Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 64 references

N$^2$LoS: Single-Tag mmWave Backscatter for Robust Non-Line-of-Sight Localization

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 A single mmWave radar plus one backscatter tag can localize a hidden target to about 11 cm in non-line-of-sight conditions.

desk verdict Single-tag NLoS localization is a real hardware win, but FS-MUSIC's theory is under-derived and the reflector-anchor assumption needs validation. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.08240 v1 pith:EMJ67EU4 submitted 2025-05-13 eess.SP

Zhenguo Shi , Yihe Yan , Yanxiang Wang , Wen Hu , Chun Tung Chou This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords mmWaveradarbackscattertagNLoSlocalizationmultipathFMCWMUSICVanAttaarrayspreadspectrum
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

N2LoS claims that centimeter-level non-line-of-sight localization is achievable with only a single mmWave radar and a single backscatter tag, with no LiDAR, metasurfaces, or tag arrays. The system reads the multipath reflections of the radar signal off walls and furniture, treats each first-order reflection as a measurement, and solves for the target by multilateration. Two new techniques carry the argument: HFD, a hybrid frequency-hopping and direct-sequence spread-spectrum modulation that separates tag reflections from environmental reflections and raises SNR, and FS-MUSIC, a frequency-spatial super-resolution estimator that recovers more multipath components than the antenna count alone permits. In tests with a 24 GHz radar of 250 MHz bandwidth, the median errors were 10.69 cm in X and 11.98 cm in Y at 5 m range in a laboratory, and still within a few decimeters in an office and an around-the-corner corridor.

What carries the argument

The central object is the virtual-target geometry: under the law of reflection, a retro-reflective tag at $P_T$ appears at $P_v^i$, the mirror image of $P_T$ across the $i$-th reflector, so the radar-to-virtual-target range minus the radar-to-reflector range gives the tag-to-reflector distance $D_{ST}^i = D^i - D_{RS}^i$. That distance is the range measurement used in a multilateration whose anchors are the reflector points $P_s^i$. HFD supplies the measurable separation between tag and reflector returns, and FS-MUSIC constructs a higher-rank signal matrix by concatenating frequency-hopping segments from each antenna, raising the number of resolvable multipaths from $2N_a/3$ to $2N_aN_f/3$ and sharpening angular resolution by a factor of $N_f$.

What would settle it

Build a scenario with two successive corners so the only strong radar-tag path contains exactly two reflections, while a single-bounce control location nearby is unobstructed. If N2LoS localizes the control point to its usual decimeter accuracy but fails to produce a stable position at the double-bounce point, the first-order-reflection assumption is the culprit; the range-AoA spectrum should also show missing or shifted reflector anchors there.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that a non-penetrable obstacle does not have to block localization: the first-order reflections it creates contain enough geometry to locate a retro-reflective tag. Each propagation path from radar to reflector to tag produces a measurable reflector point and a virtual target at the mirror image of the real target, and subtracting the radar-to-reflector range from the radar-to-virtual-target range yields the tag-to-reflector distance. With three or more non-collinear reflector points, the real target position is obtained by weighted least-squares multilateration. The paper shows in hardware that the required measurements can be extracted by modulating the tag between active and inactive states (HFD) and by stacking frequency-hopping segments to raise the rank of the MUSIC covariance matrix (FS-MUSIC).

Load-bearing premise

The system assumes every usable signal path reflects off exactly one surface, and that surface scatters enough energy back toward the radar to be measured; if a path bounces off two or more surfaces, or the reflector's return is too weak to detect, the anchor points and virtual-target distances that feed the position calculation do not exist.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, non-line-of-sight localization no longer requires environmental profiling: a commodity radar and one battery-powered tag deliver decimeter-level position estimates.
  • The tag's average power draw of about 41 microwatts across the HFD duty cycle suggests multi-year operation on a coin-cell battery, making long-term indoor tracking practical.
  • Because unique spread-spectrum codes separate tags, multiple targets can be localized simultaneously with no accuracy degradation in the tested settings.
  • The system works across metal, wood, concrete, and plaster reflectors, with metal giving the smallest errors, so it is not tied to a particular wall material.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's static measurements, the same per-frame geometry should support tracking of a moving target, because each frame re-estimates reflector anchors and the target position; a testable extension is a straight-line walk along a known trajectory with error measured per frame.
  • The FS-MUSIC rank-boosting trick is a general signal-processing idea: any frequency-hopping FMCW radar could stack hops to super-resolve multipath, so it may transfer to device-free sensing or automotive radar without backscatter tags.
  • The first-order-only assumption implies a stress test the paper did not run: place the target behind two successive corners so the strongest path has two reflections, and accuracy should degrade sharply; that controlled experiment would map the failure boundary.
  • The reported errors track SNR (lab best, office worst) more than geometry, suggesting that wider bandwidth or more frequency hops would shrink errors roughly in proportion, an easily tested prediction.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents N2LoS, a 24 GHz FMCW radar system with a single backscatter tag for non-penetrable NLoS localization. The proposed design separates reflections from the target and from environmental reflectors using an HFD modulation scheme (DSSS plus FHSS), estimates reflector anchors from monostatic scattering returns in RLC phases, estimates virtual target distances from retro-reflected paths in TLC phases, resolves multipath with a proposed FS-MUSIC algorithm, and finally applies WLS multilateration. The authors evaluate the system in laboratory, office, and around-the-corner environments, reporting median errors of 10.69 cm in X and 11.98 cm in Y at a 5 m range in the laboratory, and they compare against FSK, DSSS, and conventional MUSIC baselines. The claimed contribution is centimeter-level NLoS localization without LiDAR, metasurfaces, or dense tag arrays.

Significance. If the results hold, N2LoS is a meaningful step toward low-complexity NLoS localization: it uses only a single radar and a single tag, and it is evaluated on a working prototype in three real environments with realistic reflector materials. The HFD modulation and the frequency-spatial MUSIC extension are interesting ideas, and the power-consumption analysis adds practical value. However, the two load-bearing technical claims—the FS-MUSIC rank increase and resolvability bound, and the observability of first-order reflector anchors via monostatic scattering—are asserted without a signal model, proof, or intermediate validation. The experimental reporting also omits trial counts, standard deviations, and confidence intervals, which weakens the strength of the empirical claims. These gaps are central rather than cosmetic and need to be addressed before the main claims can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.5.1, Eq. (10)] The claim that stacking N_f frequency-hopping segments per antenna yields a covariance matrix of rank N_a N_f, and therefore 2N_aN_f/3 resolvable multipaths, is not derived. The rows of r̂ are different time-frequency segments of the same physical multipath environment; their signal components are not statistically independent, and the dependence of the steering vectors on the hop frequency is not specified. Please provide the FS-MUSIC signal model, the definition of the 2D steering vector a(d,η), a proof or systematic derivation of the rank/resolvability bound, and a numerical validation that the bound is actually achieved. Without this, the central algorithmic innovation lacks theoretical grounding.
  2. [Section 4.2 and Eq. (3)] The entire localization geometry rests on the assumption that for every usable path the same first-order reflection point P_s^i produces a detectable monostatic scattering return P_R -> P_s^i -> P_R from which D_RS^i and φ^i are measured. The paper asserts this scattering mechanism but does not validate D_RS^i or φ^i against ground-truth reflector positions, does not quantify how often at least three usable anchors are found, and does not analyze what happens when the monostatic peak is absent or originates from a different surface location. Since the WLS solve in Eqs. (12)-(13) is biased under these failure modes, this is load-bearing. Please add an intermediate evaluation of anchor estimation accuracy and a failure/ambiguity analysis.
  3. [Section 5.2, Table 1, and Table 2] The experimental claims are reported as medians and means without trial counts, standard deviations, or confidence intervals: the CDFs in Figs. 9-11 have no sample sizes, and Table 1 lists mean errors with no variance. Moreover, Table 2 states a precision of '≤11 cm' for N2LoS, which is not supported by the reported median Euclidean error of 15.89 cm in the laboratory (Fig. 10); the headline precision should be stated consistently with the measured Euclidean error. Please report per-condition sample sizes, error spreads, and significance tests for the comparisons in Figs. 13-14.
  4. [Section 4.3 and Section 4.5.2] N2LoS requires pairing each virtual target detection in TLC with a reflector anchor from RLC, but the 1-degree collinearity threshold is introduced without an ambiguity analysis, and the text does not explain how associations are resolved when reflectors are angularly close or when fewer than three anchors are available. Because WLS in Eq. (13) assumes correct associations and at least three non-collinear anchors, the robustness claim requires a quantitative study of association errors and anchor availability in the three evaluated environments.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.1] The sentence 'To assess the the performance of N2LoS' contains a duplicated 'the'.
  2. [Section 7] The related-work section twice uses 'FWCW' where 'FMCW' is intended.
  3. [Section 4.4, Eq. (8)] The correlation equation uses r_tg(n) and r_t(...) inconsistently with the earlier notation r_target(t) in Eq. (6); the correlation window length N_T and any normalization should be defined.
  4. [Figure 12] The figure is said to show classification and detection accuracy exceeding 99%, but the axis labels are not legible in the provided version; please clarify what quantity is plotted and how accuracy is computed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: N2LoS's geometric derivation, HFD separation, and FS-MUSIC estimates are independent measured inputs, not fitted outputs.

full rationale

N2LoS's claimed derivation chain is not circular by construction. The target position is solved from measured range and AoA quantities: anchor coordinates from Eq. (3) use the reflector-only round-trip distance D_RS and AoA phi from RLC returns, and the multilateration distances use D_ST = D^i - D_RS with D^i from the TLC virtual-target return. None of these quantities is defined in terms of the unknown target coordinates (x_T, y_T) that minimize Eq. (13), so the reported median errors of 10.69 cm (X) and 11.98 cm (Y) are not forced by a fitted parameter. The HFD target/reflector distinction is physical -- the tag modulates only in TLC and is inactive in RLC -- rather than being derived from the localization outcome. The 1-degree collinearity rule and the FHSS frequency set are uniform design choices, not parameters fitted to the test positions. The paper's exclusive reliance on first-order reflected paths is an explicitly stated assumption, and the concern that a reflector may not scatter enough monostatic energy back to the radar is an unvalidated observability and robustness risk, not an equation-level circularity. The only author self-citation ([29], supporting the fact that mmWave signals cannot penetrate obstacles) is not load-bearing, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from prior work by these authors. The system is validated on fresh measurements after the design was fixed, with no training or target-position fitting.

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

The central claim rests on propagation and environment assumptions (first-order reflections, detectable scattering, three non-collinear anchors, weak passive tag reflection, ideal retro-reflection) and two hand-chosen system parameters. No new physical entities are introduced; HFD and FS-MUSIC are signal-processing constructs.

free parameters (2)
  • Angular alignment threshold = 1 degree
    Section 4.3 uses a 1 degree angular difference to consider a detected virtual target and a reflector as collinear. This threshold is chosen without sensitivity analysis and affects anchor association.
  • FHSS modulation frequencies = 2, 5, 10 kHz
    Section 5.1 configures the frequency-hopping set as 2, 5, and 10 kHz. These are design choices, not fitted to minimize error, but the system's SNR and FS-MUSIC performance depend on them.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Every usable NLoS path is first-order, reflecting off exactly one surface before reaching the tag.
    Section 4.2 states 'we focus exclusively on first-order reflected paths which have higher power levels'. This is required for the reflection-point anchor model and the virtual-target geometry.
  • domain assumption Reflectors scatter detectable energy back to the radar.
    Section 4.2 relies on scattering reflection from walls and furniture to measure D^i_RS and angle phi^i; without it, reflector anchors cannot be localized.
  • domain assumption At least three non-collinear reflection points are available for multilateration.
    Section 4.2 lists this as a requirement for a unique tag position. The indoor environment must provide enough first-order multipath returns.
  • domain assumption In the RLC phase the tag's passive reflection is too weak to be detected by the radar.
    Section 4.3 needs RLC detections to contain only reflector returns; if the tag's unmodulated reflection were visible, the LoS/NLoS classification and reflector/target separation would fail.
  • domain assumption The Van Atta tag retro-reflects the incident signal exactly along the incoming direction.
    Section 4.2 places the virtual target on the line from the radar through the reflection point; a non-ideal retro-reflection direction would bias the distances D^i.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of N$^2$LoS: Single-Tag mmWave Backscatter for Robust Non-Line-of-Sight Localization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EMJ67EU4

@misc{pith2026250508240,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: N$^2$LoS: Single-Tag mmWave Backscatter for Robust Non-Line-of-Sight Localization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EMJ67EU4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08240}
}
read the original abstract

The accuracy of traditional localization methods significantly degrades when the direct path between the wireless transmitter and the target is blocked or non-penetrable. This paper proposes N2LoS, a novel approach for precise non-line-of-sight (NLoS) localization using a single mmWave radar and a backscatter tag. N2LoS leverages multipath reflections from both the tag and surrounding reflectors to accurately estimate the targets position. N2LoS introduces several key innovations. First, we design HFD (Hybrid Frequency-Hopping and Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum) to detect and differentiate reflectors from the target. Second, we enhance signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) by exploiting the correlation properties of the designed signals, improving detection robustness in complex environments. Third, we propose FS-MUSIC (Frequency-Spatial Multiple Signal Classification), a super resolution algorithm that extends the traditional MUSIC method by constructing a higher-rank signal matrix, enabling the resolution of additional multipath components. We evaluate N2LoS using a 24 GHz mmWave radar with 250 MHz bandwidth in three diverse environments: a laboratory, an office, and an around-the-corner corridor. Experimental results demonstrate that N2LoS achieves median localization errors of 10.69 cm (X) and 11.98 cm (Y) at a 5 m range in the laboratory setting, showcasing its effectiveness for real-world NLoS localization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.08240 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Impact of Low SNR on localization, the dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. shows the localization process of N 2LoS. First, the radar transmits FMCW chirp signals for localization. These signals reach the target with a single tag through reflections from surrounding reflectors. Upon receiving the signals, the tag performs HFD modulation using a novel sequence. The radar then captures the modulated HFD signals from the tag (mounted on the target) based on the retro-reflection principle. To … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. A typical NLoS scenario for N 2LoS. coordinates. We consider 𝐼 NLoS multipath paths where 𝐼 = 3 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Target and Reflector Detection. NLoS condition can be determined by comparing the target’s presence in the TLC and RLC phases. The effectiveness of HFD in distinguishing between LoS and NLoS conditions will be evaluated in Section 5.3.1. Second, we can see in the right…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The Structure of HFD Sequence We now use Fig. 6 to explain the inference that we can [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Millimetro [41] VAA tag (left) and DEMORAD radar (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Layout of different environment modulated at 2 KHz, 5 KHz, and 10 KHz, respectively, and the radar’s chirp duration is configured at 2.56 𝑚𝑠 with 32 chirps per frame. N 2LoS was deployed in three different indoor environ￾ments for performance evaluation: (1) a laborato…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Localization error for office. 0 10 20 30 40 Localization Estimation Error(cm) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 CDF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of different modulation methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Impact of the number of targets. 5.4 Robustness Analysis 5.4.1 Impact of Multi-Target Localization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Trichopou- los

    Mohammed Aladsani, Ahmed Alkhateeb, and Georgios C. Trichopou- los. 2019. Leveraging mmWave Imaging and Communications for Simultaneous Localization and Mapping. In ICASSP 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). 4539–4543. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2019.8682741

    work page arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    Ahmed A. M. Ali, Heba B. El-Shaarawy, and Hervé Aubert. 2013. Millimeter-Wave Substrate Integrated Waveguide Passive Van Atta Reflector Array. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 61, 3 (2013), 1465–1470. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2012.2228622

    arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    Eleftheriades

    Paris Ang and George V. Eleftheriades. 2018. A Passive Redirecting Van Atta-Type Reflector. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters 17, 4 (2018), 689–692. https://doi.org/10.1109/LAWP.2018.2812108

    arXiv 2018

  4. [4]

    Roshan Ayyalasomayajula, Aditya Arun, Chenfeng Wu, Sanatan Sharma, Abhishek Rajkumar Sethi, Deepak Vasisht, and Dinesh Bhara- dia. 2020. Deep learning based wireless localization for indoor naviga- tion (MobiCom ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 17, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372224.3380894

    arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    Kang Min Bae, Namjo Ahn, Yoon Chae, Parth Pathak, Sung-Min Sohn, and Song Min Kim. 2022. OmniScatter: extreme sensitivity mmWave backscattering using commodity FMCW radar. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services. 316–329

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Kang Min Bae, Hankyeol Moon, and Song Min Kim. 2024. SuperSight: Sub-cm NLOS Localization for mmWave Backscatter. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Ap- plications and Services (Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan) (MOBISYS ’24). As- sociation for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 278–291. https://doi.org/10.1145/36438...

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Kang Min Bae, Hankyeol Moon, Sung-Min Sohn, and Song Min Kim

  8. [8]

    Constantine A Balanis. 2024. Balanis’ Advanced Engineering Electro- magnetics. John Wiley & Sons

    work page 2024

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Guillermo Bielsa, Joan Palacios, Adrian Loch, Daniel Steinmetzer, Paolo Casari, and Joerg Widmer. 2018. Indoor localization using commer- cial off-the-shelf 60 GHz access points. In IEEE INFOCOM 2018-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications . IEEE, 2384–2392

    2018

  2. [10]

    Li-Xuan Chuo, Zhihong Luo, Dennis Sylvester, David Blaauw, and Hun-Seok Kim. 2017. RF-Echo: A Non-Line-of-Sight Indoor Local- ization System Using a Low-Power Active RF Reflector ASIC Tag. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Netwo...

    2017

  3. [11]

    Panasonic. CR2477. 2020. https://industrial.panasonic.com/cdbs/www- data/pdf2/ AAA4000/AAA4000C341.pdf

    2020

  4. [12]

    Alomar, and Anthony Grbic

    Mauro Ettorre, Waleed A. Alomar, and Anthony Grbic. 2018. 2-D Van Atta Array of Wideband, Wideangle Slots for Radiative Wireless Power Transfer Systems. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 66, 9 (2018), 4577–4585. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2018.2851197

    2018

  5. [13]

    Grayver and B

    E. Grayver and B. Daneshrad. 2001. A low-power all-digital FSK receiver for space applications. IEEE Transactions on Communications 49, 5 (2001), 911–921. https://doi.org/10.1109/26.923814

    2001 doi

  6. [14]

    Marco Gunia, Adrian Zinke, Niko Joram, and Frank Ellinger. 2023. Analysis and Design of a MuSiC-Based Angle of Arrival Positioning System. ACM Trans. Sen. Netw. 19, 3, Article 66 (mar 2023), 41 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3577927

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    Knightly

    Muhammad Kumail Haider, Yasaman Ghasempour, Dimitrios Kout- sonikolas, and Edward W. Knightly. 2018. LiSteer: mmWave Beam Acquisition and Steering by Tracking Indicator LEDs on Wireless APs. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Net...

    2018

  8. [16]

    Dominique Henry, Jimmy G. D. Hester, Hervé Aubert, Patrick Pons, and Manos M. Tentzeris. 2017. Long-Range Wireless Interrogation of Passive Humidity Sensors Using Van-Atta Cross-Polarization Ef- fect and Different Beam Scanning Techniques. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory...

    2017

  9. [17]

    Chengkun Jiang, Yuan He, Xiaolong Zheng, and Yunhao Liu. 2021. OmniTrack: Orientation-Aware RFID Tracking With Centimeter-Level Accuracy. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 20, 2 (2021), 634–646. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2019.2949412

    2021

  10. [18]

    Hao Kong, Cheng Huang, Jiadi Yu, and Xuemin Shen. 2024. A survey of mmwave radar-based sensing in autonomous vehicles, smart homes and industry. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Manikanta Kotaru, Kiran Joshi, Dinesh Bharadia, and Sachin Katti. 2015. Spotfi: Decimeter level localization using wifi. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM conference on special interest group on data communication . 269–282. Conference acronym ’XX, June 03–05, 2018, Woodstock, NY...

    2015

  12. [20]

    Jesus Omar Lacruz, Dolores Garcia, Pablo Jiménez Mateo, Joan Palacios, and Joerg Widmer. 2020. mm-FLEX: an open platform for millimeter- wave mobile full-bandwidth experimentation. InProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services...

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    Shengjie Li, Zhaopeng Liu, Yue Zhang, Qin Lv, Xiaopeng Niu, Leye Wang, and Daqing Zhang. 2020. WiBorder: Precise Wi-Fi based Bound- ary Sensing via Through-wall Discrimination. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 4, 3, Article 89 (sep 2020), 30 pages. https:/...

    2020 doi

  14. [22]

    Xiang Li, Shengjie Li, Daqing Zhang, Jie Xiong, Yasha Wang, and Hong Mei. 2016. Dynamic-MUSIC: accurate device-free indoor localization. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Perva- sive and Ubiquitous Computing (Heidelberg, Germany) (UbiComp ’16). A...

    2016

  15. [23]

    Xiang Li, Shengjie Li, Daqing Zhang, Jie Xiong, Yasha Wang, and Hong Mei. 2016. Dynamic-MUSIC: Accurate device-free indoor local- ization. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing . 196–207

    2016

  16. [24]

    Xiang Li, Daqing Zhang, Qin Lv, Jie Xiong, Shengjie Li, Yue Zhang, and Hong Mei. 2017. IndoTrack: Device-Free Indoor Human Tracking with Commodity Wi-Fi. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1, 3, Article 72 (sep 2017), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3130940

    2017

  17. [25]

    Yue Li, Jiayong Peng, Juntian Ye, Yueyi Zhang, Feihu Xu, and Zhiwei Xiong. 2023. Nlost: Non-line-of-sight imaging with transformer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 13313–13322

    2023

  18. [26]

    Zhengxiong Li, Baicheng Chen, Zhuolin Yang, Huining Li, Chenhan Xu, Xingyu Chen, Kun Wang, and Wenyao Xu. 2019. FerroTag: a paper- based mmWave-scannable tagging infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (New York, New York) (Se...

    2019

  19. [27]

    Lanxin Lin, Hing-Cheung So, Frankie KW Chan, Yiu Tong Chan, and KC Ho. 2013. A new constrained weighted least squares algorithm for TDOA-based localization. Signal Processing 93, 11 (2013), 2872–2878

    2013

  20. [28]

    Lindell, Gordon Wetzstein, and Matthew O’Toole

    David B. Lindell, Gordon Wetzstein, and Matthew O’Toole. 2019. Wave- based non-line-of-sight imaging using fast f-k migration. ACM Trans. Graph. 38, 4, Article 116 (jul 2019), 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3306346.3322937

    2019

  21. [29]

    Jun Liu, Jiayao Gao, Sanjay Jha, and Wen Hu. 2021. Seirios: leverag- ing multiple channels for LoRaWAN indoor and outdoor localization. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. 656–669

    2021

  22. [30]

    Haofan Lu, Mohammad Mazaheri, Reza Rezvani, and Omid Abari. 2023. A Millimeter Wave Backscatter Network for Two-Way Communication and Localization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2023 Conference. 49–61

    2023

  23. [31]

    Kutu- lakos, and David B

    Anagh Malik, Parsa Mirdehghan, Sotiris Nousias, Kiriakos N. Kutu- lakos, and David B. Lindell. 2024. Transient neural radiance fields for lidar view synthesis and 3D reconstruction. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (N...

    2024

  24. [32]

    Rico Mendrzik, Henk Wymeersch, Gerhard Bauch, and Zohair Abu- Shaban. 2019. Harnessing NLOS Components for Position and Ori- entation Estimation in 5G Millimeter Wave MIMO. IEEE Trans- actions on Wireless Communications 18, 1 (2019), 93–107. https: //doi.org/10.1109/TWC.2018.2877615

    2019

  25. [33]

    CM Michel, D Lehmann, B Henggeler, and D Brandeis. 1992. Local- ization of the sources of EEG delta, theta, alpha and beta frequency bands using the FFT dipole approximation. Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology 82, 1 (1992), 38–44

    1992

  26. [34]

    Texas Instruments MSP430FR5994 microcontroller. 2020. https://www.ti.com/product/MSP430FR5994

    2020

  27. [35]

    Wornell, William T

    Felix Naser, Igor Gilitschenski, Guy Rosman, Alexander Amini, Fredo Durand, Antonio Torralba, Gregory W. Wornell, William T. Freeman, Sertac Karaman, and Daniela Rus. 2018. ShadowCam: Real-Time Detec- tion of Moving Obstacles Behind A Corner For Autonomous Vehicles. In 2018 21...

    2018

  28. [36]

    Santosh Pandey and Prathima Agrawal. 2006. A survey on localization techniques for wireless networks. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers 29, 7 (2006), 1125–1148

    2006

  29. [37]

    Padmanabhan, and Rijurekha Sen

    Anshul Rai, Krishna Kant Chintalapudi, Venkata N. Padmanabhan, and Rijurekha Sen. 2012. Zee: zero-effort crowdsourcing for indoor localization. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (Istanbul, Turkey) (Mobicom ’12). Assoc...

    2012

  30. [38]

    Shahram Shahbazpanahi, Shahrokh Valaee, and Mohammad Hasan Bastani. 2001. Distributed source localization using ESPRIT algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 49, 10 (2001), 2169–2178

    2001

  31. [39]

    Sharp and M

    E. Sharp and M. Diab. 1960. Van Atta reflector array. IRE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 8, 4 (1960), 436–438. https://doi.org/10. 1109/TAP.1960.1144877

    1960

  32. [40]

    Anish Shastri, Neharika Valecha, Enver Bashirov, Harsh Tataria, Michael Lentmaier, Fredrik Tufvesson, Michele Rossi, and Paolo Casari

  33. [41]

    Elahe Soltanaghaei, Akarsh Prabhakara, Artur Balanuta, Matthew Anderson, Jan M Rabaey, Swarun Kumar, and Anthony Rowe. 2021. Millimetro: mmWave retro-reflective tags for accurate, long range localization. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Mobile Com...

    2021

  34. [42]

    Siddharth Somasundaram, Akshat Dave, Connor Henley, Ashok Veer- araghavan, and Ramesh Raskar. 2023. Role of transients in two-bounce non-line-of-sight imaging. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition . 9192–9201

    2023

  35. [43]

    MACOM SPDT. 2020. https://cdn.macom.com/datasheets/MASW

    2020

  36. [44]

    Axel Strobel, Christian Carlowitz, Robert Wolf, Frank Ellinger, and Martin Vossiek. 2013. A Millimeter-Wave Low-Power Active Backscat- ter Tag for FMCW Radar Systems. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques 61, 5 (2013), 1964–1972. https://doi.org/10. 1109/TMTT.20...

    2013

  37. [45]

    Tazebay and A.N

    M.V. Tazebay and A.N. Akansu. 1995. Adaptive subband transforms in time-frequency excisers for DSSS communications systems. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 43, 11 (1995), 2776–2782. https: //doi.org/10.1109/78.482125

    1995 doi

  38. [46]

    Kamil Trzebiatowski, Mateusz Rzymowski, Lukasz Kulas, and Krzysztof Nyka. 2022. Simple Millimeter Wave Identification System Based on 60 GHz Van Atta Arrays. Sensors 22, 24 (2022), 9809

    2022

  39. [47]

    Leung Tsang, Jin Au Kong, and Kung-Hau Ding. 2000. Scattering of electromagnetic waves: theories and applications . John Wiley & Sons

    2000

  40. [48]

    Andreas Velten, Thomas Willwacher, Otkrist Gupta, Ashok Veer- araghavan, Moungi G Bawendi, and Ramesh Raskar. 2012. Recovering three-dimensional shape around a corner using ultrafast time-of-flight imaging. Nature communications 3, 1 (2012), 745. N2LoS: Single-Tag mmWave Backs...

    2012

  41. [49]

    Andreas Velten, Di Wu, Adrian Jarabo, Belen Masia, Christopher Barsi, Chinmaya Joshi, Everett Lawson, Moungi Bawendi, Diego Gutierrez, and Ramesh Raskar. 2013. Femto-photography: capturing and visual- izing the propagation of light. ACM Trans. Graph. 32, 4, Article 44 (jul 201...

    2013

  42. [50]

    Vitaz, Amelia M

    Jacquelyn A. Vitaz, Amelia M. Buerkle, and Kamal Sarabandi. 2010. Tracking of Metallic Objects Using a Retro-Reflective Array at 26 GHz. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation58, 11 (2010), 3539–3544. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2010.2071350

    2010

  43. [51]

    Jing Wang, Tanja Karp, José-María Muñoz-Ferreras, Roberto Gómez- García, and Changzhi Li. 2019. A Spectrum-Efficient FSK Radar Solu- tion for Stationary Human Subject Localization Based on Vital Sign Signals. In 2019 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium (IMS) . 140–143...

    2019

  44. [52]

    Jue Wang and Dina Katabi. 2013. Dude, where’s my card? RFID posi- tioning that works with multipath and non-line of sight. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 43, 4 (aug 2013), 51–62. https://doi.org/10. 1145/2534169.2486029

    2013

  45. [53]

    Dianhan Xie, Xudong Wang, and Aimin Tang. 2022. MetaSight: localiz- ing blocked RFID objects by modulating NLOS signals via metasurfaces. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services (Portland, Oregon) (MobiSys ’22). A...

    2022

  46. [54]

    Xiangyu Xu, Hao Kong, and Jiadi Yu. 2023. Towards Robust Multi- user 3D Posture Tracking Through mmWave Signals. In Proceedings of the ACM Turing A ward Celebration Conference - China 2023 (Wuhan, China) (ACM TURC ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1...

    2023

  47. [55]

    Songzhen Yang, Meng Jin, Yuan He, and Yunhao Liu. 2021. RF-Prism: Versatile RFID-based Sensing through Phase Disentangling. In 2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). 1053–1063. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00104

    2021

  48. [56]

    Zhiyun Yao, Xuanzhi Wang, Kai Niu, Rong Zheng, Junzhe Wang, and Daqing Zhang. 2024. WiProfile: Unlocking Diffraction Effects for Sub- Centimeter Target Profiling Using Commodity WiFi Devices. In Pro- ceedings of the 30th Annual International Conference on Mobile Comput- ing an...

    2024

  49. [57]

    Juntian Ye, Yu Hong, Xiongfei Su, Xin Yuan, and Feihu Xu. 2024. Plug- and-Play Algorithms for Dynamic Non-line-of-sight Imaging. ACM Trans. Graph. 43, 5, Article 155 (jun 2024), 12 pages. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3665139

    2024 doi

  50. [58]

    Kegen Yu, Kai Wen, Yingbing Li, Shuai Zhang, and Kefei Zhang. 2019. A Novel NLOS Mitigation Algorithm for UWB Localization in Harsh Indoor Environments. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 68, 1 (2019), 686–699. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2018.2883810

    2019

  51. [59]

    Shichao Yue, Hao He, Peng Cao, Kaiwen Zha, Masayuki Koizumi, and Dina Katabi. 2022. CornerRadar: RF-Based Indoor Localization Around Corners. 6, 1, Article 34 (mar 2022), 24 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3517226

    2022

  52. [60]

    Jia Zhang, Yinian Zhou, Rui Xi, Shuai Li, Junchen Guo, and Yuan He

  53. [61]

    Renjie Zhao, Timothy Woodford, Teng Wei, Kun Qian, and Xinyu Zhang. 2020. M-cube: A millimeter-wave massive MIMO software radio. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking . 1–14

    2020

  54. [63]

    AmbiEar: mmWave Based Voice Recognition in NLoS Scenarios. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 6, 3, Article 151 (sep 2022), 25 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3550320

    2022 doi

  55. [2022]

    IEEE Com- munications Surveys & Tutorials 24, 3 (2022), 1708–1749

    A Review of Millimeter Wave Device-Based Localization and Device-Free Sensing Technologies and Applications. IEEE Com- munications Surveys & Tutorials 24, 3 (2022), 1708–1749. https: //doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2022.3177305

    2022

  56. [2023]

    In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services (Helsinki, Finland) (MobiSys ’23)

    Hawkeye: Hectometer-range Subcentimeter Localization for Large-scale mmWave Backscatter. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services (Helsinki, Finland) (MobiSys ’23). Association for Computing Machin- ery, New York, ...

    doi

Pith tools

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