Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Knowledge Sharing-enabled Semantic Rate Maximization for Multi-cell Task-oriented Hybrid Semantic-Bit Communication Networks

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Jointly choosing which knowledge to share, how much to compress, and which base station to serve each device maximizes the generalized effective semantic transmission rate in multi-cell hybrid semantic/bit networks.

desk verdict A solid new formulation undercut by a load-bearing sign error: the paper's own simulation parameters make its semantic accuracy model decreasing in ξ, so the monotonic-optimization and optimality claims in §III-B2 do not hold as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01635 v1 pith:ZQBCLK3D submitted 2025-01-03 eess.SP

Hong Chen , Fang Fang , Xianbin Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords semanticcommunicationsknowledgesharinghybridsemantic-bitnetworkstask-orientedextractionratiomulti-cellmonotonicoptimizationSBSassociation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proposes a transmission mechanism in which a mobile device first uploads the task-related knowledge its chosen base station is missing, and then sends data that relies on that shared knowledge through semantic communications while sending the rest as ordinary bits. The authors claim that jointly optimizing three decisions — which mismatched knowledge classes to share, how aggressively to extract semantic information (the semantic extraction ratio), and which small base station to associate with — maximizes the total effective semantic transmission rate of all devices, while respecting each task's semantic accuracy and delay requirements. The resulting mixed-integer nonlinear program is decomposed into per-pair knowledge-and-extraction subproblems and an association subproblem, with the per-pair part solved by enumeration plus monotonic optimization and the association part solved exactly as weighted bipartite matching. A cheaper two-tier partitioning heuristic is shown in simulation to nearly match the optimum and to outperform a baseline that shares no knowledge. If correct, the paper gives a concrete resource-allocation rule for task-oriented semantic networks operating with mismatched knowledge bases.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the generalized effective semantic transmission rate $\gamma_{m,n}$ defined in (15), a ratio of useful semantic information (semantically recovered data weighted by accuracy $\varepsilon_{m,n}(\xi_{m,n})$ plus bit-transmitted data for unshared knowledge classes) to total transmission time. The argument runs on the monotonicity of the semantic accuracy function $\varepsilon_{m,n}(\xi_{m,n})$ of Eq. (12): with a monotone curve, the reduced subproblem in $\xi_{m,n}$ becomes a monotonic optimization problem (22)–(23), solvable globally by Polyblock outer approximation, and the accuracy constraint (14) collapses to the lower bound $\xi_{m,n} \ge \xi^{\mathrm{th}}_{m,n}$. The second piece is the two-tier class partitioning heuristic (Algorithm 1), which sorts mismatched knowledge classes by the data-benefit ratio $\Phi^B_{m,k} = d^T_{m,k}/d^K_{m,k}$ and then by the time-ratio $\Phi^D_{m,n,k}$, turning exponential enumeration over sharing subsets into a linear search over prefix sets. The third piece maps the SBS association subproblem to weighted bipartite matching, solved optimally by the modified Kuhn-Munkres algorithm.

What would settle it

Compute Eq. (12) with the Table I parameters $\theta_1=-6.205\times 10^{-8}$, $\theta_2=16.45$, $\theta_3=0.9228$, $\theta_4=-0.06917$ at $\xi=0.5$, $0.75$, and $1$; if $\varepsilon(0.5)>\varepsilon(1)$, then the accuracy curve decreases over the range the optimization uses, and the monotonic transformation plus the $\xi\ge\xi^{\mathrm{th}}$ reduction would need a different justification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes a rate-maximization formulation and a solution method. The generalized effective semantic transmission rate $\gamma_{m,n}$ counts semantically transmitted information weighted by accuracy plus bit-transmitted information, normalized by total transmission time, so the hybrid mechanism is evaluated as one integrated metric. The paper claims that the optimal operating point is found by jointly setting the knowledge sharing set $K^{\mathrm{Cu}}_{m,n}$, the semantic extraction ratio $\xi_{m,n}$, and the binary association $x_{m,n}$; no single one of these suffices. For a fixed sharing set, the reduced problem becomes monotonic in $\xi_{m,n}$ and is solved globally by Polyblock outer approximation; for fixed per-pair solutions, the association problem becomes a maximum-weight matching and is solved optimally by the modified Kuhn-Munkres algorithm. Simulations then support the efficiency claim for the two-tier heuristic and the benefit of knowledge sharing over the no-sharing baseline.

Load-bearing premise

Everything hinges on the assumption that semantic accuracy rises with the extraction ratio $\xi$, a property the paper states for its fitted curve but that its own Table I parameters contradict because two of the fitted coefficients are negative, which makes accuracy fall as extraction rises.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The association layer can be solved optimally by weighted bipartite matching once each MD–SBS pair's best sharing set and extraction ratio are known, so the hard combinatorial part is confined to the per-pair subproblems.
  • The proposed two-tier heuristic matches the optimum closely in small networks, and the gap shrinks when cloudlet computation capacity or delay tolerance grows.
  • Knowledge sharing pays off most when knowledge data are small relative to the raw data they unlock, and the benefit disappears once knowledge sizes grow large, giving a practical threshold for switching to pure bit transmission.
  • The total semantic rate saturates as delay tolerance, bandwidth, or cloudlet count grows, so provisioning beyond those saturation points yields little additional benefit.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same per-pair-plus-matching decomposition would likely extend to other task-oriented objectives, such as energy consumption or task success probability, because the rate objective and the SBS-association layer separate cleanly.
  • The prefix structure of the two-tier partitioning suggests an online policy: as channel rates vary, an MD could decide which knowledge classes to upload in order of data-benefit ratio, re-optimizing the cutoff each coherence interval.
  • Because the objective counts bit-transmitted data equally with semantically transmitted data, re-weighting the two terms by task importance or energy cost would shift the optimal sharing set and stress-test how robust the policy is.
  • Because the Polyblock optimality proof is built on monotonicity of the accuracy curve, treating the fitted curve as non-monotone would be a direct stress test of the global-optimality claim.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies a task-oriented semantic communication network in which mobile devices may share mismatched knowledge with a selected small-cell base station, and any unshared knowledge is served by conventional bit communication. Its system model leads to a mixed-integer nonlinear program (problem (16)) maximizing a generalized effective semantic transmission rate over the knowledge-sharing set KCu_{m,n}, the semantic extraction ratio ξ_{m,n}, and the SBS association x_{m,n}, subject to delay, accuracy, and cloudlet-capacity constraints. The authors decompose the problem into per-device/per-SBS KUER subproblems and a separate association problem. For each fixed knowledge-sharing set, the reduced one-variable subproblem (21) is transformed into a supposedly monotonic optimization problem (22)-(23) and solved by a Polyblock outer approximation (Algorithm 2); the outer enumeration over KCu is proposed as the optimum solver, and the association problem is solved by Kuhn-Munkres matching. The efficient algorithm replaces the outer enumeration by a two-tier class partitioning (Algorithm 1). Numerical experiments compare the efficient algorithm to the exhaustive optimum and to a no-knowledge-sharing baseline.

Significance. Should the derivations hold, the paper would offer a useful and well-structured treatment of a realistic KB-mismatch scenario, and the decomposition into per-pair optimization plus matching is a sensible architecture. The paper is also transparent in giving complete pseudo-code and a default-parameter table. However, the central optimality claim depends on the monotonicity of the semantic accuracy model and on the monotone structure of the feasible set; both are problematic. The accuracy model parameters used in the simulations contradict the model's own nonnegativity assumption, and the delay constraint is not monotone in ξ. As a result, the claimed optimality of Algorithm 2 and the simulation comparisons are not supported by the present manuscript.

major comments (2)
  1. [III-B2, Eq. (12), Table I] The reduction to a monotonic optimization problem in Section III-B2 rests on the assertion that ε_{m,n}(ξ) in Eq. (12) is monotonically increasing in ξ, 'which can be proved by the first-order derivative of the function,' but the derivative is not shown. For Eq. (12) one obtains dε/dξ = θ1θ2 e^{θ2(1−ξ)} + θ3θ4 e^{−θ4(1−ξ)}. With the stated condition θ1,θ2,θ3,θ4 ≥ 0 this derivative is nonnegative, which is presumably the intended argument. However, Table I and the text of Section IV set (θ1,θ2,θ3,θ4) = (−6.205e−8, 16.45, 0.9228, −0.06917), which violates the stated nonnegativity constraint. With these values both terms of the derivative are negative, so ε is strictly decreasing on [0,1]; moreover ε(0) ≈ 1.85, violating the model property 0 ≤ ε ≤ 1 stated in Section II-D. Consequently, h(ξ) in problem (21) is decreasing in ξ, constraint (14) gives an upper bound ξ ≤ ξth rather than the lower bound ξ ≥ ξth used in (22d), and the Polyblock transformation and optimality claim in Algorithm 2 do not follow. Since Figures 5-10 are generated with this same parameter set, the simulation results do not support the paper's claims as written.
  2. [III-B2, Eqs. (3), (5), (6), (21)-(23), Algorithm 3] Even if ε were increasing, the claim that problem (21) can be transformed into a monotonic optimization problem is not justified, because the delay constraint (22c) is not monotone in ξ. With KCu_{m,n} fixed, the left-hand side of that constraint has the form α ξ + β ξ^{−ρ} with α,β > 0, where α comes from tS_{m,n} in Eq. (3) and β from tR_{m,n} in Eqs. (5)-(6). This function is convex and minimized at an interior point, so its feasible set is generally an interval [r1,r2] rather than a normal (downward-closed) set. After intersecting with ξ ≥ ξth, the feasible set need not be normal, and the projection operation used in Algorithm 3, whose binary search assumes that feasibility along the ray from vmin is prefix-monotone, can fail when ξth < r1. The paper does not establish the normality required for Polyblock outer approximation, so the convergence to a global optimum of problem (21) and hence the optimality of the exhaustive enumeration plus Polyblock procedure is unsupported even under the intended monotone ε model.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (12)] The fitted model is written as ε′_{m,n}(ξ|θ1,θ2,θ3,θ4), but the prime is also used for derivatives elsewhere; please use a distinct symbol, for example ε̂ or ε̃, to avoid confusion.
  2. [II-C] The text states that each MD associates with one and only one SBS, but constraint (10) is ∑_n x_{m,n} ≤ 1, which allows an MD to remain unassociated. The matching formulation in Section III-C should clarify whether unassociated MDs are permitted and how the bipartite graph handles the capacities Smax_n.
  3. [IV] The parameters (θ1,θ2,θ3,θ4) are given only in the text rather than in Table I; placing them in the table would make the inconsistency with the stated nonnegativity constraint in Eq. (12) immediately visible.
  4. [General] There are several typographical errors, including 'semenatic' in the Fig. 1 caption, 'intergrading' in the introduction, and 'complimental' in Section II-B; these should be corrected.
  5. [IV] The simulation 'validity' claim rests on comparing the proposed algorithms with each other and with a no-knowledge-sharing scheme under the same approximate ε model; an external benchmark or real model-evaluation data would be needed to substantiate the physical accuracy of the semantic accuracy model.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the optimization is self-contained given the imported semantic-accuracy model.

full rationale

The paper's central optimization objective (16) is a defined metric rather than a derived physical law, and the semantic accuracy model (12) is an input imported from prior work [26], not a prediction of this paper. The monotonic transformation in Section III-B2 uses the stated property that epsilon(xi) is monotonically increasing, and the Polyblock algorithm is standard for monotonic optimization. No fitted parameter of this paper is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing argument reduces to a self-citation chain; the self-citations ([34], [36], [39]) are peripheral parameter settings or algorithmic inspiration, not the basis of the main claim. A genuine correctness concern exists: Table I sets theta1 = -6.205e-8 and theta4 = -0.06917, contradicting the stated theta_i >= 0 constraint and making Eq. (12) decreasing in xi, which would invalidate the xi >= xi_th interval and the Polyblock optimality claim. However, this is an internal inconsistency between the model's assumed properties and its chosen parameters, not a circular reduction of the paper's output to its input. The evaluation is closed-loop (same model for derivation and simulation), which limits external validation, but that is a benchmarking limitation, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result depends heavily on the assumed semantic accuracy model, whose parameters are imported from [26] and are inconsistent with the model's stated monotonicity, and on a heuristic computation load relation. No independent validation against real semantic encoders, decoders, or channel traces is provided.

free parameters (2)
  • Semantic accuracy model parameters theta1, theta2, theta3, theta4 = (-6.205e-8, 16.45, 0.9228, -0.06917) from [26], as used in Table I
    They define epsilon(xi) in Eq (12) and are used in the objective and accuracy constraint. The paper treats them as given, but they are fitted to model evaluation data elsewhere and the chosen values conflict with the paper's stated nonnegativity requirement.
  • Computation load exponent rho = 1
    The relation omega = 1 / xi^rho in Eq (5) is stated without loss of generality and set to 1 in Table I. It models how computation load increases with semantic compression and is not derived or measured.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Semantic accuracy epsilon(xi) is monotonically increasing in the semantic extraction ratio xi.
    Used in Section III-B2 to transform the reduced subproblem into a monotonic optimization and to derive the feasible interval xi >= xi_th. This is contradicted by the Table I parameter values, which make epsilon decreasing in xi.
  • domain assumption The semantic accuracy model in Eq (12) with the stated nonnegative parameter constraints accurately represents real semantic accuracy.
    Invoked in Section II-D as an approximation to the intractable accuracy of neural semantic models. No independent semantic accuracy data is provided; the simulation uses the same fitted model.
  • ad hoc to paper The computation load ratio satisfies omega = 1 / xi^rho.
    Eq (5) in Section II-B states this relation without empirical support. It directly affects the delay constraint and the objective through the computing time terms.
  • domain assumption Knowledge data sizes, requested data sizes, and semantic information amounts are known perfectly.
    Section II-A treats dT_m,k, dK_m,k, and Im,k as exact inputs. There is no estimation error model or measurement procedure.
  • domain assumption Model fine-tuning time after knowledge sharing is negligible.
    Section II-B states that fine-tuning is fast and its time can be ignored compared to wireless transmission and task execution. This affects the delay constraint.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Knowledge Sharing-enabled Semantic Rate Maximization for Multi-cell Task-oriented Hybrid Semantic-Bit Communication Networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZQBCLK3D

@misc{pith2026250101635,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Knowledge Sharing-enabled Semantic Rate Maximization for Multi-cell Task-oriented Hybrid Semantic-Bit Communication Networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZQBCLK3D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01635}
}
read the original abstract

In task-oriented semantic communications, the transmitters are designed to deliver task-related semantic information rather than every signal bit to receivers, which alleviates the spectrum pressure by reducing network traffic loads. Effective semantic communications depend on the perfect alignment of shared knowledge between transmitters and receivers, however, the alignment of knowledge cannot always be guaranteed in practice. To tackle this challenge, we propose a novel knowledge sharing-enabled task-oriented hybrid semantic and bit communications mechanism, where a mobile device (MD) can proactively share and upload the task-related mismatched knowledge to associated small base station (SBS). The traditional bit communications can be adopted as an aid to transmit the rest data related to unshared mismatched knowledge to guarantee the effective execution of target tasks. Considering the heterogeneous transceivers in multi-cell networks, target task demands, and channel conditions, an optimization problem is formulated to maximize the generalized effective semantic transmission rate of all MDs by jointly optimizing knowledge sharing, semantic extraction ratio, and SBS association, while satisfying the semantic accuracy requirements and delay tolerances of MD target tasks. The formulated mixed integer nonlinear programming problem is decomposed into multiple subproblems equivalently. An optimum algorithm is proposed and another efficient algorithm is further developed using hierarchical class partitioning and monotonic optimization. Simulation results demonstrate the validity and superior performance of proposed solutions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01635 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Network architecture for multi-cell KB-aware task- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Procedure of proposed task-oriented semantic/bit c [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Procedure of polyblock outer approximation algorit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Total semantic rate versus cloudlet computation cap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Total semantic rate versus wireless channel bandwid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Total semantic rate versus maximum delay tolerance. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Total semantic rate versus knowledge data size. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Flexible Semantic-Aware Resource Allocation: Serving More Users Through Similarity Range Constraints

    cs.NI 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A flexible semantic-aware resource allocation algorithm for multi-user semantic image transmission sets bandwidth, power, and compression rates so that each user's semantic similarity lands inside an acceptable range,...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [26]

    Adaptable semanti c compres- sion and resource allocation for task-oriented communicat ions,

    C. Liu, C. Guo, Y . Y ang, and N. Jiang, “Adaptable semanti c compres- sion and resource allocation for task-oriented communicat ions,” IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking , vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 769–782, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    Semantic communications for future in ternet: Fundamentals, applications, and challenges,

    W. Y ang, H. Du, Z. Q. Liew, W. Y . B. Lim, Z. Xiong, D. Niyato, X. Chi, X. Shen, and C. Miao, “Semantic communications for future in ternet: Fundamentals, applications, and challenges,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 213–250, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    Semantic communications : Overview, open issues, and future research directions,

    X. Luo, H.-H. Chen, and Q. Guo, “Semantic communications : Overview, open issues, and future research directions,” IEEE Wireless Communi- cations, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 210–219, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [3]

    From semantic communic ation to semantic-aware networking: Model, architecture, and open problems,

    G. Shi, Y . Xiao, Y . Li, and X. Xie, “From semantic communic ation to semantic-aware networking: Model, architecture, and open problems,” IEEE Communications Magazine , vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 44–50, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [4]

    Semantic communication meets edge intel ligence,

    W. Y ang, Z. Q. Liew, W. Y . B. Lim, Z. Xiong, D. Niyato, X. Chi , X. Cao, and K. B. Letaief, “Semantic communication meets edge intel ligence,” IEEE Wireless Communications , vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 28–35, 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [5]

    Multimedia semantic communications: Representation, en coding and transmission,

    Y . Duan, Q. Du, X. Fang, Z. Xie, Z. Qin, X. Tao, C. Pan, and G. Liu, “Multimedia semantic communications: Representation, en coding and transmission,” IEEE Network , vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 44–50, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [6]

    A general ized semantic communication system: From sources to channels,

    Z. Qin, F. Gao, B. Lin, X. Tao, G. Liu, and C. Pan, “A general ized semantic communication system: From sources to channels,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 18–26, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Cognitive semantic communication systems driven by knowl- edge graph: Principle, implementation, and performance ev aluation,

    F. Zhou, Y . Li, M. Xu, L. Y uan, Q. Wu, R. Q. Hu, and N. Al- Dhahir, “Cognitive semantic communication systems driven by knowl- edge graph: Principle, implementation, and performance ev aluation,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 193–208, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 40 references
  1. [8]

    Knowledge-enhanced semantic communication system with O FDM transmissions,

    X. Xu, H. Xiong, Y . Wang, Y . Che, S. Han, B. Wang, and P . Zhan g, “Knowledge-enhanced semantic communication system with O FDM transmissions,” Science China Information Sciences , vol. 66, no. 7, p. 172302, 2023

    2023

  2. [9]

    Deep le arning- enabled semantic communication systems with task-unaware transmitter and dynamic data,

    H. Zhang, S. Shao, M. Tao, X. Bi, and K. B. Letaief, “Deep le arning- enabled semantic communication systems with task-unaware transmitter and dynamic data,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 170–185, 2023

    2023

  3. [10]

    Robust semantic communications with masked VQ-V AE enabled codebo ok,

    Q. Hu, G. Zhang, Z. Qin, Y . Cai, G. Y u, and G. Y . Li, “Robust semantic communications with masked VQ-V AE enabled codebo ok,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 8707–8722, 2023

    2023

  4. [11]

    Knowledge graph emb ed- ding: A survey of approaches and applications,

    Q. Wang, Z. Mao, B. Wang, and L. Guo, “Knowledge graph emb ed- ding: A survey of approaches and applications,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering , vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 2724–2743, 2017

    2017

  5. [12]

    Deep learning-e mpowered semantic communication systems with a shared knowledge bas e,

    P . Yi, Y . Cao, X. Kang, and Y .-C. Liang, “Deep learning-e mpowered semantic communication systems with a shared knowledge bas e,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 6174– 6187, 2024

    2024

  6. [13]

    Knowledge-aware semantic commu nication system design,

    S. Kadam and D. I. Kim, “Knowledge-aware semantic commu nication system design,” in ICC 2023 - IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2023, pp. 6102–6107

    2023

  7. [14]

    Wire less resource optimization in hybrid semantic/bit communicati on networks,

    L. Xia, Y . Sun, D. Niyato, L. Zhang, and M. A. Imran, “Wire less resource optimization in hybrid semantic/bit communicati on networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.04162 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Semantic kno wledge base-enabled zero-shot multi-level feature transmission optimization,

    Y . Sun, H. Chen, X. Xu, P . Zhang, and S. Cui, “Semantic kno wledge base-enabled zero-shot multi-level feature transmission optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 4904–4917, 2024

    2024

  9. [16]

    Knowledge base aware semantic communication in vehicular networks,

    L. Xia, Y . Sun, D. Niyato, K. Ma, J. Kang, and M. A. Imran, “ Knowledge base aware semantic communication in vehicular networks,” in ICC 2023 - IEEE International Conference on Communications , 2023, pp. 3989– 3994

    2023

  10. [17]

    Generative AI-driven semantic communication networks: A rchitecture, technologies and applications,

    C. Liang, H. Du, Y . Sun, D. Niyato, J. Kang, D. Zhao, and M. A. Imran, “Generative AI-driven semantic communication networks: A rchitecture, technologies and applications,” IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Com- munications and Networking , pp. 1–1, 2024

    2024

  11. [18]

    An effic ient approach to sharing edge knowledge in 5G-enabled industria l internet of things,

    Y . Lin, X. Wang, H. Ma, L. Wang, F. Hao, and Z. Cai, “An effic ient approach to sharing edge knowledge in 5G-enabled industria l internet of things,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics , vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 930–939, 2023

    2023

  12. [19]

    A hierarchical b lockchain- enabled federated learning algorithm for knowledge sharin g in internet of vehicles,

    H. Chai, S. Leng, Y . Chen, and K. Zhang, “A hierarchical b lockchain- enabled federated learning algorithm for knowledge sharin g in internet of vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 3975–3986, 2021

    2021

  13. [20]

    AI- generated incentive mechanism and full-duplex semantic co mmunica- tions for information sharing,

    H. Du, J. Wang, D. Niyato, J. Kang, Z. Xiong, and D. I. Kim, “AI- generated incentive mechanism and full-duplex semantic co mmunica- tions for information sharing,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 2981–2997, 2023

    2023

  14. [21]

    Distributed task-oriented communication n etworks with multimodal semantic relay and edge intelligence,

    J. Guo, H. Chen, B. Song, Y . Chi, C. Y uen, F. R. Y u, G. Y . Li, and D. Niyato, “Distributed task-oriented communication n etworks with multimodal semantic relay and edge intelligence,” IEEE Communica- tions Magazine, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 82–89, 2024

    2024

  15. [22]

    Towa rd in- telligent resource allocation on task-oriented semantic c ommunication,

    H. Zhang, H. Wang, Y . Li, K. Long, and V . C. M. Leung, “Towa rd in- telligent resource allocation on task-oriented semantic c ommunication,” IEEE Wireless Communications , vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 70–77, 2023

    2023

  16. [23]

    Task- oriented communications for 6G: Vision, principles, and te chnologies,

    Y . Shi, Y . Zhou, D. Wen, Y . Wu, C. Jiang, and K. B. Letaief, “Task- oriented communications for 6G: Vision, principles, and te chnologies,” IEEE Wireless Communications , vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 78–85, 2023

    2023

  17. [24]

    Task-oriented and semantic-aware heterogeneous network s for artificial intelligence of things: Performance analysis and optimiza tion,

    X. Xu, B. Xu, S. Han, C. Dong, H. Xiong, R. Meng, and P . Zhan g, “Task-oriented and semantic-aware heterogeneous network s for artificial intelligence of things: Performance analysis and optimiza tion,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 228–242, 2024

    2024

  18. [25]

    Computing offl oading and semantic compression for intelligent computing tasks in ME C systems,

    Y . Zheng, T. Zhang, R. Huang, and Y . Wang, “Computing offl oading and semantic compression for intelligent computing tasks in ME C systems,” in 2023 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conferen ce (WCNC), 2023, pp. 1–6

    2023

  19. [27]

    DR L-driven dynamic resource allocation for task-oriented semantic co mmunication,

    H. Zhang, H. Wang, Y . Li, K. Long, and A. Nallanathan, “DR L-driven dynamic resource allocation for task-oriented semantic co mmunication,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 3992–4004, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Semantic communication f or edge intelligence: Theoretical foundations and implications o n protocols,

    Z. Utkovski, A. Munari, G. Caire, J. Dommel, P .-H. Lin, M . Franke, A. C. Drummond, and S. Sta´ nczak, “Semantic communication f or edge intelligence: Theoretical foundations and implications o n protocols,” IEEE Internet of Things Magazine , vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 48–53, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Online resource allocation for semantic-aware edge compu ting sys- tems,

    Y . Cang, M. Chen, Z. Y ang, Y . Hu, Y . Wang, C. Huang, and Z. Z hang, “Online resource allocation for semantic-aware edge compu ting sys- tems,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , pp. 1–1, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Joint computatio n offloading and radio resource allocations in small-cell wireless cell ular networks,

    H. Chen, D. Zhao, Q. Chen, and R. Chai, “Joint computatio n offloading and radio resource allocations in small-cell wireless cell ular networks,” IEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 745–758, 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    Machin e intelligence at the edge with learning centric power alloca tion,

    S. Wang, Y .-C. Wu, M. Xia, R. Wang, and H. V . Poor, “Machin e intelligence at the edge with learning centric power alloca tion,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 7293– 7308, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    The levenberg-marquardt algorithm for no nlinear least squares curve-fitting problems,

    H. P . Gavin, “The levenberg-marquardt algorithm for no nlinear least squares curve-fitting problems,” Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Duke University August , vol. 3, 2019

    2019

  25. [33]

    Resource all ocation for text semantic communications,

    L. Y an, Z. Qin, R. Zhang, Y . Li, and G. Y . Li, “Resource all ocation for text semantic communications,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 1394–1398, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Semantic extraction mode l selection for iot devices in edge-assisted semantic communications,

    H. Chen, F. Fang, and X. Wang, “Semantic extraction mode l selection for iot devices in edge-assisted semantic communications, ” IEEE Com- munications Letters , vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1733–1737, 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    Bipartite matching based user grouping for grouped ofdm-idma,

    X. Zhou, L. Y ang, and D. Y uan, “Bipartite matching based user grouping for grouped ofdm-idma,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communica- tions, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 5248–5257, 2013

    2013

  28. [36]

    Task cla ss par- titioning for mobile computation offloading,

    H. Chen, T. D. Todd, D. Zhao, and G. Karakostas, “Task cla ss par- titioning for mobile computation offloading,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 2534–2549, 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Monotonic optimization in communication and networking systems,

    Y . J. A. Zhang, L. Qian, J. Huang et al. , “Monotonic optimization in communication and networking systems,” F oundations and Trends® in Networking, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–75, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    Resourc e alloca- tion for multi-user downlink MISO OFDMA-URLLC systems,

    W. R. Ghanem, V . Jamali, Y . Sun, and R. Schober, “Resourc e alloca- tion for multi-user downlink MISO OFDMA-URLLC systems,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 68, no. 11, pp. 7184–7200, 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Digital twin model selection for feature accuracy,

    H. Chen, T. D. Todd, D. Zhao, and G. Karakostas, “Digital twin model selection for feature accuracy,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 11 415–11 426, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Re source allocation for wireless-powered iot networks with short pa cket com- munication,

    J. Chen, L. Zhang, Y .-C. Liang, X. Kang, and R. Zhang, “Re source allocation for wireless-powered iot networks with short pa cket com- munication,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1447–1461, 2019

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.