Polarforming Design with Phase Shifter Based Polarization Reconfigurable Antennas

Jingze Ding; Rui Zhang; Zijian Zhou

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Polarforming Design with Phase Shifter Based Polarization Reconfigurable Antennas

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single phase shifter per antenna can steer polarization to match the channel, beating fixed and switchable antennas by up to 6.3 dB in SNR.

desk verdict A clean phase-only polarization adaptation scheme whose abstract oversells the reachable polarization states; worth reviewing if the claims are tightened and the loss vs. full polarization control is quantified. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21990 v1 pith:N65M7LS4 submitted 2025-05-28 eess.SP

Zijian Zhou , Jingze Ding , Rui Zhang This is my paper

classification eess.SP

keywords PolarformingpolarizationreconfigurableantennaphaseshifteradaptationSISOcommunicationchanneldepolarizationSNRmaximizationalternatingoptimization

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proposes a polarization-reconfigurable antenna that uses a single RF chain and one phase shifter to control the phase difference between a vertical and a horizontal element, and argues that this is enough to shape the antenna's polarization to match the incoming electromagnetic wave. The authors call this polarforming and show in a SISO link that jointly tuning the phase shifts at both ends maximizes the received SNR. The proposed scheme is claimed to outperform conventional fixed-polarization antennas and existing switchable or agile polarization antennas, with simulated SNR gains of 1.9, 2.7, 5.6, and 6.3 dB over SPRA, PAA, CPA, and LPA at 4 bps/Hz. If true, this matters because polarization adaptation becomes available to low-cost, single-RF-chain devices rather than requiring two RF chains as in dual-polarized antennas.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the polarforming vector pair $\mathbf{f}(\theta)$ and $\mathbf{g}(\phi)$, which encode the antenna's polarization as a function of a single phase shift, and the closed-form phase-alignment rule of Theorem 1. The theorem turns the non-concave SNR maximization over two coupled phase variables into two simple subproblems, each solved by reading the phase of one off-diagonal entry of a Hermitian matrix built from the channel $\mathbf{P}$ and the current phase of the other side. It is this mechanism that lets the antenna sweep linear, circular, and elliptical polarizations and that guarantees the alternating optimization cannot decrease the SNR.

What would settle it

Take the same SISO channel model and repeat the simulations at inverse XPD values far from chi = 0.2, such as chi = 0.02 (one polarization nearly absent) or chi = 2 (strong depolarization), and compare the proposed scheme against PAA: if PAA matches or beats polarforming whenever the channel's two polarization components have very different magnitudes, the equal-amplitude restriction is the limiting assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that maximizing the SNR of a phase-shifter-based polarization-reconfigurable antenna link reduces to aligning the phases of two unit-magnitude polarization vectors. With transmit polarforming vector $\mathbf{f}(\theta)=[1, e^{j\theta}]^T/\sqrt{2}$ and receive vector $\mathbf{g}(\phi)=[1, e^{j\phi}]^T$, the channel response is $h(\theta,\phi)=\mathbf{g}(\phi)^H \mathbf{P} \mathbf{f}(\theta)$, and the paper proves a closed-form rule: for any $2\times 2$ Hermitian matrix $\mathbf{W}$, the phase $\psi$ maximizing $[1, e^{j\psi}]\mathbf{W}[1, e^{j\psi}]^H$ is the phase of the off-diagonal entry $[\mathbf{W}]_{21}$. Alternating this rule between receiver and transmitter yields a monotone algorithm that converges in about six iterations in simulation. The paper claims this beats switchable, agile, circularly fixed, and linearly fixed antennas because it can continuously match the channel's polarization state, including general elliptical polarizations, with only one RF chain per antenna.

Load-bearing premise

The whole scheme rests on the assumption that equal-strength vertical and horizontal components whose phase difference is tuned can match the channel's polarization; real channels that need unequal component amplitudes would not be fully matched.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single RF chain plus one phase shifter per antenna is enough to continuously adapt polarization, closing part of the gap to dual-RF-chain dual-polarized antennas.
Receive-side polarforming yields larger gains than transmit-side polarforming, because the transmit power constraint punishes dual-element antennas when only one side adapts.
At 4 bps/Hz the proposed scheme shows SNR gains of 1.9 dB over SPRA, 2.7 dB over PAA, 5.6 dB over CPA, and 6.3 dB over LPA in the simulated Rayleigh channel.
The alternating algorithm converges monotonically, reaching its maximum rate within about six iterations for the simulated SNR range.
The same phase-shifter construction extends to three orthogonal antenna elements, which would allow even more general polarization states.

Reading between the lines

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

If phase-only polarization control proves robust in hardware, polarforming could be layered onto existing beamforming or MIMO arrays by adding one phase shifter per dual-element antenna, turning polarization into an extra adjustable dimension without extra RF chains.
Because the two elements always radiate equal power, the achievable polarization states lie on the great circle of equal-magnitude H/V states; in channels with strongly imbalanced cross-polarization, matching the channel would require amplitude weighting, and the simulated gains would shrink.
A testable extension is to measure the same SISO scenario with a real phase-shifter-based antenna and compare thresholds; hardware phase quantization and mutual coupling between V and H elements are the obvious places where the claimed 1.9-6.3 dB gains could erode.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a modest, clean extension of polarization-agile antennas that deserves referee time, but it oversells what a single phase shifter can do, and the simulations don't compare against unconstrained polarization matching. The authors propose a PS-based PRA: one RF chain feeds two orthogonal H/V elements, and a phase shifter sets the phase difference. The transmit PFV is f(theta)=[1,e^{jtheta}]/sqrt(2) and the receive PFV is g(phi)=[1,e^{jphi}]. That is genuinely new relative to switchable PRAs and linear-polarization-agile arrays. The optimization is a nice closed form: Theorem 1 shows the phase maximizing a 2x2 Hermitian quadratic is simply the angle of the off-diagonal, and the alternating updates in (10) and (12) are correct and monotone. The simulations are straightforward: 1e4 realizations, four benchmarks, and they show 1.9 to 6.3 dB gains over SPRA, PAA, CPA, and LPA at 4 bps/Hz. I believe the math and the gains for this specific design.

The soft spot is real and load-bearing. With equal-amplitude components, the polarization state is restricted to a one-dimensional arc: linear at +/-45 degrees, circular, and ellipses with axes at +/-45 degrees. It cannot produce linear at, say, 10 degrees, or an ellipse with 2:1 amplitude ratio. So the abstract's claim of 'general elliptical polarizations' is wrong, and the 'shaping polarization into a desired state to align with the received wave' claim is too strong. The channel's optimal transmit vector (the right singular vector of P) generically has unequal V/H magnitudes; the proposed scheme cannot reach it. The paper never quantifies how much SNR is lost to that restriction, nor does it compare against a two-PS antenna or any design that covers the full Poincare sphere. The 1.9-6.3 dB gains over PAA might partly reflect PAA being limited to linear states, not the proposed scheme's ability to align with arbitrary channel states. This is testable with the same simulation setup, so it's not an unfixable flaw.

A secondary point: Algorithm 1 is only locally convergent. The alternating updates monotonically increase SNR, but the problem is non-concave. A simple multi-start or grid baseline would show how much local optima matter. Also, no code or data are released, but that's a minor omission for this kind of paper.

Who is this for: people working on polarization-agile antennas, low-cost single-RF-chain transceivers, and reconfigurable antennas. It is a decent conference-level or short journal paper once the claims are tightened. I'd send it to peer review, but with a strong request: correct the polarization-state characterization and add a comparison against unconstrained polarization control. That would tell us whether the restricted design actually captures most of the gain.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a 'polarforming' concept for a phase-shifter-based polarization reconfigurable antenna (PRA) that uses two orthogonal V/H elements and a single RF chain. For a SISO system, it defines transmit and receive polarization-forming vectors f(θ) and g(φ), expresses the channel as h = g^H P f, and formulates the SNR maximization over the two phase shifts. Theorem 1 gives the closed-form optimal phase for a quadratic form of a Hermitian 2×2 matrix, and Algorithm 1 alternates between the transmit and receive phase updates. Simulations compare the proposed scheme with switchable PRAs (SPRA), polarization-agile antennas (PAA), fixed circular (CPA), and fixed linear (LPA) antennas, reporting SNR gains of 1.9–6.3 dB at 4 bps/Hz.

Significance. The core mathematical result is correct and clean: Theorem 1 is valid, and the alternating updates in Algorithm 1 are monotone in SNR. The hardware proposal is simple and the optimization is computationally light, so the scheme is potentially useful for low-cost polarization adaptation. If the polarization-coverage claims are restricted to the actually achievable set and the receive-vector normalization is made consistent, the paper would offer a solid contribution. As written, however, the overclaimed generality and the normalization artifact in the comparisons prevent the significance from being established.

major comments (3)

[Section IV (benchmark definitions) and Eq. (4)] The comparison is not on an equal footing for receive normalization. The proposed receive PFV g(φ) in Eq. (2) has norm √2, while the PAA and LPA benchmarks use receive vectors with norm 1 (Section IV, benchmark definitions). Since the SNR in Eq. (4) scales as |g^H P f|², this gives the proposed scheme a 3 dB advantage over PAA and LPA that is independent of polarization adaptability. The statement that 'normalization at the receiver is not necessary' does not justify the discrepancy; with completely arbitrary receive scaling the optimization problem would be ill-posed. Please normalize all receive vectors to the same norm (or provide a physical model for the combiner gain) and recompute Figs. 3–5. This could materially change the reported 2.7 dB and 6.3 dB gains over PAA and LPA in Fig. 5.
[Abstract and Eq. (2)] The claim that the PS-based PRA can 'form linear, circular, and general elliptical polarizations' is stronger than what the architecture delivers. With f(θ) = (1/√2)[1, e^{jθ}]^T and g(φ) = [1, e^{jφ}]^T, the V/H components always have equal amplitude, so the achievable states are restricted to the great circle of the Poincaré sphere where S1 = 0. This set contains linear polarizations at ±45°, circular polarizations, and ellipses with axes at ±45°, but not arbitrary linear orientations or general ellipses with unequal V/H amplitudes. Please characterize the achievable polarization set explicitly and revise the abstract and introduction to avoid overclaiming, or extend the design with amplitude control.
[Section III, Algorithm 1] Algorithm 1 is an alternating maximization with closed-form subproblem solutions, but because the objective in (5) is non-concave, it only guarantees convergence to a stationary point. The paper does not compare the result with a global search over θ, φ ∈ [0, 2π] (e.g., a dense grid or multi-start). Since the problem is two-dimensional, such a comparison is easy and would establish whether the reported SNR is the best achievable under the equal-amplitude constraint. Without it, the numerical gains in Figs. 2–5 may reflect the initialization at (0,0) rather than the algorithm's true optimum.

minor comments (3)

[Eq. (2)] The receive PFV g(φ) is not normalized to unit norm while the transmit PFV f(θ) is; please add a sentence explaining the convention used for receive vectors, e.g., whether a passive lossless combiner is assumed or whether the normalization is left implicit.
[Section II, channel model] The description 'The elements of the matrix H_iid ∈ C^{2×2} are i.i.d. and circularly distributed random variables with equal covariance of 1/√2 after normalization' is vague; please specify the exact distribution (e.g., zero-mean circularly symmetric complex Gaussian with variance 1/√2 per entry) and state the normalization explicitly.
[Throughout] The notation for the receive phase shift is inconsistent in places, with both φ and ϕ appearing; please unify the symbols and ensure the spacing in terms like 'P AA' is consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation and simulations are self-contained, with no fitted parameters renamed as predictions and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's optimization formulation is self-contained. The transmit and receive polarforming vectors are explicitly defined in Eq. (2) as f(θ) = [1, e^{jθ}]/√2 and g(φ) = [1, e^{jφ}], and the SNR expression in Eq. (4) is built directly from them together with the externally sourced polarized channel model P = Ψ ⊙ H_i.i.d., with Ψ given in Eq. (3) and credited to [17]. Theorem 1 is a complete algebraic derivation of the optimal phase for a 2×2 Hermitian quadratic form; it does not assume the conclusion. The alternating updates in Eqs. (10) and (12) follow by direct application of Theorem 1 and are not fitted to the simulation targets. No parameter is inferred from the rate curves in Figs. 2–5 and then presented as a prediction; the gains over SPRA, PAA, CPA, and LPA are computed from the model after fixing the inverse XPD χ = 0.2 as in [15]. The paper does cite the authors' companion paper [1] for the term 'polarforming' and for the general claim that polarization can triple capacity, but that citation is background and not load-bearing: none of the optimization, theorem, or simulation results depend on [1] for their validity. The skeptical point that f(θ) only reaches equal-power polarization states and therefore may not realize arbitrary 'general elliptical polarizations' is a legitimate correctness or scope concern, but it is not circularity: the restriction is stated openly in Eq. (2), and the paper's claims can be tested independently against the model. No step in the derivation reduces to its own inputs, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted constants are used; the single simulation parameter chi is taken from prior work. The central design rests on an ideal equal-gain, phase-only PRA model and a specific channel model, neither of which is validated with hardware or measured channels.

free parameters (1)

inverse XPD chi = 0.2 (simulation setting, taken from [15])
The reported SNR gains depend on the assumed inverse cross-polarization discrimination; it is not fitted but is a user-selected simulation parameter, and gains would change for other chi.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Polarized channel matrix P = Psi ⊙ H_iid with Psi from Eq. (3) and a single scalar XPD parameter chi
The channel depolarization is modeled by a fixed correlation matrix from [17]; deviations from this model would change results.
domain assumption Perfect CSI of P is available at both transmitter and receiver
Stated in footnote 1; the optimization uses full channel knowledge, which is difficult to acquire in practice.
domain assumption Narrowband quasi-static Rayleigh fading, AWGN, and negligible noise from antenna elements and PSs
These assumptions justify the SNR expression (4); the paper does not analyze wideband or hardware noise.
domain assumption PS-based PRA has two ideal equal-gain H/V elements driven by one RF chain with an ideal phase shifter spanning 0 to 2 pi
The polarization vector (2) assumes equal-magnitude elements and no amplitude control; physical antennas may have coupling, imbalance, and limited phase range.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polarforming Design with Phase Shifter Based Polarization Reconfigurable Antennas." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N65M7LS4

@misc{pith2026250521990,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polarforming Design with Phase Shifter Based Polarization Reconfigurable Antennas},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N65M7LS4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21990}
}

read the original abstract

In this paper, we propose a new form of polarization reconfigurable antennas (PRAs) that can form linear, circular, and general elliptical polarizations assisted by phase shifters (PSs). With PRAs, polarforming is achieved, which enables the antenna to shape its polarization into a desired state for aligning with that of the received electromagnetic (EM) wave or reconfiguring that of the transmit EM wave. To demonstrate the benefits of polarforming, we investigate a PRA-aided single-input single-output (SISO) communication system equipped with tunable PSs for polarization adaptation. We characterize the achievable signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the receiver as a function of the phase shifts of PS-based PRAs. Moreover, we develop an alternating optimization approach to maximize the SNR by optimizing the phase shifts at both the transmitter and receiver. Finally, comprehensive simulation results are presented, which not only validate the effectiveness of polarforming in mitigating the channel depolarization effects, but also demonstrate its substantial performance improvement over conventional systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21990 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Convergence behavior of Algorithm 1. all values of SNR, which validates the convergence analysis in Sections III. In comparison to the proposed scheme marked by “Polarforming” with PS-based PRAs, four benchmark schemes are considered, defined below. • SPRA: This system is assisted with SPRAs at the transmitter and/or receiver, where each SPRA is connected to a single RF chain and can switch among two polarization … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Achievable rate of transmit polarforming versus SNR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Achievable rate of polarforming versus SNR when it is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Achievable rate of receive polarforming versus SNR w [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Polarforming for Wireless Networks: Opportunities and Challenges
cs.IT 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

Polarforming, which reconfigures antenna polarization with a single RF chain per antenna, is presented as a cost-effective way to exploit polarization degrees of freedom in wireless networks.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Polarforming for wireless net- works: Opportunities and challenges,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, B. Jiao, and R. Zhang, “Polarforming for wireless net- works: Opportunities and challenges,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.20760, 2025

arXiv 2025
[2]

Movable antennas for wireles s commu- nication: Opportunities and challenges,

L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wireles s commu- nication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114-120, Jun. 2024

2024
[3]

Movab le antenna-enabled co-frequency co-time full-duplex wirele ss communica- tion,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, W. Li, C. Wang, L. Lin, and B. Jiao, “Movab le antenna-enabled co-frequency co-time full-duplex wirele ss communica- tion,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 2412-2416, Oct. 2024

work page 2024
[4]

Power-efﬁcient ful l-duplex satellite communications aided by movable antennas,

L. Lin, J. Ding, Z. Zhou, and B. Jiao, “Power-efﬁcient ful l-duplex satellite communications aided by movable antennas,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 656-660, Mar. 2025

work page 2025
[5]

Movable antenna-aided sec ure full-duplex multi-user communications,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, and B. Jiao, “Movable antenna-aided sec ure full-duplex multi-user communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2389-2403, Mar. 2025

work page 2025
[6]

Flu id antenna systems,

K.-K. Wong, A. Shojaeifard, K.-F. Tong and Y . Zhang, “Flu id antenna systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1950-1962, Mar. 2021

work page 1950
[7]

Near-ﬁeld multiuser communications aided by movable antennas,

J. Ding, L. Zhu, Z. Zhou, B. Jiao, and R. Zhang, “Near-ﬁeld multiuser communications aided by movable antennas,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 138-142, Jan. 2025

work page 2025
[8]

Movable-an tenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,

W. Mei, X. Wei, B. Ning, Z. Chen, and R. Zhang, “Movable-an tenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1853-1857, Jul. 2024

work page 2024

Show all 17 references

[9]

Movable a ntenna- aided near-ﬁeld integrated sensing and communication,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, X. Shao, B. Jiao, and R. Zhang, “Movable a ntenna- aided near-ﬁeld integrated sensing and communication,” ar Xiv preprint arXiv:2412.19470, 2024

2024 arXiv
[10]

Flexible-ant enna systems: A pinching-antenna perspective,

Z. Ding, R. Schober, and H. Vincent Poor, “Flexible-ant enna systems: A pinching-antenna perspective,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , early access, Mar. 2025

2025
[11]

Massive MIMO with dual-polarize d antennas,

¨O. ¨Ozdogan and E. Bj¨ ornson, “Massive MIMO with dual-polarize d antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1448- 1463, Feb. 2023

2023
[12]

Internet of Things in industri es: A survey,

L. D. Xu, W. He, and S. Li, “Internet of Things in industri es: A survey,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat. , vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2233–2243, Nov. 2014

2014
[13]

Des ign and im- plementation of broadband MEMS RHCP/LHCP reconﬁgurable ar rays using rotated E-shaped patch elements,

J. M. Kovitz, H. Rajagopalan, and Y . Rahmat-Samii, “Des ign and im- plementation of broadband MEMS RHCP/LHCP reconﬁgurable ar rays using rotated E-shaped patch elements,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 2497–2507, Jun. 2015

2015
[14]

Capacity maximization wi th polarization-agile antennas in the MIMO communication sys tem,

S.-C. Kwon and A. F. Molisch, “Capacity maximization wi th polarization-agile antennas in the MIMO communication sys tem,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM) , San Diego, CA, USA, Dec. 2015, pp. 1–6

2015
[15]

Linear polarization optimization for wideband MIMO systems with reconﬁgurable arrays,

M. R. Castellanos and R. W. Heath, “Linear polarization optimization for wideband MIMO systems with reconﬁgurable arrays,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 2282-2295, Mar. 2024

2024
[16]

Analysi s of the perfor- mance enhancement of MIMO systems employing circular polar ization,

F. A. Dicandia, S. Genovesi, and A. Monorchio, “Analysi s of the perfor- mance enhancement of MIMO systems employing circular polar ization,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 4824–4835, Sep. 2017

2017
[17]

On polarization chan nel modeling,

Y . He, X. Cheng, and G. L. St¨ uber, “On polarization chan nel modeling,” IEEE Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 80-86, Feb. 2016

2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Polarforming for wireless net- works: Opportunities and challenges,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, B. Jiao, and R. Zhang, “Polarforming for wireless net- works: Opportunities and challenges,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.20760, 2025

arXiv 2025

[2] [2]

Movable antennas for wireles s commu- nication: Opportunities and challenges,

L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wireles s commu- nication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114-120, Jun. 2024

2024

[3] [3]

Movab le antenna-enabled co-frequency co-time full-duplex wirele ss communica- tion,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, W. Li, C. Wang, L. Lin, and B. Jiao, “Movab le antenna-enabled co-frequency co-time full-duplex wirele ss communica- tion,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 2412-2416, Oct. 2024

work page 2024

[4] [4]

Power-efﬁcient ful l-duplex satellite communications aided by movable antennas,

L. Lin, J. Ding, Z. Zhou, and B. Jiao, “Power-efﬁcient ful l-duplex satellite communications aided by movable antennas,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 656-660, Mar. 2025

work page 2025

[5] [5]

Movable antenna-aided sec ure full-duplex multi-user communications,

J. Ding, Z. Zhou, and B. Jiao, “Movable antenna-aided sec ure full-duplex multi-user communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2389-2403, Mar. 2025

work page 2025

[6] [6]

Flu id antenna systems,

K.-K. Wong, A. Shojaeifard, K.-F. Tong and Y . Zhang, “Flu id antenna systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1950-1962, Mar. 2021

work page 1950

[7] [7]

Near-ﬁeld multiuser communications aided by movable antennas,

J. Ding, L. Zhu, Z. Zhou, B. Jiao, and R. Zhang, “Near-ﬁeld multiuser communications aided by movable antennas,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 138-142, Jan. 2025

work page 2025

[8] [8]

Movable-an tenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,

W. Mei, X. Wei, B. Ning, Z. Chen, and R. Zhang, “Movable-an tenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1853-1857, Jul. 2024

work page 2024