Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 53 references

Channel Estimation for Wideband XL-MIMO: A Constrained Deep Unrolling Approach

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a constrained unrolled proximal gradient descent network with a learned U-Net proximal mapping estimates wideband XL-MIMO channels more accurately than dictionary-based and deep baselines, reporting a 2.85 dB NMSE…

desk verdict Plausible empirical gains for wideband XL-MIMO channel estimation, but the advertised convergence theorem does not follow from the proof; still worth a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07717 v2 pith:LF4F3YP6 submitted 2025-05-12 eess.SP

Peicong Zheng , Xuantao Lyu , Ye Wang , Yi Gong This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords XL-MIMOchannelestimationdeepunrollingproximalgradientdescentnear-fieldpropagationbeamsplitspatialnon-stationaritymonotonicconstraint
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

The paper tries to establish that channel estimation for wideband XL-MIMO systems—where near-field spherical wavefronts, frequency-dependent beam split, and spatially non-stationary visibility regions break conventional sparse representations—can be solved by unrolling proximal gradient descent into a learned network. The network replaces the handcrafted channel prior with a trainable U-Net (a multi-scale encoder-decoder network) proximal mapping and gives every layer its own learned step size, so no explicit dictionary or regularization function is needed. A monotonic descent constraint forces each layer's estimate to move closer to the true channel, and a primal-dual training method with decaying noise injection stabilizes convergence. If the claim holds, the approach supplies one estimation pipeline for both linear and planar arrays that beats LMMSE, OMP, ISTA-Net+, AMP-SBL, and D2-CNN in the simulated wideband XL-MIMO scenarios.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the unrolled proximal gradient descent network. Each layer first takes a gradient step on the data-fidelity term with a learnable step size $\alpha_t$, then applies a trainable proximal mapping implemented as a U-Net—a multi-scale encoder-decoder with residual blocks and skip connections—so the unknown channel prior is learned rather than specified. The convergence mechanism is the monotonic descent constraint $\|h_t-h\|_2-(1-\epsilon)\|h_{t-1}-h\|_2 \leq 0$, enforced through a primal-dual update of a Lagrangian with one dual variable per layer, together with noise injection whose variance decays across layers. Theorem 2 uses this constraint to show that the expected distance to the true channel eventually enters a region whose size is controlled by the sample complexity, the failure probability, and the contraction factor $\epsilon$.

What would settle it

Running the same planar-array experiment at 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio with visibility regions drawn as multiple disjoint blocks instead of one contiguous rectangle would settle it: if the normalized mean-squared-error advantage over the AMP-SBL baseline falls below the reported 2.85 dB, the learned proximal mapping is fitted to the simulator's block geometry rather than to spatial non-stationarity in general.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the maximum a posteriori (MAP) formulation of wideband XL-MIMO channel estimation can be solved without constructing polar-domain dictionaries or explicit regularizers: a five-layer unrolled proximal gradient descent network, whose proximal operator is a U-Net with residual blocks and whose step sizes are learned per layer, implicitly learns the channel prior from data. Adding the monotonic descent constraint $\|h_t-h\|_2-(1-\epsilon)\|h_{t-1}-h\|_2 \leq 0$ and training with a primal-dual Lagrangian update yields layer-wise estimates that descend toward the true channel, with a convergence bound that shrinks as the number of training samples grows. In simulation, the network reports NMSE around $-12.61$ dB at 0 dB SNR under the UPA configuration, about 2.85 dB better than AMP-SBL and 3.39 dB better than ISTA-Net+, with larger margins over LMMSE and OMP and at higher SNR. The paper further reports that the method improves with antenna dimensionality and with pilot overhead, and that the constrained variant has more stable intermediate-layer convergence than the unconstrained one.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that real channels resemble the synthetic training distribution, in particular that each propagation path is visible over one contiguous block of the array and that path counts, distances, and signal-to-noise ratios stay inside the ranges used for training.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Under the UPA configuration at 0 dB SNR, the method reports NMSE around $-12.61$ dB, about 2.85 dB better than AMP-SBL and 3.39 dB better than ISTA-Net+, with the gap widening at 10 dB SNR.
  • The learned proximal mapping improves monotonically with pilot overhead from 256 to 1024 symbols under UPA, reaching $-16.63$ dB at 512 pilots.
  • A network trained only on three-path channels keeps most of its accuracy for two-path channels and degrades gracefully at five paths; joint training on two to five paths improves the five-path case by about 0.48 dB.
  • The monotonic descent constraint makes intermediate-layer NMSE decrease layer by layer, whereas the unconstrained network shows wider variation across layers.
  • Learned estimators exploit higher antenna dimensionality: the proposed method improves from about $-19.21$ dB at 10 dB SNR in the ULA to $-20.04$ dB in the UPA, while LMMSE degrades as the array grows.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same unrolled PGD skeleton could be applied to other ill-posed XL-MIMO inverse problems, such as beam training, localization, or integrated sensing and communication, since the proximal network removes the need to design a new dictionary for each channel structure.
  • The contiguous-block visibility model is the most restrictive simulation choice; a direct extension would test disjoint or statistically measured visibility regions to see whether the learned prior captures antenna-domain structure or only block geometry.
  • The convergence bound in Theorem 2 gives a sample-complexity handle: one could measure how the NMSE gap over AMP-SBL shrinks as the training set is reduced, isolating the value of the monotonic constraint from sheer data volume.
  • Another testable extension is cross-band transfer: train at 100 GHz and evaluate at 28 GHz or 300 GHz without retraining, which would reveal whether the learned proximal mapping is tied to the simulated carrier frequency or captures transferable near-field structure.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper addresses channel estimation in wideband XL-MIMO systems under near-field propagation, beam split, and spatial non-stationarity. It formulates estimation as a maximum a posteriori problem, unrolls proximal gradient descent with learnable step sizes and a U-Net proximal operator, and imposes a monotonic descent constraint on layer-wise error. A primal-dual training algorithm is proposed, with Theorem 1 bounding the duality gap and Theorem 2 claiming convergence of the expected layer-wise distance to the true channel. Simulations under ULA and UPA configurations report that the proposed PGD-Net outperforms LMMSE, OMP, ISTA-Net+, AMP-SBL, and a same-architecture CNN (D2-CNN).

Significance. If the results hold, the paper makes a useful contribution to model-based deep learning for XL-MIMO channel estimation. The experimental design is internally consistent and stronger than most papers in this area because it includes a same-architecture CNN baseline (D2-CNN), which helps isolate the benefit of unrolling rather than the U-Net backbone. The channel model jointly capturing near-field, beam split, and spatial non-stationarity for both ULA and UPA is also a useful asset. However, the advertised theoretical convergence guarantee is not established by the proof as written: the key step in Appendix A is invalid, and a central inequality conditions on an event while using an unconditional expectation. This weakens the claim that the monotonic descent constraint is backed by theory. The empirical comparison remains plausible, but the theoretical gap is load-bearing because convergence analysis is listed as one of the paper's contributions. No code or data is provided, which limits reproducibility.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A, Eqs. (32)-(33)] The proof of Theorem 2 does not establish the claimed limit inferior. Inequality (32) only gives a one-sided upper recurrence on Z_t, which implies at most a limsup bound. The assertion in Eq. (33) that lim inf_t (epsilon Z_t - zeta(J,delta) - delta C/(1-delta)) = 0 is not a consequence of (32); for example, the sequence Z_t = 0 satisfies (32) but makes the expression equal to -zeta - delta C/(1-delta). Without a derived lower bound or an additional argument, the application of Fatou's lemma and the subsequent display (39) do not follow. This gap invalidates Theorem 2 as stated, and the convergence analysis is a central advertised contribution of the paper.
  2. [Appendix A, Eq. (30)] Inequality (30) conditions on the event A_t that the constraint in (26) is satisfied, but its right-hand side uses the unconditional expectation E[||h_{t-1}-h||^2]. Conditioning on A_t changes the distribution of h_{t-1}, so the inequality needs a conditional expectation or a separate argument controlling the conditional law. Additionally, Eq. (31) bounds the second term by a constant C said to follow from Assumption 1, but Assumption 1 bounds the loss and constraint functions, not the network outputs ||h_t||; boundedness of the layer outputs must be assumed or proved separately. These issues affect the derivation of recurrence (32) and therefore the proof of Theorem 2.
  3. [Section V-A and Section V-B] The empirical claim of general superiority is made for channels drawn from a single synthetic distribution in which each visibility region is a contiguous block selected uniformly at random and all training, validation, and test channels share the same SNR range and geometry statistics. If deployed channels have non-contiguous visibility regions, different path counts, or different SNR distributions, the reported gains are not guaranteed to transfer. The paper should either qualify the abstract claim as applying to this synthetic distribution or test robustness to at least one mismatched geometry, e.g., non-contiguous visibility masks or out-of-range SNR. This is not a fatal issue for the in-distribution comparison, but it is load-bearing for the broader claim of outperforming prior methods in wideband XL-MIMO.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figures 6 and 7] The legend and captions spell the baseline as 'ISAT-Net+' instead of 'ISTA-Net+'; this appears in both ULA and UPA panels and should be corrected.
  2. [Section V-A] The paper states that 'for each SNR level, 5e7 data pairs are generated' but does not specify the number of SNR levels or whether the four plotted SNR values (-5, 0, 5, 10 dB) are the only ones used. The total training data size should be stated unambiguously.
  3. [Section V-A] Several training hyperparameters are not reported: the number of epochs, total number of training batches, the primal and dual step sizes mu_w and mu_lambda in Algorithm 1, the contraction factor epsilon in Eq. (17), and the noise variance schedule sigma_t^2 in Eq. (19). These are needed to reproduce the results and to interpret the convergence experiments.
  4. [Section V-A and Table I] No code or data is made available, which is unusual for a heavily empirical paper of this type. A public implementation would materially strengthen confidence in the reported NMSE numbers.
  5. [Figure 9] The shaded confidence intervals are not defined. The paper should specify whether they are standard deviations or confidence bands over test realizations, and how many realizations were used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central NMSE claim is an external benchmark comparison, the convergence theorem is conditional and draws on external results [51], [52], and the paper's self-citations [23], [24], [33] are contextual rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's strongest claim is empirical: the proposed unrolled PGD network outperforms LMMSE, OMP, ISTA-Net+, AMP-SBL, and D2-CNN on a synthetic wideband XL-MIMO channel model. This is a measured performance comparison, not a derivation from fitted inputs; all baselines are evaluated on the same training and test distributions, so the comparison is self-contained and externally checkable. The monotonic descent constraint (Eq. 17) is an explicit design input, and Theorem 2's bound (Eq. 27) is a conditional consequence of that constraint plus Assumptions 1-5; the theorem does not predict anything independent of its own assumptions, so it is not circular in the sense of a fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction. The convergence argument imports results from constrained learning theory [51] and robust stochastically-descending unrolled networks [52], both of which are external to the present authors, so the load-bearing citation chain is not a self-citation chain. The paper's self-citations ([23], [24], [33]) appear in the literature review and motivation, supporting contextual claims about prior work on trainable PGD, near-field dictionary learning, and hybrid-field estimation; they do not carry the central NMSE claim or the convergence guarantee. A non-circularity concern does exist: in Appendix A, the step from Eq. (32) to Eq. (33) is asserted by citing [52] without demonstrating that the assumptions of [52] are satisfied for this network; this is a proof-completeness and correctness issue, not a circularity issue, and it does not raise the circularity score. The low score of 2 reflects only the presence of minor, non-load-bearing self-citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result is an empirical algorithm claim resting on a substantial synthetic data model and on imported constrained-learning theory. The learnable network parameters and step sizes are the fitted quantities that produce the reported NMSE; the paper neither reports nor releases them. No new physical entities or forces are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Layer-wise step sizes alpha_t = not reported
    Introduced in (14) and trained via (23); the paper states alpha_t is learnable but does not report fitted values.
  • U-Net proximal weights theta_t = not reported
    Parameters of the proximal mapping network in (15), trained on synthetic data and not released.
  • Contraction factor epsilon = not reported
    Hyperparameter of the monotonic descent constraint (17); the value is not given.
  • Noise variance schedule sigma_t^2 = not reported
    Noise injection in (19) uses variances decreasing across layers; the schedule is not specified.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Spherical-wavefront near-field channel model with distance-dependent steering vectors in (4), (8), and (9).
    Standard near-field XL-MIMO model imported from cited literature and used to generate all training and test data.
  • domain assumption Channel consists of L=3 paths with contiguous visibility regions q(VR_l) in (6) and coverage in {0.25, 0.5, 0.75}.
    Simulation model controls the dataset; the paper does not test non-contiguous visibility or other coverage patterns.
  • domain assumption MAP formulation (11) treats the regularizer R(h) as the negative log-prior and assumes a learned proximal operator approximates this prior.
    Bayesian interpretation is standard but the replacement of R(h) by a trained network is an approximation whose fidelity is not measured.
  • standard math Assumptions 1-5 borrowed from constrained learning theory [51], including universal approximation in a convex hull and strict feasibility.
    Formal conditions under which primal-dual gap bounds hold; invoked by Theorem 1 without verification for the PGD-Net architecture.
  • domain assumption Uplink pilot orthogonality and TDD reciprocity allow per-user independent channel estimation.
    Standard system assumption in Section II-A; ensures the single-user signal model in (1) and (2).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Channel Estimation for Wideband XL-MIMO: A Constrained Deep Unrolling Approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LF4F3YP6

@misc{pith2026250507717,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Channel Estimation for Wideband XL-MIMO: A Constrained Deep Unrolling Approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LF4F3YP6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07717}
}
read the original abstract

Extremely large-scale multiple-input multiple-output (XL-MIMO) enables the formation of narrow beams, effectively mitigating path loss in high-frequency communications. This capability makes the integration of wideband high-frequency communications and XL-MIMO a key enabler for future 6G networks. Realizing the full potential of such wideband XL-MIMO systems depends critically on acquiring accurate channel state information. However, channel estimation is significantly challenging due to inherent wideband XL-MIMO channel characteristics, including near-field propagation, beam split, and spatial non-stationarity. To effectively capture these channel characteristics, we formulate channel estimation as a maximum a posteriori problem, which facilitates the use of prior channel knowledge. We then propose an unrolled proximal gradient descent algorithm with learnable step sizes, which employs a dedicated neural network for proximal mapping. This design empowers the proposed algorithm to implicitly learn prior channel knowledge directly from data, thereby eliminating the need for explicit regularization functions. To improve the convergence, we introduce a monotonic descent constraint on the layer-wise estimation error and provide theoretical analyses to characterize the algorithm's convergence behavior. Simulation results show that the proposed unrolling-based algorithm outperforms the traditional and deep learning-based methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07717 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. System diagram of a hybrid precoding architecture sh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Scatterer distance and angles relative to the ULA. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Impact of beam split and spatial non-stationarity on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Scatterer distance and angles relative to the UPA. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Architecture of the proposed unrolled proximal grad [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: NMSE performance versus SNR under ULA and UPA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: NMSE performance versus pilot overhead under ULA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: NMSE performance versus number of paths under ULA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: NMSE performance versus number of unrolled layers. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A tutorial on near -field XL-MIMO communications toward 6G,

    H. Lu, Y . Zeng, C. Y ou, Y . Han, J. Zhang, Z. Wang, Z. Dong, S. Jin, C.-X. Wang, T. Jiang, X. Y ou, and R. Zhang, “A tutorial on near -field XL-MIMO communications toward 6G,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2213–2257, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Near-field communications: A comprehensive survey,

    Y . Liu, C. Ouyang, Z. Wang, J. Xu, X. Mu, and A. L. Swindlehu rst, “Near-field communications: A comprehensive survey,” IEEE Commu- nications Surveys & Tutorials , pp. 1–1, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Terahertz communications and sensing for 6G and beyond: A comprehensive review,

    W. Jiang, Q. Zhou, J. He, M. A. Habibi, S. Melnyk, M. El-Abs i, B. Han, M. D. Renzo, H. D. Schotten, F.-L. Luo, T. S. El-Bawab, M. Junt ti, M. Debbah, and V . C. M. Leung, “Terahertz communications and sensing for 6G and beyond: A comprehensive review,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2326–2381, 2024

    2024

  4. [4]

    On th e road to 6G: Visions, requirements, key technologies, and te stbeds,

    C.-X. Wang, X. Y ou, X. Gao, X. Zhu, Z. Li, C. Zhang, H. Wang, Y . Huang, Y . Chen, H. Haas, J. S. Thompson, E. G. Larsson, M. D. Renzo, W. Tong, P . Zhu, X. Shen, H. V . Poor, and L. Hanzo, “On th e road to 6G: Visions, requirements, key technologies, and te stbeds,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 905–974, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Next generation advanced transce iver tech- nologies for 6G and beyond,

    C. Y ou, Y . Cai, Y . Liu, M. Di Renzo, T. M. Duman, A. Y ener, and A. Lee Swindlehurst, “Next generation advanced transce iver tech- nologies for 6G and beyond,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 582–627, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Towards 6G wireless communication networks: Vision, enabling technologies, and new paradigm shifts,

    X. Y ou, C.-X. Wang, J. Huang, X. Gao, Z. Zhang, M. Wang, Y . H uang, C. Zhang, Y . Jiang, J. Wang et al., “Towards 6G wireless communication networks: Vision, enabling technologies, and new paradigm shifts,” Science China information sciences , vol. 64, pp. 1–74, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Toward 6G-enabled mo bile vision analytics for immersive extended reality,

    M. Zhang, L. Shen, X. Ma, and J. Liu, “Toward 6G-enabled mo bile vision analytics for immersive extended reality,” IEEE Wireless Com- munications, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 132–138, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Integrating sensing an d communi- cations for ubiquitous IoT : Applications, trends, and chal lenges,

    Y . Cui, F. Liu, X. Jing, and J. Mu, “Integrating sensing an d communi- cations for ubiquitous IoT : Applications, trends, and chal lenges,” IEEE Network, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 158–167, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Internet of things in smart cities: Comprehensive review, open issues, and challenges,

    E. H. Houssein, M. A. Othman, W. M. Mohamed, and M. Y ounan, “Internet of things in smart cities: Comprehensive review, open issues, and challenges,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 11, no. 21, pp. 34 941–34 952, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Hybrid beamforming for massive MIMO: A surve y,

    A. F. Molisch, V . V . Ratnam, S. Han, Z. Li, S. L. H. Nguyen, L. Li, and K. Haneda, “Hybrid beamforming for massive MIMO: A surve y,” IEEE Communications Magazine , vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 134–141, 2017

    2017

  3. [11]

    Beamforming technologies for ultra-massive MIM O in terahertz communications,

    B. Ning, Z. Tian, W. Mei, Z. Chen, C. Han, S. Li, J. Y uan, an d R. Zhang, “Beamforming technologies for ultra-massive MIM O in terahertz communications,” IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 4, pp. 614–658, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Ch annel estimation and hybrid combining for wideband terahertz mas sive MIMO systems,

    K. Dovelos, M. Matthaiou, H. Q. Ngo, and B. Bellalta, “Ch annel estimation and hybrid combining for wideband terahertz mas sive MIMO systems,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1604–1620, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    TeraMIMO: A channel simu lator for wideband ultra-massive MIMO terahertz communications ,

    S. Tarboush, H. Sarieddeen, H. Chen, M. H. Loukil, H. Jem aa, M.- S. Alouini, and T. Y . Al-Naffouri, “TeraMIMO: A channel simu lator for wideband ultra-massive MIMO terahertz communications ,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology , vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 12 325– 12 341, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Compre ssed sensing for wireless communications: Useful tips and trick s,

    J. W. Choi, B. Shim, Y . Ding, B. Rao, and D. I. Kim, “Compre ssed sensing for wireless communications: Useful tips and trick s,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1527–1550, 2017

    2017

  7. [15]

    Com pressive sensing techniques for next-generation wireless communic ations,

    Z. Gao, L. Dai, S. Han, C.-L. I, Z. Wang, and L. Hanzo, “Com pressive sensing techniques for next-generation wireless communic ations,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 144–153, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    Channel estimation via orthogonal matching pursuit for hybrid MIMO systems in millimeter wave com- munications,

    J. Lee, G.-T. Gil, and Y . H. Lee, “Channel estimation via orthogonal matching pursuit for hybrid MIMO systems in millimeter wave com- munications,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 2370–2386, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Channel estimation strategies for multi-user mmWave systems,

    M. A and A. P . Kannu, “Channel estimation strategies for multi-user mmWave systems,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 5678–5690, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Off-grid sparse bayesian le arning-based channel estimation for mmWave massive MIMO uplink,

    H. Tang, J. Wang, and L. He, “Off-grid sparse bayesian le arning-based channel estimation for mmWave massive MIMO uplink,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 45–48, 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    Quasi-static and time-selective channel estimati on for block- sparse millimeter wave hybrid MIMO systems: Sparse bayesia n learning (SBL) based approaches,

    S. Srivastava, A. Mishra, A. Rajoriya, A. K. Jagannatha m, and G. As- cheid, “Quasi-static and time-selective channel estimati on for block- sparse millimeter wave hybrid MIMO systems: Sparse bayesia n learning (SBL) based approaches,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , ...

    2019

  12. [20]

    Millimeter wave chann el estimation via exploiting joint sparse and low-rank structures,

    X. Li, J. Fang, H. Li, and P . Wang, “Millimeter wave chann el estimation via exploiting joint sparse and low-rank structures,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1123–1133, 2018

    2018

  13. [21]

    Generalized approxi mate message passing for massive MIMO mmWave channel estimation with lap lacian prior,

    F. Bellili, F. Sohrabi, and W. Y u, “Generalized approxi mate message passing for massive MIMO mmWave channel estimation with lap lacian prior,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 3205– 3219, 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    Deep learning-bas ed channel estimation for beamspace mmwave massive MIMO systems,

    H. He, C.-K. Wen, S. Jin, and G. Y . Li, “Deep learning-bas ed channel estimation for beamspace mmwave massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 852–855, 2018

    2018

  15. [23]

    Trainable proximal gradi ent descent- based channel estimation for mmWave massive MIMO systems,

    P . Zheng, X. Lyu, and Y . Gong, “Trainable proximal gradi ent descent- based channel estimation for mmWave massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1781–1785, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Dictionary learn ing based near-field channel estimation for wideband XL-MIMO systems ,

    P . Zheng, X. Lyu, Y . Wang, and Y . Gong, “Dictionary learn ing based near-field channel estimation for wideband XL-MIMO systems ,” in 2024 IEEE 25th International W orkshop on Signal Processing Adva nces in Wireless Communications (SPAWC), 2024, pp. 246–250

    2024

  17. [25]

    Channel estimation for extremely lar ge-scale MIMO: Far-field or near-field?

    M. Cui and L. Dai, “Channel estimation for extremely lar ge-scale MIMO: Far-field or near-field?” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 2663–2677, 2022

    2022

  18. [26]

    Near-field sparse ch annel representation and estimation in 6G wireless communicatio ns,

    X. Zhang, H. Zhang, and Y . C. Eldar, “Near-field sparse ch annel representation and estimation in 6G wireless communicatio ns,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 450–464, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Multiple access for near-field communi cations: SDMA or LDMA?

    Z. Wu and L. Dai, “Multiple access for near-field communi cations: SDMA or LDMA?” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communica- tions, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1918–1935, 2023

    1918

  20. [28]

    Bayesian off-grid near-field channel estimation,

    A. Rajoriya, J. N. Pisharody, Y . Mishra, and R. Budhiraj a, “Bayesian off-grid near-field channel estimation,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology, pp. 1–6, 2025

    2025

  21. [29]

    Mas sive unsourced random access for near-field communications,

    X. Xie, Y . Wu, J. An, D. W. K. Ng, C. Xing, and W. Zhang, “Mas sive unsourced random access for near-field communications,” IEEE Trans- actions on Communications , vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 3256–3272, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Near-field chan nel estimation for extremely large-scale array communication s: A model- based deep learning approach,

    X. Zhang, Z. Wang, H. Zhang, and L. Y ang, “Near-field chan nel estimation for extremely large-scale array communication s: A model- based deep learning approach,” IEEE Communications Letters , vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1155–1159, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Chan- nel estimation for XL-MIMO systems with polar-domain multi -scale residual dense network,

    H. Lei, J. Zhang, H. Xiao, X. Zhang, B. Ai, and D. W. K. Ng, “ Chan- nel estimation for XL-MIMO systems with polar-domain multi -scale residual dense network,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology , vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 1479–1484, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    D eep learning for near-field XL-MIMO transceiver design: Princi ples and techniques,

    W. Y u, Y . Ma, H. He, S. Song, J. Zhang, and K. B. Letaief, “D eep learning for near-field XL-MIMO transceiver design: Princi ples and techniques,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 52–58, 2025

    2025

  25. [33]

    Convolutional di ctionary learning based hybrid-field channel estimation for XL-RIS- aided mas- sive MIMO systems,

    P . Zheng, X. Lyu, Y . Wang, and Y . Gong, “Convolutional di ctionary learning based hybrid-field channel estimation for XL-RIS- aided mas- sive MIMO systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , pp. 1–1, 2025

    2025

  26. [34]

    Spat ial non- stationary near-field channel modeling and validation for m assive MIMO 13 systems,

    Z. Y uan, J. Zhang, Y . Ji, G. F. Pedersen, and W. Fan, “Spat ial non- stationary near-field channel modeling and validation for m assive MIMO 13 systems,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 921–933, 2023

    2023

  27. [35]

    Non-stationarities in extra-large-scale massive MIMO,

    E. D. Carvalho, A. Ali, A. Amiri, M. Angjelichinoski, an d R. W. Heath, “Non-stationarities in extra-large-scale massive MIMO,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 74–80, 2020

    2020

  28. [36]

    Channel estimation for extremely large-scale massive MIMO systems,

    Y . Han, S. Jin, C.-K. Wen, and X. Ma, “Channel estimation for extremely large-scale massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 633–637, 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    Non-stationary channel estimation for extremely large-scale MIMO,

    Y . Chen and L. Dai, “Non-stationary channel estimation for extremely large-scale MIMO,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 7683–7697, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Bayesian channel estima tion in multi-user massive MIMO with extremely large antenna array ,

    Y . Zhu, H. Guo, and V . K. N. Lau, “Bayesian channel estima tion in multi-user massive MIMO with extremely large antenna array ,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , vol. 69, pp. 5463–5478, 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Spatially non-stationary XL-MIMO channel estima tion: A three-layer generalized approximate message passing meth od,

    A. Tang, J.-B. Wang, Y . Pan, W. Zhang, Y . Chen, H. Y u, and R . C. d. Lamare, “Spatially non-stationary XL-MIMO channel estima tion: A three-layer generalized approximate message passing meth od,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , vol. 73, pp. 356–371, 2025

    2025

  32. [40]

    Joint visibilit y region detection and channel estimation for XL-MIMO systems via al ternating map,

    W. Xu, A. Liu, M.-j. Zhao, and G. Caire, “Joint visibilit y region detection and channel estimation for XL-MIMO systems via al ternating map,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , vol. 72, pp. 4827–4842, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    Channel estimation for XL-MIMO syst ems with decentralized baseband processing: Integrating loca l reconstruction with global refinement,

    A. Tang, J.-B. Wang, Y . Pan, C. Zeng, Y . Chen, H. Y u, M. Xia o, R. C. de Lamare, and J. Wang, “Channel estimation for XL-MIMO syst ems with decentralized baseband processing: Integrating loca l reconstruction with global refinement,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.17059 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Near-field rai nbow: Wideband beam training for XL-MIMO,

    M. Cui, L. Dai, Z. Wang, S. Zhou, and N. Ge, “Near-field rai nbow: Wideband beam training for XL-MIMO,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 3899–3912, 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    Near-field terahertz communications: Mod el-based and model-free channel estimation,

    A. M. Elbir, W. Shi, A. K. Papazafeiropoulos, P . Kourtes sis, and S. Chatzinotas, “Near-field terahertz communications: Mod el-based and model-free channel estimation,” IEEE Access , vol. 11, pp. 36 409– 36 420, 2023

    2023

  36. [44]

    Near-field wideband channel estimati on for extremely large-scale MIMO,

    M. Cui and L. Dai, “Near-field wideband channel estimati on for extremely large-scale MIMO,” Science China Information Sciences , vol. 66, no. 7, p. 172303, 2023

    2023

  37. [45]

    Deep unfolding based chann el estimation for wideband terahertz near-field massive MIMO systems,

    J. Gao, X. Chen, and G. Y . Li, “Deep unfolding based chann el estimation for wideband terahertz near-field massive MIMO systems,” Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering , vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1162–1172, 2024

    2024

  38. [46]

    Deep learning-based near-field wideband channel estimation: A j oint LISTA- CP approach,

    J. Y ang, B. Ai, W. Chen, S. Y ang, G. Shi, N. Wang, and C. Y ue n, “Deep learning-based near-field wideband channel estimation: A j oint LISTA- CP approach,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology , pp. 1–13, 2025

    2025

  39. [47]

    Knowledge and data dual-driven channel estimation a nd feedback for ultra-massive MIMO systems under hybrid field beam squin t effect,

    K. Wang, Z. Gao, S. Chen, B. Ning, G. Chen, Y . Su, Z. Wang, a nd H. V . Poor, “Knowledge and data dual-driven channel estimation a nd feedback for ultra-massive MIMO systems under hybrid field beam squin t effect,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 23, no. 9,...

    2024

  40. [48]

    Beam-de lay domain channel estimation for mmWave XL-MIMO systems,

    H. Hou, X. He, T. Fang, X. Yi, W. Wang, and S. Jin, “Beam-de lay domain channel estimation for mmWave XL-MIMO systems,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing , vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 646–661, 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    Proximal algorithms,

    N. Parikh and S. Boyd, “Proximal algorithms,” F oundations and trends® in Optimization , vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 127–239, 2014

    2014

  42. [50]

    Enhanced dee p residual networks for single image super-resolution,

    B. Lim, S. Son, H. Kim, S. Nah, and K. Mu Lee, “Enhanced dee p residual networks for single image super-resolution,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recogn ition workshops, 2017, pp. 136–144

    2017

  43. [51]

    Constrained learning with non-convex losses,

    L. F. O. Chamon, S. Paternain, M. Calvo-Fullana, and A. R ibeiro, “Constrained learning with non-convex losses,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 1739–1760, 2023

    2023

  44. [52]

    Robust st ochastically- descending unrolled networks,

    S. Hadou, N. NaderiAlizadeh, and A. Ribeiro, “Robust st ochastically- descending unrolled networks,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Process- ing, vol. 72, pp. 5484–5499, 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    ISTA-Net: Interpretable optim ization-inspired deep network for image compressive sensing,

    J. Zhang and B. Ghanem, “ISTA-Net: Interpretable optim ization-inspired deep network for image compressive sensing,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), June 2018

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.