Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A Tutorial-cum-Survey on Self-Supervised Learning for Wi-Fi Sensing: Trends, Challenges, and Outlook

T0 review · 3 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 Self-supervised learning can match fully supervised Wi-Fi sensing accuracy in same-domain tasks with only 5–10 labeled samples per class, but its success depends on dataset structure and the choice of augmentations.

desk verdict A useful survey with a small but shaky benchmark; the headline SSL-comparable claim is contradicted by its own UT-HAR numbers and the augmentation protocol is never validated. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12052 v1 pith:IRUXWLFH submitted 2025-05-29 eess.SP

Ahmed Y. Radwan , Mustafa Yildirim , Navid Hasanzadeh , Hina Tabassum , Shahrokh Valaee This is my paper
classification eess.SP
keywords self-supervisedlearningWi-Fisensingchannelstateinformationcontrastivenon-contrastivefew-shothumanactivityrecognitiondomainadaptation
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 tutorial-cum-survey argues that self-supervised learning (SSL) can learn usable representations of Wi-Fi channel state information (CSI) without any labels, and that fine-tuning those representations with only 5–10 labeled samples per class can match fully supervised activity recognition when training and testing come from the same dataset and task. The authors support this with experiments on four SSL methods—SimCLR, VICReg, Barlow Twins, and SimSiam—across three public CSI datasets. On SignFi, 10-shot SimCLR reaches 95.47% accuracy versus 95.58% for full supervision, and on WiMANS it reaches 56.64% versus 56.47%; on UT-HAR the same setup reaches only 41.4% versus 99.4%. The paper reads this spread as evidence that SSL's effectiveness is dataset-dependent, succeeding on large structured data and struggling on small, low-diversity data, and it argues that label-efficient SSL should nevertheless be a central tool for Wi-Fi sensing.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a two-view augmentation scheme—Gaussian noise with standard deviation 0.01 and 10% random masking (Eqs. 53–54)—that creates positive pairs from unlabeled CSI samples, combined with four SSL objectives that shape the embedding space: the NT-Xent contrastive loss (SimCLR), variance-invariance-covariance regularization (VICReg), cross-correlation-to-identity redundancy reduction (Barlow Twins), and stop-gradient negative cosine similarity (SimSiam). After pretraining, the projection head is removed, the encoder is frozen, and only a linear classifier is trained on 5 or 10 labeled samples per class (Algorithm 1). This protocol isolates the contribution of the learned representation from the classifier, so the accuracy differences across datasets measure how well each SSL objective structures CSI features under the fixed augmentation choice.

What would settle it

Run the four SSL methods on UT-HAR while varying only the augmentation: if swapping the fixed augmentations for CSI-specific ones (such as subcarrier masking or Doppler-based warping) lifts 10-shot accuracy from 41.4% toward the 99.4% supervised baseline, then the same-domain claim is augmentation-dependent; if no augmentation closes the gap, the claim fails on UT-HAR.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that SSL pretraining on unlabeled CSI, followed by few-shot linear evaluation with a frozen encoder, can deliver accuracy comparable to a fully supervised model trained on the complete dataset, provided the task and environment are the same. The evidence is strongest on SignFi's 276-class sign-language task and WiMANS' multi-user activity task, where 10-shot SimCLR effectively ties or slightly exceeds the supervised baseline; on UT-HAR, the authors report a large gap and attribute it to the dataset's limited size and simplicity causing overfitting. The paper also shows that cross-task transfer, pretraining on SignFi and fine-tuning on WiMANS with 10 shots, reaches about 39.87% against a 56.47% supervised baseline, roughly 70% of the supervised performance, so learned representations generalize across tasks only partially. In the authors' framing, SSL is not a replacement for supervised learning in every regime but a label-efficient route that works when the data is rich enough for its augmentations to define meaningful invariances.

Load-bearing premise

The experimental conclusion depends on the premise that the hand-picked augmentations—Gaussian noise with standard deviation 0.01 and 10% random masking—form valid positive pairs for all four SSL methods on all three datasets.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On large structured CSI benchmarks such as SignFi, labeling effort can drop to about ten examples per gesture class without losing accuracy, since 10-shot SimCLR reaches 95.47% against 95.58% supervised.
  • On multi-user, multi-activity sensing such as WiMANS, SSL trained without labels can slightly exceed the supervised baseline in the 10-shot setting (56.64% vs 56.47%), suggesting label-efficient deployment is feasible in complex multi-label settings.
  • On small, low-diversity datasets such as UT-HAR, SSL does not match supervision (41.4% vs 99.4% at 10 shots), so same-domain parity is not a general guarantee and depends on dataset richness.
  • Cross-task transfer preserves only part of the learned signal: SignFi-pretrained SSL reaches roughly 70% of supervised WiMANS accuracy, indicating that SSL representations adapt to new tasks better than random features but worse than same-domain supervision.
  • The computational cost of SSL training remains high—over 7 GB peak memory on WiMANS—so the label savings come with training-side resource demands that matter for edge deployment.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper never ablates its augmentation choice; replacing the fixed Gaussian-noise-plus-masking with CSI-specific augmentations (e.g., subcarrier or antenna masking, Doppler-based warping, phase perturbation) would directly test whether the same-domain parity claim holds across augmentation families.
  • The UT-HAR number in the paper's own table bounds the headline claim: 'comparable to supervised' is accurate for SignFi and WiMANS but not for every same-domain task, so a careful reader should carry that boundary into any extension.
  • Because all four SSL methods share the same encoder backbone and frozen-encoder protocol, the comparison mostly isolates loss functions under one inductive bias; varying augmentation strength or batch size could reveal whether any method is being systematically handicapped.
  • A natural follow-up is cross-device and cross-environment evaluation within the same dataset, which would connect these few-shot results to the paper's own discussion of domain adaptation and Doppler-based features.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a tutorial-cum-survey on self-supervised learning (SSL) for Wi-Fi sensing based on channel state information (CSI). It covers Wi-Fi standardization, CSI fundamentals and extraction tooling, public datasets, preprocessing techniques, conventional deep learning methods, and contrastive/non-contrastive SSL architectures. The authors also contribute an experimental evaluation of four SSL methods (SimCLR, VICReg, Barlow Twins, SimSiam) with 5-shot and 10-shot fine-tuning on WiMANS, UT-HAR, and SignFi, plus a transfer-learning experiment from SignFi to WiMANS, with fully supervised baselines as upper bounds. The central claim is that SSL achieves performance comparable to supervised learning in same-domain tasks, especially in few-shot settings, while cross-domain adaptation remains challenging.

Significance. If the experimental claim were established, the paper would provide a useful practical message for the Wi-Fi sensing community: SSL with few-shot fine-tuning can substantially reduce labeling cost on some datasets. The survey also has genuine value as a broad reference: the dataset comparison in Table V, the preprocessing taxonomy in Section IV, the SSL architecture overview in Section VI, and the computational cost analysis in Table XI are concrete contributions that go beyond a purely narrative survey. The experimental section is transparent about parameters (Tables IX and X) and reports averaged accuracy over five seeds, which is a reasonable level of reproducibility for a survey-cum-tutorial. However, the headline claim about SSL being comparable to supervised learning is not supported by the paper's own Table XII on UT-HAR, and the augmentation protocol behind the comparison is not validated. The paper is therefore best treated as a useful survey with a preliminary, configuration-dependent experimental study rather than a definitive benchmark.

major comments (3)
  1. [§VII-F, Tables XII and I (Contributions)] There is a direct internal contradiction in the UT-HAR results. Section VII-F states that 'the highest accuracy is observed with Barlow Twins, which achieves 36.72% in the 5-shot setting and 38.52% in the 10-shot setting. VICReg follows with 33.76% and 34.44%.' Table XII reports SimCLR at 40.6% and 41.4% for UT-HAR, which are higher than both Barlow Twins and VICReg. This error is not merely cosmetic: the same table shows supervised UT-HAR at 99.40%, so the strongest 10-shot SSL result (41.4%) is far below the supervised baseline. This contradicts the contribution claim in Section I-B that 'SSL methods achieved performance comparable to supervised learning in same-domain tasks' without any dataset qualification. The text and the claim must be corrected, and the claim should be restricted to the datasets and settings where it actually holds (SignFi 10-shot and WiMANS 10-shot).
  2. [§VII-B, Eqs. (53)-(54), §VII-H] The augmentation protocol is fixed to Gaussian noise with standard deviation 0.01 and 10% random masking for all four SSL methods and all three datasets, but no ablation, sensitivity analysis, or justification is provided to show that these transforms form meaningful positive pairs for CSI in each setting. The paper's own Section VII-H concedes that SimSiam's failure on SignFi is likely due to 'suboptimal hyperparameters or insufficient regularization,' which means the comparison under a single shared protocol does not isolate the SSL methods' capabilities. The UT-HAR results (e.g., SimSiam at 23.44% 10-shot and SimCLR at 41.4% versus 99.40% supervised) are exactly the pattern one would expect if the augmentations were mismatched to the data. The authors should either provide an augmentation ablation or sensitivity analysis, or explicitly reframe Section I-B and Section VII-H as preliminary observations under a fixed, unvalidated protocol rather than as evidence about SSL's general comparability to supervised learning.
  3. [§VII-C, §III-C1] The experimental setup describes UT-HAR as having '7 activities' (Section VII-C), while Section III-C1 states that UT-HAR includes 'six activities (e.g., walking, sitting) performed by six individuals.' If the number of classes differs from the dataset description, the experimental results and the comparison in Table XII are affected. This inconsistency should be resolved by stating the exact number of classes used and, if preprocessing or filtering changed the class set, documenting that.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table IX] The column header 'SSL algorithmss' contains a typo; it should read 'SSL algorithms.'
  2. [Section VII-F] The sentence 'The limited size and simplicity of the UT-HAR dataset likely contribute to overfitting, hindering the effectiveness of contrastive learning approaches like SimCLR' is not consistent with Table XII, which shows SimCLR achieving the best UT-HAR results among the SSL methods. This explanation should be revised or removed after the numerical contradiction is fixed.
  3. [Section IV-D6] The MiniRocket description states that it produces '9,996 features' by default, but it would be helpful to clarify whether this number applies to the CSI input shape used in this paper or is the default for the reference implementation.
  4. [Table V] The row for the IEEE 802.11ac 80 MHz dataset lists '242 Subcarriers,' while the Nexmon CSI tool is described in Section III-A4 as capturing 'all 256 subcarriers in 80 MHz channels'; the discrepancy should be explained or reconciled.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the benchmark results are self-contained; minor self-citations and the unvalidated augmentation recipe are robustness concerns, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central experimental claim, that SSL methods achieve performance comparable to supervised learning in same-domain settings, is a summary of Table XII and is not derived from any prior claim of the authors. The evaluation uses public datasets (UT-HAR, WiMANS, SignFi) and standard SSL losses (NT-Xent, MSE, cross-correlation, VICReg terms), with supervised baselines trained independently on the full datasets; no parameter is fitted to the evaluation target and then reported as a prediction. The self-citations present in the paper ([42] for the Doppler velocity model, [49] for the UT-HAR dataset, [66] for phase processing) are background or dataset references and are not load-bearing for the experimental conclusions. The paper itself flags a limitation in Section VII-H, attributing SimSiam's collapse to 'suboptimal hyperparameters or insufficient regularization,' and the augmentation recipe in Eqs. (53)-(54) is fixed without ablation; however, these are missing-support or configuration-validity concerns, not circular steps in which an output is equivalent to an input by construction. The observed mismatch with the stated claim (e.g., UT-HAR 41.4% vs. 99.4% supervised, and SimSiam at 20.56% on SignFi) affects correctness of the summary, not the circularity of the derivation. Overall, no step in the paper's derivation chain reduces to its own inputs or to a self-citation chain.

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

The experimental conclusions rest on hand-picked hyperparameters and augmentations, standard CSI modeling assumptions, and the correctness of public dataset labels. No new physical entities or fitted constants are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Gaussian noise std (sigma) = 0.01
    Used in Eq. 53 for data augmentation; chosen by hand, no sensitivity analysis reported.
  • Masking probability = 0.1
    Used in Eq. 54 for random masking augmentation; chosen by hand, no ablation reported.
  • SSL learning rate = 0.01
    Table IX; fixed for all SSL methods and datasets, no tuning reported.
  • Fine-tuning learning rate = 0.001
    Tables IX and X; fixed for few-shot classifier training.
  • Temperature tau for contrastive losses = not reported
    Eqs. 33-34 depend on temperature, but the experimental value of tau is not stated.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The MIMO-OFDM received signal model y=Hx+eta (Eq. 1) and multipath representation (Eq. 2) adequately characterize Wi-Fi channels.
    Section II-B; foundational for all subsequent CSI discussion, ignores hardware impairments and non-stationarity.
  • domain assumption Constant-velocity motion model h_fc = D a + n (Eq. 8) for moving users.
    Section II-D; used to motivate Doppler velocity estimation, assumes constant velocities over M samples.
  • domain assumption Dataset labels and splits in WiMANS, UT-HAR, and SignFi are correct and representative.
    Section VII; all experimental conclusions depend on the public datasets' annotations and train-test splits.
  • ad hoc to paper The chosen augmentations (Gaussian noise, 10% masking) produce meaningful positive pairs for all four SSL algorithms.
    Section VII-B; no justification or ablation, affects the entire SSL comparison.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Tutorial-cum-Survey on Self-Supervised Learning for Wi-Fi Sensing: Trends, Challenges, and Outlook." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IRUXWLFH

@misc{pith2026250612052,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Tutorial-cum-Survey on Self-Supervised Learning for Wi-Fi Sensing: Trends, Challenges, and Outlook},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IRUXWLFH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12052}
}
read the original abstract

Wi-Fi technology has evolved from simple communication routers to sensing devices. Wi-Fi sensing leverages conventional Wi-Fi transmissions to extract and analyze channel state information (CSI) for applications like proximity detection, occupancy detection, activity recognition, and health monitoring. By leveraging existing infrastructure, Wi-Fi sensing offers a privacy-preserving, non-intrusive, and cost-effective solution which, unlike cameras, is not sensitive to lighting conditions. Beginning with a comprehensive review of the Wi-Fi standardization activities, this tutorial-cum-survey first introduces fundamental concepts related to Wi-Fi CSI, outlines the CSI measurement methods, and examines the impact of mobile objects on CSI. The mechanics of a simplified testbed for CSI extraction are also described. Then, we present a qualitative comparison of the existing Wi-Fi sensing datasets, their specifications, and pin-point their shortcomings. Next, a variety of preprocessing techniques are discussed that are beneficial for feature extraction and explainability of machine learning (ML) algorithms. We then provide a qualitative review of recent ML approaches in the domain of Wi-Fi sensing and present the significance of self-supervised learning (SSL) in that context. Specifically, the mechanics of contrastive and non-contrastive learning solutions is elaborated in detail and a quantitative comparative analysis is presented in terms of classification accuracy. Finally, the article concludes by highlighting emerging technologies that can be leveraged to enhance the performance of Wi-Fi sensing and opportunities for further research in this domain

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.12052 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. HAR using Wi-Fi CSI TABLE I: Wi-Fi Sensing Applications Application References Description Localization [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] Tracking a target’s location within a space using ambient Wi-Fi signals. Traditional methods require the target to have transmitting or receiving hardware. Recent studies focus on device-free tracking using CSI data to create environmental signal fingerprints. Tech￾niques like Domain Adapta… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Evolution of Methodologies for Wi-Fi Sensing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Structure of the CSI matrix, illustrating dimensions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Active sensing and passive sensing setups for CSI data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The spatial arrangement of a Wi-Fi transmitter and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Overview of SSL Architecture Paradigms for each sample by minimizing the distance between different augmented views of the same instance. Through augmenta￾tions such as cropping, flipping, and colour jittering, these architectures teach models to associate variations w…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Graphical illustration of SSL followed by few-Shot learning. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_7.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

  1. The Rosenberg $ \mathbb{S}^{1} $-Stability Conjecture for $ \chi(X) = 0 $

    math.DG 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    For closed oriented manifolds X with dim X ≥ 5 and χ(X)=0, the Rosenberg S¹-stability conjecture holds: X × S¹ admits a PSC metric if and only if X does.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

141 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    WiFi sensing on the edge: Signal processing techniques and challenges for real-world systems,

    S. M. Hernandez and E. Bulut, “WiFi sensing on the edge: Signal processing techniques and challenges for real-world systems,”IEEE Commun. Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 46–76, 2023. 29

    2023

  2. [2]

    WiFi sensing with channel state information: A survey,

    Y . Ma, G. Zhou, and S. Wang, “WiFi sensing with channel state information: A survey,”ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 52, no. 3, jun 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3310194

    doi:10.1145/3310194 2019

  3. [3]

    Deep transfer learning for WiFi localization,

    P. Li, H. Cui, A. Khan, U. Raza, R. Piechocki, A. Doufexi, and T. Farnham, “Deep transfer learning for WiFi localization,” in2021 IEEE Radar Conf. (RadarConf21). IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–5

    2021

  4. [4]

    Device-free localization based on CSI fingerprints and deep neural networks,

    R. Zhou, M. Hao, X. Lu, M. Tang, and Y . Fu, “Device-free localization based on CSI fingerprints and deep neural networks,” in2018 15th Annual IEEE Intl. Conf. on Sensing, Communication, and Networking (SECON), 2018, pp. 1–9

    2018

  5. [5]

    Adaptive device-free localization in dynamic environments through adaptive neural networks,

    R. Zhou, H. Hou, Z. Gong, Z. Chen, K. Tang, and B. Zhou, “Adaptive device-free localization in dynamic environments through adaptive neural networks,”IEEE Sensors Jrnl., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 548–559, 2020

    2020

  6. [6]

    Indoor localization based on CSI in dynamic environments through domain adaptation,

    L. Yang, T. Kamada, and C. Ohta, “Indoor localization based on CSI in dynamic environments through domain adaptation,”IEICE Commun. Express, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 564–569, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    A low-overhead indoor positioning system using CSI fingerprint based on transfer learning,

    Y . Zhang, C. Wu, and Y . Chen, “A low-overhead indoor positioning system using CSI fingerprint based on transfer learning,”IEEE Sensors Jrnl., vol. 21, no. 16, pp. 18 156–18 165, 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Environment-Robust WiFi-Based Human Activity Recognition Using Enhanced CSI and Deep Learning,

    Z. Shi, Q. Cheng, J. A. Zhang, and R. Y . Da Xu, “Environment-Robust WiFi-Based Human Activity Recognition Using Enhanced CSI and Deep Learning,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 9, no. 24, pp. 24 643–24 654, 2022

    2022

Show all 141 references
  1. [9]

    WiFinger: Leveraging commodity WiFi for fine-grained finger gesture recognition,

    S. Tan and J. Yang, “WiFinger: Leveraging commodity WiFi for fine-grained finger gesture recognition,” inProc. of the 17th ACM Intl. Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing, ser. MobiHoc ’16. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2016, p. 201–210...

    2016

  2. [10]

    Device-free secure interaction with hand gestures in WiFi-enabled IoT environment,

    Y . Zhao, R. Gao, S. Liu, L. Xie, J. Wu, H. Tu, and B. Chen, “Device-free secure interaction with hand gestures in WiFi-enabled IoT environment,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 5619–5631, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Wibot! in-vehicle behaviour and gesture recognition using wireless network edge,

    M. Raja, V . Ghaderi, and S. Sigg, “Wibot! in-vehicle behaviour and gesture recognition using wireless network edge,” in2018 IEEE 38th Intl. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), 2018, pp. 376– 387

    2018

  4. [12]

    SignFi: Sign language recognition using WiFi,

    Y . Ma, G. Zhou, S. Wang, H. Zhao, and W. Jung, “SignFi: Sign language recognition using WiFi,”Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., vol. 2, no. 1, mar 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3191755

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    A trained-once crowd counting method using differential WiFi channel state information,

    S. Di Domenico, M. De Sanctis, E. Cianca, and G. Bianchi, “A trained-once crowd counting method using differential WiFi channel state information,” inProc. of the 3rd Intl. on Workshop on Physical Analytics, 2016, pp. 37–42

    2016

  6. [14]

    FarSense: Pushing the range limit of WiFi-based respiration sensing with CSI ratio of two antennas,

    Y . Zeng, D. Wu, J. Xiong, E. Yi, R. Gao, and D. Zhang, “FarSense: Pushing the range limit of WiFi-based respiration sensing with CSI ratio of two antennas,”Proc. of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1–26, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    ResFi: WiFi-enabled device-free respiration detection based on deep learning,

    J. Hu, J. Yang, J.-B. Ong, D. Wang, and L. Xie, “ResFi: WiFi-enabled device-free respiration detection based on deep learning,” in2022 IEEE 17th Intl. Conf. on Control & Automation (ICCA), 2022, pp. 510–515

    2022

  8. [16]

    Tracking vital signs during sleep leveraging off-the-shelf WiFi,

    J. Liu, Y . Wang, Y . Chen, J. Yang, X. Chen, and J. Cheng, “Tracking vital signs during sleep leveraging off-the-shelf WiFi,” inProc. of the 16th ACM Intl. Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing, ser. MobiHoc ’15. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Mac...

    2015

  9. [17]

    PhaseBeat: Exploiting CSI phase data for vital sign monitoring with commodity WiFi devices,

    X. Wang, C. Yang, and S. Mao, “PhaseBeat: Exploiting CSI phase data for vital sign monitoring with commodity WiFi devices,” in2017 IEEE 37th Intl. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). IEEE, 2017, pp. 1230–1239

    2017

  10. [18]

    Heart rate variability extraction using commodity Wi-Fi devices via time domain signal processing,

    I. Shirakami and T. Sato, “Heart rate variability extraction using commodity Wi-Fi devices via time domain signal processing,” in2021 IEEE EMBS Intl. Conf. on Biomedical and Health Informatics (BHI). IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–4

    2021

  11. [19]

    Deep learning and its applications to WiFi human sensing: A benchmark and a tutorial,

    J. Yang, X. Chen, D. Wang, H. Zou, C. X. Lu, S. Sun, and L. Xie, “Deep learning and its applications to WiFi human sensing: A benchmark and a tutorial,” no. arXiv:2207.07859, Jul 2022, arXiv:2207.07859 [cs, eess]. [Online]. Available: http: //arxiv.org/abs/2207.07859

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Contactless WiFi sensing and monitoring for future healthcare - emerging trends, challenges, and opportunities,

    Y . Ge, A. Taha, S. A. Shah, K. Dashtipour, S. Zhu, J. Cooper, Q. H. Abbasi, and M. A. Imran, “Contactless WiFi sensing and monitoring for future healthcare - emerging trends, challenges, and opportunities,” IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, vol. 16, pp. 171–191, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    Lightseg: An online and low-latency activity segmentation method for Wi-Fi sensing,

    L. Chen, X. Zheng, L. Xu, L. Liu, and H. Ma, “Lightseg: An online and low-latency activity segmentation method for Wi-Fi sensing,” in Intl. Conf. on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking, and Services. Springer, 2022, pp. 227–247

    2022

  14. [22]

    Sensorless sensing with WiFi,

    Z. Zhou, C. Wu, Z. Yang, and Y . Liu, “Sensorless sensing with WiFi,” Tsinghua Science and Technology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2015

    2015

  15. [23]

    CSI- based human sensing using model-based approaches: a survey,

    Z. Wang, Z. Huang, C. Zhang, W. Dou, Y . Guo, and D. Chen, “CSI- based human sensing using model-based approaches: a survey,”Jrnl. of Computational Design and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 510–523, 02 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwab003

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    A survey on machine learning en- hanced integrated sensing and communication systems: Architectures, algorithms, and applications,

    M. A. K. Respati and B. M. Lee, “A survey on machine learning en- hanced integrated sensing and communication systems: Architectures, algorithms, and applications,”IEEE Access, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    WiFi vision: Sensing, recognition, and detection with commodity MIMO-OFDM WiFi,

    Y . He, Y . Chen, Y . Hu, and B. Zeng, “WiFi vision: Sensing, recognition, and detection with commodity MIMO-OFDM WiFi,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 8296–8317, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    WiFi-based human sensing with deep learning: Recent advances, challenges, and opportunities,

    I. Ahmad, A. Ullah, and W. Choi, “WiFi-based human sensing with deep learning: Recent advances, challenges, and opportunities,”IEEE Open Jrnl. of the Commun. Society, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Self-supervised learning for WiFi CSI-based human activity recognition: A systematic study,

    K. Xu, J. Wang, H. Zhu, and D. Zheng, “Self-supervised learning for WiFi CSI-based human activity recognition: A systematic study,”

  20. [28]

    Widar3.0: Zero-effort cross-domain gesture recognition with Wi-Fi,

    Y . Zhang, Y . Zheng, K. Qian, G. Zhang, Y . Liu, C. Wu, and Z. Yang, “Widar3.0: Zero-effort cross-domain gesture recognition with Wi-Fi,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 8671–8688, 2022

    2022

  21. [29]

    Evaluating self-supervised learning for WiFi CSI-based human activity recognition,

    K. Xu, J. Wang, H. Zhu, and D. Zheng, “Evaluating self-supervised learning for WiFi CSI-based human activity recognition,”ACM Trans- actions on Sensor Networks, 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    WiFi-based cross-domain gesture recognition via modified prototypical networks,

    X. Zhang, C. Tang, K. Yin, and Q. Ni, “WiFi-based cross-domain gesture recognition via modified prototypical networks,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 8584–8596, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Opportunities and challenges of wireless human sensing for the smart iot world: A survey,

    Z. Liu, X. Liu, J. Zhang, and K. Li, “Opportunities and challenges of wireless human sensing for the smart iot world: A survey,”IEEE Network, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 104–110, 2019

    2019

  24. [32]

    SenseFi: A library and benchmark on deep-learning-empowered WiFi human sensing,

    J. Yang, X. Chen, H. Zou, C. X. Lu, D. Wang, S. Sun, and L. Xie, “SenseFi: A library and benchmark on deep-learning-empowered WiFi human sensing,”Patterns, vol. 4, no. 3, 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Cross-Domain WiFi sensing with channel state information: A survey,

    C. Chen, G. Zhou, and Y . Lin, “Cross-Domain WiFi sensing with channel state information: A survey,”ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 55, no. 11, feb 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3570325

    2023 doi

  26. [34]

    On ieee 802.11: wireless lan technology,

    S. Banerji and R. S. Chowdhury, “On ieee 802.11: wireless lan technology,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1307.2661, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    An overview on IEEE 802.11 bf: Wlan sensing,

    R. Du, H. Hua, H. Xie, X. Song, Z. Lyu, M. Hu, Y . Xin, S. McCann, M. Montemurro, T. X. Hanet al., “An overview on IEEE 802.11 bf: Wlan sensing,”IEEE Commun. Surveys & Tutorials, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    The evolution of Wi-Fi technology and standards,

    IEEE Standards Association, “The evolution of Wi-Fi technology and standards,” https://standards.ieee.org/beyond-standards/ the-evolution-of-wi-fi-technology-and-standards/, 2023, accessed: 2024-08-23

    2023

  29. [37]

    What will Wi-Fi 8 be? a primer on IEEE 802.11 bn ultra high reliability,

    L. Galati-Giordano, G. Geraci, M. Carrascosa, and B. Bellalta, “What will Wi-Fi 8 be? a primer on IEEE 802.11 bn ultra high reliability,” IEEE Commun. Magazine, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 126–132, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    IEEE 802.11 bf WLAN sensing procedure: Enabling the widespread adoption of Wi-Fi sensing,

    T. Ropitault, C. R. da Silva, S. Blandino, A. Sahoo, N. Golmie, K. Yoon, C. Aldana, and C. Hu, “IEEE 802.11 bf WLAN sensing procedure: Enabling the widespread adoption of Wi-Fi sensing,”IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 58–64, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    When next-gen sensing meets legacy wi-fi: Performance analyses of ieee 802.11 bf and ieee 802.11 ax coexistence,

    N. Keshtiarast, P. K. Bishoyi, I. M. Lumbantobing, and M. Petrova, “When next-gen sensing meets legacy wi-fi: Performance analyses of ieee 802.11 bf and ieee 802.11 ax coexistence,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.04637, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Wi-Fi 8: Embracing the millimeter-wave era,

    X. Liu, T. Chen, Y . Dong, Z. Mao, M. Gan, X. Yang, and J. Lu, “Wi-Fi 8: Embracing the millimeter-wave era,”IEEE Communications Magazine, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    A survey of the real-time metaverse: Challenges and opportu- nities,

    M. Hatami, Q. Qu, Y . Chen, H. Kholidy, E. Blasch, and E. Ardiles- Cruz, “A survey of the real-time metaverse: Challenges and opportu- nities,”Future Internet, vol. 16, no. 10, p. 379, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Hand movement velocity estimation from WiFi channel state information,

    N. Hasanzadeh, R. Djogo, H. Salehinejad, and S. Valaee, “Hand movement velocity estimation from WiFi channel state information,” in2023 IEEE 9th Intl. Workshop on Computational Advances in Multi- Sensor Adaptive Processing (CAMSAP), 2023, pp. 296–300

    2023

  35. [43]

    Tool release: Gather- ing 802.11 n traces with channel state information,

    D. Halperin, W. Hu, A. Sheth, and D. Wetherall, “Tool release: Gather- ing 802.11 n traces with channel state information,”ACM SIGCOMM computer communication review, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 53–53, 2011

    2011

  36. [44]

    Precise power delay profiling with commodity WiFi,

    Y . Xie, Z. Li, and M. Li, “Precise power delay profiling with commodity WiFi,” inProc. of the 21st Annual Intl. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking, ser. MobiCom ’15. New York, 30 NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2015, p. 53–64. [Online]. Available: https:/...

    2015

  37. [45]

    Precise power delay profiling with commodity WiFi,

    ——, “Precise power delay profiling with commodity WiFi,” in Proceedings of the 21st Annual international conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, 2015, pp. 53–64

    2015

  38. [46]

    Human activity recognition using CSI information with nexmon,

    J. Sch ¨afer, B. R. Barrsiwal, M. Kokhkharova, H. Adil, and J. Liebe- henschel, “Human activity recognition using CSI information with nexmon,”Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 19, p. 8860, 2021

    2021

  39. [47]

    Passive WiFi CSI sensing based machine learning framework for COVID- safe occupancy monitoring,

    A. Sharma, J. Li, D. Mishra, G. Batista, and A. Seneviratne, “Passive WiFi CSI sensing based machine learning framework for COVID- safe occupancy monitoring,” in2021 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops). IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–6

    2021

  40. [48]

    Lightweight and standalone IoT based WiFi sensing for active repositioning and mobility,

    S. M. Hernandez and E. Bulut, “Lightweight and standalone IoT based WiFi sensing for active repositioning and mobility,” in21st Intl. Symposium on ”A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks” (WoWMoM) (WoWMoM 2020), Cork, Ireland, Jun. 2020

    2020

  41. [49]

    A survey on behavior recognition using WiFi channel state information,

    S. Yousefi, H. Narui, S. Dayal, S. Ermon, and S. Valaee, “A survey on behavior recognition using WiFi channel state information,”IEEE Commun. Magazine, vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 98–104, 2017

    2017

  42. [50]

    Wiar: A public dataset for WiFi-based activity recognition,

    L. Guo, L. Wang, C. Lin, J. Liu, B. Lu, J. Fang, Z. Liu, Z. Shan, J. Yang, and S. Guo, “Wiar: A public dataset for WiFi-based activity recognition,”IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 154 935–154 945, 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    WiCount: A deep learning approach for crowd counting using WiFi signals,

    S. Liu, Y . Zhao, and B. Chen, “WiCount: A deep learning approach for crowd counting using WiFi signals,” in2017 IEEE Intl. Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications and 2017 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Ubiquitous Computing and Commun. (ISPA/IUCC), 2017, pp. 967–974

    2017

  44. [52]

    WiMANS: A benchmark dataset for WiFi-based multi-user activity sensing,

    S. Huang, K. Li, D. You, Y . Chen, A. Lin, S. Liu, X. Li, and J. A. McCann, “WiMANS: A benchmark dataset for WiFi-based multi-user activity sensing,” 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    Falldefi: Ubiquitous fall detection using commodity Wi-Fi devices,

    S. Palipana, D. Rojas, P. Agrawal, and D. Pesch, “Falldefi: Ubiquitous fall detection using commodity Wi-Fi devices,”Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., vol. 1, no. 4, jan 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3161183

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    Wi-sl: Contactless fine-grained gesture recognition uses channel state information,

    Z. Hao, Y . Duan, X. Dang, Y . Liu, and D. Zhang, “Wi-sl: Contactless fine-grained gesture recognition uses channel state information,”Sensors, vol. 20, no. 14, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/20/14/4025

    2020

  47. [55]

    CrossSense: Towards cross-site and large-scale WiFi sensing,

    J. Zhang, Z. Tang, M. Li, D. Fang, P. Nurmi, and Z. Wang, “CrossSense: Towards cross-site and large-scale WiFi sensing,” in Proc. of the 24th Annual Intl. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking, ser. MobiCom ’18. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2018,...

    2018

  48. [56]

    DeepSeg: Deep-learning- based activity segmentation framework for activity recognition using WiFi,

    C. Xiao, Y . Lei, Y . Ma, F. Zhou, and Z. Qin, “DeepSeg: Deep-learning- based activity segmentation framework for activity recognition using WiFi,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 5669–5681, 2021

    2021

  49. [57]

    ehealth CSI: A Wi-Fi CSI dataset of human activities,

    I. Galdino, J. C. H. Soto, E. Caballero, V . Ferreira, T. C. Ramos, C. Albuquerque, and D. C. Muchaluat-Saade, “ehealth CSI: A Wi-Fi CSI dataset of human activities,”IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 71 003– 71 012, 2023

    2023

  50. [58]

    A CSI dataset for Wireless human sensing on 80 mhz Wi-Fi channels,

    F. Meneghello, N. D. Fabbro, D. Garlisi, I. Tinnirello, and M. Rossi, “A CSI dataset for Wireless human sensing on 80 mhz Wi-Fi channels,” IEEE Commun. Magazine, vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 146–152, 2023

    2023

  51. [59]

    Human activity recognition based on Wi-Fi CSI data -a deep neural network approach,

    A. Zhuravchak, O. Kapshii, and E. Pournaras, “Human activity recognition based on Wi-Fi CSI data -a deep neural network approach,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 198, pp. 59–66, 2022, 12th Intl. Conf. on Emerging Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive Networks / 11th Intl. Conf. on...

    2022

  52. [60]

    Human activity recognition using CSI information with nexmon,

    J. Sch ¨afer, B. R. Barrsiwal, M. Kokhkharova, H. Adil, and J. Liebehenschel, “Human activity recognition using CSI information with nexmon,”Applied Sciences, vol. 11, no. 19, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/19/8860

    2021

  53. [61]

    Robust WiFi- enabled device-free gesture recognition via unsupervised adversarial domain adaptation,

    H. Zou, J. Yang, Y . Zhou, L. Xie, and C. J. Spanos, “Robust WiFi- enabled device-free gesture recognition via unsupervised adversarial domain adaptation,” in2018 27th Intl. Conf. on Computer Communi- cation and Networks (ICCCN), 2018, pp. 1–8

    2018

  54. [62]

    Zigfi: Harness- ing channel state information for cross-technology communication,

    X. Guo, Y . He, X. Zheng, L. Yu, and O. Gnawali, “Zigfi: Harness- ing channel state information for cross-technology communication,” IEEE/ACM Trans. on Networking, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 301–311, 2020

    2020

  55. [63]

    EyeFi: Fast human identification through vision and WiFi-based trajectory matching,

    S. Fang, T. Islam, S. Munir, and S. Nirjon, “EyeFi: Fast human identification through vision and WiFi-based trajectory matching,” in 2020 16th Intl. Conf. on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2020, pp. 59–68

    2020

  56. [64]

    Widar 3.0: WiFi-based activity recognition dataset,

    Z. Yang, Y . Zhang, G. Zhang, and Y . Zheng, “Widar 3.0: WiFi-based activity recognition dataset,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.21227/7znf-qp86

    2020 doi

  57. [65]

    Data prepro- cessing for supervised leaning,

    S. B. Kotsiantis, D. Kanellopoulos, and P. E. Pintelas, “Data prepro- cessing for supervised leaning,”Intl. Jrnl. of computer science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 111–117, 2006

    2006

  58. [66]

    Enhancing generalization in human activity recognition through improved Wi-Fi channel state information phase processing and antenna pair selection,

    N. Hasanzadeh and S. Valaee, “Enhancing generalization in human activity recognition through improved Wi-Fi channel state information phase processing and antenna pair selection,” in2024 IEEE 34th Intl. Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing (MLSP), 2024, pp. 1–6

    2024

  59. [67]

    Common phase error correction for OFDM in wireless communication,

    V . S. Abhayawardhana and I. J. Wassell, “Common phase error correction for OFDM in wireless communication,” inProc. of the 3rd Intl. Symposium on Communication Systems, Networks and Digital Signal Processing (CSNDSP’02), November 2002

    2002

  60. [68]

    A phase-measurement offset compensation technique suitable for automation,

    M. F. Wagdy and M. S. P. Lucas, “A phase-measurement offset compensation technique suitable for automation,”IEEE Trans. on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. IM-36, no. 3, pp. 721–724, Sept. 1987

    1987

  61. [69]

    WiFi CSI-based device-free sensing: from fresnel zone model to CSI-ratio model,

    D. Wu, Y . Zeng, F. Zhang, and D. Zhang, “WiFi CSI-based device-free sensing: from fresnel zone model to CSI-ratio model,”CCF Trans. on Pervasive Computing and Interaction, pp. 1–15, 2022

    2022

  62. [70]

    Understanding and modeling of WiFi signal based human activity recognition,

    W. Wang, A. X. Liu, M. Shahzad, K. Ling, and S. Lu, “Understanding and modeling of WiFi signal based human activity recognition,” in Proc. of the 21st Annual Intl. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking, ser. MobiCom ’15. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machine...

    2015

  63. [71]

    Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estima- tion,

    R. Schmidt, “Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estima- tion,”IEEE Trans. on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 276–280, 1986

    1986

  64. [72]

    Minirocket: A very fast (almost) deterministic transform for time series classification,

    A. Dempster, D. F. Schmidt, and G. I. Webb, “Minirocket: A very fast (almost) deterministic transform for time series classification,” in Proc. of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conf. on knowledge discovery & data mining, 2021, pp. 248–257

    2021

  65. [73]

    Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey,

    V . Sze, Y .-H. Chen, T.-J. Yang, and J. S. Emer, “Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey,”Proc. of the IEEE, vol. 105, no. 12, pp. 2295–2329, 2017

    2017

  66. [74]

    WiCount: A deep learning approach for crowd counting using WiFi signals,

    S. Liu, Y . Zhao, and B. Chen, “WiCount: A deep learning approach for crowd counting using WiFi signals,” in2017 IEEE Intl. Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications and 2017 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Ubiquitous Computing and Commun. (ISPA/IUCC). IEEE, 2017,...

    2017

  67. [75]

    Recent advances in convolutional neural networks,

    J. Gu, Z. Wang, J. Kuen, L. Ma, A. Shahroudy, B. Shuai, T. Liu, X. Wang, G. Wang, J. Caiet al., “Recent advances in convolutional neural networks,”Pattern recognition, vol. 77, pp. 354–377, 2018

    2018

  68. [76]

    CNN-based device-free health monitoring and prediction system using WiFi signals,

    A. Kumar, S. Singh, V . Rawal, S. Garg, A. Agrawal, and S. Yadav, “CNN-based device-free health monitoring and prediction system using WiFi signals,”Intl. Jrnl. of Information Technology, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 3725–3737, 2022

    2022

  69. [77]

    A CNN-MLP deep model for sensor-based human activity recognition,

    A. Nadia, S. Lyazid, K. Okba, and C. Abdelghani, “A CNN-MLP deep model for sensor-based human activity recognition,” in2023 15th Intl. Conf. on Innovations in Information Technology (IIT). IEEE, 2023, pp. 121–126

    2023

  70. [78]

    Recent advances in recurrent neural networks,

    H. Salehinejad, S. Sankar, J. Barfett, E. Colak, and S. Valaee, “Recent advances in recurrent neural networks,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.01078, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Recurrent neural networks for accurate rssi indoor localization,

    M. T. Hoang, B. Yuen, X. Dong, T. Lu, R. Westendorp, and K. Reddy, “Recurrent neural networks for accurate rssi indoor localization,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 10 639–10 651, 2019

    2019

  72. [80]

    A WiFi-based smart home fall detection system using recurrent neural network,

    J. Ding and Y . Wang, “A WiFi-based smart home fall detection system using recurrent neural network,”IEEE Trans. on Consumer Electronics, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 308–317, 2020

    2020

  73. [81]

    Commodity WiFi sensing in ten years: Status, challenges, and opportunities,

    S. Tan, Y . Ren, J. Yang, and Y . Chen, “Commodity WiFi sensing in ten years: Status, challenges, and opportunities,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 9, no. 18, pp. 17 832–17 843, 2022

    2022

  74. [82]

    Fundamentals of recurrent neural network (RNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM) network,

    A. Sherstinsky, “Fundamentals of recurrent neural network (RNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM) network,”Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, vol. 404, p. 132306, 2020

    2020

  75. [83]

    Multi-user human activity recognition through adaptive location-independent WiFi signal characteristics,

    F. Abuhoureyah, S. K. Swee, and W. Y . Chiew, “Multi-user human activity recognition through adaptive location-independent WiFi signal characteristics,”IEEE Access, 2024

    2024

  76. [84]

    LSTM-based jamming detection and forecasting model using transport and application layer parameters in Wi-Fi based IoT systems,

    F. tu Zahra, Y . S. Bostanci, and M. Soyturk, “LSTM-based jamming detection and forecasting model using transport and application layer parameters in Wi-Fi based IoT systems,”IEEE Access, 2024

    2024

  77. [85]

    Wi-SensiNet: Through-wall human activity recognition based on WiFi sensing,

    X. Fu, C. Wang, and S. Li, “Wi-SensiNet: Through-wall human activity recognition based on WiFi sensing,” in2024 5th Intl. Conf. on Big Data 31 & Artificial Intelligence & Software Engineering (ICBASE). IEEE, 2024, pp. 238–241

    2024

  78. [86]

    Bidirectional LSTM-CRF models for sequence tagging,

    Z. Huang, W. Xu, and K. Yu, “Bidirectional LSTM-CRF models for sequence tagging,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.01991, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Time-selective RNN for device-free multiroom human presence detection using WiFi CSI,

    L.-H. Shen, A.-H. Hsiao, F.-Y . Chu, and K.-T. Feng, “Time-selective RNN for device-free multiroom human presence detection using WiFi CSI,”IEEE Trans. on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–17, 2024

    2024

  80. [88]

    Robofisense: Attention-based robotic arm activity recognition with WiFi sensing,

    R. Zandi, K. Behzad, E. Motamedi, H. Salehinejad, and M. Siami, “Robofisense: Attention-based robotic arm activity recognition with WiFi sensing,”IEEE Jrnl. of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 2024

    2024

  81. [89]

    A survey of transformers,

    T. Lin, Y . Wang, X. Liu, and X. Qiu, “A survey of transformers,”AI open, vol. 3, pp. 111–132, 2022

    2022

  82. [90]

    xLSTM: Extended long short-term memory,

    M. Beck, K. P ¨oppel, M. Spanring, A. Auer, O. Prudnikova, M. Kopp, G. Klambauer, J. Brandstetter, and S. Hochreiter, “xLSTM: Extended long short-term memory,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.04517, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Noise identification with the k- means algorithm,

    W. Tang and T. M. Khoshgoftaar, “Noise identification with the k- means algorithm,” in16th IEEE Intl. Conf. on Tools with Artificial Intelligence. IEEE, 2004, pp. 373–378

    2004

  84. [92]

    Multiple-perspective clustering of passive Wi-Fi sensing trajectory data,

    Z. Koh, Y . Zhou, B. P. L. Lau, C. Yuen, B. Tuncer, and K. H. Chong, “Multiple-perspective clustering of passive Wi-Fi sensing trajectory data,”IEEE Trans. on Big Data, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1312–1325, 2020

    2020

  85. [93]

    SwinFi: a CSI compression method based on swin transformer for Wi-Fi sensing,

    J. Bian, “SwinFi: a CSI compression method based on swin transformer for Wi-Fi sensing,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03957, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Autosen: improving automatic WiFi human sensing through cross-modal autoencoder,

    Q. Gao, Y . Hao, and Y . Liu, “Autosen: improving automatic WiFi human sensing through cross-modal autoencoder,” inICASSP 2024- 2024 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2024, pp. 8235–8239

    2024

  87. [95]

    A robust CSI-based Wi-Fi passive sensing method using attention mechanism deep learning,

    Z. He, X. Zhang, Y . Wang, Y . Lin, G. Gui, and H. Gacanin, “A robust CSI-based Wi-Fi passive sensing method using attention mechanism deep learning,”IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 10, no. 19, pp. 17 490–17 499, 2023

    2023

  88. [96]

    FewSense, towards a scalable and cross-domain Wi-Fi sensing system using few-shot learning,

    G. Yin, J. Zhang, G. Shen, and Y . Chen, “FewSense, towards a scalable and cross-domain Wi-Fi sensing system using few-shot learning,”IEEE Trans. on Mobile Computing, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 453–468, 2022

    2022

  89. [97]

    One is enough: Enabling one-shot device-free gesture recognition with cots WiFi,

    L. Zhao, R. Xiao, J. Liu, and J. Han, “One is enough: Enabling one-shot device-free gesture recognition with cots WiFi,” inIEEE INFOCOM 2024-IEEE Conf. on Computer Commun.IEEE, 2024, pp. 1231–1240

    2024

  90. [98]

    A survey on contrastive self-supervised learning,

    A. Jaiswal, A. R. Babu, M. Z. Zadeh, D. Banerjee, and F. Makedon, “A survey on contrastive self-supervised learning,” Technologies, vol. 9, no. 1, 2021. [Online]. Available: https: //www.mdpi.com/2227-7080/9/1/2

    2021

  91. [99]

    A comprehensive survey on source-free domain adaptation,

    J. Li, Z. Yu, Z. Du, L. Zhu, and H. T. Shen, “A comprehensive survey on source-free domain adaptation,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 5743–5762, 2024

    2024

  92. [100]

    Autofi: Toward automatic wi-fi human sensing via geometric self-supervised learning,

    J. Yang, X. Chen, H. Zou, D. Wang, and L. Xie, “Autofi: Toward automatic wi-fi human sensing via geometric self-supervised learning,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 7416–7425, 2022

    2022

  93. [101]

    Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster as- signments,

    M. Caron, I. Misra, J. Mairal, P. Goyal, P. Bojanowski, and A. Joulin, “Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster as- signments,” inProc. of the 34th Intl. Conf. on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020, pp. 9912–9924

    2020

  94. [102]

    Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster assignments,

    ——, “Unsupervised learning of visual features by contrasting cluster assignments,” inAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. Balcan, and H. Lin, Eds., vol. 33. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020, pp. 9912–9924. [Online]. Availabl...

    2020

  95. [103]

    A simple frame- work for contrastive learning of visual representations,

    T. Chen, S. Kornblith, M. Norouzi, and G. Hinton, “A simple frame- work for contrastive learning of visual representations,” inProc. of the 37th Intl. Conf. on Machine Learning, 2020, pp. 1597–1607

    2020

  96. [104]

    Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,

    K. He, H. Fan, Y . Wu, S. Xie, and R. Girshick, “Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,” inProc. of the IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 9729– 9738

    2020

  97. [105]

    Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised learning,

    J.-B. Grill, F. Strub, F. Altch ´e, C. Tallec, P. H. Richemond, E. Buchatskaya, C. Doersch, B. Avila Pires, Z. D. Guo, M. G. Azar et al., “Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised learning,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.07733, 2020

    2006 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Unsupervised feature learning via non-parametric instance discrimination,

    Z. Wu, Y . Xiong, S. X. Yu, and D. Lin, “Unsupervised feature learning via non-parametric instance discrimination,” inProc. of the IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), June 2018

    2018

  99. [107]

    Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,

    K. He, H. Fan, Y . Wu, S. Xie, and R. Girshick, “Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning,” inProc. of the IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), June 2020

    2020

  100. [108]

    Noise-contrastive estimation: A new estimation principle for unnormalized statistical models,

    M. Gutmann and A. Hyv ¨arinen, “Noise-contrastive estimation: A new estimation principle for unnormalized statistical models,” inProc. of the thirteenth Intl. Conf. on artificial intelligence and statistics. JMLR Workshop and Conf. Proc., 2010, pp. 297–304

    2010

  101. [109]

    Barlow twins: Self-supervised learning via redundancy reduction,

    J. Zbontar, L. Jing, I. Misra, Y . LeCun, and S. Deny, “Barlow twins: Self-supervised learning via redundancy reduction,” inIntl. Conf. on machine learning. PMLR, 2021, pp. 12 310–12 320

    2021

  102. [110]

    Vicreg: Variance-invariance- covariance regularization for self-supervised learning,

    A. Bardes, J. Ponce, and Y . LeCun, “Vicreg: Variance-invariance- covariance regularization for self-supervised learning,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.04906, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Exploring simple siamese representation learn- ing,

    X. Chen and K. He, “Exploring simple siamese representation learn- ing,” inProc. of the IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), June 2021, pp. 15 750–15 758

    2021

  104. [112]

    Masked autoencoders are scalable vision learners,

    K. He, X. Chen, S. Xie, Y . Li, P. Doll ´ar, and R. Girshick, “Masked autoencoders are scalable vision learners,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2022, pp. 16 000–16 009

    2022

  105. [113]

    Simmim: A simple framework for masked image modeling,

    Z. Xie, Z. Zhang, Y . Cao, Y . Lin, J. Bao, Z. Yao, Q. Dai, and H. Hu, “Simmim: A simple framework for masked image modeling,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2022, pp. 9653–9663

    2022

  106. [114]

    A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations,

    T. Chen, S. Kornblith, M. Norouzi, and G. Hinton, “A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations,” in Proc. of the 37th Intl. Conf. on Machine Learning, ser. Proc. of Machine Learning Research, H. D. III and A. Singh, Eds., vol

  107. [115]

    Semi-supervised contrastive learning for human activity recognition,

    D. Liu and T. Abdelzaher, “Semi-supervised contrastive learning for human activity recognition,” in2021 17th Intl. Conf. on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2021, pp. 45–53

    2021

  108. [116]

    Self-supervised WiFi-based activity recognition,

    M. J. Bocus, H.-S. Lau, R. McConville, R. J. Piechocki, and R. Santos- Rodriguez, “Self-supervised WiFi-based activity recognition,” in2022 IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps), 2022, pp. 552–557

    2022

  109. [117]

    Contrastive self-supervised representation learning for sensing signals from the time-frequency perspective,

    D. Liu, T. Wang, S. Liu, R. Wang, S. Yao, and T. Abdelzaher, “Contrastive self-supervised representation learning for sensing signals from the time-frequency perspective,” in2021 Intl. Conf. on Computer Commun. and Networks (ICCCN), 2021, pp. 1–10

    2021

  110. [118]

    WIFIACT: Enhancing human sensing through environment robust preprocessing and bayesian self-supervised learning,

    N. Lyons, A. Santra, V . K. Ramanna, K. Uln, R. Taori, and A. Pandey, “WIFIACT: Enhancing human sensing through environment robust preprocessing and bayesian self-supervised learning,” inICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2...

    2024

  111. [119]

    1597–1607

    PMLR, 13–18 Jul 2020, pp. 1597–1607. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/chen20j.html

    2020

  112. [120]

    Context-aware predictive coding: A representation learning framework for wifi sens- ing,

    B. Barahimi, H. Tabassum, M. Omer, and O. Waqar, “Context-aware predictive coding: A representation learning framework for wifi sens- ing,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, 2024

    2024

  113. [121]

    Self-supervised learning frameworks for IoT applications,

    D. Liu, “Self-supervised learning frameworks for IoT applications,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2022

    2022

  114. [122]

    Maskcae: Masked convolutional autoencoder via sensor data reconstruction for self-supervised human activity recognition,

    D. Cheng, L. Zhang, L. Qin, S. Wang, H. Wu, and A. Song, “Maskcae: Masked convolutional autoencoder via sensor data reconstruction for self-supervised human activity recognition,”IEEE Journal of Biomed- ical and Health Informatics, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 2687–2698, 2024

    2024

  115. [123]

    Signal- guided masked autoencoder for wireless positioning with limited la- beled samples,

    J. Wang, W. Fang, J. Xiao, Y . Zheng, L. Zheng, and F. Liu, “Signal- guided masked autoencoder for wireless positioning with limited la- beled samples,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 1759–1764, 2025

    2025

  116. [124]

    Using self- supervised learning can improve model robustness and uncertainty,

    D. Hendrycks, M. Mazeika, S. Kadavath, and D. Song, “Using self- supervised learning can improve model robustness and uncertainty,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019

    2019

  117. [125]

    Distinguishable iq feature repre- sentation for domain-adaptation learning of WiFi device fingerprints,

    A. Elmaghbub and B. Hamdaoui, “Distinguishable iq feature repre- sentation for domain-adaptation learning of WiFi device fingerprints,” IEEE Trans. on Machine Learning in Commun. and Networking, 2024

    2024

  118. [126]

    On the difficulty of defending self-supervised learning against model extraction,

    A. Dziedzic, N. Dhawan, M. A. Kaleem, J. Guan, and N. Papernot, “On the difficulty of defending self-supervised learning against model extraction,” inInternational Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 5757–5776

    2022

  119. [127]

    Cross-domain wifi sensing with channel state information: A survey,

    C. Chen, G. Zhou, and Y . Lin, “Cross-domain wifi sensing with channel state information: A survey,”ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1–37, 2023

    2023

  120. [128]

    Dp-sslora: a privacy-preserving medical classification model combining differen- tial privacy with self-supervised low-rank adaptation,

    C. Yan, H. Yan, W. Liang, M. Yin, H. Luo, and J. Luo, “Dp-sslora: a privacy-preserving medical classification model combining differen- tial privacy with self-supervised low-rank adaptation,”Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 179, p. 108792, 2024. 32

    2024

  121. [129]

    We can hear you with wi-fi!

    G. Wang, Y . Zou, Z. Zhou, K. Wu, and L. M. Ni, “We can hear you with wi-fi!” inProc. of the 20th annual Intl. Conf. on Mobile computing and networking, 2014, pp. 593–604

    2014

  122. [130]

    EfficientFi: Toward large-scale lightweight WiFi sensing via CSI compression,

    J. Yang, X. Chen, H. Zou, D. Wang, Q. Xu, and L. Xie, “EfficientFi: Toward large-scale lightweight WiFi sensing via CSI compression,” IEEE Internet of Things Jrnl., vol. 9, no. 15, pp. 13 086–13 095, 2022

    2022

  123. [131]

    A machine learning-oriented survey on tiny machine learning,

    L. Capogrosso, F. Cunico, D. S. Cheng, F. Fummi, and M. Cristani, “A machine learning-oriented survey on tiny machine learning,”IEEE Access, 2024

    2024

  124. [132]

    Toward self-learning edge intelligence in 6G,

    Y . Xiao, G. Shi, Y . Li, W. Saad, and H. V . Poor, “Toward self-learning edge intelligence in 6G,”IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 34–40, 2021

    2021

  125. [133]

    Bringing AI to edge: From deep learning’s perspective,

    D. Liu, H. Kong, X. Luo, W. Liu, and R. Subramaniam, “Bringing AI to edge: From deep learning’s perspective,”Neurocomputing, vol. 485, pp. 297–320, 2022

    2022

  126. [134]

    CUDLE: Learning under label scarcity to detect cannabis use in uncontrolled environments using wearables,

    R. R. Azghan, N. C. Glodosky, R. K. Sah, C. Cuttler, R. McLaughlin, M. J. Cleveland, and H. Ghasemzadeh, “CUDLE: Learning under label scarcity to detect cannabis use in uncontrolled environments using wearables,”IEEE Sensors Journal, 2025

    2025

  127. [135]

    Sense and learn: Self- supervision for omnipresent sensors,

    A. Saeed, V . Ungureanu, and B. Gfeller, “Sense and learn: Self- supervision for omnipresent sensors,”Machine Learning with Appli- cations, vol. 6, p. 100152, 2021

    2021

  128. [136]

    WiFi and vision multimodal learning for accurate and robust device- free human activity recognition,

    H. Zou, J. Yang, H. Prasanna Das, H. Liu, Y . Zhou, and C. J. Spanos, “WiFi and vision multimodal learning for accurate and robust device- free human activity recognition,” inProc. of the IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops, June 2019

    2019

  129. [137]

    Two-stream convolution augmented transformer for human activity recognition,

    B. Li, W. Cui, W. Wang, L. Zhang, Z. Chen, and M. Wu, “Two-stream convolution augmented transformer for human activity recognition,”Proc. of the AAAI Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 286–293, May 2021. [Online]. Available: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AA...

    2021

  130. [138]

    Self-supervised multimodal learning: A survey,

    Y . Zong, O. M. Aodha, and T. Hospedales, “Self-supervised multimodal learning: A survey,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, pp. 1–20, 2024

    2024

  131. [139]

    Human activity recognition via wi-fi and inertial sensors with machine learning,

    W. Guo, S. Yamagishi, and L. Jing, “Human activity recognition via wi-fi and inertial sensors with machine learning,”IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 18 821–18 836, 2024

    2024

  132. [141]

    Towards pervasive sensing: A multimodal approach via CSI and RGB image modalities fusion,

    F. Zhou, G. Zhu, X. Li, H. Li, and Q. Shi, “Towards pervasive sensing: A multimodal approach via CSI and RGB image modalities fusion,” in Proceedings of the 3rd ACM MobiCom Workshop on Integrated Sensing and Communications Systems, 2023, pp. 25–30

    2023

  133. [2023]

    Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.02412

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.02412

    arXiv

Pith tools

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