Refined Metrics, Sensing Limits, and Resource Allocation in OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC

Bruno Felipe Costa; Taufik Abr\~ao

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Refined Metrics, Sensing Limits, and Resource Allocation in OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 This paper argues that rate-splitting multiple access (RSMA) is the one scheme that can meet strict communication and sensing targets simultaneously in an OTFS low-Earth-orbit ISAC downlink, while conventional SDMA cannot.

desk verdict A useful OTFS-RSMA ISAC framework, but the headline RSMA-vs-SDMA claim is built into the problem setup rather than demonstrated. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02624 v1 pith:IAWXXEIB submitted 2025-06-03 eess.SP

Bruno Felipe Costa , Taufik Abrão This is my paper

classification eess.SP

keywords ISACLEOsatellitesOTFSRSMACramér-RaoboundimperfectCSISICmax-minfairness

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 tries to establish that in a low-Earth-orbit satellite downlink using OTFS modulation and rate-splitting multiple access (RSMA), the system can satisfy strict communication and sensing limits simultaneously, and that conventional space-division multiple access (SDMA) cannot. The authors derive signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) expressions that include imperfect channel knowledge and imperfect successive interference cancellation, and Cramér-Rao bound (CRB) expressions for delay and Doppler estimation that depend on the waveform's delay-Doppler energy spread. They then solve a max-min fair resource allocation problem constrained by these metrics, using a genetic algorithm. If the central claim is right, the common stream that RSMA adds is not a minor feature but the mechanism that makes joint communication-sensing targets feasible in this setting.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the split of each user's message into a common stream and a private stream, both precoded in the delay-Doppler domain. The same precoder set $\mathbf{P}$ determines both sides of the problem: it shapes the SINR denominators through the LMMSE filter responses, and it determines the sensing Cramér-Rao bound through the waveform moments $S_n$, $S_i$ and the cross-correlation terms $C_{\tau\nu}$, $C_{\mu\tau}$, $C_{\mu\nu}$ that enter the Fisher information matrix. Inverting that matrix turns the waveform shape into concrete sensing constraints. The common stream is decoded first and subtracted, which gives the optimizer an extra power-sharing degree of freedom that SDMA lacks.

What would settle it

Recompute the Fisher information matrix and Cramér-Rao bounds directly from the mean echo signal by numerical differentiation and check whether they match Eqs. (12)-(16); if they differ, or if the assumed relation $\partial\alpha/\partial\tau_T = -2\alpha(\tau_T)/\tau_T$ fails against a physical LEO echo model, the claimed feasibility advantage of RSMA is not established by this paper.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the extra common stream created by RSMA provides the degrees of freedom needed for one set of precoders to meet both a common-rate communication threshold and Cramér-Rao sensing thresholds, while the SDMA case ($\alpha = 0$) misses the common-rate requirement in all 3000 Monte Carlo frames. The paper also shows a tunable trade-off: adjusting the RSMA splitting factor $\alpha$ shifts the operating point between higher minimum user rate and finer delay-estimation accuracy, while the Doppler CRB stays nearly constant. These results hold under imperfect CSI with relative error power $-25$ dB, an imperfect SIC residual factor of $0.03$, and a sparse delay-Doppler channel with four paths.

Load-bearing premise

The sensing side of the argument rests on Cramér-Rao-bound formulas that this paper imports from a companion preprint rather than rederiving; if those formulas, or the assumed echo-gain derivative $\partial\alpha/\partial\tau_T = -2\alpha(\tau_T)/\tau_T$, are wrong, the feasibility comparison collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

An optimized RSMA downlink can satisfy a common-rate QoS of 0.1 bps/Hz together with the stated delay and Doppler Cramér-Rao thresholds, while SDMA fails the common-rate target in every Monte Carlo frame.
The splitting factor alpha gives operators a tuning knob that trades a small loss in minimum user rate for improved delay-estimation accuracy across the operational range.
The refined SINR expressions make the resource allocation explicitly sensitive to channel-estimation error and residual SIC interference, so the feasibility result is not an artifact of perfect-CSI assumptions.
The genetic algorithm consistently finds feasible RSMA operating points, indicating that the constrained parameter space is not empty under the tested impairments.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper does not test whether the feasibility advantage survives as the number of users grows; with more private streams contending for the same common-stream resource, the joint QoS targets may become harder to meet.
Replacing the genetic algorithm with a gradient-based solver such as WMMSE or successive convex approximation would clarify whether the RSMA feasibility region, rather than the heuristic's search behavior, is what produces the result.
Because the CRB formulas are imported from a companion paper, an independent re-derivation or a Monte Carlo check of the sensing thresholds would isolate whether the SDMA failure comes from the sensing model or from the communication constraints.
A natural testable extension is to let the echo gain follow an orbital geometry model instead of the fixed derivative relation, and see whether the RSMA operating region (alpha between 0.1 and 0.5) remains feasible.

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

Quick take: this is a plausible integration of OTFS, RSMA, and ISAC for LEO satellites, with refined SINR and CRB expressions and a max-min resource allocation solved by a genetic algorithm. The sensing CRB, however, is lifted from the authors' own companion paper, and the RSMA-vs-SDMA comparison is largely definitional: with alpha=0 there is no common stream, so the common-rate QoS constraint is unsatisfiable by construction. That doesn't kill the framework, but it does mean the abstract overclaims.

What's new: the combination of OTFS, RSMA, and CRB-based sensing constraints in one resource allocation problem, with explicit treatment of ICSI and ISIC in the SINR. The SINR expressions (3) and (8) are reasonable LMMSE-style extensions. The CRB accounting for parameter-dependent echo gain is interesting, and linking it to waveform moments Sn and Si is sensible. The max-min formulation is standard but appropriate. The Monte Carlo setup is thorough (3000 frames) for a proof-of-concept.

Soft spots, in order: (1) The CRB is not derived here; Eqs. (12)-(16) are stated as results from [19], and the derivative d(alpha)/d(tau) = -2alpha/tau is asserted without justification. A reader cannot verify the sensing side without chasing the companion paper. (2) The SDMA baseline is unfair. Setting alpha=0 removes the common stream entirely, so R_c,k=0, and constraint (17c) can never be satisfied. The 0% satisfaction for SDMA is therefore a logical consequence, not an empirical finding. Nothing in the results demonstrates that RSMA gives better sensing or interference management; it just adds a common stream that the optimization can use to meet an imposed QoS. (3) GA details are thin: no mutation/crossover settings, no penalty formulation, no convergence check. (4) The grid is tiny (M=4, N=8) and there is no code or data, so reproducibility is limited.

The math looks plausible, and the authors are transparent about borrowing from [19] and about the problem's complexity. The citation pattern is honest.

Who this is for: readers working on RSMA-ISAC for non-terrestrial networks who want a compact model and a template for integrating SINR and CRB constraints. It deserves peer review, but only after the authors either include the CRB derivation or clearly frame the paper as a study that uses the CRB from [19], fix the baseline, and soften the 'uniquely enables' claim. I'd treat the current version as a solid workshop paper in need of major revision.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper considers a downlink LEO satellite integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) system using OTFS and RSMA. It derives LMMSE-based SINR expressions that account for imperfect CSI and imperfect SIC, and CRB expressions for delay and Doppler estimation under a delay-dependent echo gain. These metrics are embedded in a max-min fairness precoder optimization with common-rate, CRB, and power constraints, which is solved by a genetic algorithm. Numerical results are used to claim that RSMA uniquely satisfies both communication and sensing QoS targets while SDMA, represented by alpha=0, fails.

Significance. The SINR modeling under ICSI/ISIC and the attempt to connect CRB behavior to waveform moments are relevant to OTFS-ISAC design. If fully supported, the tunable alpha-based trade-off between communication and sensing would be a useful engineering insight. However, the headline claim is not established as presented: the SDMA comparison is largely definitional, the sensing bound is imported from an inaccessible companion preprint, and the numerical Doppler-CRB data are internally inconsistent. The paper contains useful building blocks but requires substantial revision before its central claims can be accepted.

major comments (4)

[Section V, Table II, Eq. (17c)] The SDMA baseline alpha=0 fails by construction. When alpha=0, the common-stream precoder P_c is zero, so in Eq. (3) SINR_c,k=0 and hence R_c,k=0, which is below the required R_req_c=0.1 bps/Hz in constraint (17c). Therefore the reported 'Rc Met (%) = 0' in Table II is a logical consequence of the formulation, not an empirical demonstration that RSMA offers superior interference management or sensing capability. The abstract and Section V claim that RSMA 'uniquely enables' simultaneous satisfaction of the constraints is unsupported. A fair comparison would either impose a common-rate constraint on SDMA in an achievable way, or explicitly compare the two schemes under the same service model rather than giving SDMA no common stream to satisfy a common-rate constraint.
[Section III, Eqs. (9)-(16)] The core sensing result is not derived in this manuscript. The text states that the derivatives are 'showed in [19]' and that the FIM elements 'become [19]', where [19] is the authors' own companion preprint. The CRB constraints (17d)-(17e) thus rest entirely on an external, not-yet-available document. In addition, the relation d alpha / d tau_T = -2 alpha(tau_T)/tau_T is asserted immediately after Eq. (9) with no derivation; for a LEO echo, the delay dependence of the complex gain involves range-dependent path loss and phase, so this simple inverse-power form is not obvious. The authors should include the full derivation in the paper or an appendix, and justify the derivative from a physical propagation model.
[Section V, Fig. 2(d) vs. Table II] The Doppler CRB data are internally inconsistent. Table II reports Avg. CRB(nu_T) = 0.496 x 10^4 Hz^2 = 4960 Hz^2 for alpha=0.1, which is below the sensing threshold epsilon_nu = 5.0 x 10^3 Hz^2, but Fig. 2(d) shows a CDF that is 0 at 5000 Hz^2 and reaches 1 only near 8000 Hz^2, implying every Monte Carlo frame has CRB(nu_T) >= 5000 Hz^2. These two statements cannot both be true. The text also claims 'near-zero violation frequencies' while the CDF indicates the Doppler CRB constraint is violated for essentially all frames. The units or the plotted values must be corrected, and the conclusion about simultaneous sensing feasibility must be re-examined.
[Section IV, Table I] The optimization problem (17) has no decision variable alpha and no constraint linking alpha to P_c and P_p, yet Table II and Fig. 2 are parameterized by alpha. The GA implementation is also underspecified: no encoding, fitness function, penalty mechanism, or convergence criterion is described. This makes the numerical results difficult to reproduce and leaves the role of alpha in the optimized solution unclear. Please define alpha formally in the problem formulation or explain exactly how the GA varies it, and provide the missing implementation details.

minor comments (5)

[Section IV, problem statement] In the definition after Eq. (17), Rc,k is said to be computed 'using (8)', but it should reference Eq. (3), the common-stream SINR, rather than Eq. (8).
[Section II] The expression 'E[|sc|2 = 1)' is missing a closing bracket and a superscript; it should read E[|sc|^2] = 1.
[References] Reference [19] is given only as an arXiv 'submit/' identifier, which is not a stable public identifier; please provide the final arXiv number or include the derivation directly in this paper.
[Section V, Fig. 2(a) and Table II] The axis label in Fig. 2(a) uses units of 10^-11 while Table II reports values in 10^-14; please unify the units to avoid confusion.
[Throughout] There are several typos, including 'demonstres' in Section V, 'These results demonstrated... solving this problem.These results' in Section VI, and 'i.e.,, 0.1 <= alpha <= 0.5' in the conclusion.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

RSMA's 'unique feasibility' is definitional: SDMA is α=0, which forces zero common rate and violates constraint (17c); the CRB sensing limits are imported from the authors' own companion preprint [19].

self definitional [Sec. IV Eq. (17c), Sec. V Table II / Fig. 2(a), Table I ('RSMA Parameter α')]
"RSMA Parameter α ∈ {0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 0.8, 1.0} ... As detailed in Table II, SDMA categorically fails to meet the common rate requirement (Rreq_c = 0.1 bps/Hz), achieving 0% satisfaction ('Rc Met (%) = 0'). In stark contrast, all evaluated RSMA strategies (α ≥ 0.1) achieve 100% satisfaction ... SDMA (α = 0)"

In the numerical study, SDMA is represented by α=0. Since α is the RSMA splitting factor controlling power allocation between common and private streams, α=0 implies no common-stream power, i.e., P_c=0 in the common SINR expression (3). Then the numerator |w_c,k Ĥ_k P_c|^2 in (3) is zero, so SINR_ref_c,k = 0 and R_c,k = log2(1+0) = 0. Constraint (17c) requires R_c,k ≥ Rreq_c = 0.1 bps/Hz, which is unsatisfiable for every SDMA realization by construction, not by measured performance. The 'unique' RSMA feasibility claim is therefore built into the problem definition: the common-rate QoS constraint can only be met by systems that transmit a common stream. The reported 0% vs 100% comparison is a logical necessity, not evidence of superior interference management or sensing capability.
self citation load bearing [Sec. III, Eqs. (12)–(16) and Ref. [19]]
"The derivatives are showed in [19], using ∂α/∂τT = −2α(τT)/τT): ... By adopting |α|^2 = |α(τT)|^2, |β|^2 = |βT|^2 for simplicity and compactness, the FIM elements become [19]: ... [19] B. F. Costa and T. Abrao, 'Derivation of CRB and Refined SINR Expressions for OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC Systems,' May 2025, preprint submitted to arXiv. arXiv:submit/6355313 [cs.IT]."

The sensing-QoS constraints in the resource allocation problem, (17d)–(17e), use the CRB values from Eqs. (12)–(16). The manuscript does not derive these expressions: the required derivatives 'are showed in [19]' and the FIM elements 'become [19]'. Reference [19] is a companion preprint by the same two authors, with no machine-checked proof, code reproduction, or externally falsifiable benchmark supplied in the present paper. Consequently, the sensing limits that support the headline feasibility comparison are load-bearing self-citations: any error in [19] propagates directly into the feasibility conclusion. This is not an independent mathematical check of the claimed result.

full rationale

The paper's central claim that RSMA 'uniquely enables' simultaneous communication and sensing QoS is primarily an artifact of the problem definition. Constraint (17c) imposes a common-rate QoS Rc,k ≥ 0.1 bps/Hz. The common-stream SINR (3) is zero whenever no power is allocated to the common stream. In the numerical study, SDMA is parameterized as α=0, which is exactly the no-common-stream case, so SDMA's 0% satisfaction of (17c) follows from Eq. (3) and the constraint itself, not from any measured deficiency. Similarly, all RSMA variants with α≥0.1 satisfy (17c) essentially because they are given a nonzero common stream by construction. The sensing side is also not self-contained: the CRB expressions (12)–(16) are imported from the authors' own companion preprint [19], an unverified self-citation that is load-bearing for constraints (17d)–(17e). There is no machine-checked proof or external benchmark to independently confirm those sensing metrics. The SINR derivation under ICSI/ISIC and the optimization formulation are legitimate contributions, but the headline 'uniquely enables' comparison and the sensing limits both reduce to definitional or self-cited inputs, so the central result is forced rather than demonstrated.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The manuscript introduces no new physical entities. The main external load is the companion preprint [19], which carries the sensing derivation; the simulation impairment parameters are hand-chosen. The echo-gain derivative assumption is unstated in its derivation and is load-bearing for the delay CRB.

free parameters (3)

ICSI error variance σe² = -25 dB relative power
Hand-picked impairment level used in the refined SINR expressions; controls the σe² Ptot noise term.
ISIC residual factor Θk = 0.03
Hand-picked residual common-stream interference after imperfect SIC; controls I(res)p,k.
RSMA splitting factor α = swept over {0.0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 0.8, 1.0}
Power split between common and private streams; the main comparison is a parameter scan, not an optimized variable.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The DD channel is sparse with P=4 paths and quasi-static per OTFS frame
Used throughout; reflects LEO channel modeling from Refs [4], [14], [15].
domain assumption Echo gain derivative ∂α(τT)/∂τT = -2α(τT)/τT
Stated after Eq. (9) and used in Eq. (11); no derivation or citation is provided in this paper.
domain assumption LMMSE residual channel error is white with variance σe² Ptot and residual interference is Gaussian
Basis of the closed-form SINR expressions (2)-(8), following the methodology of [16].
ad hoc to paper The FIM and CRB derivation in the authors' companion paper [19] is correct
The CRB expressions (12)-(16) are imported from [19] without presenting the derivation in this manuscript.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Refined Metrics, Sensing Limits, and Resource Allocation in OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IAWXXEIB

@misc{pith2026250602624,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Refined Metrics, Sensing Limits, and Resource Allocation in OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IAWXXEIB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02624}
}

read the original abstract

This paper develops an integrated OTFS-RSMA framework employing advanced SP techniques tailored for this demanding environment. We derive refined communication performance metrics, specifically SINR expressions capturing the practical effects of ICSI and ISIC. Moreover, fundamental sensing limits are established via CRB derivation incorporating parameter-dependent echo gain, linking waveform SP properties to estimation accuracy. The resource allocation is formulated as a non-convex optimization problem aiming for Max-Min Fairness under constraints derived from these SP metrics. Illustrative results, obtained via GA optimization, crucially demonstrate that the proposed RSMA scheme uniquely enables the simultaneous satisfaction of stringent communication and sensing constraints metrics, a capability not achieved by conventional SDMA. Such results {highlight the efficacy of the integrated OTFS-RSMA precoding and optimization approach for designing robust and feasible LEO-ISAC systems. Index Terms -- ISAC, LEO, OTFS, RSMA, Channel Modeling, CRB, SINR, ICSI, ISIC, Resource Allocation, Max-Min Fairness, Delay-Doppler (DD) Processing, Satellite Communications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02624 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** LEO motion impact on DD channel: Time-varying geometry causes Doppler shifts, delay variations, and multipath spread. estimation [6], robust data detection (e.g., using Message Passing (MP)/Belief Propagation (BP) algorithms exploiting channel sparsity [7]), and managing inherent DD interference [5]. To manage multiuser interference, Rate-Splitting Multiple Access (RSMA) provides a flexible SP framework [8]. By spl… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Performance evaluation (Nmc=3000, M=4, N=8): (a) Fundamental ISAC trade-off. (b)-(d) CDF’s illustrating performance reliability for different α values. constrained multi-objective problem. These results underscore the effectiveness of the integrated OTFS-RSMA framework, managed via SP-based resource allocation, in providing a robust, flexible, and QoS-aware solution for LEO ISAC systems, particularly showcasing RSM… view at source ↗

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

RSMA-Assisted OFDM-OTFS Hybrid Framework for Mixed-Mobility Multiuser Systems
eess.SP 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

An RSMA hybrid lets OFDM users share a full-band common stream for ICI resilience while OTFS users occupy disjoint bands and cancel the common stream, outperforming OMA under channel estimation error.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[19]

Derivation of CRB and Refined SINR Expressions for OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC Systems,

B. F. Costa and T. Abrao, “Derivation of CRB and Refined SINR Expressions for OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC Systems,” May 2025, preprint submitted to arXiv. arXiv:submit/6355313 [cs.IT]

work page arXiv 2025
[1]

Orthogonal time frequency space for integrated sensing and communication: A survey,

E. Shtaiwi, A. Abdelhadi, H. Li, Z. Han, and H. V . Poor, “Orthogonal time frequency space for integrated sensing and communication: A survey,” 2024

work page 2024
[2]

RSMA-based bistatic ISAC framework for LEO satellite systems,

J. Park, J. Seong, J. Ryu, Y . Mao, and W. Shin, “RSMA-based bistatic ISAC framework for LEO satellite systems,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops) , 2024, pp. 1840–1845

work page 2024
[3]

Performance evaluation of OTFS under different channel conditions for LEO satellite downlink,

S. K. Devarajalu and D. Jose, “Performance evaluation of OTFS under different channel conditions for LEO satellite downlink,” in Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Wireless Netw. Mobile Commun. (WINCOM) , 2023, pp. 1–6

work page 2023
[4]

Orthogonal time frequency space modulation,

R. e. a. Hadani, “Orthogonal time frequency space modulation,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC) , 2017, pp. 1–6

work page 2017
[5]

OTFS versus OFDM: Which is superior in multiuser LEO satellite communications,

Y . Liu, M. Chen, C. Pan, T. Gong, J. Yuan, and J. Wang, “OTFS versus OFDM: Which is superior in multiuser LEO satellite communications,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 139–155, 2025

work page 2025
[6]

Sparse delay doppler estimation for zak-otfs enabled isac system,

G. Kumar, V . Bhatia, and M. Juntti, “Sparse delay doppler estimation for zak-otfs enabled isac system,” in 2025 IEEE 5th International Symposium on Joint Communications e Sensing (JCS) , 2025, pp. 1–6

work page 2025
[7]

On the effective- ness of OTFS for joint radar parameter estimation and communication,

L. Gaudio, M. Kobayashi, G. Caire, and G. Colavolpe, “On the effective- ness of OTFS for joint radar parameter estimation and communication,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 5951–5965, 2020

2020

Show all 21 references

[8]

Rate-splitting multiple access for multi-antenna joint radar and communications,

C. Xu, B. Clerckx, S. Chen, Y . Mao, and J. Zhang, “Rate-splitting multiple access for multi-antenna joint radar and communications,”IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. , vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1332–1347, 2021

2021
[9]

A rate-splitting strategy to enable joint radar sensing and communication with partial csit,

R. Cerna-Loli, O. Dizdar, and B. Clerckx, “A rate-splitting strategy to enable joint radar sensing and communication with partial csit,” in Proc. 22nd IEEE Int. Workshop Signal Process. Adv. Wireless Commun. (SPA WC), 2021, pp. 491–495

2021
[10]

Downlink OTFS-RSMA cross-domain transmission scheme and sum-rate maximization,

Q. Huai, W. Yuan, Y . Wu, and P. Fan, “Downlink OTFS-RSMA cross-domain transmission scheme and sum-rate maximization,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 600–604, 2025

2025
[11]

Power allocation for high mobility OTFS-RSMA system with path-selective one-tap receiver,

J. Liu, Y . Liang Guan, Y . Ge, and B. Clerckx, “Power allocation for high mobility OTFS-RSMA system with path-selective one-tap receiver,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 661–665, 2025

2025
[12]

Rate-splitting for max-min fair multigroup multicast beamforming in overloaded systems,

H. Joudeh and B. Clerckx, “Rate-splitting for max-min fair multigroup multicast beamforming in overloaded systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 16, no. 11, pp. 7276–7289, 2017

2017
[13]

Rate-splitting multiple access: Fundamentals, survey, and future research trends,

Y . Mao, O. Dizdar, B. Clerckx, R. Schober, P. Popovski, and H. V . Poor, “Rate-splitting multiple access: Fundamentals, survey, and future research trends,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut. , vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 2073– 2126, 2022

2022
[14]

Study on new radio (NR) to support non-terrestrial networks (Release 15),

3GPP, “Study on new radio (NR) to support non-terrestrial networks (Release 15),” 3GPP, Tech. Rep. 38.811, Sep. 2020, ver. 15.4.0

2020
[15]

Rate-splitting multiple access for quantized ISAC LEO satellite systems: A max-min fair energy- efficient beam design,

Z. Liu, L. Yin, W. Shin, and B. Clerckx, “Rate-splitting multiple access for quantized ISAC LEO satellite systems: A max-min fair energy- efficient beam design,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 15 394–15 408, 2024

2024
[16]

Rate-splitting multiple access for downlink multiuser MIMO: Precoder optimization and PHY- layer design,

A. Mishra, Y . Mao, O. Dizdar, and B. Clerckx, “Rate-splitting multiple access for downlink multiuser MIMO: Precoder optimization and PHY- layer design,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 874–890, 2022

2022
[17]

S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1993

1993
[18]

Optimal ber minimum precoder design for otfs-based isac systems,

J. Wu, W. Yuan, Z. Wei, J. Yan, and D. W. K. Ng, “Optimal ber minimum precoder design for otfs-based isac systems,” in ICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2024, pp. 12 966–12 970

2024
[20]

Weighted sum-rate maximization using weighted MMSE for MIMO- BC beamforming design,

S. S. Christensen, R. Agarwal, E. De Carvalho, and J. M. Cioffi, “Weighted sum-rate maximization using weighted MMSE for MIMO- BC beamforming design,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 4792–4799, 2008

2008
[21]

D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1989

1989

Pith tools

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

[1] [19]

Derivation of CRB and Refined SINR Expressions for OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC Systems,

B. F. Costa and T. Abrao, “Derivation of CRB and Refined SINR Expressions for OTFS-RSMA LEO ISAC Systems,” May 2025, preprint submitted to arXiv. arXiv:submit/6355313 [cs.IT]

work page arXiv 2025

[2] [1]

Orthogonal time frequency space for integrated sensing and communication: A survey,

E. Shtaiwi, A. Abdelhadi, H. Li, Z. Han, and H. V . Poor, “Orthogonal time frequency space for integrated sensing and communication: A survey,” 2024

work page 2024

[3] [2]

RSMA-based bistatic ISAC framework for LEO satellite systems,

J. Park, J. Seong, J. Ryu, Y . Mao, and W. Shin, “RSMA-based bistatic ISAC framework for LEO satellite systems,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops) , 2024, pp. 1840–1845

work page 2024

[4] [3]

Performance evaluation of OTFS under different channel conditions for LEO satellite downlink,

S. K. Devarajalu and D. Jose, “Performance evaluation of OTFS under different channel conditions for LEO satellite downlink,” in Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Wireless Netw. Mobile Commun. (WINCOM) , 2023, pp. 1–6

work page 2023

[5] [4]

Orthogonal time frequency space modulation,

R. e. a. Hadani, “Orthogonal time frequency space modulation,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC) , 2017, pp. 1–6

work page 2017

[6] [5]

OTFS versus OFDM: Which is superior in multiuser LEO satellite communications,

Y . Liu, M. Chen, C. Pan, T. Gong, J. Yuan, and J. Wang, “OTFS versus OFDM: Which is superior in multiuser LEO satellite communications,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 139–155, 2025

work page 2025

[7] [6]

Sparse delay doppler estimation for zak-otfs enabled isac system,

G. Kumar, V . Bhatia, and M. Juntti, “Sparse delay doppler estimation for zak-otfs enabled isac system,” in 2025 IEEE 5th International Symposium on Joint Communications e Sensing (JCS) , 2025, pp. 1–6

work page 2025

[8] [7]

On the effective- ness of OTFS for joint radar parameter estimation and communication,

L. Gaudio, M. Kobayashi, G. Caire, and G. Colavolpe, “On the effective- ness of OTFS for joint radar parameter estimation and communication,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 5951–5965, 2020

2020