I Introduction
Massive connectivity of wireless devices is essential for industrial, commercial, and critical applications of massive machinetype communications (mMTC) [1, 2], which provides a concrete platform for the Internet of Things (IoT). Unlike humantype communications (HTC), mMTC is characterized by small size data, infrequent transmission, low cost devices, low mobility, and so on [3]. In practice, mMTC systems need to support a massive number of devices with low control overhead, low latency, and low power consumption for delaysensitive and energy efficient communications.
Nonorthogonal multiple access (NOMA) [4, 5] has received a great deal of attention for massive connectivity in 5G wireless systems. In codedomain NOMA, userspecific and nonorthogonal spreading sequences are assigned to users for their nonorthogonal multiplexing through common resources. In sparse code multiple access (SCMA) [6], sparse spreading sequences are assigned to users, where a message passing algorithm (MPA) [7] and a list sphere decoding based MPA decoder [8] can be deployed for reliable multiuser detection with low complexity. Complexvalued spreading sequences are employed for multiuser shared access (MUSA) [9], where the successive interference cancellation (SIC) can be performed for multiuser detection. Also, pattern division multiple access (PDMA) [10] attempted to enable massive connectivity with low complexity through an efficient pattern matrix design and a recursive approach of multiuser detection [11]. For a survey on existing works of codedomain NOMA, readers are referred to [5]
. Recently, the stateoftheart technique of deep learning
[12] has been applied for multiuser detection in uplink codedomain NOMA systems [13][15].Grantfree access is of tremendous interest to connect a massive number of users to mMTC systems with low latency and low signaling overhead [16]. In uplink grantfree access, active users send their data with no accessgrant procedure. Then, a base station (BS) receiver has to identify active users with no aid of a grant procedure and detect each active user’s data from the superimposed signal. The principle of compressed sensing (CS) [17] can be applied for multiuser detection in uplink grantfree access, exploiting the sparse activity that many users are present in a cell, but only a few of them are active at a time. Many research articles [18][32] demonstrated that a CSbased detector can be successfully deployed at BS for joint activity detection, channel estimation, and/or data detection in uplink grantfree access.
For nonorthogonal and grantfree access, it is crucial to design a set of nonorthogonal sequences with low correlation, constructively or algorithmically, which ultimately guarantees reliable CSbased detection at BS. Moreover, if the transmitted signals of active users are spread onto multiple subcarriers, the high peaktoaverage power ratio (PAPR) will cause signal distortion deteriorating all potential benefits of multicarrier communications [33, 34]. Various reduction techniques [34] have been proposed for mitigating the PAPR of multicarrier transmitted signals. Recently, efforts have been made to reduce the PAPR of uplink multicarrier signals in SCMA [35, 36]. In summary, we need to design a set of nonorthogonal sequences with low correlation and low PAPR properties, which ensures reliable and power efficient uplink grantfree access.
In literature, many constructive designs have been presented to provide a variety of pilot or spreading sequences for multiple access. In [37]
, quasiorthogonal sequences have been introduced to increase the system capacity of CDMA. Random sequences with the Gaussian distributed elements have been used in
[21][25] to theoretically guarantee reliable CSbased detection for uplink access. Also, the works of [26][30] used pseudorandom noise sequences for CSbased detection in uplink grantfree NOMA. In multicarrier communications, Golay complementary sequences and sets [38][40] can be employed to provide theoretically bounded low PAPR. In [41], Golay complementary sequences have been also applied for low PAPR preambles in the filterbank multicarrier (FBMC) modulation. Binary [42] and nonbinary [43] Golay spreading sequences have been employed for low PAPR in uplink grantfree NOMA. Other complementary sequences have been studied in [44][48] for PAPR reduction. ZadoffChu (ZC) sequences [49], also known as constant amplitude and zero autocorrelation (CAZAC) sequences, have been adopted as preambles for random access in 3GPPLTE [50], providing low PAPR for multicarrier transmission.Noting that a sensing matrix of CS is a collection of nonorthogonal column sequences, we can find many algorithmic approaches for good sequences from the efforts of optimizing the sensing matrix. Elad [51] launched an algorithmic design for a sensing matrix by minimizing the average measure of the coherence iteratively. In [52][55], several algorithms have been proposed for optimizing a sensing matrix, where each one attempts to approximate its Gram matrix to that of an equiangular tight frame (ETF) [56]. In [57], Chen et al.
demonstrated that a unitnorm tight frame is a closest design of a nearly orthogonal matrix. Other algorithms can be found in
[58] and [59]. From these efforts, each sensing matrix optimized algorithmically can offer a set of nonorthogonal sequences for reliable CSbased detection. In [60] and [61], deep learning (DL) techniques have been also applied for pilot or spreading sequence design. In general, the nonorthogonal sequences obtained by algorithmic and DLbased designs can take arbitrary elements with no structure, which may not be suitable for cost efficient implementation in mMTC devices.Recently, the genetic algorithm (GA) [62] has been applied for sensing matrix optimization in specific applications, e.g., reducing the complexity of radar imaging [63], allocating an optimized pilot pattern for channel estimation [64], and maximizing the energy efficiency of wireless sensor networks (WSN) [65]. In particular, GA has been used to find subsampling patterns to optimize partial Fourier matrices with specific parameters [63, 64]. This GAbased optimization motivates us to scrutinize the effectiveness of GA for optimizing a sensing matrix, which can ultimately present a set of nonorthogonal sequences for uplink grantfree access.
In this paper, we propose a twostage genetic algorithm (GA) to design a new set of nonorthogonal sequences^{1}^{1}1 The resulting sequences from our design can be used as spreading, pilot, or signature sequences, depending on specific access schemes. for uplink grantfree access, where each sequence has unimodular and complexvalued elements of finite phase for cost efficient implementation in an mMTC device. Each stage of GA makes an evolutionary approach to reach an optimized result by transforming and improving the intermediate outcomes. The firststage GA is to find a subsampling index set to optimize^{2}^{2}2In this paper, ‘optimize’ does not mean to find a global optimum, since GA may converge to local optima. a partial unitary matrix by approximating it to an ETF, where the evolutionary approach tries to minimize the average distance between the inner product of its column pair and the Welch bound equality [66]. Then, the secondstage GA tries to find a sequence to be commonly masked to each column of the partial unitary matrix from the firststage, in order to reduce the PAPR of the resulting columns. Note that masking each column with a common sequence does not change the inner products and their distribution among the resulting column pairs. Finally, the masked columns of the partial unitary matrix are proposed as new nonorthogonal sequences with low correlation and low PAPR properties, which can be uniquely assigned to users for uplink grantfree access.
Through simulations, the phase transition diagrams reveal that the partial Fourier and ZCbased matrices optimized by our firststage GA guarantee more reliable CS reconstruction than the randomly subsampled counterparts, respectively, over a wide range of compression and sparsity ratios. In addition, it turns out that the secondstage GA is effective to enhance the PAPR properties of the resulting sequences, where the PAPR distributions appear to be acceptable for multicarrier transmission. In uplink grantfree access, we show that the performance of the Fourier and ZCbased sequences from our twostage GA is superior to that of random sequences, while comparable to that of ZC sequences of prime length, for CSbased joint activity detection and channel estimation Compared to algebraic design, we confirm that this GAbased design can present a new set of nonorthogonal sequences of arbitrary length, exhibiting acceptable PAPR distribution and guaranteeing reliable CSbased detection, which can be more suitable for grantfree massive connectivity.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II describes a system model of uplink grantfree access under consideration, where a CS problem is formulated for joint activity detection and channel estimation. Section III outlines a framework for nonorthogonal sequence design using a twostage GA. In each stage, we formulate the design goal by an optimization problem. Section IV describes the evolution steps of each stage GA along with the cost function for the optimization problem. Algorithms 1 and 2 summarize the twostage GA. Section V presents simulation results to demonstrate the effectiveness of each stage GA. In addition, we evaluate the performance of the proposed sequences, comparing to other conventional ones, in CSbased joint activity detection and channel estimation. Finally, concluding remarks will be given in Section IV.
Notations: Throughout this paper,
. A matrix (or a vector) is represented by a boldface upper (or a lower) case letter.
denotes the transpose of a matrix , whileis its conjugate transpose. The identity matrix is denoted by
, where the dimension is determined in the context. denotes a matrix taking the magnitude of each element of . For a vector , is its subvector, indexed by an index set , and is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal entries are from . The inner product of vectors and is denoted by . The norm of a vector is denoted by . The Frobenius norm of a matrix is denoted by . Finally, is a circularly symmetric complex Gaussian random vector with mean and covariance .Ii System Model
In this paper, we consider a twophase grantfree access scheme [21, 22] for a singlecell massive connectivity. In an mMTC cell, a base station (BS) receiver equipped with antennas accommodates total devices each of which transmits with a single antenna. For a fully grantfree access, we assume that devices are static^{3}^{3}3 If devices are moving from cell to cell, it is hard to guarantee unique sequence assignment in a fully grantfree manner for all devices in a cell, and some coordination may be required to assign unique sequences to devices. in a cell and thus BS accommodates a fixed set of devices having their own userspecific sequences. In the first phase, each active device transmits its sequence as a dedicated pilot, and the BS receiver then tries to identify active devices and estimate their channel profiles from the superimposed pilots. Data can be directly transmitted in the secondphase from active devices with no grant from BS. In this twophase scheme, we assume that the channels and the device activity remain unchanged during slots for pilot and data transmissions. Figure 1 illustrates this system model.
With sparse activity, each device is assumed to be active with probability
in an i.i.d. manner, where active devices are synchronized. In an access time, an activity indicator vector can be defined by withwhere is a set of active devices and the number of active devices is .
When device is active, it transmits its unique pilot sequence over subcarriers for grantfree access, where . We consider a flat Rayleigh fading channel, where the channel gain remains unchanged during the coherence time interval of slots. Let , , be a channel vector from device , where is the channel gain between device and BS receiver antenna . Assuming that the path loss and shadowing effects are known and can be removed by BS, we have . Then, the received signal at antenna can be represented by
(1) 
where for . In (1), is a matrix of pilot sequences, and is the complex Gaussian noise vector at antenna .
Collecting the received signals of (1), we have a multiple measurement vector (MMV) model of
(2) 
where , , and , respectively. Due to the activity indicator , it is clear that has the rowwise sparsity with nonzero and zero rows. Then, BS can apply a joint sparse recovery algorithm to solve the MMV problem of (2), in order to detect the activity indicator and estimate the channel vector for . If the nonzero rows of are estimated, the row indices mean a detected index set of active devices, denoted by , while the coefficients of each nonzero row give an estimated channel vector for . The CSbased joint active user detection (AUD) and channel estimation (CE) complete the first phase of uplink grantfree access. In the second phase, the BS receiver detects data from active devices with the knowledge of device identity and channel profiles obtained from the first phase [21, 22]. In this paper, we restrict our attention to joint AUD and CE in the first phase via joint sparse recovery under the CS MMV model.
Remark 1
A CS MMV model can also be applied for oneshot detection in uplink grantfree NOMA [29, 42]. In this system, each active device transmits its unique spreading sequence of length , spread onto subcarriers, carrying its pilot and data over time slots. Assuming that the channels and the device activity remain unchanged, the received signals over slots are also modeled by (2). A BS receiver equipped with a single antenna then conducts CSbased joint activity detection, channel estimation, and data detection, by solving the MMV problem of (2). Readers are referred to [29] and [42] for more details.
Iii Framework for Sequence Design
The goal of this paper is to present a set of nonorthogonal sequences for grantfree massive connectivity. In CS MMV model, the sequence set forms the matrix in (2), where the problem of sequence design boils down to designing a sensing matrix for reliable CSbased detection. This section outlines a framework for sensing matrix design using the genetic algorithm (GA), which ultimately provides a set of good nonorthogonal sequences for uplink grantfree access.
Iiia Partial Unitary Matrices
Compressed sensing (CS) [17] is to reconstruct an dimensional sparse signal from its underdetermined dimensional measurement , where . The signal is called sparse if it has at most nonzero elements, where . In CS techniques, it is essential to design a good sensing matrix , in order to guarantee reliable reconstruction of sparse signals.
Taking some rows out of a unitary matrix is a well known operation to obtain a partial unitary matrix [67] that enjoys practical benefits as well as theoretical CS recovery guarantee. A partial unitary matrix is formulated by
(3) 
where is an unitary matrix of . In (3), is a subsampling operator selecting rows out of ones whose indices are specified by , where . If the indices of are selected randomly, guarantees reliable CS reconstruction theoretically with high probability, provided that [68]. In practice, a partial unitary matrix allows fast and efficient measurement and reconstruction for CS, thanks to the fast unitary transform, e.g., fast Fourier or Hadamard transform.
To design unimodular sequences, we begin with a unitary matrix whose elements take the magnitude of . Then, the first stage of sequence design attempts to find a subsampling index set to optimize a partial unitary matrix for reliable CS reconstruction.
IiiB PAPR Reduction
In system model of Section II, if the sequence is transmitted through subcarriers, the peaktoaverage power ratio (PAPR) of its OFDM signal is determined by [33]
(4) 
where . In (4), we assumed that is unimodular, i.e., , for .
Given a partial unitary matrix , we try to reduce the PAPR of the column sequences^{4}^{4}4 If has a column of all ones, like the Fourier or Hadamard matrix, the maximum PAPR of the column sequences of its partial unitary matrix has the highest value of , regardless of .. For PAPR reduction, we apply a unimodular and complexvalued sequence as a common mask to each column of , i.e.,
(5) 
In (5), we use a modulated ary sequence for , i.e., , where for . Then, it is clear that the inner product of a column pair in is identical to that of the corresponding pair in , since , which suggests that the new matrix may exhibit the same performance of CSbased detection as the matrix .
In the second design stage, we search for a masking sequence that allows the column sequences of to have a desired PAPR property, maintaining the performance of reliable CS reconstruction from the first design stage.
IiiC Genetic Algorithm
The genetic algorithm (GA) is an evolutionary technique to solve an optimization problem that is computationally intractable [62]. Inspired by the evolutionary mechanism in nature, GA transforms and evolves chromosomes
through crossover, mutation, selection, population updates, and so on. Through a sufficient number of generations, GA converges to a fittest chromosome, which can be a solution to the optimization problem. Thanks to the fast convergence to local optima, GA has attracted much attention in machine learning and data mining
[69][71]. Recently, GA has expanded its application to other areas, e.g., channel coding [72][75], spreading code design [76, 77], CS recovery [78][80] and matrix optimization [63][65], etc.In Section III.A and III.B, we introduced two design stages to obtain a set of good sequences. At each stage, the design goal can be specified by an optimization problem that needs to be solved by GA. Given a unitary matrix , the objective of the first design stage is to find a fittest chromosome or subsampling index set in (3). The optimization problem for this objective can be formulated by
(6) 
where is a cost function of the firststage optimization. The cost function needs to be a good metric that reflects the performance of CS reconstruction with the partial unitary matrix . The firststage GA tries to minimize the cost function through evolution steps, in order to find a solution to (6).
When the firststage GA is completed, the partial unitary matrix with an optimized subsampling index set is available for the second design stage. Given , the secondstage GA tries to find a fittest chromosome or unimodular masking sequence of length , which is a solution to another optimization problem of
(7) 
where is a set of all modulated ary sequences of length . In (7), is a cost function of the secondstage optimization, which should be a metric for the PAPR property of the column sequences of . The secondstage GA tries to enhance the PAPR property with , maintaining the performance of for reliable CS reconstruction.
Finally, if and are found by the twostage GA, we obtain the matrix in (2), where the column sequences are proposed as nonorthogonal sequences with low PAPR for reliable CSbased detection in uplink grantfree access. In next section, our twostage GA will be described with the details to find and , respectively.
Iv TwoStage Genetic Algorithm
In this section, we describe the evolutionary steps of our twostage GA. The firststage GA is to find an optimized subsampling index set with , where and are fixed. Given , the secondstage GA then attempts to find an optimized masking sequence , where .
Iva Stage 1: Subsampling Optimization
IvA1 Initialization
A population is defined by a collection of subsampling index sets, i.e., , where with for . Initially, the indices of are selected randomly.
IvA2 Cost Function
In the firststage, we propose the cost function for an index set by
(8) 
where is a matrix with diagonal entries of and offdiagonal entries of . Intuitively, the cost function of (8) represents the average (rmssense) distance between the inner product of a column pair of and the Welch bound equality (WBE) [66]. Attempting to minimize the cost function, the firststage GA makes the inner product of a column pair of closer to the WBE, which approximates the resulting matrix to an equiangular tight frame (ETF) [56]. The target matrix is similar to, but not the same as the one in the convex set (e.g. (12) in [53] and (14) in [54]) for optimizing CS matrices. As remarked by [54], it is more reasonable to measure a distance from in (8), rather than , which has been confirmed by the optimization of [53].
IvA3 Crossover
In population , let us consider a pair of index sets and , , where we assume . Then, and indices are randomly selected from and , respectively, where . Finally, the selected indices, which should be all distinct, are combined to generate a new index set through crossover. In other words, we create a new subsampling index set by combining parents, where a parent index set with a lower cost function is more involved in creating its offspring. We apply the crossover for every pair of parent index sets from , which yields a new population of size at each evolution step.
IvA4 Mutation
In nature, parts of a chromosome can be mutated in a generation, which provides diversity for evolution. In the firststage GA, indices are randomly selected from each index set in , which is then replaced by new (random) ones through mutation. At each evolution step, we apply the mutation to all index sets in , which yields a new population of size .
IvA5 Population Update
Through crossover and mutation, we have a new, intermediate population , where the size^{5}^{5}5Identical chromosomes in (or ), if any, are treated as separate ones. is . From , we select the index sets with the lowest cost functions of (8). The population is then updated by the fittest index sets at each evolution step.
IvA6 Iteration and Selection
In the firststage GA, the evolution steps of crossover, mutation, and population update are repeated by a predefined number of iterations, denoted by . In the end, the fittest index set of , which has the lowest cost function of (8), will be selected as an optimized subsampling index set .
Algorithm 1 describes the entire steps of the firststage GA to optimize a subsampling index set.
2.5 Algorithm 1 Genetic Algorithm for Subsampling Optimization 
Input: Unitary matrix , Number of measurements , 
Population size , Crossover rate , Mutation rate , 
Maximum number of iterations . 
Initialization: Create a population 
of randomly selected index sets, where . 
Compute the cost function (8) for each index set of . 
Iteration: 
for to do 
Crossover: Create a new population with index sets from . 
Mutation: Create a new population with index sets from . 
Population update: Compute the cost function (8) for each index set 
of , select the index sets 
from with the lowest cost functions, and 
update with the fittest index sets. 
end for 
Selection: Select the fittest index set from . 
Output: Optimized subsampling index set 
IvB Stage 2: Masking Sequence Optimization
IvB1 Initialization
In the secondstage GA, a population consists of masking sequences, i.e., , where each element of is for and . Initially, is randomly taken from .
IvB2 Cost Function
Note that the partial unitary matrix is available by the optimized subsampling index set from the firststage GA. In the secondstage GA, the cost function for a masking sequence is proposed by
(9) 
where . In (9), is a set of columns in whose PAPR belong to the top , where . That is, is the average of top PAPR of , which will be minimized to enhance the PAPR distribution of the columns of .
IvB3 Crossover
As in the firststage GA, we consider a pair of sequences and from , , where . Then, the first elements from and the last elements from are combined to generate a new masking sequence, where . Applying the crossover for every pair of sequences in , we have a new population of size at each evolution step.
IvB4 Mutation
For mutation, the secondstage GA randomly selects elements from each sequence in , where each element is replaced by a new (random) ary modulated one. We obtain a new population of size by applying the mutation to all sequences in .
IvB5 Population Update
Through crossover and mutation, we obtain , where . From , we select the sequences with the lowest cost functions of (9). The population is then updated by the fittest sequences at each evolution step.
IvB6 Iteration and Selection
In the secondstage GA, crossover, mutation, and population update are repeated by a predefined number of iterations, denoted by . Finally, the fittest sequence of , which has the lowest cost function of (9), will be selected as an optimized mask .
2.5 Algorithm 2 Genetic Algorithm for Masking Sequence Optimization 
Input: Partial unitary matrix , Number of measurements , 
Population size , Crossover rate , Mutation rate , 
Maximum number of iterations . 
Initialization: Create a population 
of random modulated ary sequences of length . 
Compute the cost function (9) for each sequence of . 
Iteration: 
for to do 
Crossover: Create a new population with sequences from . 
Mutation: Create a new population with sequences from . 
Population update: Compute the cost function (9) for each sequence 
of , select the sequences 
from with the lowest cost functions, and 
update with the fittest sequences. 
end for 
Selection: Select the fittest masking sequence from . 
Output: Optimized masking sequence 
Algorithm 2 describes the entire steps of the secondstage GA to optimize a masking sequence. Finally, a set of nonorthogonal sequences, or , is provided by our twostage GA of Algorithms 1 and 2, as illustrated by Fig. 2.
Remark 2
The set of nonorthogonal sequences designed by our twostage GA can be represented by
(10) 
Given a unitary matrix , (10) means that the matrix can be generated by the operations of row selection specified by and masking by . Therefore, a BS receiver can generate the sequence set easily with the highly structured unitary matrix by storing and . Moreover, CSbased detection can be carried out fast and efficiently at BS, exploiting the fast unitary transform by . Also, each mMTC device is able to generate its unique sequence onthefly with a unique column structure of by storing and , which allows its cheap and efficient implementation.
V Simulation Results
In this section, we first demonstrate the effectiveness of our twostage GA for nonorthogonal sequence design. Then, we present simulation results of CSbased detection for uplink grantfree access, which demonstrates the performance of nonorthogonal sequences designed by our twostage GA.
For the unitary matrix , we use the Fourier matrix , where for . Additionally, we consider another unitary matrix based on ZadoffChu (ZC) sequences [49]. Each cyclic shift of the ZC sequence of even length becomes a column of a matrix , where each element is given by
Due to the perfect autocorrelation [49] of ZC sequences, it is clear that , called the ZC matrix, is also unitary.
Beginning with and , our twostage GA gives and , respectively, by Algorithms 1 and 2. Finally, their columns are proposed as nonorthogonal sequences, called Fourierbased and ZCbased sequences, respectively.
Va Effectiveness of TwoStage GA
In simulations, each stage GA has the population size of , the crossover rate , and the mutation number , respectively. Algorithm 1 has , whereas in Algorithm 2, as experiments showed that the cost function of Algorithm 2 converges slowly. Finally, the cost function of Algorithm 2 computes top average of PAPR of (or ) for a mask sequence .
Fig. 3 displays the evolution of the cost functions (8) and (9) of the fittest chromosomes, respectively, from partial Fourier and ZC matrices, where and . The figure shows that each stage GA continues to reduce its cost function over the evolution steps. As mentioned above, we observed that the cost function of Algorithm 2 converges slowly, compared to that of Algorithm 1. It is because the search space size for the optimization problem (7) is , which is much larger than that of (6), or . Fig. 3 also reveals that the cost functions of partial Fourier and ZC matrices converge to similar values, which suggests that their performance of CS reconstruction and PAPR property will be similar to each other.
To investigate the effectiveness of the firststage GA, we sketch the phase transition diagrams for CS reconstruction with partial Fourier and ZC matrices, respectively, obtained by Algorithm 1. We consider an MMV problem , where (or ), is a jointly sparse matrix with common nonzero rows, and is a collection of measurement vectors. The nonzero entries of are independently drawn from
, where their row positions are uniformly distributed. Also, each element of
is the i.i.d. Gaussian noise from, where the signaltonoise ratio (SNR) is set to
dB. In phase transition, we made trials of CS reconstruction at each test point, where the step sizes of and are and , respectively. The phase transition indicates that the corresponding CS reconstruction is successful with probability exceeding below the transition curve, where a success is declared if an estimated achieves .Fig. 4 depicts the phase transitions for partial Fourier and ZC matrices under MMV reconstruction by the simultaneous orthogonal matching pursuit (SOMP) [81], where the number of nonzero rows of is assumed to be known in advance. In the figure, ‘GA (avg)’ indicates the phase transition of (or ) for which the cost function (8) has been minimized by Algorithm 1. Meanwhile, ‘GA (coh)’ corresponds to the case in which Algorithm 1 changed its cost function with the mutual coherence, i.e., , where and are the th and the th columns of , respectively, with or . Also, ‘random (coh)’ and ‘random (avg)’ show the phase transitions for randomly subsampled Fourier (or ZC) matrices that have the lowest coherence and the lowest cost function (8), respectively, out of trials. Fig. 4 shows that the phase transition curves of ‘GA (avg)’ are higher than or equal to all the other ones over most compression ratios, which demonstrates that the partial Fourier and ZC matrices optimized by Algorithm 1 with the cost function (8) present reliable MMV reconstruction over a wide range of compression and sparsity ratios.
The effectiveness of the secondstage GA is verified by Fig. 5, which sketches the maximum and top average PAPR of the sequences obtained by Algorithm 2. In the figure, ‘avg’ means that Algorithm 2 utilized the cost function of (9), while ‘max’ indicates that the maximum PAPR of has been used as the cost function of Algorithm 2, where or . To demonstrate the PAPR improvement by Algorithm 2, we also sketch ‘no mask’, which indicates the PAPR properties of the sequences obtained by Algorithm 1 only, or column sequences of (or ). Note that the maximum PAPR of partial Fourier matrices for ‘no mask’ is outside the scope of this figure, taking the highest value of due to a column of all ones in . Fig. 5 demonstrates that Algorithm 2 can significantly reduce the maximum and top average PAPR of the sequences from and , respectively. Also, it reveals that using the cost function (9) is more effective for Algorithm 2 to enhance the PAPR properties.
VB Performance of CSbased Detection
Numerical experiments examine the performance of the proposed nonorthogonal sequences for CSbased AUD and CE in uplink grantfree access. Under the system model of Section II, we assume that there are devices in an mMTC cell, where each one is assigned a unique nonorthogonal pilot sequence of length . Reflecting sparse activity, each device sends its pilot with probability at each access time. At BS, the received signaltonoise ratio (SNR) per device is set to .
For CSbased AUD and CE, a BS receiver deploys the SOMP algorithm that requires no prior knowledge of the number of active devices^{6}^{6}6 In simulations, this sparsityblind SOMP stops its iteration empirically if the maximum signal proxy is less than .. In AUD, both undetected and falsealarmed devices are treated as errors. Thus, the activity error rate (AER) is defined by the average of , where and are true and detected sets of active devices, respectively. Also, channel estimation errors are measured by the normalized mean squared errors (NMSE), or the average of , where and are true and estimated channel vectors, respectively, for truly active devices. In simulations, the averages for AER and NMSE are computed over access trials.
To obtain the Fourier and ZCbased sequences from and , respectively, Algorithms 1 and 2 use the same parameters as in Section V.A, but and . For comparison, we generate complexvalued random Gaussian sequences of length
, where each element is drawn from the i.i.d. complex Gaussian distribution with zero mean and variance
[21]. Also, we use the complexvalued MUSA spreading sequences of length , where each element is randomly taken from the 3level signal constellation, i.e., , in Fig. 2(b) of [9]. Generating random Gaussian and MUSA sequences, we have matrices and , respectively, where each one is a matrix with the lowest coherence among trials.The last sequence set for comparison is obtained by cyclic shifts of the ZadoffChu (ZC) sequences with multiple roots, where the sequence length is a prime number closest to . In specific, we begin with an matrix that consists of all cyclic shifts of a th root ZC sequence [49] of length with the th element of , where is a root number between and . Due to the perfect autocorrelation of the ZC sequence, is unitary for any . For a set of sequences with low PAPR, we then sort the root numbers in ascending order of the maximum PAPR that the column sequences of achieve. Taking the first root numbers, denoted by , we produce a matrix , where the first columns are finally selected for an matrix , or a set of ZC sequences of prime length . The coherence of is , close to the Welch bound equality, due to the crosscorrelation of ZC sequences with distinct roots [82]. In simulations, the matrix in (2) is determined by the sequence sets under consideration, i.e., , and , respectively.
Fig. 6
displays the complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of PAPR of nonorthogonal sequences under consideration, where
and . The ZC sequences of prime length , whose PAPR has been optimized as mentioned above, exhibit the best PAPR distribution with maximum of dB. On the other hand, complexvalued random Gaussian and MUSA sequences have the poor distributions, where the maximum PAPR are dB and dB, respectively. It is shown that the PAPR distributions of Fourier and ZCbased sequences from our twostage GA are not so good as that of ZC sequences of prime length, but much better than those of the random sequences, showing the maximum of dB and dB, respectively. As a result, the PAPR distributions of the proposed sequences appear to be acceptable for multicarrier transmission.Fig. 7 shows the performance of CSbased AUD and CE over the received SNR per device. In the figure, the AER and NMSE of Fourier and ZCbased sequences from our twostage GA are significantly lower than those of complexvalued random Gaussian and MUSA sequences. The figure also shows that the proposed sequences slightly outperform the ZC sequences of prime length. In addition, Figs. 8 and 9 depict the AER and NMSE over the number of BS antennas and the sequence length, respectively, which also confirm the excellent performance of Fourier and ZCbased sequences. Taking into account the difference between and , we can say that the AUD and CE performance of the proposed sequences are similar to those of the ZC sequences of prime lengths.
VC Discussion
The simulation results of this section demonstrated that the Fourier and ZCbased sequences designed by our twostage GA outperform complexvalued random Gaussian and MUSA sequences for CSbased AUD and CE. Also, we observed that the performance of the proposed sequences is similar to that of the ZC sequences of prime lengths.
In comparison to the ZC sequences, we would like to point out other potential benefits of the proposed sequences. First, the nonorthogonal sequences from our twostage GA have no limit to the granularity of sequence length, which suggests that one can obtain the sequences of arbitrary length, according to the availability of resource subcarriers. Meanwhile, the length of the ZC sequences should be odd prime only, which is less flexible for managing resource subcarriers. Being able to take arbitrary sequence lengths, the proposed sequences are expected to facilitate mMTC systems to manage the resources more effectively for grantfree access.
Second, the proposed sequences constitute a partial unitary matrix with a column mask through arbitrary row selection, whereas the ZC sequences of prime length form a deterministic matrix with low coherence. While the coherencebased recovery guarantee of the deterministic matrix is limited by its theoretical bottleneck [17], our partial unitary matrix can present theoretical recovery guarantee with higher sparsity, which ensures reliable CSbased detection theoretically for more active devices in mMTC. In summary, the proposed nonorthogonal sequences can be a good option for uplink grantfree access, supporting any number of subcarriers and providing theoretically guaranteed performance for CSbased AUD and CE. Remarkably, our GAbased design offers a new set of nonorthogonal sequences with many advantages over the ZC sequences of prime length, which are known for the superb performance in practice.
Vi Conclusion
This paper has presented a twostage genetic algorithm (GA) to design new nonorthogonal sequences for uplink grantfree access in mMTC. The firststage GA is to find a subsampling index set for a partial unitary matrix that can be approximated to an ETF. The secondstage GA then tries to find a masking sequence to be commonly applied to each column of the partial unitary matrix from the firststage, in order to enhance the PAPR property of the resulting columns. In each stage GA, a new cost function has been elaborately proposed to improve the optimized result. Finally, the masked columns of the partial unitary matrix are proposed as new nonorthogonal sequences for uplink grantfree access. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first effort to apply the GA technique to nonorthogonal sequence design for achieving low correlation and low PAPR properties simultaneously.
Simulation results demonstrated that the partial Fourier and ZC matrices optimized by our firststage GA guarantee reliable CS reconstruction over a wide range of compression and sparsity ratios. Also, we observed that the secondstage GA produces the Fourier and ZCbased sequences that have acceptable PAPR distributions for multicarrier transmission. Finally, we demonstrated that the Fourier and ZCbased sequences exhibit reliable performance of CSbased AUD and CE in uplink grantfree access, which can be suitable for massive connectivity.
The main benefits of this GAbased design are summarized as follows.

The nonorthogonal sequences obtained by this GAbased design present theoretical recovery guarantee for CS reconstruction by forming a partial unitary matrix through arbitrary row selection. Simulation results confirmed that the Fourier and ZCbased sequences from this design show excellent performance of CSbased AUD and CE in uplink grantfree access.

This GAbased design is able to generate nonorthogonal sequences of arbitrary length, which can be a good choice for sequence lengths for which algebraically designed sequences with low correlation are unknown. In practice, the sequences of arbitrary length can be useful for mMTC systems to manage the resources effectively.

Based on unitary matrices, this GAbased design can offer unimodular sequences of finite phase with rich structure, which are suitable for cost efficient implementation in mMTC devices.
While this GAbased design successfully presented new nonorthogonal sequences for grantfree massive connectivity, a further study will be necessary to enhance the design method. First, the PAPR of the Fourier and ZCbased sequences, although improved through evolution, still needs to be reduced further. It will be challenging, but necessary to devise a more elaborate method for further PAPR reduction so that the PAPR distribution of the resulting sequences can be as good as that of the ZC sequences of prime lengths. Second, this GAbased design using the Fourier or ZC matrices increases the number of phases of sequence elements as more sequences are required to support more mMTC devices. To resolve this issue, we have employed the Hadamard matrices for our twostage GA, but found that the performance of CSbased detection is worse than that of Fourier or ZC matrices. To obtain sequences of small phase, we may need to study further with another unitary matrix of high dimension but with each element of smaller phase. Third, the proposed nonorthogonal sequences are for a singlecell massive connectivity, but a further study will be necessary for this GAbased design to provide multiple sets of nonorthogonal sequences for multicell environments. Finally, our twostage GA can be considered as a component of DLbased sequence design, which is our ongoing research work.
References
 [1] T. Taleb and A. Kunz, “Machine type communications in 3GPP networks: Potential, challenges, and solutions,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 178184, Mar. 2012.
 [2] C. Bockelmann et al., “Massive machinetype communications in 5G: Physical and MAClayer solutions,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 5965, Sep. 2016.
 [3] 3GPP TS 22.368, V13.1.0, Service Requirements for Machinetype Communications (MTC), Release 13, 2015.
 [4] L. Dai, B. Wang, Y. Yuan, S. Han, C.L. I, and Z. Wang, “Nonorthogonal multiple access for 5G: Solutions, challenges, opportunities, and future research trends,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 7481, Sep. 2015.
 [5] L. Dai, B. Wang, Z. Ding, Z. Wang, S. Chen, and L. Hanzo, “A survey of nonorthogonal multiple access for 5G,” IEEE Commun. Surveys & Tut., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 22942323, 2018.
 [6] H. Nikopour and H. Baligh, “Sparse code multiple access,” Proc. IEEE 24th Int. Symp. Pers. Indoor Mobile Radio Commun. (IEEE PIMRC), London, U.K., Sep. 2013, pp. 332336.
 [7] S. Zhang et. al., “Sparse code multiple access: An energy efficient uplink approach for 5G wireless systems,” Proc. IEEE Glob. Commun. Conf. (IEEE GLOBECOM), Austin, TX, USA, Dec. 2014, pp. 47824787.
 [8] F. Wei and W. Chen, “A low complexity SCMA decoder based on list sphere decoding,” Proc. IEEE Glob. Commun. Conf. (IEEE GLOBECOM), Washington, DC, USA, Dec. 2016, pp. 16.
 [9] Z. Yuan, G. Yu, W. Li, Y. Yuan, X. Wang, and J. Xu, “Multiuser shared access for Internet of Things,” IEEE 83rd Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC Spring), pp. 15, China, May 1518, 2016.
 [10] S. Kang, X. Dai, and B. Ren, “Pattern division multiple access for 5G,” Telecommun. Netw. Technol., vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 4347, May 2015.
 [11] M. V. Jamali and H. Mahdavifar, “A Lowcomplexity recursive approach toward codedomain NOMA for massive communications,” Proc. IEEE Glob. Commun. Conf. (IEEE GLOBECOM), Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2018, pp. 16.
 [12] I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengjo, and A. Courville, Deep Learning, Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2016.
 [13] N. Ye, X. Li, H. Yu, L. Zhao, W. Liu, and X. Hou, “DeepNOMA: A unified framework for NOMA using deep multitask learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 22082225, Apr. 2020.

[14]
W. Kim, Y. Ahn, and B. Shim, “Deep neural networkbased active user detection for grantfree NOMA systems,”
IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 21432155, Apr. 2020.  [15] T. Sivalingam, S. Ali, N. H. Mahmood, N. Rajatheva, and M. LatvaAho, “Deep neural networkbased blind multiple user detection for grantfree multiuser shared access,” arXiv:2106.11204v1 [cs.IT], Jun. 2021.
 [16] A. C. Cirik, N. M. Balasubramanya, L. Lampe, G. Vos, and S. Bennett, “Toward the standardization of grantfree operation and the associated NOMA strategies in 3GPP,” IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 6066, Dec. 2019.
 [17] Y. C. Eldar and G. Kutyniok, Compressed Sensing: Theory and Applications, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012.
 [18] A. T. Abebe and C. G. Kang, “Iterative order recursive least square estimation for exploiting framewise sparsity in compressive sensingbased MTC,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 10181021, May 2016.
 [19] C. Wei, H. Liu, Z. Zhang, J. Dang, and L. Wu, “Approximate message passingbased joint user activity and data detection for NOMA,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 640643, Mar. 2017.
 [20] A. Cirik, N. M. Balasubramanya, and L. Lampe, “Multiuser detection using ADMMbased compressive sensing for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 4649, Feb. 2018.
 [21] L. Liu and W. Yu, “Massive connectivity with massive MIMO  part I: Device activity detection and channel estimation,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 29332946, June 2018.
 [22] L. Liu, E. G. Larsson, W. Yu, P. Popovski, C. Stefanovic and E. de Carvalho, “Sparse signal processing for grantfree massive connectivity: A future paradigm for random access protocols in the internet of things,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 8899, Sept. 2018.
 [23] J. Ahn, B. Shim, and K. B. Lee, “EPbased joint active user detection and channel estimation for massive machinetype communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 51785189, July 2019.
 [24] X. Shao, X. Chen and R. Jia, “A dimension reductionbased joint activity detection and channel estimation algorithm for massive access,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 68, pp. 420435, 2020.
 [25] S. Jiang, X. Yuan, X. Wang, C. Xu, and W. Yu, “Joint user identification, channel estimation, and signal detection for grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun., vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 69606976, Oct. 2020.
 [26] B. Wang, L. Dai, T. Mir, and Z. Wang, “Joint user activity and data detection based on structured compressive sensing for NOMA,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 14731476, July 2016.
 [27] B. Wang, L. Dai, Y. Zhang, T. Mir and J. Li, “Dynamic compressive sensingbased multiuser detection for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 23202323, Nov. 2016.
 [28] Y. Du et al., “Efficient multiuser detection for uplink grantfree NOMA: Priorinformation aided adaptive compressive sensing perspective,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 28122828, Dec. 2017.
 [29] Y. Du, B. Dong, W. Zhu, P. Gao, Z. Chen, X. Wang, and J. Fang, “Joint channel estimation and multiuser detection for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 682685, Aug. 2018.
 [30] Y. Du, C. Cheng, B. Dong, Z. Chen, X. Wang, J. Fang, and S. Li, “Blocksparsitybased multiuser detection for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 78947909, Dec. 2018.
 [31] N. Y. Yu, “Multiuser activity and data detection via sparsityblind greedy recovery for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 20822085, Nov. 2019.
 [32] M. Ke, Z. Gao, Y. Wu, X. Gao, and R. Schober, “Compressive sensingbased adaptive active user detection and channel estimation: Massive access meets massive MIMO,” IEEE Trans. Signal. Process., vol. 68, pp. 764779, 2020.
 [33] S. Litsyn, Peak Power Control in Multicarrier Communications, Cambridge University Press, 2007.
 [34] G. Wunder, R. F. H. Fischer, H. Boche, S. Litsyn and J.S. No, “The PAPR problem in OFDM transmission: New directions for a longlasting problem” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 130144, Nov. 2013.
 [35] A. S.Rajasekaran, M. Vameghestahbanati, M. Farsi, H. Yanikomegoglu, and H. Saeedi, “Resource allocationbased PAPR analysis in uplink SCMAOFDM systems,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 162803162817, 2019.
 [36] Z. Mheich, L. Wen, P. Xiao, and A. Maaref, “Design of SCMA codebooks based on golden angle modulation,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 15011509, Feb. 2019.
 [37] K. Yang, Y.K. Kim, and P. V. Kumar, “Quasiorthogonal sequences for codedivision multipleaccess system,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 982993, May 2000.
 [38] M. J. E. Golay, “Complementary series,” IRE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. IT7, pp. 8287, 1961.
 [39] J. A. Davis and J. Jedwab, “Peaktomean power control in OFDM, Golay complementary sequences, and ReedMuller codes,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 23972417, Nov. 1999.
 [40] K. G. Paterson, “Generalized ReedMuller codes and power control in OFDM modulation,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 104120, Jan. 2000.
 [41] Z. Liu, P. Xiao, and S. Hu, “LowPAPR preamble design for FBMC systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 68, no. 8, pp. 78697876, Aug. 2019.
 [42] N. Y. Yu, “Binary Golay spreading sequences and ReedMuller codes for uplink grantfree NOMA,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 276290, Jan. 2021.
 [43] N. Y. Yu, “Nonorthogonal Golaybased spreading sequences for uplink grantfree access,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 21042108, Oct. 2020.
 [44] Z. Liu, Y. L Guan, and U. Parampalli, “New complete complementary codes for peaktomean power control in multicarrier CDMA,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 11051113, Mar. 2014.
 [45] Y. Li and C. Xu, “ZCZ aperiodic complementary sequence sets with low column sequence PMEPR,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 13031306, Aug. 2015.
 [46] T. Jiang, C. Ni and Y. Xu, “Novel 16QAM and 64QAM nearcomplementary sequences with low PMEPR in OFDM systems,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 43204330, Oct. 2016.
 [47] C. Chen, “Complementary sets of nonpoweroftwo length for peaktoaverage power ratio reduction in OFDM,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 75387545, Dec. 2016.
 [48] S. Wu and C. Chen, “Optimal Zcomplementary sequence sets with good peaktoaverage powerratio property,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 15001504, Oct. 2018.
 [49] C. Chu, “Polyphase codes with good periodic correlation properties,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 531532, Jul. 1972.
 [50] 3GPP TS 36.211 V13.1.0, Physical Channel and Modulation, Mar. 2016.
 [51] M. Elad, “Optimized projections for compressed sensing,” IEEE Trans. Sig. Proc., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 56955702, Dec. 2007.
 [52] J. Xu, Y. Pi, and Z. Cao, “Optimized projection matrix for compressive sensing,” EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process., vol. 2010, 2010.
 [53] V. Abolghasemi, S. Ferdowsi, and S. Sanei, “A gradientbased alternating minimization approach for optimization of the measurement matrix in compressive sensing,” Signal Process., vol. 92, pp. 9991009, 2012.
 [54] G. Li, Z. Zhu, D. Yang, L. Chang, and H. Bai, “On projection matrix optmization for compressive sensing systems,” IEEE Trans. Sig. Proc., vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 28872898, Jun. 2013.
 [55] Q. Xu, Z. Sheng, Y. Fang, and L. Zhang, “Measurement matrix optimization for compressed sensing system with constructed dictionary via TakenakaMalmquist functions,” Sensors 21, no. 4: 1229, 2021.
 [56] J. Kovacevic and A. Chebira, An Introduction to Frames, Foundations and Trends in Signal Processing, now Publishers Inc., 2008.
 [57] W. Chen, M. R. D. Rodrigues, and I. J. Wassell, “On the use of unitnorm tight frames to improve the average MSE performance in compressive sensing applications,” IEEE Sig. Process. Lett., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 811, Jan. 2012.
 [58] J. M. DuarteCarvajalino and G. Saprio, “Learning to sense sparse signals: simultaneous sensing matrix and sparsifying dictionary optimization,” IEEE Trans. Imag. Process., vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 19351408, 2009.
 [59] C. Lu, H. Li, and Z. Lin, “Optimized projections for compressed sensing via direct mutual coherence minimization,” Signal Process., vol. 151, pp. 4555, 2018.
 [60] C. Chun, J. Kang and I. Kim, “Deep learningbased joint pilot design and channel estimation for multiuser MIMO channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 19992003, Nov. 2019.
 [61] N. Kim, D. Kim, B. Shim and K. B. Lee, “Deep learningbased spreading sequence design and active user detection for massive machinetype communications,” IEEE Wirel. Commun. Lett., Early Access, June 2021.

[62]
J. H. Holland,
Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis With Applications to Biology, Control and Artificial Intelligence
, Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1992.  [63] Y.J. Chen, Q. Zhang, Y. Luo, and Y.A. Chen, “Measurement matrix optimization for ISAR sparse imaging based on genetic algorithm,” IEEE Geoscience Remote Sens. Lett., vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 18751879, Dec. 2016.
 [64] Y. Nie, X Yu, and Z. Yang, “Deterministic pilot pattern allocation optimization for sparse channel estimation based on CS theory in OFDM system,” EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw., 2019:7, 2019.
 [65] M. A. Mazaideh and J. Levendovszky, “A multihop routing algorithm for WSNs based on compressive sensing and multiple objective genetic algorithm,” Journ. of Commun. Netw., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 138147, Apr. 2021.
 [66] L. R. Welch, “Lower bounds on the maximum cross correlation of signals,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. IT20, no. 3, pp. 397399, May 1974.
 [67] M. Duarte and Y. C. Eldar, “Structured compressed sensing: From theory to applications,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 59, no. 9, pp. 40534085, Sep. 2011.
 [68] M. Rudelson and R. Vershynin, “On sparse reconstruction from Fourier and Gaussian measurements,” Comm. Pure Appl. Math., vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 10251045, Aug. 2008.

[69]
A. A. Freitas, “A survey of evolutionary algorithms for data mining and knowledge discovery,”
Advances in Evolution. Comput., SpringerVerlag, pp. 819845, 2002.  [70] L. Yang, D. H. Widyantoro, T. Ioerger, and J. Yen, “An entropybased adaptive genetic algorithm for learning classification rules,” Proc. 2001 Congress Evolution. Comput., pp. 790796, 2001.
 [71] P. Vivekanandan, M. Rajalakshmi, and R. Nedunchezhian, “An intelligent genetic algorithm for mining classification rules in large data sets,” Computing and Informatics, vol. 32, pp. 122, 2013.
 [72] L. Hebbes, R. .R. Malyan, and A. P. Lenaghan, “Genetic algorithms for turbo codes,” Proc. Int Conf. Comput. Tool., vol. 1, pp. 478481, Nov. 2005.
 [73] H. Maini, K. Mehrotra, C. Mohan, and S. Ranka, “Genetic algorithms for softdecision decoding of linear block codes,” Evol. Comput., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 145164, Jun. 1994.
 [74] A. Scandura, A. D. Pra, L. Arnone, L. I. Passoni, and J. C. Moreira, “A geneticalgorithm based decoder for low density parity check codes,” Latin Amer. Appl. Res., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 169172, Jul. 2006.
 [75] A. Elkelesh, M. Ebada, S. Crammerer, and S. ten Brink, “Decodertailored polar code design using the genetic algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 45214534, Jul. 2019.
 [76] H. H. Dam, H.J. Zepernick, and H. Luders, “On the design of complexvalued spreading sequences using a genetic algorithm,” IEEE ISSTA, pp. 704707, Sydney, Australia, Aug., 2004.
 [77] B. Natarajan, S. Das, and D. Stevens, “An evolutionary approach to designing complex spreading codes for DSCDMA,” IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun.,, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 20512056, Sep. 2005.
 [78] M. H. Conde and O. Loffeld, “A genetic algorithm for compressive sensing sparse recovery,” IEEE Int. Symp. Signal Process. Inf. Technol., pp. 106111, 2017.
 [79] H. You and J. Zhu, “A genetic approach to fusion of algorithms for compressive sensing,” Int. Symp. Neural Netw., Advances in Neural NetworksISNN2017, pp. 371379, Springer, 2017.
 [80] M. E. Erkoc and N. Karaboga, “Evolutionary algorithms for sparse signal reconstruction,” Signal, Image and Video Processing, vol. 13, pp. 12931301, SpringerVerlag London Ltd., 2019.
 [81] J. A. Tropp, A. C. Gilbert, and M. J. Strauss, “Algorithms for simultaneous sparse approximation. Part I: Greedy pursuit,” Signal Process., vol. 86, pp. 572588, Apr. 2006.
 [82] D. V. Sarwate, “Bounds on crosscorrelation and autocorrelation of sequences,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. IT25, no. 6, pp. 720724, Nov. 1979.