Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Hardware Limitations and Optimization Approach in 1-Bit RIS Design at 28 GHz

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 genetic algorithm can recover most of the gain that 1-bit phase quantization loses on a 28 GHz reconfigurable intelligent surface, as shown by a 2.82 dB measured improvement.

desk verdict A real 28 GHz 1-bit RIS prototype with a plausible 2.82 dB gain from GA optimization, but the central measurement needs uncertainty quantification and Eq. (7) has a real error. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08930 v1 pith:YD4KDHQH submitted 2025-06-10 eess.SP

Hossein Rezaei , Mehmet Emin Arslan , George Yammine , Niels Neumann , Norman Franchi This is my paper
classification eess.SP
keywords reconfigurableintelligentsurface1-bitRISphasequantizationgeneticalgorithm28GHzspecularreflectionPINdiodemillimeter-wave
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 aims to show that in a practical 28 GHz reflecting surface whose elements can each switch between only two phase states, the signal lost to coarse phase quantization can be substantially recovered by optimizing which elements are in which state, rather than by rounding the ideal continuous phases. The authors build a 10 by 10 prototype and measure that a genetic-algorithm-optimized phase pattern increases received power at the designed 60° reflection angle by 2.82 dB compared with the quantized baseline. The paper also establishes that specular reflection, caused by the hardware's back layer and by non-ideal phase differences between the two element states, is not reduced by phase optimization and must be addressed at the hardware level. If correct, this means even the cheapest, most constrained RIS hardware can be made significantly more effective through smarter phase-pattern selection.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the genetic-algorithm fitness function (Eq. 10): over the binary state matrix $\Phi \in \{0,1\}^{Q_x \times Q_y}$, maximize $\left|\sum_{n_x,n_y} e^{j(\alpha^\star_{n_x,n_y} + \psi \Phi_{n_x,n_y})}\right|$, where $\alpha^\star$ is the initial phase of each cell set by the incident and reflected angles and $\psi$ is the phase difference between the cell's ON and OFF states. This turns RIS design into a discrete search over phase configurations and lets the algorithm put each element in the state that best aligns the reflected wave, instead of rounding a continuous solution. The analytical array model of Eqs. (1)-(8) supplies the coherent-sum expression the fitness function optimizes, and the PIN-diode unit cell supplies the two physical states that realize $\psi$.

What would settle it

Measure the full angle-resolved reflected power of the 10x10 prototype for both the quantized and the GA-optimized phase distributions. If the GA distribution's peak near 60° is not higher than the quantized one, or if the 2.82 dB advantage disappears when the receiver is moved by more than a beamwidth off 60°, the central claim is refuted. As a model check, re-run the GA using a full-wave simulator as the fitness function and compare the chosen pattern with the analytical-GA pattern; a mismatch would show the coherent-sum assumption is the weak point.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that phase quantization error and hardware-induced specular reflection are independent performance limiters in 1-bit RIS, and only the former is treatable by signal-processing-style optimization. In simulation with an 11x11 array reflecting a normally incident wave to 60°, a 1-bit quantized phase shifter with an ideal 180° state-to-state difference loses about 4 dB relative to a continuous-phase upper bound and shifts the main lobe off the target angle; optimizing the binary pattern recovers about 2 dB and realigns the lobe. The recovery persists for non-ideal phase differences of 150°, 110°, and 50°, where optimization brings the gain back to roughly the level of the quantized 180° case, at the price of stronger specular reflection. The measured 10x10 prototype confirms the central number: the genetic-algorithm pattern gives a 2.82 dB higher received power at 60° than the quantized pattern. The paper concludes that phase-pattern optimization is an effective tool for 1-bit RIS, while the residual specular reflection is a hardware constraint.

Load-bearing premise

The genetic algorithm's fitness function assumes every unit cell reflects with the same known phase difference between its two states and that the total field is just the sum of isolated cells; if mutual coupling or back-layer scattering varies across the array, the pattern that looks best in the model may not be best on the real hardware.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The measured 2.82 dB gain means a 1-bit surface can outperform its naive quantized design at no extra hardware cost.
  • Quantized phase rounding is a poor baseline for 1-bit RIS; direct binary search should be used in system-level evaluations.
  • Beam-pointing accuracy improves: the optimized pattern realigns the main lobe to the intended angle, which matters for mmWave links and radar.
  • Because specular reflection persists even with an ideal 180° cell and an optimized pattern, suppressing it requires hardware-level measures such as shielding or absorbing the back layer; optimization alone is insufficient.
  • The optimization also lowers the closest sidelobe in simulation, giving a degree of sidelobe control alongside main-lobe gain.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same genetic-algorithm-plus-binary-search idea should transfer to other quantized apertures, such as 1-bit transmitarrays or holographic surfaces, where rounding continuous phases is the usual shortcut; the expected benefit would grow as the number of phase states shrinks.
  • The paper's 2.82 dB figure is a single-point measurement at 60°; a full angle-resolved scan would reveal whether the gain comes from a sharper main lobe, lower sidelobes, or both, and would test whether the GA merely redirects energy already present.
  • Because the fitness function assumes a uniform $\psi$ and isolated element contributions, re-running the GA with per-element phase values measured on the real prototype (or with a full-wave surrogate) would show how much of the measured gain survives the unmodeled mutual coupling and back-layer scattering.
  • If the model is right, the benefit of optimization should increase as the phase difference $\psi$ degrades from 180°, since the paper's simulations show optimization restoring performance across a wide range of $\psi$; this gives a testable prediction for future prototypes with weaker diodes or tighter fabrication tolerances.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a 1-bit reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) prototype at 28 GHz, using PIN-diode-controlled unit cells whose ON/OFF phase difference is adjusted through a microstrip line length. It investigates hardware non-idealities, particularly the non-ideal phase difference between states and back-layer specular reflections, using both analytical array formulas and full-wave FEM simulations. A genetic algorithm (GA) is proposed to optimize the binary phase distribution to maximize reflected power toward a desired angle (60 degrees), and a measurement on a 10x10 array is reported, showing a 2.82 dB received-power improvement over a conventionally quantized phase distribution. The paper argues that GA-based phase optimization recovers part of the quantization loss and can partially compensate for non-ideal phase differences, while not mitigating the specular reflection that arises from hardware layering.

Significance. If confirmed, the work provides a useful experimental data point for discrete-phase RIS optimization at mmWave, and the inclusion of full-wave unit-cell simulations, a physical prototype, and a real measurement campaign is a strength. The observation that back-layer reflections create specular components not captured by simple phase-shift models is relevant for practical RIS design. The paper also makes a clear attempt at a parameter-free analytical response model, although the derivation in Eq. (7) needs correction. The main limitation is experimental: the headline 2.82 dB improvement is not accompanied by uncertainty quantification or repeated trials, and the relationship between the modeled phase difference and the fabricated array is not stated. As a result, the strength of the central claim currently exceeds the evidence presented.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-A, Eq. (7)] Equation (7) is dimensionally inconsistent with Eq. (2): substituting the initial phase α from Eq. (2) into the array sum gives a phase argument κdx(Wx−W*x)nx + κdy(Wy−W*y)ny, so the sine factors should involve κdx(Wx−W*x)/2 and κdy(Wy−W*y)/2. As written, the omitted κdx and κdy factors change the predicted null spacing and the overall scale of the analytical response function. Please correct Eq. (7) and recompute the associated analytical curves (e.g., Figs. 6a and 7) or clarify the normalization.
  2. [Section V] The central experimental result, the 2.82 dB improvement in received power, is based on a single measurement at one receiver position, with no reported error bars, repeated trials, or discussion of transmitter/receiver drift, cable stability, or calibration. This does not currently allow the reader to distinguish a real optimization gain from measurement variation. Please provide repeated measurements with mean and standard deviation, and describe the calibration procedure and the stability of the setup over time.
  3. [Sections V and IV-C] The manuscript does not state which unit-cell phase difference ψ (or equivalently which microstrip line length l from Section II) was used in the fabricated 10×10 array and in the GA fitness function of Eq. (10). Section II reports phase differences ranging from 72° to 180° for different l values, and Fig. 8 considers several ψ values, but the measurement section never identifies the implemented value. Since the optimized phase pattern is computed for a specific ψ, the absence of this information prevents the reader from verifying that the array actually realizes the phase model assumed by the GA. Please state the designed and measured ψ for the prototype.
  4. [Sections V and III, Fig. 6b] The GA fitness function in Eq. (10) models only the coherent sum of front-layer element contributions, but the FEM results in Fig. 6b show a specular reflection component even when the phase difference is 180°, indicating back-layer contributions that the model does not capture. The measured 2.82 dB improvement could therefore be affected by unmodeled hardware effects. To strengthen the attribution of the improvement to the GA-selected phase distribution, measure the full reflection pattern (not only at 60°) for both the quantized and GA-optimized configurations, or perform a controlled test that separates the designed beam from parasitic reflections.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 8 legend] The word 'Continouos' in the legend of Fig. 8 is a typo and should read 'Continuous'.
  2. [Fig. 7 axis label] The vertical axis label '|gpd/λ|²' is dimensionally suspect because gpd from Eq. (7) is dimensionless; please clarify the normalization used or the reference quantity for the dB scale.
  3. [Section IV-C] The GA parameters (population size, number of generations, crossover and mutation rates, and stopping criteria) are not specified; for reproducibility, please provide these settings or a reference to a fixed configuration.
  4. [Section III] The phrase 'In this part, we explore...' is informal; consider replacing it with 'In this subsection...'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the GA optimization is validated by an independent measured comparison, and the only self-citations support the unit-cell design without carrying the central claim.

full rationale

The paper's central result is a measured 2.82 dB improvement of a GA-optimized 1-bit phase distribution over a quantized baseline, obtained at a single receiver position in an otherwise fixed setup (Section V, Fig. 10). The GA fitness function (Eq. 10) maximizes the coherent sum of reflected signals at the designed angle, which is the same quantity plotted in the simulation comparisons of Figs. 7 and 8; however, this is a direct optimization objective, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The phase difference ψ entering Eq. (10) is taken from unit-cell FEM simulations (Fig. 5) and is not fitted to the measured received power. The paper does not claim to predict the measured value from first principles; it claims that a heuristic optimizer improves the design, and this is checked against a physical prototype. The self-citations [34] and [35] are used to justify the tile/antenna component design of the unit cell, but they are not invoked to prove the optimization result or to forbid alternative methods. No uniqueness theorem is imported, and no ansatz is smuggled in through citation. The main weakness of the paper is experimental—the 2.82 dB figure rests on a single un-repeated measurement without uncertainty quantification or verification that the fabricated unit cells realize the assumed ψ—but that is a correctness/robustness concern, not a circularity concern. Under the strict definition of circularity used here, no derivation step reduces to its own input by construction, so the score is low.

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

The central derivation uses standard array theory and unit cell simulations. The GA is an algorithm, not an invented entity. The main assumptions are about uniformity of the phase difference and the validity of the isolated element model.

free parameters (1)
  • GA hyperparameters = not reported
    Population size, generations, crossover and mutation rates are chosen heuristically; the paper only states they are selected based on the number of unit cells. These choices affect the final phase distribution and the measured gain.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The reflected field is the coherent sum of unit cell contributions with uniform phase difference ψ (Eq. 10)
    This ignores mutual coupling, edge effects, and back layer reflections, which the paper's own FEM results (Fig. 6b) show can produce specular components not present in the analytical model.
  • domain assumption All unit cells have the same phase difference ψ between ON and OFF states
    Fabrication tolerances may cause cell to cell variation, especially at 28 GHz; the paper does not characterize this variation.
  • standard math The standard array factor identity (Eq. 6) applies to the double sum
    The identity is correct when the exponent is linear in nx and ny, which holds for ideal phase compensation but not after GA modification or quantization.
  • domain assumption GA converges to a near optimal binary configuration
    GA is a heuristic with no optimality guarantee; the paper does not provide convergence analysis or multiple runs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hardware Limitations and Optimization Approach in 1-Bit RIS Design at 28 GHz." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YD4KDHQH

@misc{pith2026250608930,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hardware Limitations and Optimization Approach in 1-Bit RIS Design at 28 GHz},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YD4KDHQH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08930}
}
read the original abstract

Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces (RIS) have emerged as a transformative technology for electromagnetic (EM) wave manipulation, offering unprecedented control over wave reflections compared to traditional metallic reflectors. By utilizing an array of tunable elements, RIS can steer and shape electromagnetic waves to enhance signal quality in wireless communication and radar systems. However, practical implementations face significant challenges due to hardware limitations and phase quantization errors. In this work, a 1-bit RIS prototype operating at 28 GHz is developed to experimentally evaluate the impact of hardware constraints on RIS performance. Unlike conventional studies that model RIS as an ideal phase-shift matrix, this study accounts for physical parameters that influence the actual reflection pattern. In particular, the presence of specular reflection due to hardware limitations is investigated. Additionally, the effects of phase quantization errors, which stem from the discrete nature of RIS elements, are analyzed, and a genetic algorithm (GA)-based optimization is introduced to mitigate these errors. The proposed optimization strategy effectively reduces gain degradation at the desired angle caused by 1-bit quantization, enhancing the overall performance of RIS. The effectiveness of the approach is validated through measurements, underscoring the importance of advanced phase control techniques in improving the functionality of RIS.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08930 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Biasing network. a) Schematic of network, b) Layout [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Equivalent unit cell models. (a) ON state, (b) OFF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Phase and reflection magnitude of unit cells in the ON and OFF states for varying MS lengths. (a) Reflection phase. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Effect of phase difference between the ON and OFF states of unit cells on amplitude of reflections. (a) Analytical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Amplitude of the response function, |gpd/λ| 2 , in dB vs. θr for (θ ⋆ t , ϕ⋆ t ) = (0, 0), (θ ⋆ r , ϕ⋆ r ) = (60°, 0). Reflection comparison of continuous and discrete phase shifter. Low-resolution phase shifter introduces deviations due to the inherent limitations of …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the reflection patterns for continuous, 1-bit quantized, and optimized phase shifters by GA, demonstrating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Testbed setup at the LINK Test Center demonstrating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Phase distributions obtained using (a) the quantization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. D. Jackson, Classical electrodynamics. John Wiley & Sons, 1998

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Shaping complex mi- crowave fields in reverberating media with binary tunable metasurfaces,

    N. Kaina, M. Dupr ´e, G. Lerosey, and M. Fink, “Shaping complex mi- crowave fields in reverberating media with binary tunable metasurfaces,” Scientific Reports, vol. 4, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Active impedance metasurface with full 360° reflection phase tuning,

    B. O. Zhu, J. Zhao, and Y . Feng, “Active impedance metasurface with full 360° reflection phase tuning,” Scientific Reports, vol. 3, 2013

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Intelligent Reflecting Surface Enhanced Wireless Network via Joint Active and Passive Beamforming,

    Q. Wu and R. Zhang, “Intelligent Reflecting Surface Enhanced Wireless Network via Joint Active and Passive Beamforming,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 5394–5409, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Holographic MIMO Surfaces for 6G Wireless Net- works: Opportunities, Challenges, and Trends,

    C. Huang et al. , “Holographic MIMO Surfaces for 6G Wireless Net- works: Opportunities, Challenges, and Trends,” IEEE Wireless Commu- nications, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 118–125, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Design Considerations and Propagation Properties Using an SDN-Controlled RIS for Wireless Backhauling,

    M. E. Arslan et al., “Design Considerations and Propagation Properties Using an SDN-Controlled RIS for Wireless Backhauling,” IEEE Trans- actions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 2451–2461, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Using Intelligent Re- flecting Surfaces for Rank Improvement in MIMO Communications,

    ¨O. ¨Ozdogan, E. Bj ¨ornson, and E. G. Larsson, “Using Intelligent Re- flecting Surfaces for Rank Improvement in MIMO Communications,” in ICASSP 2020 - 2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , 2020, pp. 9160–9164

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    RIS-Aided Localization Under Position and Orientation Offsets in the Near and Far Field,

    D.-R. Emenonye, H. S. Dhillon, and R. M. Buehrer, “RIS-Aided Localization Under Position and Orientation Offsets in the Near and Far Field,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 9327–9345, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Re- configurable and Tunable Metamaterials: A Review of the Theory and Applications,

    J. Turpin, J. Bossard, K. Morgan, D. Werner, and P. Werner, “Re- configurable and Tunable Metamaterials: A Review of the Theory and Applications,” International Journal of Antennas and Propagation , vol. 2014, pp. 1–18, 2014

    2014

  2. [10]

    Review paper on hardware of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

    B. Rana, S.-S. Cho, and I.-P. Hong, “Review paper on hardware of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,” IEEE Access , vol. 11, pp. 29 614– 29 634, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    A novel 28 GHz phased array antenna for 5G mobile communications,

    Y . LI, Y . REN, F. Y ANG, S. XU, and J. ZHANG, “A novel 28 GHz phased array antenna for 5G mobile communications,” ZTE Communi- cations, vol. 18, no. 3, p. 20, 2020. 10

    2020

  4. [12]

    A recon- figurable intelligent surface at mmWave based on a binary phase tunable metasurface,

    J.-B. Gros, V . Popov, M. A. Odit, V . Lenets, and G. Lerosey, “A recon- figurable intelligent surface at mmWave based on a binary phase tunable metasurface,” IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 2, pp. 1055–1064, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    A Probabilistic Reformulation Technique for Discrete RIS Optimization in Wireless Systems,

    A. Pradhan and H. S. Dhillon, “A Probabilistic Reformulation Technique for Discrete RIS Optimization in Wireless Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 5377–5392, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Intelligent Surface Optimization in Terahertz under Two Manifestations of Molec- ular Re-radiation,

    A. Pradhan, J. K. Devineni, H. S. Dhillon, and A. F. Molisch, “Intelligent Surface Optimization in Terahertz under Two Manifestations of Molec- ular Re-radiation,” in 2021 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), 2021, pp. 1–6

    2021

  7. [15]

    Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Assisted Cognitive Radio System,

    J. Yuan, Y .-C. Liang, J. Joung, G. Feng, and E. G. Larsson, “Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Assisted Cognitive Radio System,” IEEE Transac- tions on Communications , vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 675–687, 2021

    2021

  8. [16]

    Multicell MIMO Communications Relying on Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,

    C. Pan et al., “Multicell MIMO Communications Relying on Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 5218–5233, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Robust and Secure Wireless Communications via Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,

    X. Yu, D. Xu, Y . Sun, D. W. K. Ng, and R. Schober, “Robust and Secure Wireless Communications via Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 2637–2652, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Energy-Efficient Wireless Communications With Dis- tributed Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces,

    Z. Yang et al. , “Energy-Efficient Wireless Communications With Dis- tributed Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 665–679, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Physical Layer Security Enhancement Exploiting Intelligent Reflecting Surface,

    K. Feng, X. Li, Y . Han, S. Jin, and Y . Chen, “Physical Layer Security Enhancement Exploiting Intelligent Reflecting Surface,” IEEE Commu- nications Letters, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 734–738, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Exploiting Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces in Edge Caching: Joint Hybrid Beamforming and Content Placement Optimization,

    Y . Chen, M. Wen, E. Basar, Y .-C. Wu, L. Wang, and W. Liu, “Exploiting Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces in Edge Caching: Joint Hybrid Beamforming and Content Placement Optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 7799–7812, 2021

    2021

  13. [21]

    Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface With Energy Harvesting Assisted Cooperative Ambient Backscatter Communications,

    H. Ma, H. Zhang, N. Zhang, J. Wang, N. Wang, and V . C. M. Leung, “Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface With Energy Harvesting Assisted Cooperative Ambient Backscatter Communications,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1283–1287, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Decentralized Beamforming Design for Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Enhanced Cell- Free Networks,

    S. Huang, Y . Ye, M. Xiao, H. V . Poor, and M. Skoglund, “Decentralized Beamforming Design for Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Enhanced Cell- Free Networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 673–677, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Robust Optimization of RIS in Terahertz Under Extreme Molecular Re-Radiation Manifestations,

    A. Pradhan, M. A. Abd-Elmagid, H. S. Dhillon, and A. F. Molisch, “Robust Optimization of RIS in Terahertz Under Extreme Molecular Re-Radiation Manifestations,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Commu- nications, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1783–1797, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    A Low-Complexity Algorithmic Framework for Large-Scale IRS-Assisted Wireless Systems,

    Y . Ma, Y . Shen, X. Yu, J. Zhang, S. Song, and K. B. Letaief, “A Low-Complexity Algorithmic Framework for Large-Scale IRS-Assisted Wireless Systems,” in 2020 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps , 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  17. [25]

    Unsupervised Learning for Passive Beamforming,

    J. Gao, C. Zhong, X. Chen, H. Lin, and Z. Zhang, “Unsupervised Learning for Passive Beamforming,” IEEE Communications Letters , vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1052–1056, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Deep Learning for Large Intelligent Surfaces in Millimeter Wave and Massive MIMO Systems,

    A. Taha, M. Alrabeiah, and A. Alkhateeb, “Deep Learning for Large Intelligent Surfaces in Millimeter Wave and Massive MIMO Systems,” in 2019 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) , 2019, pp. 1–6

    2019

  19. [27]

    Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface Assisted Multiuser MISO Systems Exploiting Deep Reinforcement Learning,

    C. Huang, R. Mo, and C. Yuen, “Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface Assisted Multiuser MISO Systems Exploiting Deep Reinforcement Learning,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 1839–1850, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Practical Modeling and Beamforming for Intelligent Reflecting Surface Aided Wideband Systems,

    W. Cai, H. Li, M. Li, and Q. Liu, “Practical Modeling and Beamforming for Intelligent Reflecting Surface Aided Wideband Systems,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1568–1571, 2020

    2020

  21. [29]

    Energy Efficiency and Spectral Efficiency Tradeoff in RIS-Aided Multiuser MIMO Uplink Transmission,

    L. You, J. Xiong, D. W. K. Ng, C. Yuen, W. Wang, and X. Gao, “Energy Efficiency and Spectral Efficiency Tradeoff in RIS-Aided Multiuser MIMO Uplink Transmission,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 69, pp. 1407–1421, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Beamforming Optimization for Wireless Network Aided by Intelligent Reflecting Surface With Discrete Phase Shifts,

    Q. Wu and R. Zhang, “Beamforming Optimization for Wireless Network Aided by Intelligent Reflecting Surface With Discrete Phase Shifts,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 1838–1851, 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    Optimal Beamforming for MISO Communications via Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,

    X. Yu, D. Xu, and R. Schober, “Optimal Beamforming for MISO Communications via Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,” in 2020 IEEE 21st International Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications (SPAWC), 2020, pp. 1–5

    2020

  24. [32]

    Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface Aided Massive MIMO Systems With Low-Resolution DACs,

    J. Dai, Y . Wang, C. Pan, K. Zhi, H. Ren, and K. Wang, “Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface Aided Massive MIMO Systems With Low-Resolution DACs,” IEEE Communications Letters , vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 3124–3128, 2021

    2021

  25. [33]

    Wireless Communications With Reconfigurable Intel- ligent Surface: Path Loss Modeling and Experimental Measurement,

    W. Tang et al. , “Wireless Communications With Reconfigurable Intel- ligent Surface: Path Loss Modeling and Experimental Measurement,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 421– 439, 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    2x2 Tile Usable for Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces Operating at 28 GHz,

    M. E. Arslan, U. Nordmeyer, and N. Neumann, “2x2 Tile Usable for Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces Operating at 28 GHz,” in 2024 15th German Microwave Conference (GeMiC) . IEEE, 2024, pp. 249–252

    2024

  27. [35]

    Reflector and a method for reflecting electromagnetic waves,

    H. Rezaei, M. E. Arslan, G. Yammine, and N. Neumann, “Reflector and a method for reflecting electromagnetic waves,” European Patent Application EP24 180 578.7, filed June 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Accurate models for microstrip computer-aided design,

    E. Hammerstad and O. Jensen, “Accurate models for microstrip computer-aided design,” in 1980 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest. IEEE, 1980, pp. 407–409

    1980

  29. [37]

    1-Bit Reconfigurable Unit Cell Based on PIN Diodes for Transmit- Array Applications in X -Band,

    A. Clemente, L. Dussopt, R. Sauleau, P. Potier, and P. Pouliguen, “1-Bit Reconfigurable Unit Cell Based on PIN Diodes for Transmit- Array Applications in X -Band,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 2260–2269, 2012

    2012

  30. [38]

    A Modified 1-Bit Unit-Cell for mmWave RIS Optimized at Extreme Incident Angle,

    G. Machado et al. , “A Modified 1-Bit Unit-Cell for mmWave RIS Optimized at Extreme Incident Angle,” in 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and INC/USNC-URSI Radio Science Meeting (AP-S/INC-USNC-URSI) , 2024, pp. 1177–1178

    2024

  31. [39]

    1-Bit SubTHz RIS with Planar Tightly Coupled Dipoles: Beam Shaping and Prototypes,

    X. Ma, Y . Zhou, Q. Luo, Y . Ma, K. Stylianopoulos, and G. C. Alexan- dropoulos, “1-Bit SubTHz RIS with Planar Tightly Coupled Dipoles: Beam Shaping and Prototypes,” in 2024 18th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP) , 2024, pp. 1–5

    2024

  32. [40]

    Anomalous and Specular Reflections of Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: Configuration Strategies and System Performance,

    M. Merluzzi and A. Clemente, “Anomalous and Specular Reflections of Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: Configuration Strategies and System Performance,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 2707–2711, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    C. A. Balanis, Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2012

    2012

  34. [42]

    Physics-Based Modeling and Scalable Optimization of Large Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,

    M. Najafi, V . Jamali, R. Schober, and H. V . Poor, “Physics-Based Modeling and Scalable Optimization of Large Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 2673–2691, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design. John Wiley Sons, 1997

    1997

  36. [44]

    An introduction to genetic algorithms,

    M. Mitchell, “An introduction to genetic algorithms,” 1996

    1996

  37. [45]

    Test and Application Center L.I.N.K

    Fraunhofer IIS, “Test and Application Center L.I.N.K.” https://www.iis. fraunhofer.de/en/profil/standorte/linkhalle.html

Pith tools

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