Joint Beamforming Optimization for Active STAR-RIS-Assisted ISAC Systems
Extracted source text · arXiv 2308.06064
\documentclass[lettersize,journal]{IEEEtran}
\usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
\usepackage{algorithmic}
\usepackage{algorithm}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage[caption=false,font=normalsize,labelfont=sf,textfont=sf]{subfig}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{stfloats}
\usepackage{url}
\usepackage{verbatim}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{cite}
\usepackage{braket}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{yhmath}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{orcidlink}
%\usepackage{geometry}
%\usepackage{caption}
%\captionsetup[figure]{name={Fig.}}
%\usepackage{bm}
%\usepackage{unicode-math}
\hyphenation{op-tical net-works semi-conduc-tor IEEE-Xplore}
% updated with editorial comments 8/9/2021
%\newcommand{\bm}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath{$#1$}}}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\hypersetup{hypertex=true,
colorlinks=true,
linkcolor=blue,
anchorcolor=red,citecolor=blue}
%\geometry{left=2.54cm,right=2.54cm,top=2.54cm,bottom=2.54cm} %TWC要求各边保留1英寸，1-inch margin on all sides
\begin{document}
\title{Joint Beamforming Optimization for Active STAR-RIS Assisted ISAC systems}
\author{Shuang Zhang, Wanming Hao,~\IEEEmembership{Member,~IEEE,} Gangcan Sun, Chongwen Huang,~\IEEEmembership{Member,~IEEE,} Zhengyu Zhu,~\IEEEmembership{Senior Member,~IEEE,} Xingwang Li,~\IEEEmembership{Senior Member,~IEEE,} Chau Yuen,~\IEEEmembership{Fellow,~IEEE}
\thanks{S. Zhang, W. Hao, G. Sun, Z. Zhu are with the School of Electrical and Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China. (E-mail: yayue96@163.com, \{iewmhao,iegcsun,iezyzhu\}@zzu.edu.cn)}
\thanks{C. Huang is with College of Information Science and Electronic Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China. (E-mail: chongwenhuang@zju.edu.cn )}
\thanks{X. Li is with the School of Physics and Electronic Information Engineering, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, China. (email: lixingwang@hpu.edu.cn)}
\thanks{C. Yuen is with the School of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 639798 Singapore (e-mail: chau.yuen@ntu.edu.sg)}}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
In this paper, we investigate an active simultaneously transmitting and reflecting reconfigurable intelligent surface (STAR-RIS) assisted integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) system, in which a dual-function base station (DFBS) equipped with multiple antennas provides communication services for multiple users with the assistance of an active STAR-RIS and performs target sensing simultaneously. Through optimizing both the DFBS and STAR-RIS beamforming jointly under different work modes, our purpose is to achieve the maximized communication sum rate, subject to the minimum radar signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) constraint, active STAR-RIS hardware constraints, and total power constraint of DFBS and active STAR-RIS.
To solve the non-convex optimization problem formulated, an efficient alternating optimization algorithm is proposed.
Specifically, the fractional programming scheme is first leveraged to turn the original problem into a structure with more tractable, and subsequently the transformed problem is decomposed into multiple sub-problems. Next, we develop a derivation method to obtain the closed expression of the radar receiving beamforming, and then the DFBS transmit beamforming is optimized under the radar SNR requirement and total power constraint. After that, the active STAR-RIS reflection and transmission beamforming are optimized by majorization minimiation, complex circle manifold and convex optimization techniques. Finally, the proposed schemes are conducted through numerical simulations to show their benefits and efficiency.
\end{abstract}
\begin{IEEEkeywords}
Integrated sensing and communication, simultaneously transmitting and reflecting reconfigurable intelligent surface, alternating optimization.
\end{IEEEkeywords}
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{R}{ecently,} with the development of radar and communication technologies, their differences in antenna structure, hardware component architecture and working bandwidth have been gradually reduced, which attracts the great attention of academic and industrial fields for integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) technique \cite{ref1,ref2}. By the utilization of shared hardware platforms, spectrum and signal processing frameworks, ISAC can integrate sensing and communication tightly, and seek performance balance and maximum benefits, thereby significantly enhancing the spectral efficiency, decreasing the hardware cost and system power consumption, which has made it gained recognition as a promising technology for forthcoming sixth generation (6G) wireless communication \cite{ref3}. However, ISAC still faces several challenges in practical applications, such as high environmental dependence, limited coverage, and the existence of many blind spots. Fortunately, the advent of reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) offers a novel approach to meet these challenges owning to its ability of creating efficient line-of-sight (LoS) links and providing additional degrees of freedom (DoFs) by smartly manipulating wireless propagation environment \cite{ref4,ref5,ref6,ref7}. Typically, RIS is a two-dimensional electromagnetic surface composed of massive reconfigurable elements with low power consumption and low hardware cost, where each element has the ability to modulate the incident signals by adjusting both phase and amplitude with a controlled way \cite{ref8}.
Deploying RIS can provide a more controllable propagation environment, improving the coverage range and transmission quality \cite{ref9,ref10,ref11,ref12}.\\
\IEEEpubidadjcol
\indent Nowdays, there have been several works considering to integrate RIS into ISAC systems \cite{ref13,ref14,ref15,ref16,ref17,ref18,ref19,ref20,ref21}, in which the simultaneous enhancement of communication and sensing performance is done through the joint optimization for RIS and BS beamforming. To be specific, in \cite{ref13}, an RIS-assisted dual-function radar and communication (DFRC) system is designed for the first time in a single-user and single-target scenario. Then, the radar signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) maximization problem was formulated under transmit power budget and quality of service (QoS) constraint, and an iterative optimization algorithm was introduced, utilizing the principles of majorization minimization (MM), semidefinite programming (SDP) and semidefinite relaxation (SDR) techniques. The authors \cite{ref14} extended to the multi-user scenario, and then the RIS reflection coefficients, BS transmit beamforming and receive filter were designed jointly to maximize the sum rate, while guaranteeing the sensing performance. Based on this, a highly effective iterative algorithm framework was presented to tackle the corresponding optimization problem, utilizing alternative direction method of multipliers (ADMM), fractional programming (FP) and MM techniques. In \cite{ref15}, the authors further considered the interference of strong multiple clutters on target detection, and aimed to maximize the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the radar output while ensuring the QoS requirements for communication. To deal with it, an effective algorithm framework based on ADMM and MM was introduced. In \cite{ref16}, the authors utilized RIS to assist the multiple target detection in ISAC systems, where the minimum gain of RIS’s beampatternan effective algorithm framework based on MM and ADMM was exploited that towards the expected detection angles was maximized while meeting the minimum communication SNR constraint. The authors \cite{ref17} further considered a more general scenario, where the BS performed multiple users communication and multiple targets sensing, and comprehensively applied penalty-based and manifold optimization and MM methods to maximize the weighted summation of target detection SNRs. In \cite{ref18} and \cite{ref19}, a new comprehensive optimization metric was introduced to assess the performance of RIS-assisted ISAC systems. Specifically, work \cite{ref18} attempted to utilize the comprehensive optimization metric to maximize the radar SINR meanwhile minimizing the multi-user interference, and in work \cite{ref19}, the cross-correlation pattern, beam pattern error and total interference between multiple users and radar were minimized. The work \cite{ref20} concentrated on minimizing the BS transmit power by taking into account the effect of interference caused by the cross-correlation between radar and RIS on the overall system performance and the alternating optimization (AO) algorithm based on SDR was proposed. The authors \cite{ref21} created a novel strategy of RIS-assisted beamforming in consideration of the dimensions of target, where the conception of ultimate detection resolution (UDR) based on target size was introduced to evaluate the capability of target detection the first time, and then an optimization problem of maximizing user SNR was formulated subject to a minimum UDR requirement.
However, the aforementioned researches make the assumption that RIS reflects the incident signals only. In this case, it is necessary for the communication users or sensing targets to be placed on the identical side of both the RIS and the BS, resulting in a coverage limited to only one half of the space. Given that the spatial confinement may not always be satisfied, it can significantly restrict the flexibility and efficacy of RIS. Accordingly, there has been a growing interest in a burgeoning concept known as intelligent omni-surface (IOS) or simultaneously transmitting and reflecting (STAR)-RIS \cite{ref22,ref23,ref24,ref25} recently, which aims to achieve complete coverage of the entire space. A STAR-RIS enabled ISAC framework was first brought up in \cite{ref26} to minimize the Cramer-Rao bound (CRB) of the sensing target under the minimum communication requirement, and verified the efficacy of employing STAR-RIS to concurrently facilitate accurate sensing and high-quality communication on both sides. After that, the authors \cite{ref27} conducted the first investigation into the potential of exploiting STAR-RIS to increase the security effectiveness of ISAC systems, and a secrecy rate maximization problem was formulated while meeting the sensing SNR requirement, and an overall iterative algorithm was developed by invoking the sequential rank-one constraint relaxation and successive convex approximation methods. As a further advance, \cite{ref28} fully exploited the synergy between the STAR-RIS and ISAC based on a long-term time, and the average long-term security rate of the legitimate user (LU) was maximized by applying two deep reinforcement learning (DRL) algorithms.
Nevertheless, the above works in ISAC systems mainly focus on the passive RIS/STAR-RIS, and thus the improvement of communication or sensing performance is limited due to the multiplicative pathloss effect or double fading effect \cite{ref29}. Consequently, the active RIS/STAR-RIS is developed to overcome the multiplicative pathloss by amplifying the incident signals. In addition, several works have applied active RIS to ISAC systems, such as \cite{ref30,ref31,ref32}. However, to the best of our knowledge, the utilization of active STAR-RIS to ISAC systems has not been investigated.
Motivated by the above discussions, the joint beamforming optimization problem in the active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC systems is investigated in this paper, and the primary contributions are outlined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{We study an active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC system for overcoming the multiplicative fading effect, where the dual function BS (DFBS) simultaneously serve multiple users with the assistance of the active STAR-RIS and detect one target. Based on this, we formulate a problem aimed at maximizing the sum rate by optimizing the DFBS and active STAR-RIS beamforming jointly based on unequal energy division (UED), equal energy division (EED) and space division (SD) modes. Meanwhile, the minimum radar sensing SNR constraint, active STAR-RIS hardware constraint and total power budget constraint are considered.}
\item{Due to the direct resolution of the formulated problem is challenging, the FP method is leveraged first to convert the original problem into a more tractable structure using the quadratic transform and the Lagrangian dual transform, and then the transformed problem is decomposed into multiple sub-problems, which can be iteratively optimized using the framework of block coordinate descent (BCD). Next, we offer a derivation method for the closed expression of the radar receiving beamforming by reducing it into a typical generalized “Rayleigh quotient” optimization problem. Subsequently, the DFBS transmit beamforming can be transformed into a conventional quadratic constraint quadratic programming (QCQP) optimization problem that can find the solution with standard convex optimization algorithms or tools. In the end, the active STAR-RIS reflection/transmission are designed under three active STAR-RIS work modes. For UED mode, with given other variables, the subproblem can also be reformulated as a QCQP optimization problem and apply the standard convex optimization algorithm to obtain the solution. For EED and SD mode, the subproblem can be addressed by employing two methods, i.e., complex circle manifold (CCM) algorithm and MM algorithm.}
\item{Finally, the benefits of deploying active STAR-RIS in ISAC systems and the efficacy of the proposed algorithm are illustrated through numerical simulation outcomes. Our results show that, the proposed active STAR-RIS effectively reduces the impact of multiplicative fading and exhibits superior communication performance compared to the conventional STAR-RIS.}
\end{itemize}
\textit{Notations}: Throughout this paper, the following notations are employed. Column vectors are typically indicated by boldface lower-case letters, whereas matrices are commonly represented by boldface upper-case letters.
$(\cdot)^{T}$, $(\cdot)^{*}$, $(\cdot)^{H}$, and $(\cdot)^{-1}$ indicate the transpose, conjugate, conjugate-transpose, and the inversion operations of a matrix, respectively.
$|\cdot|$ and $\Re\{\cdot\}$ refer to the modulus and real part of a complex variable, respectively.
$\mathbb{E\{\cdot\}}$ and $\mathbb{C}^{m\times n}$ denote statistical expectation vaule and the complex space with a dimension of $m\times n$, respectively.
diag$(\cdot)$ refers to create a diagonal matrix from a vector or the diagonal elements of a matrix.
$\mathbf{I}_{M}$ indicates the $M\times M$ identity matrix.
$\otimes $ refers to the Kronecker product.
$\|\cdot\|_{F}$ indicates the F-norm of the input matrix.
In addition, arg$(\cdot)$ is the phase of complex variable.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=4in]{fig1}
\hfil
\caption{Active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC System model.}
\label{fig_1}
\end{figure*}
\section{System Model and Problem Formulation}
An active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC system is considered as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig_1}, in which a DFBS with $M$ transmit/receive antennas provides communication services to $K$ single-antenna users with assistance of an $N$-element active STAR-RIS and performs one target sensing simultaneously. Here, we define the users situated in the reflection space as the $r$-user and can be denoted by the set of $\mathcal K_{r}\triangleq\{1,2,\dots,K_{r}\}$, while the users situated in the transmission space is the $t$-user and can be denoted by the set of $\mathcal K_{t}\triangleq\{1,2,\dots,K_{t}\}$, where $K_{r}+K_{t}=K$. We assume that the active STAR-RIS is deployed in close proximity to the users for assisting downlink communications effectively. In the meantime, since the active STAR-RIS is far from the target, which flies at low altitudes and own the robust LoS link with the DFBS, the reflected target echo signals through the active STAR-RIS are relatively weak and can be ignored \cite{ref33}.
\subsection{Active STAR-RIS And Signal Models}
The active STAR-RIS owns the ability to amplify, transmit, and reflect signals simultaneously via amplifiers and phase shifters. Each element of the active STAR-RIS can have the incident signals' amplitude and phase-shift adjusted separately using different components \cite{ref34,ref35,ref36}. Hence, the reflection and transmission matrices for active STAR-RIS are defined as $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\triangleq\mathbf{B}_{r}\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}=$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\triangleq\mathbf{B}_{t}\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}=$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$, respectively, where $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r})=$ diag$([e^{j\varphi_{r,1}},\dots,e^{j\varphi_{r,N}}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ denotes the reflection phase-shift matrix, $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t})=$ diag$([e^{j\varphi_{t,1}},\dots,e^{j\varphi_{t,N}}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ denotes the transmission phase-shift matrix, $\mathbf{B}_{r}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\beta}_{r})=$ diag$([\beta_{1}^{r},\dots,\beta_{N}^{r}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ and $\mathbf{B}_{t}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\beta}_{t})=$ diag$([\beta_{1}^{t},\dots,\beta_{N}^{t}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ denote the reflection and transmission amplitude coefficients, respectively, where $\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{\tilde{a}})=$ diag$([\tilde{a}_1,\dots,\tilde{a}_{N}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ is the amplification matrix of the active STAR-RIS.
\\ \indent We define $\mathbf{A}$$_{r}\triangleq$ $\mathbf{B}_{r}$$\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ and $\mathbf{A}$$_{t}\triangleq$ $\mathbf{B}_{t}$$\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ as the equivalent reflection and transmission amplitude matrix, respectively. Thus, according to the previous description we have $\mathbf{A}$$_{r}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{a}_{r})=$ diag$([a_{r,1},\dots,a_{r,N}]^{T})=$ diag$([\tilde{a}_1\beta_{1}^{r},\dots,\tilde{a}_{N}\beta_{N}^{r}]^{T})$, $\mathbf{A}$$_{t}\triangleq$ diag$(\boldsymbol{a}_{t})=$ diag$([a_{t,1},\dots,a_{t,N}]^{T})$ $=$ diag$([\tilde{a}_1\beta_{1}^{t},\dots,\tilde{a}_{N}\beta_{N}^{r}]^{T})$, and correspondingly, $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}$ can be written as $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}=$ diag$([a_{r,1}\phi_{r,1},\dots,a_{r,N}\phi_{r,N}]^{T})$, $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}=$ diag$([a_{t,1}\phi_{t,1},\dots,a_{t,N}\phi_{t,N}]^{T})$.
The DFBS transmit a dual-functional signal $\textbf{x}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$, which is a combination of communication symbols and radar signals, which is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_1}
\textbf{x}=\textbf{W}_{c}\textbf{s}_{c}+\textbf{W}_{r}\textbf{s}_{r}=\textbf{W}\textbf{s},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\textbf{s}_{c}=[s_{c,1},\dots,s_{c,K}]^{T}\in\mathbb{C}^{K\times 1}$ and $\textbf{s}_{r}=[s_{r,1},\dots,s_{r,M}]^{T}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$
denote the communication symbols and radar signals, respectively, and $\textbf{W}_{c}=[\textbf{w}_{c,1},\dots,\textbf{w}_{c,K}]\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times K}$ and $\textbf{W}_{r}=[\textbf{w}_{r,1},\dots,\textbf{w}_{r,M}]\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times M}$ are their corresponding beamformers with $\textbf{w}_{c,i}$ or $\textbf{w}_{r,i}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$.
To avoid mutual interference in radar and communication, the radar signals and communication symbols are assumed to be independent of each other and own unit power. We also assume that
there is no cooperation between users, namely the communication symbols for different users are uncorrelated, i.e., $\mathbb{E}\{\textbf{s}_{c}\textbf{s}^H_{r}\}=\textbf{0}$, $\mathbb{E}\{\textbf{s}_{c}\textbf{s}^H_{c}\}=\textbf{I}_{K}$, $\mathbb{E}\{\textbf{s}_{r}\textbf{s}^H_{r}\}=\textbf{I}_{M}$ and $\mathbb{E}\{s_{c,i}s^*_{c,i}\}=0$, $\forall i\neq j$.
In addition, for simplicity, in \eqref{eqn_1}, we define
$\textbf{W}\triangleq [\textbf{W}_{c},\textbf{W}_{r}]\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times (K+M)}$ with
$\textbf{w}_{j}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$
denotes the $j$-th column of
$\textbf{W}$ and $\textbf{s}\triangleq[\textbf{s}^T_{c},\textbf{s}^T_{r}]^{T}\in\mathbb{C}^{(K+M)\times 1}$.
\\ \indent Let $\textbf{G}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times M}$, $\textbf{f}_{k}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$ and $\textbf{h}_{d,k}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$
represent the channels from the DFBS to the active STAR-RIS, from the active STAR-RIS to the $k$-th user and from the DFBS to the $k$-th user, respectively. In order to fully exploit the potential of active STAR-RIS, we assume that it is available for DFBS to obtain the accurate and complete channel state information. Thus, received signal at the $k$-th user can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_2}
\begin{split}
y_{k} &= \textbf{h}^H_{d,k}\textbf{x}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\textbf{y}_{r}+n_{k}
\\
&=\textbf{h}^H_{d,k}\textbf{x}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}(\textbf{G}\textbf{x}+\textbf{v})+n_{k}
\\
&=(\textbf{h}^{H}_{d,k}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G})\textbf{W}\textbf{s}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{v}+n_{k}, \enspace k\in\mathcal K_{r},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\textbf{v}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$ is the dynamic noise vector brought by the active characteristics of STAR-RIS with each entry obeying $\mathcal C\mathcal N(0,\sigma^2_{v})$, $n_{k}\sim \mathcal C\mathcal N(0,\sigma^2_{k})$ represents the complex additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) with variance $\sigma^2_{k}$ at the $k$-th user. Thus, SINR of the $k$-th user can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_3}
\text{SINR}_{k}=\frac{|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits^{K+M}\limits_{j=1,j\neq k}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}}, \enspace k\in\mathcal K_{r},
\end{equation}
\noindent where we define $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\triangleq \textbf{h}^{H}_{d,k}+\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}\in\mathbb{C}^{1\times M}$
as the equivalent channel from DFBS to the $k$-th user.
\\ \indent Similarly, the received signal at the $k$-th user can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_4}
\begin{split}
y_{k} &= \textbf{h}^H_{d,k}\textbf{x}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\textbf{y}_{t}+n_{k}
\\
&=\textbf{h}^H_{d,k}\textbf{x}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}(\textbf{G}\textbf{x}+\textbf{v})+n_{k}
\\
&=(\textbf{h}^{H}_{d,k}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G})\textbf{W}\textbf{s}+\textbf{f}^H_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{v}+n_{k}, \enspace k\in\mathcal K_{t},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent and the correspoding SINR can be given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_5}
\text{SINR}_{k}=\frac{|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits_{j=1,j\neq k}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}}, \enspace k\in\mathcal K_{t},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\triangleq \textbf{h}^{H}_{d,k}+\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}\in\mathbb{C}^{1\times M}$
represents the equivalent channel from DFBS to the $k$-th user.
\\ \indent Hence, the sum rate can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_6}
R_{\text{sum}}=\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K}\text{log}_{2}(1+\text{SINR}_{k}).
\end{equation}
From the perspective of the radar sensing, to obtain an enhanced target sensing performance, one common approach is to maximize the signal power directed towards the targets while minimizing it in other directions. On this basis, the assessment of sensing capabilities is usually conducted by using the SNR of radar echo signals. Thus, the received echo signal $\textbf{y}_{d}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$ through the direct DFBS-target link can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_7}
\textbf{y}_{d}=b\textbf{h}_{d,t}\textbf{h}_{d,t}^{H}\textbf{W}\textbf{s}+\textbf{z}_{r},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $b$ denotes the radar cross section (RCS) with $\mathbb{E}\{|b|^2\}=\xi^2$, $\textbf{h}_{d,t}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$ indicates the channel of DFBS and target, and $\textbf{z}_{r}\sim \mathcal C\mathcal N(\textbf{0},\sigma^2_{z}\textbf{I}_{M})$ is AWGN. The radar output signal at DFBS after being processed by the radar receiver filter $\textbf{u}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times 1}$ can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_8}
\begin{split}
\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{y}_{d} &=\textbf{u}^{H}b\textbf{h}_{d,t}\textbf{h}_{d,t}^{H}\textbf{W}\textbf{s}+\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{z}_{r}
\\
&=b\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}\textbf{W}\textbf{s}+\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{z}_{r},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\textbf{H}_{t}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,t}\textbf{h}_{d,t}^{H}\in\mathbb{C}^{M\times M}$. Thus, the radar output SNR can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_9}
\text{SNR}_{t}=\frac{\xi^{2}\mathbb{E}\{|\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}\textbf{W}\textbf{s}|^2\}}{\textbf{u}^{H}\sigma^2_{z}\textbf{I}_{M}\textbf{u}}.
\end{equation}
It is obvious that \eqref{eqn_9} is difficult to be solved directly. According to Jensen’s inequality, i.e., $\mathbb{E}\{f(x)\}\geqslant f(\mathbb{E}\{x\})$, and the observation that $\mathbb{E}\{\textbf{s}\textbf{s}^{H}\}=\textbf{I}_{K+M}$, the worst SNR case for radar echo signal at the DFBS can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_10}
\text{SNR}_{t}\geqslant \frac{\xi^{2}\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}\textbf{W}\textbf{W}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}^{H}\textbf{u}}{\textbf{u}^{H}\sigma^2_{z}\textbf{I}_{M}\textbf{u}}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Problem Formulation}
In this paper, we aim to jointly design DFBS transmit beamforming $\textbf{W}$, active STAR-RIS reflection and transmission beamforming matrices, i.e., $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, and radar receive filter $\textbf{u}$ to maximize the achievable sum rate, as well as satisfying the worst radar SNR requirement $\Gamma_{t}$, active STAR-RIS hardware constraints, the given power budget $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}$ at the active STAR-RIS and $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}}$ at the DFBS. The optimization problem is thus formulated as
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_11}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{0}: \quad
&\max\limits_{\textbf{w},\textbf{u},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}}\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K}\text{log}_{2}(1+\text{SINR}_{k})
\\
&\text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{1}: \frac{\xi^{2}\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}\textbf{W}\textbf{W}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}^{H}\textbf{u}}{\textbf{u}^{H}\sigma^2_{z}\textbf{I}_{M}\textbf{u}}\geqslant \Gamma_{t},
\\
&\hspace{1.9em} \mathrm{C}_{2}: \sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\|\textbf{w}_{j}\|^2=\|\textbf{W}\|^{2}_{F}\leqslant P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}},
\\
\begin{split}
&\hspace{2em} \mathrm{C}_{3}:
\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\|^2+
\sigma^2{v}\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^{2}_{F}+
\\
&\hspace{3.8em} \sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\|^2+
\sigma^2{v}\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^{2}_{F}
\leqslant P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}},
\end{split}
\\
&\hspace{2.2em} \mathrm{C}_{4}:
a_{r,n}\geqslant 0,\; a_{t,n}\geqslant 0, \; \forall n,
\\
&\hspace{2.3em} \mathrm{C}_{5}:
|\phi_{r,n}|=1, \; |\phi_{t,n}|=1,\; \forall n.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
It is clear that $\mathcal P_{0}$ is a non-convex optimization problem due to the complex objective function (11a) which includes logarithmic and fractional terms, the interdependence of variables in both the objective function (11a) and the power constraint $\mathrm{C}_{3}$, and the constraint $\mathrm{C}_{5}$ which imposes a unit modulus condition. Next, we propose an efficient iterative algorithm to deal with it.
\section{Joint Beamforming Optimization }
In this section, an AO algorithm is proposed to solve $\mathcal P_{0}$. Specifically, FP method is first utilized to convert the objective function into a more tractable form. After that, the transformed problem is divided into multiple sub-problems, that are solved in an alternating way.
\subsection{FP-based Transformation}
We first convert the complicated sum-of-logarithms and fractions in (11a) into an easier-to-compute feasible form by using the closed-form FP algorithm \cite{ref37,ref38}. Subsequently, by introducing an auxiliary variable and utilizing the Lagrangian dual transform $\boldsymbol{\gamma}=[\gamma_{1},\dots,\gamma_{K}]^{T}$ to reformulate the original objective function (11a) as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_12}
\begin{split}
\tilde{R}_{\text{sum}}(\boldsymbol{\gamma},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t},\textbf{w})=\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K+M}(1+\gamma_{k})-\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K+M}\gamma_{k}
\\
\hspace{2.2em}+\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}\frac{(1+\gamma_{k})|\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}}
\\
\hspace{2.2em}+\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}\frac{(1+\gamma_{k})|\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next, the quadratic transform is employed on the final two fractional terms of \eqref{eqn_12} through the introduction of another auxiliary variable $\boldsymbol{\rho}=[\rho_{1},\dots,\rho_{K}]^{T}$ to further recast \eqref{eqn_12} to \eqref{eqn_13}, which is presented at the top of the page.
\begin{figure*}[ht] %hb文章底部，%ht文章顶部
\centering
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_13}
\begin{split}
f(\boldsymbol{\gamma},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t},\textbf{w},\boldsymbol{\rho})=\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}\left(2\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\Re\{\rho^{*}_{k}\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{k}\}-|\rho_{k}|^2\left(\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}\right)\right)
\\
\hspace{2.2em}+\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}\left(2\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\Re\{\rho^{*}_{k}\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{k}\}-|\rho_{k}|^2\left(\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}\right)\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{figure*}
By substituting \eqref{eqn_13} into \eqref{eqn_12}, the original optimization problem $\mathcal P_{0}$ can be equivalently rewritten as $\mathcal P_{1}$
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_14}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{1}: \quad
&\max\limits_{\textbf{w},\textbf{u},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t},\boldsymbol{\gamma},\boldsymbol{\rho}}\tilde{R}_{\text{sum}}(\boldsymbol{\gamma},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t},\textbf{w},\boldsymbol{\rho})
\\
&\hspace{2em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{1}, \mathrm{C}_{2}, \mathrm{C}_{3},\mathrm{C}_{4}, \mathrm{C}_{5}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Then, $\mathcal P_{1}$ is addressed by adopting the BCD framework, which involves dividing it into several sub-problems.
\subsection{Optimize Auxiliary Variable Vectors $\boldsymbol{\gamma}$ and $\boldsymbol{\rho}$}
With given $\textbf{w}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, the optimal $\boldsymbol{\gamma}$ and $\boldsymbol{\rho}$ can be determined explicitly by letting $\frac{\partial \tilde{R}_{\text{sum}}}{\partial \gamma_{k}}$ and
$\frac{\partial f}{\partial \rho_{k}}$ to zero, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_15}
{\gamma_{k}^{opt}} = \begin{cases}
\Large{\frac{|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits_{j=1,j\neq k}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}},}&{k\in\mathcal K_{r}},\\
\Large{\frac{|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{k}|^2}{\sum\limits_{j=1,j\neq k}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}},}&{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_16}
{\rho_{k}^{opt}} = \begin{cases}
\Large{\frac{\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{k}}{\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{r,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}},}&{k\in\mathcal K_{r}},\\
\Large{\frac{\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{k}}{\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}|\tilde{\textbf{h}}^{H}_{t,k}\textbf{w}_{j}|^2+\sigma^2_{v}\|\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2+\sigma^2_{k}},}&{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Optimize Radar Receive Beamforming $\textbf{u}$}
For given $\textbf{w}$, the radar receive beamforming optimization problem can be reduced to the typical generalized “Rayleigh quotient” optimization problem \cite{ref39} as follows
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_17}
\max\limits_{\textbf{u}} \quad \frac{\xi^2\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{C}\textbf{u}}{\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{E}\textbf{u}},
\end{equation}
\noindent whose optimal solution $\textbf{u}^{opt}$ is the eigenvector that corresponds to the maximum eigenvalue of matrix $\textbf{E}^{-1}\textbf{C}$, where $\textbf{C}=\textbf{H}_{t}\textbf{W}\textbf{W}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}^{H}$, $\textbf{E}=\sigma^2_{z}\textbf{I}_{M}$.
\subsection{Optimize DFBS Beamforming $\textbf{W}$}
For given $\textbf{u}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, $\boldsymbol{\gamma}$ and $\boldsymbol{\rho}$, the optimization of DFBS transmit beamforming $\textbf{W}$ can be modeled as
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_18}
\begin{align}
&\max\limits_{\textbf{w}}\tilde{R}_{\text{sum}}(\boldsymbol{\gamma},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t},\textbf{w},\boldsymbol{\rho})
\\
&\hspace{0.5em}\text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{1}, \mathrm{C}_{2}, \mathrm{C}_{3}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
For convenience, we first give the following definitions
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_19}
\tilde{\textbf{w}}\triangleq\text{vec}\{\textbf{W}\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_20}
\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{k}\triangleq\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\rho_{k}\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}, \; k\in\mathcal K,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_21}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{r}\triangleq[\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{1}^{T},\dots,\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{k}^{T},\textbf{0}_{1\times [M(K+M)-MK_{r}]}]^{T}, k\in\mathcal K_{r},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_22}
\textbf{Q}_{r}\triangleq\textbf{I}_{K+M}\otimes\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K_{r}}|\rho_{k}|^2\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_23}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{t}\triangleq[\textbf{0}_{1\times MK_{r}},\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{1}^{T},\dots,\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{k}^{T},\textbf{0}_{1\times MM]}]^{T}, k\in\mathcal K_{t},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_24}
\textbf{Q}_{t}\triangleq\textbf{I}_{K+M}\otimes\sum\limits_{k=1}\limits^{K_{t}}|\rho_{k}|^2\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_25}
\textbf{Y}\triangleq\textbf{I}_{K+M}\otimes\textbf{H}_{t}^{H}\textbf{u}\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{H}_{t}, \; \eta\triangleq\frac{\Gamma_{t}\textbf{u}^{H}\textbf{E}\textbf{u}}{\xi^2},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_26}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\Xi}_{r}\triangleq(\textbf{I}_{K+M}\otimes\textbf{G}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}),
\\
\boldsymbol{\Xi}_{t}\triangleq(\textbf{I}_{K+M}\otimes\textbf{G}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Then, we can reformulate the subproblem into explicit and compact forms with respect to $\tilde{\textbf{w}}$
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_27}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{2}: \;
&\max\limits_{\textbf{w}}\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{r}^{H}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\}-\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Q}_{r}\tilde{\textbf{w}}+\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{t}^{H}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\}-\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Q}_{t}\tilde{\textbf{w}}
\\
&\hspace{2em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{1}: \tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Y}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\geqslant \eta,
\\
&\hspace{3.8em} \mathrm{C}_{2}: \|\tilde{\textbf{w}}\|^2 \leqslant P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}},
\\
\begin{split}
&\hspace{3.8em} \mathrm{C}_{3}:\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Xi}_{r}\tilde{\textbf{w}}+
\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Xi}_{t}\tilde{\textbf{w}} \leqslant
\\
&\hspace{2.2em}
P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}-\sigma_{v}^2\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\|^2_{F}-\sigma_{v}^2\|\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\|^2_{F}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
According to the definition of $\textbf{Y}$ in \eqref{eqn_25}, it can be inferred that $\textbf{Y}$ is a positive semi-definite Hermitian matrix and $\mathrm{C}_{1}$ is a non-convex constraint, which makes $\mathcal P_{2}$ non-convex. In order to deal with this formidable undertaking, we exploit the first-order Taylor expansion \cite{ref40} to obtain an suitable surrogate function for $\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Y}\tilde{\textbf{w}}$ and transform $\mathrm{C}_{1}$ into a linear constraint, which is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_28}
\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Y}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\geqslant \tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}_{s}\textbf{Y}\tilde{\textbf{w}}_{s}+2\Re\{\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}_{s}\textbf{Y}(\tilde{\textbf{w}}-\tilde{\textbf{w}}_{s})\}.
\end{equation}
Then, $\mathcal P_{2}$ can be rewritten as
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_29}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{3}: \;
&\min\limits_{\tilde{\textbf{w}}}\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Q}_{r}\tilde{\textbf{w}}-\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{r}^{H}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\}+\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}\textbf{Q}_{t}\tilde{\textbf{w}}-\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\alpha}_{t}^{H}\tilde{\textbf{w}}\}
\\
&\hspace{0.5em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{1}: \tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}_{s}\textbf{Y}\tilde{\textbf{w}}_{s}+2\Re\{\tilde{\textbf{w}}^{H}_{s}\textbf{Y}(\tilde{\textbf{w}}-\tilde{\textbf{w}}_{s})\}\geqslant \eta,
\\
&\hspace{2.3em} \mathrm{C}_{2},\mathrm{C}_{3}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
One can observe that $\mathcal P_{3}$ is a standard QCQP problem, which can be effectively tackled with standard convex optimization algorithm or tools, e.g., CVX \cite{ref41}.
\subsection{Optimize Active STAR-RIS Beamforming $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$}
In this section, three work modes are considered for the active STAR-RIS, and the active STAR-RIS beamforming is solved under each model.
1) UED mode
In UED mode, each element of the active STAR-RIS can transmit and reflect the incident signals with different amplitudes and phases simultaneously \cite{ref42,ref43}, and this mode owns the highest degree of freedom (DoF). With given other variables, considering the fact that $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}=\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{\psi}^{H}_{r}$diag$(\textbf{f}_{k})\textbf{G}$, $k\in\mathcal K_{r}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}^{H}_{k}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}=\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{\psi}^{H}_{t}$diag$(\textbf{f}_{k})\textbf{G}$, $k\in\mathcal K_{t}$, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_30}
\begin{split}
\textbf{d}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{f}^{H}_{k})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_31}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.5cm} \textbf{D}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_32}
\begin{split}
\textbf{d}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{f}^{H}_{k})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_33}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.5cm} \textbf{D}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_34}
\boldsymbol{\Pi}=\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j})(\text{diag}(\textbf{G}
\textbf{w}_{j}))^{H}+\sigma_{v}^2\textbf{I}_{N}.
\end{equation}
This subproblem with respect to $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}$ can be reformulated as
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_35}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{4}:
&\min\limits_{\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r},\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}}\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{H}\textbf{D}_{r}\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}-\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{H}\textbf{d}_{r}\}+\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{H}\textbf{D}_{t}\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}-\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{H}\textbf{d}_{t}\}
\\
&\hspace{0.5em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{3}: \boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Pi}\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}+\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Pi}\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}\leqslant P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Obviously, $\mathcal P_{4}$ is also a QCQP problem that can be addressed with the standard convex optimization algorithm. By considering the constraints $\mathrm{C}_{4}$ and $\mathrm{C}_{5}$, the associated phase-shift matrix $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}^{opt}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$, $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}^{opt}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times N}$ and amplification factor vector $\boldsymbol{a}_{r}^{opt}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$, $\boldsymbol{a}_{t}^{opt}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 1}$ are given by
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_36}
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}^{opt} &= \text{diag}(\text{exp}(j\text{arg}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{opt}))),
\\
\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}^{opt} &= \text{diag}(\text{exp}(j\text{arg}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{opt}))),
\\
\boldsymbol{a}_{r}^{opt} &= \text{diag}(\text{exp}(-j\text{arg}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{opt})))\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r}^{opt},
\\
\boldsymbol{a}_{t}^{opt} &= \text{diag}(\text{exp}(-j\text{arg}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{opt})))\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t}^{opt}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
According to the definition of the reflection and transmission precoding matrices for active STAR-RIS in Part II, i.e., $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r})$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t})$, we can obtain the optimal $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, respectively.
We summarize the joint beamforming optimizing scheme for UED mode in Algorithm 1.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Joint Beamforming Optimization for UED Mode.}\label{alg:alg1}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE
\STATE \textbf{Input}: $\textbf{h}_{d,k}$, $\textbf{f}_{k}$, $\sigma_{k}^2$, $\forall k\in\mathcal K$, $\textbf{G}$, $\textbf{h}_{d,t}$, $\sigma_{v}^2$, $\sigma_{z}^2$, $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}}$, $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}$
\STATE \hspace{0.9cm} $\Gamma_{t}$, $Q_{\text{max}}$, $\delta_{th}$
\STATE \textbf{Output}: DFBS beamforming $\textbf{W}$, active STAR-RIS beam-
\STATE \hspace{1.2cm} forming $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, and sum rate $R_{\text{sum}}$.
\STATE 1: Initialize: $\textbf{W}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, $t=1$, $\delta=\infty$, $R_{\text{sum}}=0$
\STATE 2: $\textbf{while}$ $t\leqslant Q_{\text{max}}$ and $\delta\geqslant\delta_{th}$ $\textbf{do}$
\STATE 3: \hspace{0.7cm} $R_{\text{pre}}=R_{\text{sum}}$;
\STATE 4: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $\gamma_{k}^{opt}$ and $\rho_{k}^{opt}$, $\forall k\in\mathcal K$ by (15) and (16);
\STATE 5: \hspace{0.7cm} Update radar receive beamformer $\textbf{u}$ by solving (17);
\STATE 6: \hspace{0.7cm} Update DFBS beamforming $\textbf{W}$ by solving $\mathcal P_{2}$;
\STATE 7: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$ by solving $\mathcal P_{4}$;
\STATE 8: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $R_{\text{sum}}$ by (6);
\STATE 9: \hspace{0.7cm} $\delta=\frac{|R_{\text{pre}}-R_{\text{max}}|}{R_{\text{max}}}$;
\STATE 10: \hspace{0.7cm} $t=t+1$.
\STATE 11: $\textbf{end while}$
\end{algorithmic}
\label{alg1}
\end{algorithm}
2) EED mode
In EED mode, the signals reflected and transmitted by active STAR-RIS have the same power, i.e., all elements of active STAR-RIS transmit and reflect the incident signal with the same amplitude simultaneously, given by
$\textbf{A}_{r}=\textbf{A}_{t}=\textbf{A}\triangleq\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{a})=\text{diag}([a_{1},\dots,a_{N}]^{T})\in\mathbb{C}^{N \times N}$.
Recall that $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r})=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}\boldsymbol{a})$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t})=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}\boldsymbol{a})$, thus the equivalent channels $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}$ can be rephrased as $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}=\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r})\textbf{G}, k\in\mathcal K_{r}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}=\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t})\textbf{G}, k\in\mathcal K_{t}$. Let $\textbf{c}_{r}=\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}\in\mathbb{C}^{1 \times N}, k\in\mathcal K_{r}$ and $\textbf{c}_{t}=\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}\in\mathbb{C}^{1 \times N}, k\in\mathcal K_{t}$, by defining
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_37}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\mu}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{c}_{r})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{r})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_38}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.5cm} \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{r})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{r}^{H}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_39}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\mu}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{c}_{t})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{t})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_40}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.5cm} \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{t})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{c}_{t}^{H}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
With given other variables, the subproblem can be transformed into the following one
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_41}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{5}:
&\min\limits_{\boldsymbol{a}}\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{r}\boldsymbol{a}-
\Re\{2\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\mu}_{r}\}+
\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{t}\boldsymbol{a}-
\Re\{2\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\mu}_{t}\}
\\
&\hspace{0.5em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} \mathrm{C}_{3}: \boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Pi}\boldsymbol{a}+\boldsymbol{a}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Pi}\boldsymbol{a}\leqslant P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}},
\\
&\hspace{2.3em} \mathrm{C}_{4}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
It is clear that $\mathcal P_{5}$ is also a standard QCQP problem and we can easily obtain the optimal $\boldsymbol{a}$ by existing convex optimization algorithm or optimization tools.
After obtaining $\boldsymbol{a}$, to solve $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, considering that $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{r})=\text{diag}(\textbf{A}\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r})$ and
$\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\psi}_{t})=\text{diag}(\textbf{A}\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t})$, we should optimize $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}$ next. Similarly, the equivalent channel $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}$ firstly be rewritten as
$\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{r,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}\textbf{G}=
\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\textbf{A})\textbf{G}, k\in\mathcal K_{r}$ and
$\tilde{\textbf{h}}_{t,k}^{H}\triangleq\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}\textbf{G}=
\textbf{h}_{d,k}^{H}+\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\textbf{A})\textbf{G}, k\in\mathcal K_{t}$. Let $\textbf{q}_{r}=\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\textbf{A}\in\mathbb{C}^{1 \times N}, k\in\mathcal K_{r}$ and $\textbf{q}_{t}=\textbf{f}_{k}^{H}\textbf{A}\in\mathbb{C}^{1 \times N}, k\in\mathcal K_{t}$. Considering that the phase-shifts $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}$ are independent, we can optimize them separately. Next, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_42}
\begin{split}
\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{q}_{r})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{r})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_43}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.4cm} \hat{\boldsymbol{\Omega}}_{r} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{r}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{r})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{r}^{H}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
With given other variables, the optimization of $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}$ is equivalent to solve the problem that follows
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_44}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{6}: \;
&\min\limits_{\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}} \hspace{0.8em} \boldsymbol{\phi}^{H}_{r}\hat{\boldsymbol{\Omega}}_{r}\boldsymbol{\phi}_{r}+
\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\phi}^{H}_{r}(-\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{r})\}
\\
&\hspace{0.5em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} |\phi_{r,n}|=1, \; \forall n.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The presence of the unit modulus constraint in (44b) results in $\mathcal P_{6}$ a non-convex optimization problem. Fortunately, two methods have been discussed in \cite{ref44} to solve this problem, i.e., MM and CCM. For a more comprehensive understanding, readers can consult \cite{ref44} for more information.
By repeating the same procedure, $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}$ can also be optimized. Specifically, by defining
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_45}
\begin{split}
\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}\sqrt{1+\gamma_{k}}\text{diag}(\rho^{*}_{k}\textbf{q}_{t})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{k}
\\
&-|\rho_{k}|^2\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{t})\textbf{G}\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{h}_{d,k},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn_46}
\begin{split}
\hspace{1.4cm} \hat{\boldsymbol{\Omega}}_{t} &\triangleq\sum\limits_{k\in\mathcal K_{t}}|\rho_{k}|^2\sigma_{v}^2\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k}^{H})\text{diag}(\textbf{f}_{k})+
\\
&|\rho_{k}|^2\sum\limits_{j=1}\limits^{K+M}\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{t})\textbf{G}\textbf{w}_{j}\textbf{w}^{H}_{j}\textbf{G}^{H}\text{diag}(\textbf{q}_{t}^{H}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent the corresponding optimization of $\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}$ can be modeled as
\begin{subequations} \label{eqn_47}
\begin{align}
\mathcal P_{7}: \;
&\min\limits_{\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}} \hspace{0.8em} \boldsymbol{\phi}^{H}_{t}\hat{\boldsymbol{\Omega}}_{t}\boldsymbol{\phi}_{t}+
\Re\{2\boldsymbol{\phi}^{H}_{t}(-\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_{t})\}
\\
&\hspace{0.5em} \text{s.t.} \hspace{0.6em} |\phi_{t,n}|=1, \; \forall n.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
We summarize the joint beamforming optimization scheme for UED mode in Algorithm 2.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Joint Beamforming Optimization for EED Mode.}\label{alg:alg1}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE
\STATE \textbf{Input}: $\textbf{h}_{d,k}$, $\textbf{f}_{k}$, $\sigma_{k}^2$, $\forall k\in\mathcal K$, $\textbf{G}$, $\textbf{h}_{d,t}$, $\sigma_{v}^2$, $\sigma_{z}^2$, $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}}$, $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}$
\STATE \hspace{0.9cm} $\Gamma_{t}$, $Q_{\text{max}}$, $\delta_{th}$
\STATE \textbf{Output}: DFBS beamforming $\textbf{W}$, active STAR-RIS beam-
\STATE \hspace{1.2cm} forming $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, and sum rate $R_{\text{sum}}$.
\STATE 1: Initialize: $\textbf{W}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$, $t=1$, $\delta=\infty$, $R_{\text{sum}}=0$
\STATE 2: $\textbf{while}$ $t\leqslant Q_{\text{max}}$ and $\delta\geqslant\delta_{th}$ $\textbf{do}$
\STATE 3: \hspace{0.7cm} $R_{\text{pre}}=R_{\text{sum}}$;
\STATE 4: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $\gamma_{k}^{opt}$ and $\rho_{k}^{opt}$, $\forall k\in\mathcal K$ by (15) and (16);
\STATE 5: \hspace{0.7cm} Update radar beamformer $\textbf{u}$ by solving (17);
\STATE 6: \hspace{0.7cm} Update DFBS beamforming $\textbf{W}$ by solving $\mathcal P_{2}$;
\STATE 7: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $\boldsymbol{a}$ by solving $\mathcal P_{5}$
\STATE 8: \hspace{0.7cm} Update $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$ by solving $\mathcal P_{6}$ and $\mathcal P_{7}$;
\STATE 9: \hspace{0.7cm} Calculate $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{r}\boldsymbol{a})$,
$\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}=\text{diag}(\boldsymbol{\Phi}_{t}\boldsymbol{a})$;
\STATE 10: \hspace{0.6cm} Update $R_{\text{sum}}$ by (6);
\STATE 11: \hspace{0.6cm} $\delta=\frac{|R_{\text{pre}}-R_{\text{max}}|}{R_{\text{max}}}$;
\STATE 12: \hspace{0.6cm} $t=t+1$.
\STATE 13: $\textbf{end while}$
\end{algorithmic}
\label{alg1}
\end{algorithm}
3) SD mode
In SD mode, elements of active STAR-RIS are segregated into two distinct groups, with one group operating in reflection mode and the other group operating in transmission mode, i.e., the corresponding amplitude coefficient $\beta_{n}$ is fixed as 1 or 0. The algorithm for this mode can be obtained with the same algorithmic framework in EEP mode as above with fixing the amplitude coefficient as 1 or 0. To make this paper more concise, we have omitted the details here.
\subsection{Analysis of Computional Complexity}
Based on the above proposed method, the joint DFBS beamforming and active STAR-RIS beamforming is straightforward. Next, we give a brief complexity analysis of the proposed algorithm. In each iteration, the computational complexity of updating $\boldsymbol{\gamma}$ is $\mathcal{O}(K^2N^2)$. The complexity of updating $\boldsymbol{\rho}$ is $\mathcal{O}(K(K+1)N^2)$. The complexity of updating the receiver filter $\textbf{u}$ is $\mathcal{O}(M^3)$.
Given the complexity of finding a solution for the standard convex QCQP problem, the computational complexity of updating the transmit beamformer $\textbf{W}$ is $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{MK+2}(1+MK)M^3K^3))$ and updating the active STAR-RIS precoding matrix $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{r}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{t}$ is $\mathcal{O}(2\sqrt{N+1}(1+2)N^3))$. Similarly, the computational complexity of updating $\textbf{A}$ is $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{N+1}(1+2)N^3))$. For EED mode, the complexity of MM or CCM is given by $\mathcal{O}(N^3+I_{o}N^2)$, where $I_{o}$ represents the number of iterations necessary for the two algorithms to converge. Thus, the overall computational complexity of Algorithm 1 is approximated as the order of $\mathcal{O}(I_{c1}(K^2N^2+M^3+M^{4.5}K^{4.5}+N^{4.5}+I_{o}N^2))$, where $I_{c1}$ represents the number of iterations necessary for Algorithm 1 to achieve convergence. Similarly, the overall computational complexity of Algorithm 2 is approximated as the order of $\mathcal{O}(I_{c2}(K^2N^2+M^3+M^{4.5}K^{4.5}+N^{4.5}+I_{o}N^2))$, where $I_{c2}$ represents the number of iterations necessary for Algorithm 2 to achieve convergence.
\section{Numerical Results}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig2}
\caption{Simulation setup for active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC system.}
\label{fig_2}
\end{figure}
In this section, simulation results are conducted to evaluate the performane of the proposed schemes. As depicted in Fig. \ref{fig_2}, in order to accurately depict the locations of DFBS and STAR-RIS, a three-dimensional coordinate system is utilized. The DFBS is positioned at the origin (0, 0, 0) meters, while the active STAR-RIS is positioned at (0, 15, 0) meters.
On both sides of the active STAR-RIS, assuming there are two users randomly distributed within a semicircular area with a radius of 10 meters centered around the active STAR-RIS, i.e., $K=$ 4. The target is assumed to be in a hovering state within a circular area with a radius of 5 meters, centered around DFBS. Specifically, the number of DFBS antennas and active STAR-RIS elements are modeled as $M=$ 8 and $N=$ 128, respectively. For simplicity, we set the RCS as $\xi^2=$ 1, radar sensing constraint $\Gamma_{t}=$ 0 dB and all noise power as the same, i.e., $\sigma_k^2=\sigma_v^2=\sigma_z^2=$ $-$80 dBm, $\forall k\in\mathcal K$. Following \cite{ref29}, we employ a conventional path-loss model that accounts for the distance-dependent attenuation of signals and all channels involved are assumed to be Rician fading that can be formulated as $\textbf{H}=\sqrt{\text{PL}}(\sqrt{\frac{\kappa}{\kappa+1}}\textbf{H}_{\text{LoS}}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{\kappa+1}}\textbf{H}_{\text{NLoS}})$, where $\text{PL}=$ 37.3 $+$ 22.0$\text{log}d$ indicates the path loss associated with $\textbf{H}$ and $d$ indicates the distance between two devices, $\kappa=$ 1 is the Ricean factor, and the deterministic LoS and NLoS Rayleigh fading components are denoted as $\textbf{H}_{\text{LoS}}$ and $\textbf{H}_{\text{NLoS}}$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig3}
\caption{Achievable sum-rate versus the number of iterations.}
\label{fig_3}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig_3} shows the convergence of the algorithms proposed under three active STAR-RIS work modes. Meanwhile, we also give the system performance with passive STAR-RIS for comparison. It is clear that the sum rate first experiences an upward trend and subsequently keeps stabilization as the number of iterations increases under all modes, which shows the efficiency of the algorithms proposed. In addition, one can observe that the sum rate with UED mode is the highest, while the passive STAR-RIS owns the lowest sum rate. In order to ensure a fair comparison with the case where the STAR-RIS passive, the total power budget $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{total}}=P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}}+P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}$ is the DFBS transmit power that constrained to 26 dBm, thus for active STAR-RIS assisted case, we constrain the power budget at DFBS and active STAR-RIS to $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{B}}=$ 0.5 $\times P_{\text{max}}^{\text{total}}$ and $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{R}}=$ 0.5 $\times P_{\text{max}}^{\text{total}}$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig4}
\caption{Achievable sum-rate versus total power budget $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{total}}$.}
\label{fig_4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig5}
\caption{Achievable sum-rate versus Rader SNR $\Gamma_{t}$.}
\label{fig_5}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig_4} shows the achievable sum rate versus total power budget $P_{\text{max}}^{\text{total}}$ under three active STAR-RIS modes and passive STAR-RIS mode. It is obvious that the sum rate increases with the total power budget under all modes, which is also easy to understand. Obviously, the UED mode still owns the highest sum rate compared to other modes. This is because that the power are optimally allocated, unlike the EED mode and SD mode. Meanwhile, due to the ``multiplicative fading", the performance of the passive STAR-RIS mode is the worst compared to other modes.
Fig. \ref{fig_5} shows the achievable sum rate versus radar SNR under different STAR-RIS modes. One can find that the sum rate under all modes decreases with radar SNR increases. This is because that more power will be used target sensing for a higher radar SNR, and thus the power used for communication will be reduced, which leads to the decrease of the sum rate. This also indicates that there exists a tradeoff between communication and sensing under the limited resource. Obtaining a high sensing performance will lead to a low communication performance, and vice versa.
Fig. \ref{fig_6} shows the sum rate versus the number of STAR-RIS elements under different STAR-RIS modes. It is obvious that the increase in the number of STAR-RIS elements leads to an enhancement in the sum rate under all modes. This is also easy to understand, more STAR-RIS elements can obtain a higher beamforming gain, enhancing the sum rate. One can also observe that the sum rate of the passive mode increases more rapidly than that of the active mode, and this may be due to the additive noise in active STAR-RIS also increases with the increased elements of STAR-RIS.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig6}
\caption{Achievable sum-rate versus active-STARS elements $N$.}
\label{fig_6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=3.4in]{fig7}
\caption{Achievable sum-rate versus the horizontal distance of the active STAR-RIS from the DFBS.}
\label{fig_7}
\end{figure}
Finally, in order to investigate the influence of the STAR-RIS location on the sum rate, we analyze the achievable sum-rate in relation to the horizontal distance between the STAR-RIS and the DFBS in Fig. \ref{fig_7}. It can be found that the sum rate decreases as the distance between DFBS and STAR-RIS increases. This can be attributed to the increased pathloss experienced by the DFBS-RIS link as the distance between STAR-RIS and DFBS increases. For passive STAR-RIS, the total power budget is the DFBS transmit power and it will be affected by large path loss when the STAR-RIS is located at a considerable distance from the DFBS. However, in the case of active STAR-RIS, portion of the total power budget is assigned to the active STAR-RIS that is only impacted by the small path loss between the active STAR-RIS and user link, which can compensate significant path loss between DFBS and STAR-RIS. Thus, the active STAR-RIS exhibits the capability to achieve a greater sum rate compared to the passive STAR-RIS.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, an ISAC system that utilizes active STAR-RIS to overcome the challenges posed by multiplicative fading and limited coverage in half-space are investigated. In particular, we formulated an optimization problem with the goal of maximizing the achievable sum rate, while also considering the performance of sensing, the power budget and the active STAR-RIS hardware constraints. An AO algorithm was proposed to efficiently solve this problem by decomposing them into several tractable subproblems that can be easily tackled with standard convex optimization algorithms and state-of-the-art algorithms. Simulation results shown the potential of the proposed active STAR-RIS assisted ISAC system and the efficiency of the proposed joint beamforming optimization algorithm. In future, we will explore the scenario of multiple targets sensing based on imperfect channel state information to enhance the practicality of our research.
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\bibitem{ref1}
Z. Feng, Z. Fang, Z. Wei, X. Chen, Z. Quan, and D. Ji. Sira-Ramirez, ``Joint radar and communication: A survey,'' \textit{China Communications}, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1--27, Jan. 2020.
\bibitem{ref2}
X. Tong, Z. Zhang, J. Wang, C. Huang and M. Debbah, ``Joint multi-user communication and sensing exploiting both signal and environment sparsity,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process}, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1409--1422, Nov. 2021.
\bibitem{ref3}
F. Liu, C. Masouros, A. P. Petropulu, H. Griffiths, and L. Hanzo, ``Joint radar and communication design: Applications, state-of-the-art, and the road ahead,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Commun.}, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 3834--3862, Jun. 2020.
\bibitem{ref4}
R. Liu, M. Liu, H. Luo, Q. Liu, and A. L. Swindlehurst, ``Integrated Sensing and Communication with Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: Opportunities, Applications, and Future Directions,'' \textit{IEEE Wireless Commun.}, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 50--57, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref5}
Z. Zhu, Z. Li, Z. Chu, G. Sun, W. Hao, P. Liu, and I. Lee, ``Resource allocation for intelligent reflecting surface assisted wireless powered IoT systems with power splitting,'' \textit{ IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 29878--2998, May. 2022.
\bibitem{ref6}
C. Huang, Z. Yang, G. C. Alexandropoulos, K. Xiong, L. Wei, C. Yuen, Z. Zhang and M. Debbah, ``Multi-hop RIS-empowered terahertz communications: a DRL-based hybrid beamforming design,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Area Comm.}, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1663--1677, Jun. 2021.
\bibitem{ref7}
W. Yan, W. Hao, C. Huang, G. Sun, O. Muta, H. Gacanin, C. Yuen, ``Beamforming analysis and design for wideband THz reconfigurable Intelligent surface communications,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Area Comm.}, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 2306--2320, Aug. 2023.
\bibitem{ref8}
M. D. Renzo, A. Zappone, M. Debbah, M. S. Alouini, S. Tretyakov, ``Smart radio environments empowered by reconfigurable intelligent surfaces: How it works, state of research, and the road ahead,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.}, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 2450--2525, Jul. 2020.
\bibitem{ref9}
Q. Wu, S. Zhang, B. Xiong, C. You, and R. Zhang, ``Intelligent reflecting surface aided wireless communications: A tutorial,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Commun.}, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3313--3351, May. 2021.
\bibitem{ref10}
W. Hao, G. Sun, M. Zeng, Z. Chu, Z. Zhen, O. A. Dobre, and P. Xiao, ``Robust design for intelligent reflecting surface-assisted MIMO-OFDMA terahertz IoT networks,'' \textit{IEEE Internet Things J.}, vol. 8, no. 16, pp. 13052--13064, Aug. 2021.
\bibitem{ref11}
W. Hao, J. Li, G. Sun, M. Zeng, and O. A. Dobre, ``Securing reconfigurable intelligent surface-aided cell-free networks,'' \textit{IEEE T. Inf. Foren. Sec.}, vol. 17, pp. 3720--3733, Oct. 2022.
\bibitem{ref12}
Z. Zhu, Z. Li, Z. Chu, Q. Wu, J. Liang, Y. Xiao, P. Liu, and I. Lee, ``Intelligent reflecting surface-assisted wireless powered heterogeneous networks,'' \textit{ IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, early access, May. 2023.
\bibitem{ref13}
Z. M. Jiang, M. Rihan, P. Zhang, L. Huang, Q. Deng, J. Zhang, and E. M. Mohamed, ``Intelligent reflecting surface aided dual-function radar and communication system,'' \textit{IEEE Syst. J.}, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 475--486, Mar. 2022.
\bibitem{ref14}
R. Liu, M. Liu, and A. L. Swindlehurst, ``Joint beamforming and reflection design for RIS-assisted ISAC systems,'' in \textit{Proc. of the 2022 30th European Signal Processing Conf. (EUSIPCO)}, Belgrade, Serbia, Oct. 2022.
\bibitem{ref15}
R. Liu, M. Li, Y. Liu, Q. Wu, and Q. Liu, ``Joint transmit waveform and passive beamforming design for RIS-aided DFRC systems,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process.}, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 995--1010, Aug. 2022.
\bibitem{ref16}
X. Song, D. Zhao, H. Hua, T. Xiao Han, X. Yang, and J. Xu, ``Joint
transmit and reflective beamforming for IRS-assisted integrated sensing and communication,'' in \textit{Proc. of the 2022 IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC)}, Austin, TX, USA, May. 2022.
\bibitem{ref17}
H. Luo, R. Liu, M. Li, and Q. Liu, ``RIS-aided integrated sensing and communication: joint beamforming and reflection design,'' \textit{ IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.}, early access, pp. 1--5, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref18}
K. Zhong, J. Hu, C. Pan, M. Deng and J. Fang, ``Joint waveform and beamforming design for RIS-aided ISAC systems,'' \textit{IEEE Signal Processing Lett.}, vol. 30, pp. 165--169, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref19}
Y. Mai, and H. Du, ``Joint beamforming and phase shift design for RIS-aided ISAC system,'' in \textit{Proc. of the 2022 IEEE 8th International Conference on Computer and Commun. (ICCC)}, Chengdu, China, Mar. 2023.
\bibitem{ref20}
M. Hua, Q. Wu, C. He, S. Ma, and W. Chen, ``Joint active and passive beamforming design for IRS-aided radar-communication,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2278--2294, Apr. 2023.
\bibitem{ref21}
Z. Xing, R. Wang, and X. Yuan, ``Joint active and passive beamforming design for reconfigurable intelligent surface enabled integrated sensing and communication,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Commun.}, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 2457--2474, Apr. 2023.
\bibitem{ref122}
Y. Liu et al., ``STAR: Simultaneous transmission and reflection for 360◦ coverage by intelligent surfaces,'' \textit{IEEE Wireless Commun.}, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 102--109, Dec. 2021.
\bibitem{ref23}
X. Mu, Y. Liu, L. Guo, J. Lin, and R. Schober, ``Simultaneously transmitting and reflecting (STAR) RIS aided wireless communications,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 3083--3098, May. 2022.
\bibitem{ref24}
S. Zhang et al., ``Intelligent omni-surfaces: Ubiquitous wireless transmission by reflective-refractive metasurfaces,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 219--233, Jan. 2022.
\bibitem{ref25}
W. Cai, M. Li, Y. Liu, L. Q. Wu, and Q. Liu, ``Joint beamforming design for intelligent omni surface assisted wireless communication systems,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1281--1297, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref26}
Z. Wang, X. Mu, and Y. Liu, ``STARS enabled integrated sensing and communications,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, early access, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref27}
Z. Liu, X. Li, H. Ji, and H. Zhang, ``Exploiting STAR-RIS for physical layer security in integrated sensing and communication networks,'' in \textit{Proc. of the IEEE 34th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Commun.}, Jun. 2023, pp. 1--8.
\bibitem{ref28}
Z. Zhu, M. Gong, Y. Liu, Z. Chu, P. Xiao, G. Sun, D. Mi, Z. He, and F. Tong, ``DRL-based STAR-RIS-assisted ISAC secure communications,'' in \textit{Proc. of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Commun. 2023 (Ucom 2023)}, Xi'an, China, Jun. 2023, pp. 1--6.
\bibitem{ref29}
Z. Zhang, L. Dai, X. Chen, C. Liu, F. Yang, R. Schober, and H. V. Poor, ``Active RIS vs. passive RIS: Which will prevail in 6G?,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Commun.}, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 1707--1725, Mar. 2023.
\bibitem{ref30}
Q. Zhu, M. Li, R. Liu, and Q. Liu, ``Joint transceiver beamforming and reflecting design for active RIS-aided ISAC systems,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.}, early access, pp. 1--5, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref31}
Y. Zhang, J. Chen, C. Zhong, H. Peng, and W. Lu, ``Active IRS-assisted integrated sensing and communication in C-RAN,'' \textit{IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett.}, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 411--415, Mar. 2023.
\bibitem{ref32}
A. A. Salem, M. H. Ismail, and A. S. Lbrahim, ``Active reconfigurable intelligent surface-assisted MISO integrated sensing and communication systems for secure operation,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.}, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 4919--4931, Apr. 2023.
\bibitem{ref33}
X. Wang, Z. Fei, Z. Zheng, and J. Guo, ``Joint waveform design and passive beamforming for RIS-assisted dual-functional radar-communication system,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.}, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 5131--5136, May. 2021.
\bibitem{ref34}
Y. Chen, Y. Wang, Z. Wang, and P. Zhang, ``Robust beamforming for active reconfigurable intelligent omni-surface in vehicular communications,'' \textit{IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.}, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 3086--3103, Oct. 2022.
\bibitem{ref35}
H. Luo, L. Lv, Q. Wu, Z. Ding, N. A. Dhahir, and J Chen, ``Beamforming design for active IOS aided NOMA networks,'' \textit{IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett.}, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 282--286, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref36}
Y. Ma, M. Li, Y. Liu, Q. Wu, and Q. Liu, ``Optimization for reflection and transmission dual-functional active RIS-assisted systems,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Commun.}, early access, pp. 1--1, Jun. 2023.
\bibitem{ref37}
K. Shen and W. Yu, ``Fractional programming for communication systems-Part I: Power control and beamforming,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Signal Process.}, vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2616--2630, May. 2018.
\bibitem{ref38}
K. Shen and W. Yu, ``Fractional programming for communication systems-Part II: Uplink scheduling via matching,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Signal Process.}, vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2631--2644, May. 2018.
\bibitem{ref39}
Q. Zhu, M. Li, R. Liu, and Q. Liu, ``Joint transceiver beamforming and reflecting design for active RIS-aided ISAC systems,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.}, early access, pp. 1--5, Feb. 2023.
\bibitem{ref40}
Y. Sun, P. Babu, and D. P. Palomar, ``Majorization-minimization algorithms in signal processing, communications, and machine learning,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Signal Process.}, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 794--816, Feb. 2017.
\bibitem{ref41}
A. Ben-Tal and A. Nemirovski, {\it{Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms, and Engineering Applications}}, Philadelphia, PA, USA: for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2001.
\bibitem{ref42}
F. Yan, R. Deng, S. Xu, and M. Li, ``Design and experiment of a near-zero-thickness high gain transmit-reflect-array antenna using anisotropic metasurface,'' \textit{IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.}, vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 2853--2861, Jun. 2018.
\bibitem{ref43}
T. Cai et al., ``High-efficiency and full-space manipulation of electromagnetic wave fronts with metasurfaces,'' \textit{Phys. Rev. Appl.}, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 033--034, Jul. 2017.
\bibitem{ref44}
C. Pan et al., ``Multicell MIMO communications relying on intelligent reflecting surfaces,'' \textit{ IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.}, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 5218--5233, Aug. 2020.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}