pith. the verified trust layer for science. sign in

arxiv: 2509.19801 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-24 · 📡 eess.SP

Electromagnetics-Compliant Optimization of Dynamic Metasurface Antennas for Bistatic Sensing

Ioannis Gavras , George C. Alexandropoulos This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 14:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords dynamic metasurface antennasbistatic sensingmutual couplingbeamforming optimizationposition error boundrobust designmetamaterial constraintslocalization
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Modeling mutual coupling in dynamic metasurface antennas maintains high bistatic sensing accuracy under uncertainties.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that incorporating mutual coupling and waveguide losses into DMA models is crucial for effective optimization in bistatic sensing applications. It proposes a robust beamforming problem that minimizes the worst-case position error bound accounting for scatterer position uncertainties and receiver synchronization errors. A tractable approximation allows handling the Lorentzian constraints on metamaterial responses, with low-complexity solutions based on searching a novel beam codebook. Monte Carlo simulations confirm that the designs achieve accuracy similar to fully digital and analog systems while complying with DMA structural limits.

Core claim

Leveraging a physically consistent model of DMAs that includes mutual coupling and propagation losses, the authors optimize the reconfigurable responses for bistatic sensing to minimize the worst-case position error bound under spatial and synchronization uncertainties, demonstrating through simulations that accurate coupling modeling is necessary for superior localization performance comparable to ideal architectures.

What carries the argument

The robust beamforming optimization minimizing worst-case position error bound via a tractable approximation of the DMA response under Lorentzian constraints and mutual coupling.

Load-bearing premise

The tractable approximation for the DMA response sufficiently captures the Lorentzian-constrained metamaterial behavior and mutual coupling effects for the optimization to remain valid under the stated uncertainties.

What would settle it

Monte Carlo simulations or hardware measurements using a more detailed electromagnetic model showing position errors significantly higher than those predicted by the optimized designs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.19801 by George C. Alexandropoulos, Ioannis Gavras.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: consisting of a DMA-equipped TX and a multi-antenna RX wishing to localize G targets lying in their vicinity, which are treated as Scattering Points (SPs). The TX’s DMA is a Uniform Planar Array (UPA) comprising reconfigurable meta￾material elements with sub-wavelength spacing and tunable responses, which are disjointly grouped into NRF microstrips, with each microstrip connected to a dedicated transmit RF… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Squared-norm difference between the exact and approximated values of (QTA + WMC) −1 versus the approximation order p for various carrier frequencies fc, using a TX DMA panel with NRF = 4 microstrips, each containing NE = 32 metamaterial elements, and (dRF, dE) = (λ/2, λ/5). The inset figure shows the squared-norm difference versus the number of metamaterials NE per microstrip. Combining the previously deri… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Squared norm difference between the optimized digital codebook Bdig and the DMA codebook Bdma as a function of the number of metamaterial elements NE per TX RF chain, considering three scenarios: mutual coupling effects (via WMC) and microstrip losses (via PSA) included, and exclusion of one or the other. were considered for the TX DMA architecture: i) one using the full DMA response model in (4) incorpora… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Beamforming gain in dB across the elevation and azimuth planes for Scenario 1, comparing the digital codebook Bdig, the DMA codebook Bdma, and the DMA codebook from Sec. III-B1 excluding mutual coupling effects by omitting matrix WMC during the derivation. The top row corresponds to a clock bias uncertainty of σclk = 1 meters, while the bottom row corresponds to σclk = 102 meters. The dotted circles in all… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: PEB versus SP position uncertainty for the proposed mutual￾coupling-aware BF strategies for σclk = 1 meter (top) and σclk = 102 meters (bottom), for G = 2 SPs. Notably, the number of frames M for all the considered methods scales accordingly with the number of points needed to cover the uncertainty region in its entirety. in (13) depends linearly on X ≜ FFH as shown below: [J]i,j = 2T σ 2 X m,k Re  f H mW… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: PEB across the xy-plane between the DMA-based TX and the RX of the considered bistatic sensing system using the following design approaches: i) direct CRB minimization (solution of P1 and P2); ii) Codebook-based BF strategy (Section III-B1); and iii) Codebook￾based BF strategy via the CRB upper bound (Section III-B2). The top row corresponds to Scenario 1, while the bottom row corresponds to Scenario 2, wh… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Dynamic Metasurface Antennas (DMAs) are recently attracting considerable research interests due to their potential to enable low-cost, reconfigurable, and highly scalable antenna array architectures for next generation wireless systems. However, most of the existing literature relies on idealized models for the DMA operation, often overlooking critical structural and physical constraints inherent to their constituent metamaterials. In this paper, leveraging a recently proposed model for this antenna architecture incorporating physically consistent modeling of mutual coupling and waveguide propagation losses, we optimize DMA-based transmission for bistatic sensing. A tractable approximation for the DMA response is first presented, which enables efficient optimization of the dynamically reconfigurable Lorentzian-constrained responses of the array's metamaterials. In particular, we formulate a robust beamforming optimization problem with the objective to minimize the worst-case position error bound, in the presence of spatial uncertainties for the environment's scatterers as well as synchronization uncertainties at the analog combining multi-antenna receiver. To address the resulting high computational complexity due to the possibly excessive number of metamaterial-based antennas and their operation constraints, two low complexity beamforming design approaches are presented that perform offline searching over a novel beam codebook. The accuracy of all presented DMA designs is assessed by means of Monte Carlo simulations for various system parameters, confirming that accurately modeling mutual coupling is essential for maintaining increased localization performance. It is also shown that, even under positioning and synchronization uncertainties, the proposed designs yield accuracy comparable to their fully digital and analog counterparts, while adhering to the structural DMA constraints.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops an electromagnetics-compliant optimization approach for Dynamic Metasurface Antennas (DMAs) in bistatic sensing. It introduces a tractable approximation of the DMA response that incorporates Lorentzian constraints on metamaterial elements, mutual coupling, and waveguide propagation losses. This approximation supports a robust beamforming formulation that minimizes the worst-case position error bound in the presence of spatial scatterer uncertainties and receiver synchronization errors. Two low-complexity designs based on offline searching over a novel beam codebook are proposed to handle the high dimensionality and constraints. Monte Carlo simulations for varying system parameters are used to demonstrate that accurate mutual-coupling modeling is essential for localization performance and that the DMA designs achieve accuracy comparable to fully digital and analog arrays while satisfying structural constraints.

Significance. If the central approximation remains faithful under the considered uncertainties, the work provides a valuable bridge between physically consistent DMA models and practical optimization for sensing, enabling scalable low-cost arrays with near-ideal performance. The codebook-based low-complexity methods and robust formulation address key implementation challenges, and the Monte Carlo validation offers empirical grounding for the necessity of mutual-coupling modeling. These elements strengthen the case for DMAs in next-generation wireless sensing systems.

major comments (2)
  1. §III (tractable approximation): The optimization and all headline claims rest on the tractable DMA response approximation capturing Lorentzian constraints and mutual coupling. No quantitative error analysis or comparison against the full mutual-coupling model is provided when the approximation is inserted into the worst-case position error bound objective under scatterer and synchronization uncertainties; this directly affects the validity of the claim that accurate mutual-coupling modeling is essential.
  2. §V (Monte Carlo results): The simulations conclude that proposed DMA designs yield accuracy comparable to fully digital and analog counterparts. However, the reported results lack explicit error bars, number of trials, or details on how the spatial and synchronization uncertainty models are sampled, which is load-bearing for assessing the statistical support of the comparability and necessity claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the DMA response vector and the codebook construction could be clarified with an additional diagram or explicit pseudocode in the beamforming design section.
  2. A few sentences on how the Lorentzian constraint is enforced within the codebook search would improve reproducibility of the low-complexity approaches.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating the revisions we will incorporate to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §III (tractable approximation): The optimization and all headline claims rest on the tractable DMA response approximation capturing Lorentzian constraints and mutual coupling. No quantitative error analysis or comparison against the full mutual-coupling model is provided when the approximation is inserted into the worst-case position error bound objective under scatterer and synchronization uncertainties; this directly affects the validity of the claim that accurate mutual-coupling modeling is essential.

    Authors: We acknowledge that an explicit quantitative error analysis of the tractable approximation, when embedded in the worst-case position error bound objective under the specified uncertainties, would provide stronger validation. The approximation was derived to preserve key physical effects while enabling tractable optimization, but we agree that direct numerical comparison to the full model in this setting is valuable. In the revised manuscript, we will add a new subsection in Section III (or an appendix) presenting such comparisons, including the relative error in the objective function and resulting position error bounds for representative uncertainty levels. This will directly bolster the claim regarding the necessity of accurate mutual-coupling modeling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §V (Monte Carlo results): The simulations conclude that proposed DMA designs yield accuracy comparable to fully digital and analog counterparts. However, the reported results lack explicit error bars, number of trials, or details on how the spatial and synchronization uncertainty models are sampled, which is load-bearing for assessing the statistical support of the comparability and necessity claims.

    Authors: We agree that greater transparency in the Monte Carlo setup is needed to allow readers to fully assess the statistical reliability of the reported performance comparisons. In the revised version of Section V, we will explicitly state the number of independent trials (Monte Carlo runs), add error bars (e.g., standard deviation or 95% confidence intervals) to the relevant figures, and provide precise details on the sampling distributions and procedures used to generate the spatial scatterer uncertainties and receiver synchronization errors. These additions will strengthen the empirical support for both the comparability results and the importance of mutual-coupling modeling. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; optimization and validation are independent of model inputs

full rationale

The paper adopts a recently proposed DMA response model incorporating mutual coupling and waveguide losses, then derives a tractable approximation to formulate a robust beamforming optimization minimizing worst-case position error bound under scatterer and synchronization uncertainties. Two low-complexity codebook-based designs are introduced, with performance evaluated via Monte Carlo simulations comparing to digital and analog baselines. No derivation step equates a claimed prediction or result to its own fitted parameters or inputs by construction, nor does any load-bearing claim reduce solely to a self-citation chain without independent simulation evidence. The central claims rest on the optimization objective and external performance metrics rather than tautological redefinition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a recently proposed DMA model (assumed external) and a tractable approximation whose accuracy is not quantified in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The Lorentzian response model plus mutual coupling and waveguide losses accurately represent real DMA hardware.
    Invoked to justify the optimization constraints and the claim that modeling mutual coupling is essential.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5805 in / 1179 out tokens · 27949 ms · 2026-05-18T14:40:09.161996+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. 2D Waveguide-Fed Metasurfaces: Physically Consistent Modeling, Validation, and Optimization

    eess.SP 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A physically consistent coupled-dipole framework for waveguide-fed metasurfaces that adds radiation-reaction corrections and supports differentiable beamforming optimization validated against full-wave simulations.

  2. Wideband Sensing with Dynamic Metasurface Antennas under Realistic Phase Response Modeling

    eess.SP 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Realistic DMA modeling shows frequency selectivity and waveguide attenuation inflate CRBs for wideband spatitemporal parameter estimation in uplink OFDM sensing.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Circuit-compliant optimization of dynamic metasurface antennas for near-field localization,

    I. Gavras and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “Circuit-compliant optimization of dynamic metasurface antennas for near-field localization,” inProc. IEEE ICC, Montreal, Canada, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual- functional wireless networks for 6g and beyond,

    F. Liuet al., “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual- functional wireless networks for 6g and beyond,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Toward distributed and intelligent integrated sensing and communications for 6G networks,

    E. Strinati Calvaneseet al., “Toward distributed and intelligent integrated sensing and communications for 6G networks,”IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 60–67, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Comprehensive FR1 (C) and FR3 lower and upper mid-band propagation and material penetration loss measurements and channel models in indoor environment for 5G and 6G,

    D. Shakyaet al., “Comprehensive FR1 (C) and FR3 lower and upper mid-band propagation and material penetration loss measurements and channel models in indoor environment for 5G and 6G,”IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc., vol. 5, pp. 5192–5218, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    A tutorial on terahertz-band localization for 6G communication systems,

    H. Chenet al., “A tutorial on terahertz-band localization for 6G communication systems,”IEEE Commun. Surveys & Tuts., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 1780–1815, 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Overview of millimeter wave communications for fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks—with a focus on propagation models,

    T. S. Rappaportet al., “Overview of millimeter wave communications for fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks—with a focus on propagation models,”IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 6213–6230, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Next generation advanced transceiver technologies for 6G and beyond,

    C. Youet al., “Next generation advanced transceiver technologies for 6G and beyond,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., 2025

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Spatiotemporal light control with active meta- surfaces,

    A. M. Shaltoutet al., “Spatiotemporal light control with active meta- surfaces,”Science, vol. 364, no. 6441, 2019

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Energy efficiency of DMAs vs. conventional MIMO: a sensitivity analysis,

    P. Ramirez-Espinosaet al., “Energy efficiency of DMAs vs. conventional MIMO: a sensitivity analysis,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09181, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive mimo communications,

    N. Shlezingeret al., “Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive mimo communications,”IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 106–113, 2021

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Energy-efficient tri-hybrid precoding with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    M. R. Castellanoset al., “Energy-efficient tri-hybrid precoding with dynamic metasurface antennas,” inProc. IEEE Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst., Comput, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 2023

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Electromagnetic based communication model for dynamic metasurface antennas,

    R. J. Williamset al., “Electromagnetic based communication model for dynamic metasurface antennas,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 8616–8630, 2022

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    Beam focusing for near-field multiuser mimo com- munications,

    H. Zhanget al., “Beam focusing for near-field multiuser mimo com- munications,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 7476– 7490, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    60 GHz programmable dynamic metasurface antenna (DMA) for next-generation communication, sensing, and imaging appli- cations: From concept to prototype,

    A. Jabbaret al., “60 GHz programmable dynamic metasurface antenna (DMA) for next-generation communication, sensing, and imaging appli- cations: From concept to prototype,”IEEE Open J. Antennas Propag., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 705–726, 2024

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Reconfigurable intelligent surface-based wireless commu- nications: Antenna design, prototyping, and experimental results,

    L. Daiet al., “Reconfigurable intelligent surface-based wireless commu- nications: Antenna design, prototyping, and experimental results,”IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 45 913–45 923, 2020

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    Hardware aspects of sub-thz antennas and reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces for 6G communications,

    K. Rasilainenet al., “Hardware aspects of sub-thz antennas and reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces for 6G communications,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 2530–2546, 2023

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Autoregressive attention neural networks for non-line-of-sight user tracking with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    K. Stylianopouloset al., “Autoregressive attention neural networks for non-line-of-sight user tracking with dynamic metasurface antennas,” in Proc. IEEE Works. Comput. Adv. Multi-Sensor Adaptive Process., Los Sue˜nos, Costa Rica, 2023

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Near-field localization with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    Q. a. Yang, “Near-field localization with dynamic metasurface antennas,” inProc. IEEE ICASSP, Rhodes Island, Greece, 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Near-field localization with dynamic metasurface antennas at THz: A CRB minimizing approach,

    I. Gavras and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “Near-field localization with dynamic metasurface antennas at THz: A CRB minimizing approach,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, pp. 1854–1858, 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    Metasurface-based receivers with 1-bit adcs for multi-user uplink communications,

    P. Gavriilidiset al., “Metasurface-based receivers with 1-bit adcs for multi-user uplink communications,” inIEEE ICASSP, Seoul, Korea, 2024

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Near-field localization with1-bit quantized hybrid A/D reception,

    I. Gavraset al., “Near-field localization with1-bit quantized hybrid A/D reception,” inProc. IEEE ICASSP, Seoul, South Korea, 2024

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Near-field beam tracking with extremely large dynamic metasurface antennas,

    P. Gavriilidis and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “Near-field beam tracking with extremely large dynamic metasurface antennas,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., 2025

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Full duplex holographic mimo for near-field integrated sensing and communications,

    I. Gavraset al., “Full duplex holographic mimo for near-field integrated sensing and communications,” inProc. EUSIPCO, Helsinki, Finland, 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Joint near-field target tracking and communications with full duplex holographic MIMO,

    I. Gavras and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “Joint near-field target tracking and communications with full duplex holographic MIMO,” inProc. IEEE ICASSP, Seoul, South Korea, 2024

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Extremely large full duplex MIMO for simultaneous downlink communications and monostatic sens- ing at sub-THz frequencies,

    G. C. Alexandropoulos and I. Gavras, “Extremely large full duplex MIMO for simultaneous downlink communications and monostatic sens- ing at sub-THz frequencies,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.10693, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [27]

    An analysis of beamed wireless power transfer in the fresnel zone using a dynamic, metasurface aperture,

    D. R. Smithet al., “An analysis of beamed wireless power transfer in the fresnel zone using a dynamic, metasurface aperture,”J. Applied Physics, vol. 121, no. 1, 2017

    work page 2017

  27. [28]

    Energy efficiency maximization of massive MIMO communications with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    L. Youet al., “Energy efficiency maximization of massive MIMO communications with dynamic metasurface antennas,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 393–407, 2023

    work page 2023

  28. [29]

    Simultaneous near-field THz communications and sensing with full duplex metasurface transceivers,

    I. Gavras and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “Simultaneous near-field THz communications and sensing with full duplex metasurface transceivers,” inProc. IEEE SPA WC, Lucca, Italy, 2024

    work page 2024

  29. [30]

    DMA reception for simultaneous area-wide sensing and multi- user uplink communications,

    ——, “DMA reception for simultaneous area-wide sensing and multi- user uplink communications,” inProc. IEEE SPA WC, Surrey, UK, 2025

    work page 2025

  30. [31]

    How do microstrip losses impact near-field beam depth in dynamic metasurface antennas?

    P. Gavriilidis and G. C. Alexandropoulos, “How do microstrip losses impact near-field beam depth in dynamic metasurface antennas?”arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.12280, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [32]

    Optimal spatial signal design for mmWave po- sitioning under imperfect synchronization,

    M. F. Keskinet al., “Optimal spatial signal design for mmWave po- sitioning under imperfect synchronization,”IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 5558–5563, 2022

    work page 2022

  32. [33]

    Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive MIMO communications,

    N. Shlezinger, G. C. Alexandropoulos, M. F. Imani, Y . C. Eldar, and D. R. Smith, “Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive MIMO communications,”IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 106–113, Apr. 2021

    work page 2021

  33. [34]

    Single-anchor localizability in 5G millimeter wave networks,

    E. Christopheret al., “Single-anchor localizability in 5G millimeter wave networks,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 65–69, 2019

    work page 2019

  34. [35]

    Direct path interference suppression in bistatic system: DTV based radar,

    R. Sainiet al., “Direct path interference suppression in bistatic system: DTV based radar,” inProc. Intern. Conf. Radar, Adelaide, SA, Australia, 2003

    work page 2003

  35. [36]

    Enabling situational awareness in millimeter wave massive MIMO systems,

    R. Mendrziket al., “Enabling situational awareness in millimeter wave massive MIMO systems,”IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1196–1211, 2019

    work page 2019

  36. [37]

    Path loss in reconfigurable intelligent surface-enabled channels,

    S. W. Ellingson, “Path loss in reconfigurable intelligent surface-enabled channels,” inIEEE PIMRC, Helsinki, Finland, 2021

    work page 2021

  37. [38]

    Full duplex holographic MIMO for near-field integrated sensing and communications,

    I. Gavraset al., “Full duplex holographic MIMO for near-field integrated sensing and communications,” inProc. European Signal Proces. Conf., Helsinki, Finland, 2023

    work page 2023

  38. [39]

    PhysFad: Physics-based end-to-end channel modeling of RIS-parametrized environments with adjustable fading,

    R. Faqiriet al., “PhysFad: Physics-based end-to-end channel modeling of RIS-parametrized environments with adjustable fading,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 580–595, 2023

    work page 2023

  39. [40]

    On the tacit linearity assumption in common cascaded models of RIS-parametrized wireless channels,

    A. Rabaultet al., “On the tacit linearity assumption in common cascaded models of RIS-parametrized wireless channels,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 10 001–10 014, 2024

    work page 2024

  40. [41]

    S. M. Kay,Fundamentals of statistical signal processing: estimation theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1993

    work page 1993

  41. [42]

    Epigraphical projection and proximal tools for solving constrained convex optimization problems,

    G. Chierchiaet al., “Epigraphical projection and proximal tools for solving constrained convex optimization problems,”Signal, Image, Video Process., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1737–1749, 2015

    work page 2015

  42. [43]

    CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.0,

    I. CVX Research, “CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.0,” http://cvxr.com/cvx, 2012

    work page 2012

  43. [44]

    Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,

    Z.-Q. Luoet al., “Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,”IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 20–34, 2010

    work page 2010

  44. [45]

    RIS-aided joint localization and synchronization with a single-antenna receiver: Beamforming design and low-complexity estimation,

    A. Fascistaet al., “RIS-aided joint localization and synchronization with a single-antenna receiver: Beamforming design and low-complexity estimation,”IEEE Sel. Topics in Signal Process., vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1141–1156, 2022

    work page 2022

  45. [46]

    Range compression and waveform optimization for MIMO radar: A Cram ´er–Rao bound based study,

    J. Liet al., “Range compression and waveform optimization for MIMO radar: A Cram ´er–Rao bound based study,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 218–232, 2007

    work page 2007

  46. [47]

    Codebook design for hybrid beamforming in millimeter wave systems,

    J. Songet al., “Codebook design for hybrid beamforming in millimeter wave systems,” inProc. IEEE Inter . Conf Comm., London, UK, 2015

    work page 2015

  47. [48]

    Riemannian conjugate gradient methods: General framework and specific algorithms with convergence analyses,

    H. Sato, “Riemannian conjugate gradient methods: General framework and specific algorithms with convergence analyses,”SIAM J. Optimiza- tion, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2690–2717, 2022

    work page 2022

  48. [49]

    Interior point polynomial time methods in convex programming,

    A. Nemirovski, “Interior point polynomial time methods in convex programming,”Lecture notes, vol. 42, no. 16, pp. 3215–3224, 2004

    work page 2004

  49. [50]

    S. P. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe,Convex optimization. Cambridge university press, 2004

    work page 2004

  50. [51]

    C. A. Balanis,Antenna theory: analysis and design. John wiley & sons, 2016

    work page 2016