as @xmath51 where @xmath52 is the virtual uplink channel awgn .    in terms of the channel models and ,
the sinrs for the downlink and uplink are respectively expressed as @xmath53 and @xmath54 then , fixing the beamformers , the _ downlink _ power minimization problem can be written as @xmath55 its dual problem can be obtained by using the lagrange duality theory with @xmath56 corresponding to the lagrangian multiplier of the @xmath17th qos constraint@xcite@xmath57 it can be shown that problem is equivalent to the following _ uplink _ weighted power minimization problem@xcite @xmath58 by noting that all the inequality constraints of both problem and must hold with equality at the optimality and furthermore the corresponding system of linear equations with respect to @xmath59 has a unique solution ( * ? ? ?
* lemmas 1 & 2 ) .
to summarize , the classical lagrange duality theory leads to the well - known uplink - downlink duality theorem :    ( uplink - downlink duality @xcite ) : _ for any given set of normalized beamformers @xmath60 and @xmath61 , a set of given sinr values @xmath62 is achievable in the downlink using the total power consumption @xmath63 if and only if the same set of sinr values is achievable in the dual uplink channel with the weighted total power of @xmath64 . _
the udd algorithm is based on the uplink - downlink duality theory .
we summarize the udd algorithm requires uplink / downlink power update only once at each iteration and thus is more efficient .
however , the convergence result to be shown later in proposition 2 also applies to the udd algorithm in @xcite .
] @xcite in table [ tab : pseudo_code_mmse_socp ] .
it should be pointed out that , the udd algorithm requires a feasible initialization @xcite .
otherwise , the steps 7 and 11 in the algorithm are not well - defined . + it is also worth noting that the work @xcite ( resp .
@xcite ) only shows that the mmse - socp ( resp .
udd ) algorithm keeps the qcpm objective function nonincreasing as the iteration proceeds . in this paper
, we reveal the connection between the mmse - socp and the udd algorithm .
moreover prove that the two algorithms can monotonically converge to a kkt solution of the qcpm problem .
* * input * : @xmath65 , @xmath66 , @xmath67 , @xmath68 * * output * : the beamformers @xmath69 and @xmath70 .
* set @xmath71 and @xmath72 * initialize @xmath73 , @xmath68 . *
* repeat * * @xmath74 ; * @xmath75 , @xmath50 * @xmath76 , @xmath50 * update @xmath47 s by solving  //uplink power allocation * @xmath77 , @xmath50 * @xmath78 , @xmath50 * @xmath79 , @xmath50 * update @xmath46 s by solving  //downlink power allocation * @xmath80 , @xmath50 * * until * some convergence criterion is met     +
in this section , we first analyze the kkt conditions of problem ( p1 ) . based on the results of the kkt analysis
, we then present a new iterative power minimization algorithm , dubbed mmse - dual , to solve the system of kkt equations .
moreover , the proposed algorithm reveals some connections between the mmse - socp and the udd algorithm .
first , let us define the lagrange function associated with problem ( p1 ) as @xmath81 where @xmath82^t$ ] is the lagrange multiplier vector .
for a given optimal primal dual tuple @xmath83 , the kkt conditions of problem ( p1 ) are given by    [ eqkkt ] @xmath84    where @xmath85 and @xmath86 are the first - order optimality conditions with respect to the receive and transmit beamformers , respectively .
the equation @xmath87 is the complementary condition ; and the equations @xmath88 and @xmath89 are the primal and dual feasibility conditions . in the sequel , we analyze the above kkt system .
[ lemma : lambdapositive ] _ for any primal - dual tuple @xmath83 that satisfies , we have @xmath90 , and all the qos constraints hold with equality . _    we prove this using contradiction .
assume the contrary that one of the optimal lagrange multipliers , say @xmath91 , equals to zero .
multiplying by @xmath92 yields @xmath93 this implies @xmath94 , which contradicts the assumption that @xmath95 .
let us define @xmath96 and @xmath97    [ lemma : akuk ] _ for any primal - dual tuple @xmath83 that satisfies , the minimum eigenvalue of @xmath98 is zero .
furthermore , the optimal normalized receive beamformers are given by @xmath99 _    clearly
, implies that @xmath98 must have at least one zero eigenvalue . on the other hand , since @xmath100 @xmath98 has at most one nonpositive eigenvalue .
hence , the minimum eigenvalue of @xmath98 is zero .
furthermore , the equation   implies that @xmath101 and therefore @xmath102 combining and lemma  [ lemma : lambdapositive ] , it can be verified that @xmath103 is the unique solution of up to scaling .    defining @xmath104 and
@xmath105 the next lemma follows directly from the kkt equations and .
the proof of this lemma is similar to the proof of lemma  [ lemma : akuk ] and thus omitted from the manuscript .
[ lemma : bkvk]_for any primal - dual tuple @xmath83 that satisfies , the minimum eigenvalue of @xmath106 is zero .
moreover , the optimal transmit beamformers are given by @xmath107 where the coefficients @xmath108 is chosen such that is satisfied .
_    _ for any primal - dual tuple @xmath83 that satisfies , the lagrange multipliers @xmath109 satisfies the system of equations @xmath110 where @xmath111
. moreover , the unique solution of can be obtained by a fixed point iteration . _    from lemma  [ lemma : bkvk ] , we have @xmath112 it follows from schur complement that @xmath113\succeq 0.\ ] ] since @xmath114 is positive definite , using schur complement again implies @xmath115 for any primal - dual tuple @xmath83 that satisfies the kkt condition , the above inequality must hold with equality ; otherwise @xmath116 by the schur complement , which contradicts lemma  [ lemma : bkvk ] . hence , it holds that @xmath117 on the other hand , @xmath118 where the second equality is due to the identity @xmath119 ( * ? ? ?
hence can be rewritten as @xmath120 which implies . moreover , the right hand side of is a standard function is a standard function if it satisfies 1 ) @xmath121 ; 2 ) @xmath122 for @xmath123 ; 3 ) @xmath124 for @xmath125 . if @xmath126 is a standard function , the system of equations @xmath127 has a unique solution which can be obtained by a fixed point algorithm .
see more details in @xcite .
] of @xmath128 .
hence , the solution of is unique and can be obtained by a fixed point algorithm @xcite .
based on the results of the kkt analysis , we here present a new iterative power minimization algorithm , dubbed mmse - dual algorithm , to solve the system of kkt equations ( [ neq : kkt1]-[neq : kkt5 ] ) .
our proposed mmse - dual algorithm first updates the receive beamformers using the mmse receiver , followed by the update of the transmit beamformers using equations and .
the algorithm is outlined in table  [ tbl : pseudo_code_mimo ] . in this table
, @xmath129 denotes the total number of fixed point iterations for calculating the optimal lagrange multipliers .    before stating the properties of the proposed algorithm ,
let us first see how the mmse - dual algorithm plays a key role in establishing the connection between the mmse - socp algorithm and the udd algorithm .
first notice that in the mmse - dual algorithm , the procedure of updating the transmit beamformers ( i.e. , steps 7 - 13 in table ii ) is equivalent to solving @xmath130 this follows from the fact that the kkt condition of ( p2 ) are identical to ( [ neq : kkt2]-[neq : kkt5 ] ) and strong duality holds for problem ( p2)@xcite . since the updates of the receive beamformer in mmse - dual is the same as the receiver update in the mmse - socp algorithm , the mmse - dual algorithm is in essence the mmse - socp algorithm .
the only difference of the mmse - dual algorithm with the mmse
socp @xcite is that , instead of updating the transmit beamformers by directly solving the socp ( p2 ) , we use semi - closed form computation and .
it is not hard to see that the complexity of each iteration of the fixed point algorithm is dominated by the computation of @xmath131 , which is @xmath132 .
hence , the mmse - dual algorithm has lower complexity than the mmse - socp algorithm .
next we explore the relation between the mmse - dual and the udd algorithm . comparing the algorithms in table i and ii , it is not difficult to see that , the dual variables @xmath128 and the auxiliary variables @xmath108 in the mmse - dual algorithm respectively play the role of the dual uplink transmit power and the downlink transmit power in the udd algorithm .
this implies that , although the udd algorithm is developed from a different point of view , it works in a similar way as the mmse - dual algorithm towards solving the kkt system .
furthermore , the constraints of problem must be satisfied with equality at the optimality .
hence it is readily seen that the mmse - dual algorithm updates the auxiliary variables @xmath108 in the same way as the downlink transmission power @xmath133 in the udd algorithm ; see step 11 in table i and step 13 in table ii .
the only difference between the two algorithms lies in the update of the dual variables @xmath128 ( or equivalently the dual uplink transmit power @xmath47 in udd ) . in the mmse - dual algorithm , the lagrange multipliers @xmath128
are updated by the fixed point algorithm independent of the current transmit beamformers , while the update of uplink transmit power in the udd algorithm depends on the current transmission beamformers ; see steps 7 - 10 in table ii and step 7 in table i. note that , if problem is feasible , the update of the uplink transmit power in the udd algorithm is equivalent to solving a linear system of @xmath59 which has complexity of @xmath134 .
hence , when @xmath135 , the udd algorithm and the mmse - dual algorithm have comparable complexity .
but in the general single stream case where @xmath136 , the udd algorithm has lower complexity than the mmse - dual algorithm .
* * input * : @xmath65 , @xmath66 , @xmath67 , @xmath68 * * output * : the beamformers @xmath69 and @xmath70 . * set @xmath71 and @xmath72 * initialize @xmath73 and @xmath91 , @xmath68 . *
* repeat * * @xmath74 ; * @xmath137 , @xmath50 * @xmath138 , @xmath50 * * for * @xmath139 to @xmath129//fixed point algorithm * @xmath140 * @xmath141 , @xmath50 * * end for * * @xmath142 , @xmath50 * @xmath79 , @xmath50 * solve for the linear system of @xmath108 : * @xmath143 , @xmath50 * @xmath144 , @xmath50 * * until * some convergence criterion is met     +    in a nutshell , similar to the mmse - dual algorithm , the mmse - socp algorithm and the udd algorithm both work towards solving the kkt system . in the next section , we rigorously show that the three algorithms indeed monotonically converge to a kkt solution .
in this section , we establish the convergence of the three algorithms . compared to the existing convergence results of the mmse - socp algorithm in @xcite and the udd algorithm in @xcite
, we show below a stronger convergence result that every limit point of the three algorithms is a kkt solution of . before stating the convergence results , we first present three lemmas which will be used later in the convergence proof .
[ lem : phase - rotation ] for any feasible @xmath70 , the optimal solution to problem is unique up to phase rotation .
let @xmath145 and @xmath146 be any two optimal solutions to problem .
moreover , we define @xmath147 and @xmath148 , @xmath149 . in the following ,
we prove @xmath150 , @xmath149 .
it is noted that any feasible solution to the following socp @xmath151 is feasible to problem .
it follows that the optimal value of problem is not greater than that of problem . on the other hand
, it is easily seen that the optimal solution @xmath145 to problem is a feasible solution to problem .
hence , @xmath145 is an optimal solution to problem .
similarly , we infer that @xmath146 is an optimal solution to the following socp @xmath152 by comparing the above two socp formulations and noting @xmath153 , we conclude that @xmath154 is an optimal solution to problem .
since the socp problem has a strictly convex objective function , it has a unique solution .
thus we have @xmath150 , @xmath149 , implying that the optimal solution to problem is unique up to phase rotation .
this completes the proof .
[ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] if @xmath70 and @xmath69 satisfy the sinr constraints of problem ( p1 ) with equality and for each @xmath17 @xmath155 is an mmse - receiver , i.e. , @xmath156 for all @xmath17 with @xmath157 being an arbitrary nonzero constant , then we have @xmath158    since @xmath70 and @xmath69 satisfy the constraints of problem ( p1 ) with equality , we have @xmath159 which can be rearranged as @xmath160 by substituting the mmse receiver @xmath156 into and noting that @xmath161 , @xmath50 , we get @xmath162 since we have @xmath163 ( due to @xmath164 ) , it follows that @xmath165 this implies that for each @xmath17 the matrix @xmath166 is positive semidefinite .
hence , from , we obtain @xmath167 which completes the proof .    due to the uplink  downlink duality
, we also have the following lemma .
the proof of the lemma is similar to that of lemma [ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] and thus omitted for brevity .
[ lem : lemma5-prop2 ] if @xmath70 and @xmath69 satisfy the sinr constraints of the virtual uplink weighted power minimization problem s . ] with equality and moreover for each @xmath17 , @xmath73 is a ( virtual uplink ) mmse - receiver , i.e. , @xmath168 with @xmath169 being an arbitrary nonzero constant , then we have @xmath170 where @xmath114 s are defined as in section iii .
[ rem : remak - seciv ] lemmas [ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] and [ lem : lemma5-prop2 ] indicate that , for the downlink / virtual uplink power minimization problem , if a set of transmit and receive beamformers satisfies the sinr constraints with equality and moreover complies with the mmse receiver structure , the first  order optimality condition with respect to the downlink / virtual uplink receive beamformers follows .
in other words , if a set of transmit and receive beamformers fulfills both the assumptions of lemma [ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] and lemma [ lem : lemma5-prop2 ] , then it is a kkt solution to the kkt system .      in this subsection , we study the convergence behavior of the mmse - socp ( or equivalently mmse - dual ) algorithm .
[ prop1-seciv ] _ let @xmath171 denote a sequence generated by the mmse - dual algorithm ( or equivalently the mmse - socp algorithm ) .
suppose @xmath172 is feasible for problem ( p1 ) , then every limit point of @xmath171 is a kkt point of ( p1 ) .
_    here we prove the result for the mmse - socp algorithm .
the proof for the mmse - dual algorithm follows immediately due to its equivalence to mmse - socp algorithm .
the iterations of the mmse - socp algorithm are illustrated as @xmath173 , where the two arrows correspond to the two update rules shown in sec .
ii.b in order .
since the objective function is coercive , @xmath174 is bounded and consequently @xmath175 is bounded as well . hence , the sequence @xmath176 has at least one limit point .
consider a subsequence @xmath177 converging to the limit point @xmath178 .
moreover , by further restricting to another subsequence , we can assume that @xmath179 converges to a limit point @xmath180 .    in the sequel
, we first prove that @xmath181 ( up to a phase rotation ) . clearly , @xmath182 since the objective value is decreasing and it is bounded from below . now consider a fixed transmit beamformer @xmath183 so that @xmath184 where @xmath185 is defined in .
due to the continuity of the sinr function , there exists an index @xmath186 so that for all @xmath187 , @xmath188 .
since at each iteration of the algorithm , the transmit beamformers are updated after the receive beamformers , for all @xmath187 we have @xmath189 letting @xmath190 implies @xmath191 furthermore , according to the update rule , we have @xmath192 and thus @xmath193 combining with the fact that holds for any @xmath183 satisfying , we obtain such that @xmath194 , we can scale up @xmath183 with any constant @xmath195 so that the scaled @xmath183 ( i.e. , @xmath196 ) satisfies .
furthermore , analogous to , we have @xmath197 , @xmath198 , implying @xmath199 .
therefore , combining with the fact that holds for any @xmath183 satisfying implies .
similar arguments are also used in the proof of proposition 2 . ]
@xmath200 on the other hand , since the update of receive beaformers using mmse receivers keeps the sinr feasibility , we have @xmath201 . letting @xmath202
, we obtain @xmath203 combining , and , we infer that @xmath180 is also an optimal solution to problem .
according to lemma [ lem : phase - rotation ] , we have @xmath181 up to an appropriate phase rotation .
next , with @xmath204 , we prove that the limit point @xmath205 is a kkt point of ( p1 ) .
based on the receive beamformer update rule in the algorithm , @xmath206 , where @xmath207 . letting @xmath190 implies @xmath208 with @xmath209 . on the other hand
, implies that there exists a set of multipliers @xmath210 so that @xmath211 by lemma [ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] , we infer from and that @xmath212 clearly , the equations , and imply that the limit point @xmath205 is a kkt point of ( p1 ) .
the following theorem states our convergence result of the udd algorithm :    _ let @xmath213 denote a sequence generated by the udd algorithm .
suppose @xmath214 is feasible for problem ( p1 ) , then every limit point of @xmath215 is a kkt point of ( p1 ) .
_    for the ease of understanding , the iterations of the udd algorithm are visually presented in fig .
[ fig : udd - flow - chart ] where each arrow indicates an update rule as labeled .
let @xmath216 be the sequence generated by the udd algorithm .
clearly , the sequences @xmath217 and @xmath218 are bounded .
on the other hand , since the objective functions of problems and are both coercive , @xmath219 and @xmath220 are also bounded .
hence , the sequence @xmath221 is bounded .
it follows that there exists a subsequence @xmath222 converging to a limit point @xmath223 .
furthermore , by further restricting to a subsequence , we can assume that the subsequence @xmath224 converges to some limit point @xmath225 .
according to @xcite , we have the monotonic convergence , i.e. , @xmath226 , implying that @xmath227 .
first , we prove that @xmath228 is the optimal solution of problem with @xmath44 s and @xmath45 s being fixed to @xmath229 s and @xmath230 s respectively , and consequently @xmath231 , @xmath232 .
let @xmath233 .
due to the continuity of the sinr functions , we can always find an integer @xmath234 , such that for all @xmath235 , @xmath236 step 11 of the udd algorithm [ see ( a ) in fig .
[ fig : udd - flow - chart ] ] implies @xmath237 and @xmath238 taking limit as @xmath239 yields @xmath240 and @xmath241 since at the optimality of problem the sinr constraint must hold with equality , and implies @xmath242    similarly , we next show that @xmath243 is the optimal solution of problem with @xmath44 s and @xmath45 s being fixed to @xmath244 s and @xmath230 s respectively , and moreover @xmath245 , @xmath232 . let @xmath246 due to the continuity of the sinr functions , we can always find @xmath234 , for all @xmath235 , such that @xmath247 due to step 7 of the udd algorithm [ see ( c ) in fig .
[ fig : udd - flow - chart ] ] , we have @xmath248 and @xmath249 hence , we infer that @xmath250 and @xmath251    now we show @xmath252 after doing an appropriate phase rotation . due to the feasible initialization , we have for any @xmath253 that [ see ( b ) in fig .
[ fig : udd - flow - chart ] ] @xmath254 taking limit as @xmath239 yields @xmath255 where the equality is due to . in the following ,
we show that the inequality in actually achieves equality .
define @xmath256 and assume for contrary that there exists one @xmath257 that is strictly greater than @xmath67 . by the uplink - downlink duality theory
, there exists @xmath258 such that @xmath259 for all @xmath17 and @xmath260 .
since there exists one @xmath17 for which @xmath261 , the total power @xmath262 can be further decreased by reducing @xmath263 .
hence , and imply @xmath264 .
this yields a contradiction due to the fact that @xmath265 .
hence , we have @xmath266 note that steps 5 - 6 of the udd algorithm [ see ( b ) in fig . [ fig : udd - flow - chart ] ] imply @xmath267 where @xmath268 is normalization factor . from the above equation , we infer that @xmath269 maximizes @xmath270 with respect to @xmath44 .
it follows from that @xmath271 also maximizes @xmath270 .
thus we have @xmath272 for some complex valued scalar @xmath273 with @xmath274 .
next , we show @xmath275 and further @xmath276 , @xmath232 .
step 9 of the udd algorithm [ see ( d ) in fig .
[ fig : udd - flow - chart ] ] implies @xmath277 taking limit as @xmath239 , we have @xmath278 and thus @xmath279 by noting @xmath280 . combining , , and @xmath281 , we infer that both @xmath282 s and @xmath283 s are the optimal solutions to problem with there @xmath44 s and @xmath45 s replaced by @xmath269 s and @xmath284 s respectively .
since problem has a unique solution@xcite , we conclude @xmath285 , @xmath232 , and @xmath286    now we are ready to end up the proof . by noting @xmath287 and @xmath288 , step 5 - 8 of the udd algorithm implies @xmath289 where @xmath290 is a normalization factor . on the other hand ,
step 9 - 12 of the udd algorithm implies @xmath291 where @xmath292 is a normalization factor .
, , , and can be equivalently written as @xmath293 where @xmath294 , @xmath295 . combining lemma [ lem : lemma4-prop1 ] , , and , we obtain @xmath296 similarly , lemma [ lem : lemma5-prop2 ] , , and
imply @xmath297 it can be readily seen that , , , and implies the kkt condition with @xmath298 for all @xmath17 .
thus the proof is completed .
[ rem : feasibility ] although both algorithms require feasible initialization , it is easier for the mmse - dual algorithm than the udd algorithm to obtain a feasible initialization . for example , when @xmath299 , it is guaranteed that problem ( p1 ) with any given nonzero @xmath155 s is feasible ( e.g. , zero - forcing solution for @xmath73 s ) and thus the mmse - dual algorithm can be randomly initialized in this case
. however , random initialization for the udd algorithm in this case may fail .
this is also verified with a specific example in section vi .
now we consider the extension of the two algorithms to the multiple stream case . differently from @xcite , we assume that joint detection is employed at receivers .
let @xmath300 be the transmit beamformer for user @xmath17 . in this case ,
each user s achieved rate is given by @xmath301 where @xmath302 is the interference plus noise covariance matrix .
we are interested in solving the following rate constrained power minimization problem @xmath303 where @xmath304 represents the rate requirement for user @xmath17 .
it is known that the streams of user @xmath17 can be decoded sequentially without loss of information using mmse receiver coupled with sequential interference cancelation ( sic ) technique@xcite .
indeed , it is easily verified that @xmath305 where @xmath306 @xmath307 is the @xmath308-th column of @xmath309 , i.e. , the transmit beamformer for stream @xmath308 , and @xmath310 is referred to as mmse - sic receiver .
define @xmath311 , @xmath312 . with equal rate allocation @xmath313 across multiple streams , liu .
al ( * ? ? ?
* theorem 4 ) proved that the following sinr - constrained power minimization problem @xmath314 can achieve the same optimal solution as that of problem .
however , we still can not solve problem to global optimality .
fortunately , the special structure of problem allows us to apply the udd algorithm or mmse - dual algorithm .
since the udd algorithm or mmse - dual algorithm reaches a kkt point of problem , a question arises : whether a kkt point of problem is also a kkt point of problem . in the following proposition
, we show the kkt equivalence of the two problems under a mild set of conditions .
the proof is relegated to appendix .
[ prop : prop3 ] let @xmath315 be a kkt point of problem , and let @xmath316 suppose @xmath317 satisfies @xmath318 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 , then    1 .
@xmath317 is a kkt point of problem .
2 .   a kkt point of
can be obtained by solving problem using either the mmse - dual or the udd algorithm .
it can be shown that the condition @xmath318 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 is equivalent to @xmath321 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 ; see in appendix .
this means that , for each user @xmath17 , detection of all the second , third , ... , and the @xmath322-th symbols are interfered by the first symbol , which is generally true in the multi - stream scenario .    in the proof of proposition
[ prop : prop3 ] , the assumption @xmath318 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 is used to obtain @xmath323 , @xmath320 , which finally leads to part 1 ) .
it is worthy mentioning that , if this assumption is relaxed , there indeed exists some example ( shown in the end of this paper ) where @xmath323 , @xmath320 may not hold and in this case the kkt point @xmath317 of problem is not a kkt point of problem .
let @xmath324 .
similar to the single stream case , it can be shown that , for the multi - stream case , the complexity of each fixed point iteration in the mmse - dual algorithm is as in the single stream case . ] @xmath325 , while solving the system of equations for the @xmath326 dual variables in the udd algorithm requires the complexity of @xmath327 .
hence , in the general multi - stream case where @xmath328 , the mmse - dual algorithm has a lower complexity than the udd algorithm .
in this section , we numerically evaluate the performance of the mmse - dual algorithm and the udd algorithm . note that , we here only provide the convergence performance of the two algorithms in the single stream case but similar convergence behavior is also observed in the multiple stream case .
the qos level and noise variance are set equally to be @xmath329 and @xmath12 across all the users .
uncorrelated fading channel model for all channel matrices between users and the bs are assumed .
each channel coefficient is generated from the zero mean complex gaussian distribution with unit variance .
we also set @xmath330 for the number of fixed point iterations .      in our first numerical experiment , we study the effect of the infeasible initialization on the algorithms . in the experiment ,
the bs serves two users , all equipped with two antennas , i.e. , @xmath331 .
we set @xmath332 , @xmath333 , and the channel matrices between the bs and the two users are respectively @xmath334,\ ] ]    @xmath335.\ ] ]    with initial transmit beamformers @xmath336^t,\ ] ] @xmath337^t,\ ] ] the corresponding normalized mmse receivers are calculated as @xmath338^t,\ ] ] @xmath339^t,\ ] ] leading to sinr values , @xmath340 and @xmath341 , which are both smaller than the required sinr value @xmath332 .
furthermore , it can be easily checked that the linear system on @xmath342 and @xmath343 with the fixed initial beamformers @xmath344 has negative solutions @xmath345 and @xmath346 .
therefore , the uplink power update can not be done in the udd algorithm .
while the udd algorithm fails with this initialization , the mmse - dual algorithm can quickly reach a feasible point in the second iteration and then exhibits a monotonic convergence in subsequent iterations , as shown in fig .
[ fig : fig2 ] .          in this set of numerical experiments , we randomly initialize the mmse - dual algorithm
. the udd algorithm is initialized by a feasible point obtained by few iterations of the mmse - dual algorithm .
figure [ fig : fig3 ] shows that the mmse - dual algorithm and the udd algorithm have a very similar convergence behavior .
, @xmath347 , @xmath348 , @xmath332 , @xmath333.,width=259 ]    figures [ fig : fig4 ] and [ fig : fig5 ] show that the two algorithms can almost always converge to a same objective function value which may be global optimum regardless of initial points ( different initial points are denoted by circles )
. however , in an extremely rare case , local convergence for the mmse - dual algorithm ( also for the udd algorithm ) was observed in fig .
[ fig : fig6 ] where two different initial points resulted in two different objective values upon convergence .    , @xmath349 , @xmath348 , @xmath332 , @xmath333 .
]    , @xmath349 , @xmath348 , @xmath332 , @xmath333 . ]    , @xmath350 , @xmath351 , @xmath352 , @xmath353 . ]
in this paper , we have considered the sinr  constrained power minimization problem for mu - mimo system . based on the kkt analysis of the power minimization problem
, we propose the mmse - dual algorithm .
although the latter algorithm is in essence the mmse - socp algorithm in @xcite , it connects the mmse - socp algorithm and the udd algorithm .
it is shown that the udd algorithm@xcite also works towards the kkt condition of the qcpm problem as the mmse - dual / the mmse - socp algorithm .
furthermore , we theoretically prove that all three algorithms can monotonically converge to a kkt point of the qcpm problem .
our numerical experiments show that the three algorithms almost always converge to a same value which may be the optimal value , but local convergence of these algorithms is also observed .
the proof of the second part of proposition 3 is trivial once the first part is proven .
hence , we here focus on proving the first part of proposition 3 .
let @xmath354 be the lagrange multiplier associated with the constraint of problem indexed by @xmath355 .
the kkt condition of problem is given by    @xmath356    in the following , we are going to show that given any tuple @xmath357 satisfying the above system , @xmath358 must also satisfy the kkt condition for problem .
the proof is divided into two steps .    in the first step ,
we prove that can be equivalently rewritten as the first  order optimality condition of problem by using and , and showing @xmath323 , @xmath50 . from , we infer that @xmath359 must be in the form of mmse receiver @xmath360 where @xmath361 is an arbitrary nonzero scalar . by taking @xmath362 and using
, we have @xmath363 moreover , from and , we have @xmath364 it follows that @xmath365 where in the second equality we have used woodbury identity@xcite .
similarly , we have @xmath366 where we have used the relation @xmath367 in the first and third equality , and the woodbury identity in the last equality .    by using
, we have @xmath368 using , we get @xmath369 and using , we obtain @xmath370 by defining @xmath371 and substituting , , and into , we have @xmath372    by noting that @xmath373 we rewrite as @xmath374 considering with @xmath375 and @xmath376 , we have @xmath377 left - multiplying @xmath378 on both sides of and using yeild @xmath379 implying @xmath380 due to @xmath381 by assumption .
recursively , we infer from that @xmath382 , by using the condition @xmath383 , @xmath384 . hence , by letting @xmath385 for all @xmath17 , and using @xmath386 $ ] , we can compactly write as @xmath387    note that we have @xmath388 and @xmath389 substituting and into yields @xmath390 which is the first  order optimality condition of problem .    in the second step ,
we prove by using that @xmath317 satisfies the constraints of problem with equality .
since @xmath391 , @xmath312 , @xmath50 , we have @xmath392 where we use the identity @xmath393@xcite in the first equality and in the second equality . by summing over @xmath312
, we obtain @xmath394    combining , , and together with @xmath395 @xmath50 , we concludes that @xmath317 and @xmath128 satisfy the kkt condition of problem
.    1    m.  hong and z .- q .
luo , _ signal processing and optimal resource allocation for the interference channel _ , academic press library in signal processing , elsevier , 2013 .
a.  wiesel , y.  c. eldar , and s.  shamai(shitz ) , `` linear precoding via conic optimization for fixed mimo receivers , '' _ ieee transactions on signal processing _
1 , pp . 161176 , 2006 .
m.  razaviyayn , m.  hong , and z .- q .
luo , `` linear transceiver design for a mimo interfering broadcast channel achieving max - min fairness , '' _ signal processing _ , vol .
3327 - 3340 , dec . 2013 .
q. h. spencer , a. l. swindlehurst and m. haardt , `` zero - forcing methods for downlink spatial multiplexing in multiuser mimo channels , '' _ ieee trans .
signal process .
2 , feb . 2004 .
z. g. pan , k. k. wong , and t. s. ng , `` generalized multiuser orthogonal space division multiplexing , '' _ ieee trans .
wireless commun .
3 , no . 6 , pp . 1 - 5 , nov .
a. m. khachan , a. j. tenebaum , r. s. adve , `` linear processing for the downlink in multiuser mimo systems with multiple data streams , '' presented at ieee conference on communications , vol .
9 , pp . 4113 - 4118 , june 2006 .
h. dahrouj and w. yu , `` coordinated beamforming for the multicell multi - antenna wireless system , '' _ ieee trans .
wireless commun .
_ , vol . 9 , no .
5 , may 2010 .
chang , l. tassiulas , f. farrokhi , `` joint transmitter receiver diversity for efficient space division multiaccess , '' _ ieee trans .
wireless commun .
_ , vol . 1 , no
. 1 , pp . 16 - 27 ,
jan . 2002 .
m. codreanu , a. tolli , m. juntti , m. latva - aho , `` joint design of tx - rx beamformers in mimo downlink channel , '' _ ieee trans .
signal process .
9 , pp . 4639 - 4655 , sept .
2007 . b. song , r. cruz , and b. d. rao . `` network duality for multiuser mimo beamforming networks and applications , '' _ ieee trans .
_ , vol 50 , no .
618 - 630 , mar .
e. visotsky and u. madhow , `` optimum beamforming using transmit antenna arrays , '' presented at ieee vehicular technology conference , vol .
851 - 856 , may 1999 .
wong , g. zheng , and t .- s .
ng , `` convergence analysis of downlink mimo antenna system using second - order cone programming , '' presented at the the 62nd ieee vehicular technology conference , pp .
492 - 496 , sept . 2005 .
h. boche and m. schubert , `` a general duality theory for uplink and downlink beamforming , '' presented at ieee vehicular technology conference ( vtc ) , vancouver , canada , vol .
87 - 91 , sept . 2002 .
p. viswanath and d. n. c. tse , `` sum capacity of the vector gaussian broadcast channel and uplink - downlink duality , '' _ ieee trans .
info . theory _ ,
49 , no . 8 , pp .
1912 - 1921 , aug . 2003 .
r. hunger and m. joham , `` a general rate duality of the mimo multiple access channel and the mimo broadcast channel , '' presented at ieee global telecommunications conference , pp . 1 - 5 , nov .
m. bengtasson and b. ottersten , `` optimal and suboptimal transmit beamforming , '' chapter 18 in _ handbook of antennas in wireless communications _ , l. c. godara , ed . , crc press , aug .
r. d. yates , `` a framework for uplink power control in cellular radio systems , '' _ ieee j. sel .
areas commun .
13 , no . 7 , pp .
13411347 , sept .
m. varanasi and t. guess , `` optimum decision feedback multiuser equalization with successive decoding achieves the total capacity of the gaussian multiple - access channel , '' presented at asilomar conference on signals , systems , and computers , vol .
2 , pp . 1405 - 1409 , 1997 .
d. bertsekas , _ nonlinear programming _ , 2nd ed .
belmont , ma : athena scientific , 1999 .
a. liu , y. liu , h. xiang and w. luo .
`` mimo b - mac interference network optimization under rate constraints by polite water - filling and duality , '' _ ieee trans . signal process .
k. b. petersern and m. s. pedersern , _ the matrix cookbook_. http://matrixcookbook.com , nov .
s. boyd and l. vandenberghe , _
convex optimization_. cambridge u.k .
: cambridge univ .
press , 2004 .
in the proof of proposition [ prop : prop3 ] , the assumption @xmath318 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 is used to obtain @xmath323 , @xmath320 , which finally leads to part 1 ) of proposition [ prop : prop3 ] .
intuitively , it may hold that @xmath323 for the case when @xmath396 , even if the assumption does not hold .
however , it is worthy mentioning that , if the assumption is relaxed , there indeed exists some counter example as shown below , where , @xmath323 , @xmath320 may not hold when @xmath396 , @xmath320 and as a result the kkt point @xmath317 of problem is not a kkt point of problem .
let us consider the special case  the point to point mimo system with two streams . in this case
, the rate - constrained power minimization problem boils down to @xmath397 with equal rate allocation for the two streams , the optimal solution to problem can be found by solving the following problem @xmath398 where @xmath399 .
let @xmath400 and @xmath401 be the lagrange multiplier associated with the first and second constraint of problem , respectively . in the following ,
we show that there may exist the case @xmath402 when @xmath403 .
the kkt system of problem is given by @xmath404    for the special case , we relax the assumption , i.e. , let @xmath405 , which holds if @xmath406 and @xmath407 are two orthogonal eigenvectors of @xmath408 . in the following ,
we let @xmath406 and @xmath407 be two orthogonal eigenvectors of @xmath408 , such that @xmath409 and @xmath410 . hence
, we have @xmath411 and @xmath412 where @xmath413 and @xmath414 are the two corresponding eigenvalues of @xmath408 .
furthermore , we let @xmath415 @xmath416 and @xmath417    now we are ready to show that @xmath418 defined above satisfies the kkt system ( [ exkkt1]-[exkkt7 ] ) .
let us start with examining and .
first , since @xmath405 , we have @xmath419 .
thus , @xmath420 which is clearly orthogonal to @xmath421 and @xmath422 due to @xmath405 .
it follows that @xmath423 where the first equality is due to @xmath424 and , the second equality is due to + @xmath410 , and the last equality is due to .
thus , follows .
similarly , we can verify that @xmath421 and @xmath407 satisfy .
next let us check and .
first , due to and @xmath410 , we have @xmath425 .
it follows that @xmath426 where the second equality is due to and the last equality follows from @xmath427 and @xmath411 .
thus , follows .
similarly we can verify .