Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 27 references

Bilinear Subspace Variational Bayesian Inference for Joint Scattering Environment Sensing and Data Recovery in ISAC Systems

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that one Bayesian loop can localize 3D scatterers, estimate multiuser channels, and recover uplink data in an ISAC system, while its subspace-constrained inverse keeps complexity practical and performance near genie-aided.

desk verdict Solid algorithmic extension with a real but addressable model-mismatch gap; the convergence proof has a small unproven step. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00811 v2 pith:FG2AZILC submitted 2025-02-02 eess.SP

An Liu , Wenkang Xu , Wei Xu , Giuseppe Caire This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords integratedsensingandcommunicationISAC3DscattererlocalizationbilinearsparserecoveryvariationalBayesianinferencemassiveMIMO-OFDMjointsparsitydynamicpositiongrid
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 claims that in an uplink integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) system, the base station can sense the three-dimensional scattering environment, estimate the multiuser channels, and recover the users' data in a single inference procedure rather than treating sensing and communication as separate tasks. The key modeling move is a 3D location-domain sparse channel representation in which every non-line-of-sight path is assigned to a grid point corresponding to a virtual scatterer, so that different users' channels share a common sparse support. On top of that model, the paper builds an EM-Turbo-BiSVBI algorithm that alternates a variational Bayesian estimation step for channels and data with a gradient-based learning step for the grid, time offsets, and user positions. The payoff, if the claims hold, is that sensing accuracy is largely insensitive to pilot overhead, with localization staying accurate even at two pilot subcarriers, and the whole procedure approaches the performance of an ideal genie-aided receiver in simulation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the virtual-scatterer equivalence in Eq. (6), which turns any NLoS path, regardless of how many bounces it physically took, into a single-bounce reflection from a virtual point at position $(\theta,\phi,r)$, so the whole environment can be described by a sparse grid of locations. Combined with the 3D location-domain sparse representation of Eq. (10), this yields a linear-in-channel, bilinear-in-data observation model. The inference machinery is EM-Turbo-BiSVBI: Module A applies BiSVBI with an independence-constrained variational posterior, a subspace-constrained inverse on the estimated support $\hat{\mathcal S}$, and a gradient update for the posterior mean; Module B passes extrinsic messages for the joint support variable; the M-step performs gradient ascent on an EM surrogate to update the dynamic grid, time offsets, and user positions. A SMUSIC-SCVBI coarse estimator first identifies candidate angles and builds a compact position grid, which is what makes the $O(|\hat{\mathcal S}|^3)$ complexity claim meaningful. Theorem 3 is the convergence certificate that connects these approximations to stationary solutions of the original variational problem.

What would settle it

Run the same EM-Turbo-BiSVBI pipeline in a scene whose scattering includes an extended reflector such as a wall or large flat surface instead of only isolated point scatterers, and compare scatterer localization RMSE and channel NMSE against the point-scatterer case at identical SNR and pilot count. If the estimates degrade sharply or the recovered virtual scatterers drift off the true surface, the single-bounce equivalence in Eq. (6) is falsified as a general model of the propagation environment.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's contribution is a tractable solution to the joint sensing and data recovery problem in a massive MIMO-OFDM uplink, formulated as bilinear structured sparse recovery with a dynamic position grid and imperfect parameters. The paper introduces the 3D location-domain sparse channel model of Eq. (10), driven by the virtual-scatterer equivalence of Eq. (6), and a three-layer Bernoulli-Gamma-Gaussian prior that encodes joint sparsity across users. The algorithmic core is BiSVBI: a subspace-constrained matrix inverse replaces the high-dimensional inversion $W_\alpha^{-1}$ by working only on the estimated support $\hat{\mathcal S}$, and a gradient update with Armijo step size refines the posterior mean. Theorem 3 states that BiSVBI monotonically decreases the AVBI KLD objective and that every limiting point is a stationary solution of Problem AVBI. The EM outer loop then refines the position grid and learns time offsets and user positions, and a SMUSIC-SCVBI coarse stage shrinks the search region. Simulations indicate that this combination achieves near-genie channel, data, and localization performance while cutting the dominant per-iteration complexity from $O((K(Q+1))^3)$ to $O(|\hat{\mathcal S}|^3+\dots)$.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes every non-line-of-sight propagation path can be represented as reflection from a single virtual point scatterer lying exactly on the dynamic position grid; if real environments contain diffuse scattering or extended reflectors such as walls, this equivalence in Eq. (6) can be misspecified and the paper provides no robustness analysis for that case.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • High-accuracy scatterer localization persists even with $N_p=2$ pilot subcarriers, because data subcarriers act as extra sensing observations; the paper's simulations show localization RMSE stays small when pilots are scarce.
  • The three-layer BGG prior's joint sparsity gives a substantial gain over an i.i.d. prior and over angular-domain baselines, so sharing scatterers across users is what drives the mutual enhancement of sensing and communication.
  • The subspace-constrained inverse cuts the per-iteration complexity of the posterior mean update from $O((K(Q+1))^3)$ to $O(|\hat{\mathcal S}|^3+\dots)$, and simulations show convergence speed and steady-state performance nearly identical to the full-inverse version.
  • Learning time offsets and user positions inside the EM loop brings performance close to the genie-aided case in data recovery NMSE and localization RMSE.
  • Theorem 3 gives a monotone-decreasing KLD guarantee with stationary limiting points, so unlike heuristic bilinear message-passing baselines, the algorithm carries a convergence certificate under the model assumptions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editor's inference: the scatterer map produced by this algorithm is an environmental description rather than a per-user channel, so it could plausibly be reused for downlink beamforming or predictive handover; the paper does not test that reuse.
  • Editor's inference: the reported performance is demonstrated for isolated point scatterers in a 100 m by 100 m by 10 m area; extended reflectors or diffuse scattering would likely violate the single-bounce equivalence in Eq. (6), so a robustness study against such environments is a natural next experiment.
  • Editor's inference: because the algorithm outputs soft posterior distributions for data symbols, it could be nested with a channel decoder in a turbo equalization loop; the paper stops at a Gaussian data prior and does not explore coded iterative decoding.
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

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper studies uplink massive MIMO-OFDM ISAC with multiple single-antenna users, where the base station jointly localizes scatterers, estimates multiuser channels, and recovers data. The authors introduce a 3D location-domain sparse channel model over a dynamic position grid, a three-layer Bernoulli-Gamma-Gaussian prior for joint support, and formulate the problem as bilinear structured sparse recovery with uncertain parameters such as user positions and timing offsets. They propose EM-Turbo-BiSVBI: a turbo E-step combining a bilinear subspace-constrained variational Bayesian inference module (diagonal covariance, subspace-constrained inverse for the posterior mean, gradient refinement) with message passing on the support graph, and an EM M-step that refines the dynamic grid and imperfect factors by gradient ascent. They also propose a SMUSIC-SCVBI coarse estimation stage to build compact position grids. Theorem 3 claims monotone KLD decrease and convergence to stationary points of the constrained VBI problem. Simulations against VB-CESD, ST-MUSIC, a two-stage scheme, an iid-prior variant, and a full-inverse variant show NMSE and RMSE gains and near-genie performance.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper contributes a scalable algorithmic framework for an important ISAC problem: it reduces the dominant matrix inverse from O(K(Q+1))^3 to O(|S_hat|^3) with a support-subspace update, integrates data-aided sensing with dynamic-grid refinement, and demonstrates the value of location-domain joint sparsity by ablating it with an iid-prior version. The variational update equations follow from a clearly stated constrained KL objective, and the comparison against EM-Turbo-BiVBI is a useful check on the subspace approximation. However, the physical premise that all NLoS paths are equivalent to single-bounce scatterers is user-dependent for multi-bounce paths, and the joint-support prior that drives the reported gains depends on this premise. The convergence proof for Theorem 3 also has a gap. Both issues are discussed below; the algorithmic and simulation contributions remain a solid basis for revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II-B, Eq. (6); Sec. III-B] The virtual-scatterer equivalence in Eq. (6) is valid per path, but the virtual position p=(theta,phi,r) is a function of the user position p_u,k through Eq. (6). For a genuine multi-bounce path via the same physical reflector, two users at different positions will in general be assigned different virtual positions. Consequently, the common-support prior p(s_k|s) and the joint support s defined in Sec. III-B need not hold for the channels the paper claims to sense. Section VI generates channels with the Quadriga UMA model, but the paper does not state whether the generated paths are single-bounce point-reflector paths, nor how the ground-truth scatterer positions used in the localization RMSE are extracted from the Quadriga realization. As written, Figs. 7 and 8 verify the algorithm only when the model is exactly true. I request either (a) restrict the system model and claims to single-bounce point scatterers and justify the Quadriga channel as an approximation of that model, or (b) add a mismatch experiment with multi-bounce or diffuse scattering and report the resulting localization and channel NMSE. This is load-bearing because the joint-sparsity prior is the source of the largest performance gain over the iid version in the simulations.
  2. [Appendix B, Theorem 3; Eq. (32)] The proof of Theorem 3 has two gaps. First, it asserts 'strong convexity of KL(...) w.r.t. xi_j' for all xi_j not equal to mu_alpha, but no strong-convexity argument is supplied for the Gamma parameters (a_kq, b_kq), the support probabilities lambda_kq, or the noise parameters c and d; the KL is not generally strongly convex in these variables. Second, the theorem's statement covers the BiSVBI algorithm, but the implemented algorithm updates the support set S_hat by thresholding mu_alpha in Eq. (32), and S_hat enters the posterior-mean update through the subspace-constrained inverse in Eq. (29) and the robust initialization in Eq. (61). The parameterization xi in Eq. (58) and the alternating update in Eq. (59) do not include S_hat, so the proof does not cover the algorithm as implemented. Please either provide a corrected proof that handles the support update and does not rely on unproved strong convexity, or restate the theorem to match what is actually proven.
  3. [Sec. IV-E, Sec. V-D, Figs. 5-7] The abstract and Sec. IV claim that the subspace-constrained inverse reduces complexity 'with almost no sacrifice' on performance and convergence speed. The evidence for this is the convergence comparison in Figs. 5 and 6 for one scenario, with no wall-clock time, per-iteration runtime, or complexity-matched benchmark. The complexity orders in Eqs. (42) and (53) are asymptotic and do not by themselves justify 'almost no sacrifice', especially because the thresholding in Eq. (32) makes the achieved support S_hat a random quantity. Please report measured runtime or a complexity-matched comparison, or soften the claim to 'negligible performance loss in the tested scenarios'.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Lemma 2, Sec. IV-C2] The lemma statement says 'for given q(v_k), v_k not equal to alpha', but the intended meaning, based on the proof and the sentence before Eq. (27), is that all densities q(v_l) with l not equal to k are given. Please correct the wording.
  2. [Fig. 8] The caption of Fig. 8(a) reads 'Scatterer localization RMSE' while the vertical axis in the figure is labeled 'Channel estimation NMSE'. This mismatch should be fixed, since Fig. 8(c) already reports RMSE.
  3. [Sec. VI-C] The text says 'we very N p from 2 to 32'; this should read 'we vary N p'. In addition, the footnote in Sec. VI refers to 'VR-CESD' and 'TS-MUSIC', while the baselines are elsewhere called VB-CESD and ST-MUSIC.
  4. [Eq. (36)] The definition of C_kq contains a typographical artifact: the term labeled 'bn' should be the appropriate Gamma rate parameter, and the overbar notation for the inactive-state parameters should be applied consistently. Please re-check the display.
  5. [Algorithm 1] Algorithm 1 line 5 says the gradient update is performed 'for Bx times', but the surrounding text and Theorem 3 use B_alpha. Also, line 11 updates the support S_hat before the outer support-to-modules message is sent; it would be clearer to specify whether S_hat is updated once per outer EM iteration or once per turbo iteration.
  6. [Sec. VI] The simulation section does not report several parameters that the algorithm depends on: the inner iteration count I, the outer iteration count T, the gradient iteration counts B_alpha and B_x, and the support threshold epsilon (Eq. (32)). These choices are needed for reproducibility and should be stated.
  7. [Abstract and Index Terms] There are minor typos: 'estimating the the location-domain' in the abstract, and 'blinear' in the index terms.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the BiSVBI updates and convergence proof are derived in this paper, and the self-citations are component-level rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central object is a variational Bayesian algorithm for a bilinear model. The 3D location-domain sparse representation in Eq. (10) is introduced as a modeling assumption, supported by the algebraic virtual-scatterer equivalence in Eq. (6); it is not a prediction derived from the algorithm's output. The bilinear observation model (15a)-(15b) follows exactly from the stated signal model. The E-step variational updates are derived in the paper (Lemma 2 and Appendix A), and Theorem 3's convergence-to-stationary-solution proof is given in Appendix B without invoking the authors' earlier work; it proceeds by monotone KLD decrease and standard stationary-point arguments. The only uses of the authors' own prior results are [19] for the M-step gradient-ascent convergence and [16] for the SCVBI special case in the coarse estimation stage. These are prior published results used for sub-components, and the simulations validate the main claims against an IID-prior ablation and a genie-aided baseline. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: user positions, time offsets, and the dynamic grid are estimated in the M-step rather than assumed. The physical robustness concern about multi-bounce or diffuse scattering relative to Eq. (6) is a modeling/correctness risk, not a circularity, because the paper does not claim to derive that equivalence from its own outputs. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the physical channel model (single-bounce equivalence), the dynamic grid assumption, and the variational factorization constraints. None of these are independently verified beyond the paper's own simulations. Several hyperparameters are chosen by hand, though they are standard for this class of sparse Bayesian algorithms.

free parameters (5)
  • Support threshold ε = 2-3 times noise power 1/⟨γ⟩
    Used in (32) to estimate support S_hat from posterior mean; directly affects subspace-constrained inverse and algorithm convergence.
  • BGG hyperparameters a, b, a_bar, b_bar = a=1, b=1, a_bar=1, b_bar=10^-5 (typical values from [19])
    Shape/rate parameters of Gamma priors in (12); control sparsity and active-signal variance.
  • Support priors λ_k,q, λ_q, λ_k0 = λ_k,q set to 1/|U_k| in simulations
    Prior probabilities in (13) that encode expected overlap between per-user supports and global support.
  • Grid sizes Q1, Q2, Qr = Q1=Q2=16, Qr=10 in simulations
    Number of angle/range grid points; trade-off between resolution and complexity.
  • Iteration counts Bα, I, T = Not specified numerically in text
    Gradient updates in (30), inner VBI iterations, and outer EM iterations; affect convergence and complexity.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Every NLoS path is equivalent to a single-bounce path through a virtual scatterer, with delay given by (4)-(6).
    Used in Section II-B to justify the 3D location-domain sparse representation (10). If propagation is diffuse or has non-point reflections, the grid model is inaccurate.
  • domain assumption There exists a dynamic grid r* covering all true scatterer positions, and the initial uniform grid is used as a starting point.
    Section III-A: 'there always exists a grid r* that covers the true positions of all scatterers.' This assumes grid resolution is sufficient and the non-convex optimization can find it.
  • ad hoc to paper The variational posterior is factorized and q(alpha), q(x) are Gaussian with diagonal covariance (22)-(24).
    Imposed to avoid high-dimensional matrix inverses. Theorem 3 proves convergence only for this constrained problem, not the original posterior.
  • domain assumption The three-layer BGG prior (Eqs. 11-13) with Gamma and Bernoulli distributions captures the joint sparsity of MU channels.
    This is a modeling choice, following [17], [19]; the degree of overlap λ_k,q and hyperparameters are set by hand.
  • domain assumption Noise is AWGN with Gamma prior; data symbols are Gaussian with known variances; user location and time offset priors given.
    Standard statistical model assumed in Section II and III; the simulation priors (σ_p^2=1, τ_o within [-2/B,2/B]) are specific.
  • ad hoc to paper The EM surrogate and gradient ascent converge to a stationary point of the MAP objective, following the result in [19].
    Invoked in Section IV-D for the M-step. The paper acknowledges q(t)(v) is approximate, so the convergence is heuristic in practice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bilinear Subspace Variational Bayesian Inference for Joint Scattering Environment Sensing and Data Recovery in ISAC Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FG2AZILC

@misc{pith2026250200811,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bilinear Subspace Variational Bayesian Inference for Joint Scattering Environment Sensing and Data Recovery in ISAC Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FG2AZILC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00811}
}
read the original abstract

This paper considers a joint scattering environment sensing and data recovery problem in an uplink integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) system. To facilitate joint scatterers localization and multi-user (MU) channel estimation, we introduce a three-dimensional (3D) location-domain sparse channel model to capture the joint sparsity of the MU channel (i.e., different user channels share partially overlapped scatterers). Then the joint problem is formulated as a bilinear structured sparse recovery problem with a dynamic position grid and imperfect parameters (such as time offset and user position errors). We propose an expectation maximization based turbo bilinear subspace variational Bayesian inference (EM-Turbo-BiSVBI) algorithm to solve the problem effectively, where the E-step performs Bayesian estimation of the the location-domain sparse MU channel by exploiting the joint sparsity, and the M-step refines the dynamic position grid and learns the imperfect factors via gradient update. Two methods are introduced to greatly reduce the complexity with almost no sacrifice on the performance and convergence speed: 1) a subspace constrained bilinear variational Bayesian inference (VBI) method is proposed to avoid any high-dimensional matrix inverse; 2) the multiple signal classification (MUSIC) and subspace constrained VBI methods are combined to obtain a coarse estimation result to reduce the search range. Simulations verify the advantages of the proposed scheme over baseline schemes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00811 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the system model, the location-domain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Frame structure of the ISAC system. (UPA) of M = Mx × Mz antennas serves K single-antenna users while sensing the scattering environment,1 as illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Framework of the EM-Turbo-BiSVBI algorithm. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Module A and Module B of the Turbo-BiSVBI-E [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Convergence Behavior: Channel estimation NMSE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Convergence Behavior: Data recovery NMSE versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Sensing and estimation performance versus SNR. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Sensing and estimation performance versus the number of pilot subcarriers. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    An overview of signal processing techniques for joint communication and radar sensing,

    J. A. Zhang, F. Liu, C. Masouros, R. W. Heath, Z. Feng, L. Zheng, and A. Petropulu, “An overview of signal processing techniques for joint communication and radar sensing,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. , vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1295–1315, 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,

    F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Buzzi, “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, 2022

    2022

  3. [3]

    Joint radar and communication design: Applications, state-of-the-art, and the road ahead,

    F. Liu, C. Masouros, A. P. Petropulu, H. Griffiths, and L. Hanzo, “Joint radar and communication design: Applications, state-of-the-art, and the road ahead,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 3834–3862, 2020

    2020

  4. [4]

    A survey on fundamental limits of integrated sensing and communication,

    A. Liu, Z. Huang, M. Li, Y . Wan, W. Li, T. X. Han, C. Liu, R. Du, D. K. P. Tan, J. Lu, Y . Shen, F. Colone, and K. Chetty, “A survey on fundamental limits of integrated sensing and communication,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 994–1034, 2022

    2022

  5. [5]

    Distributed compressive CSIT estimation and feedback for FDD multi-user massive MIMO systems,

    X. Rao and V . K. N. Lau, “Distributed compressive CSIT estimation and feedback for FDD multi-user massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 3261–3271, 2014

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Closed-loop autonomous pilot and compressive CSIT feedback resource adaptation in multi-user FDD massive MIMO systems,

    A. Liu, F. Zhu, and V . K. N. Lau, “Closed-loop autonomous pilot and compressive CSIT feedback resource adaptation in multi-user FDD massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 173–183, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Joint pilot optimization, target detection and channel estimation for integrated sensing and communication systems,

    Z. Huang, K. Wang, A. Liu, Y . Cai, R. Du, and T. X. Han, “Joint pilot optimization, target detection and channel estimation for integrated sensing and communication systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , 2022, doi: 10.1109/TWC.2022.3183621

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Joint scattering environment sensing and channel estimation based on non-stationary Markov random field,

    W. Xu, Y . Xiao, A. Liu, M. Lei, and M.-J. Zhao, “Joint scattering environment sensing and channel estimation based on non-stationary Markov random field,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 3903–3917, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 27 references
  1. [9]

    Semiblind channel estimation and data detection for OFDM systems with optimal pilot design,

    T. Cui and C. Tellambura, “Semiblind channel estimation and data detection for OFDM systems with optimal pilot design,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 1053–1062, 2007

    2007

  2. [10]

    Bilinear generalized approxi- mate message passing-part I: Derivation,

    J. T. Parker, P. Schniter, and V . Cevher, “Bilinear generalized approxi- mate message passing-part I: Derivation,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 62, no. 22, pp. 5839–5853, 2014

    2014

  3. [11]

    Bilinear gaussian belief propagation for large MIMO channel and data estimation,

    K. Ito, T. Takahashi, S. Ibi, and S. Sampei, “Bilinear gaussian belief propagation for large MIMO channel and data estimation,” inProc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM) , Dec. 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  4. [12]

    Turbo-like joint data-and-channel estimation in quantized massive mimo systems,

    F. Steiner, A. Mezghani, L. Swindlehurst, J. A. Nossek, and W. Utschick, “Turbo-like joint data-and-channel estimation in quantized massive mimo systems,” in Proc. Int. ITG Workshop Smart Antennas , 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  5. [13]

    Variational Bayes’ joint channel estimation and soft symbol decoding for uplink massive MIMO systems with low resolution ADCs,

    S. S. Thoota and C. R. Murthy, “Variational Bayes’ joint channel estimation and soft symbol decoding for uplink massive MIMO systems with low resolution ADCs,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3467–3481, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Massive MIMO-OFDM systems with low resolution ADCs: Cramér-rao bound, sparse channel estimation, and soft symbol decod- ing,

    ——, “Massive MIMO-OFDM systems with low resolution ADCs: Cramér-rao bound, sparse channel estimation, and soft symbol decod- ing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 70, pp. 4835–4850, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    TST-MUSIC for joint DOA- delay estimation,

    Y .-Y . Wang, J.-T. Chen, and W.-H. Fang, “TST-MUSIC for joint DOA- delay estimation,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 721– 729, 2001

    2001

  8. [16]

    Subspace constrained variational Bayesian inference for structured compressive sensing with a dynamic grid,

    A. Liu, Y . Zhou, and W. Xu, “Subspace constrained variational Bayesian inference for structured compressive sensing with a dynamic grid,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., pp. 1–15, 2025

    2025

  9. [17]

    Cloud-assisted cooperative localization for vehicle platoons: A turbo approach,

    A. Liu, L. Lian, V . Lau, G. Liu, and M.-J. Zhao, “Cloud-assisted cooperative localization for vehicle platoons: A turbo approach,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 68, pp. 605–620, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Joint channel parameter estimation and scatterers localization,

    J. Hong, X. Yin, and Z. Yu, “Joint channel parameter estimation and scatterers localization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., pp. 1–1, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Robust recovery of structured sparse signals with uncertain sensing matrix: A Turbo-VBI approach,

    A. Liu, G. Liu, L. Lian, V . K. N. Lau, and M.-J. Zhao, “Robust recovery of structured sparse signals with uncertain sensing matrix: A Turbo-VBI approach,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 3185– 3198, 2020

    2020

  12. [20]

    Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm,

    F. Kschischang, B. Frey, and H.-A. Loeliger, “Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory , vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 498–519, 2001

    2001

  13. [21]

    The variational approximation for Bayesian inference,

    D. G. Tzikas, A. C. Likas, and N. P. Galatsanos, “The variational approximation for Bayesian inference,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag. , vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 131–146, 2008

    2008

  14. [22]

    Fast inverse-free sparse Bayesian learning via relaxed evidence lower bound maximization,

    H. Duan, L. Yang, J. Fang, and H. Li, “Fast inverse-free sparse Bayesian learning via relaxed evidence lower bound maximization,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 774–778, 2017

    2017

  15. [23]

    Successive linear approxima- tion VBI for joint sparse signal recovery and dynamic grid parameters estimation,

    W. Xu, A. Liu, B. Zhou, and M.-j. Zhao, “Successive linear approxima- tion VBI for joint sparse signal recovery and dynamic grid parameters estimation,” [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.09149

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Signal recovery from random mea- surements via orthogonal matching pursuit,

    J. A. Tropp and A. C. Gilbert, “Signal recovery from random mea- surements via orthogonal matching pursuit,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory , vol. 53, no. 12, pp. 4655–4666, 2007

    2007

  17. [25]

    Detection of the number of coherent signals by the MDL principle,

    M. Wax and I. Ziskind, “Detection of the number of coherent signals by the MDL principle,” IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process. , vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1190–1196, 1989

    1989

  18. [26]

    Super-resolution toa estimation with diversity for indoor geolocation,

    X. Li and K. Pahlavan, “Super-resolution toa estimation with diversity for indoor geolocation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 224–234, 2004

    2004

  19. [27]

    Wiley 5G Ref, 2021

    3GPP TR 38.901 Channel Model . Wiley 5G Ref, 2021

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.