Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 44 references

Beamforming-based Achievable Rate Maximization in ISAC System for Multi-UAV Networking

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Jointly optimizing UAV beamforming, load allocation, and flight directions under a predicted-beam-coverage constraint raises total achievable rate, fairness, and sensing accuracy in multi-UAV emergency ISAC networks.

desk verdict A serious engineering framework for multi-UAV ISAC with one genuinely new frame structure, but the abstract's comparative claim is unverified by the simulations and the distributed equivalence proof does not hold up. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21895 v2 pith:H5GNRSII submitted 2025-07-29 cs.PF

Shengcai Zhou , Luping Xiang , Kun Yang , Kai Kit Wong , Dapeng Oliver Wu , Chan-Byoung Chae This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.PF
keywords ISACmulti-UAVnetworkbeamformingsuccessiveconvexapproximationiterativerankminimizationcoalitiongameextendedKalmanfilteringemergencycommunication
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

The paper is trying to establish that a multi-UAV Integrated Sensing and Communication network can serve emergency users better when beamforming, user load, and mobile-UAV flight direction are optimized together, instead of treating these tasks separately. To make that possible, it proposes a temporal frame structure that alternates omnidirectional search with directional tracking, using extended Kalman filtering to predict where users will be and drawing a predicted beam coverage ellipse around those predictions. The central engineering claim is that the joint optimization problem (39) can be decomposed into three tractable pieces: beam optimization via a distributed SCA-IRM algorithm, load balancing via a coalition game, and direction planning via a Fermat-point search, and that the combined scheme improves system performance. A sympathetic reader would care because post-disaster emergency networks have no prior user information, and sensing uncertainty is exactly what makes beams misalign and links fail.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the predicted beam coverage constraint (39h): for every angle inside the 99% confidence ellipse around the EKF-predicted user direction, the beampattern gain must stay within a tolerated mismatch of the gain at the predicted angle. This constraint turns tracking uncertainty into a convex restriction on the beamforming matrix, so beams widen when predictions are poor and sharpen as sensing improves. Around this constraint the paper builds the temporal frame structure, the distributed SCA-IRM decomposition of the beam subproblem, the coalition-game load balancing, and the Fermat-point direction search.

What would settle it

Solve problem (45) centrally to convergence and then solve the per-user problems (47) initialized from the same iterate; if the concatenated per-user beamformers do not reproduce the centralized objective value to solver tolerance, the claimed equivalence fails and the distributed algorithm's simulated gains lose their theoretical backing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that an ISAC frame structure with an omnidirectional first slot for detection followed by directional slots for tracking and communication, together with joint beamforming, load management, and mobile-UAV direction planning, increases the total achievable rate per slot while also improving fairness and sensing accuracy. The optimization problem maximizes the sum of downlink rates subject to transmit power, rank-one beamforming, minimum rate, binary load, and predicted-beam-coverage constraints. After arguing the problem is NP-hard, the paper decomposes it and solves the beam subproblem with a distributed SCA-IRM method, the load subproblem with a coalition game, and the direction subproblem by flying mobile UAVs toward Fermat points of dense user areas. Numerical results show higher total achievable rate than fixed load matrices, higher fairness in the rate distribution, sharper beams as confidence ellipses shrink, and faster integration of all users when direction planning is used.

Load-bearing premise

The distributed beamforming result rests on the assumption that the last centralized SCA iteration and the collection of per-user subproblems yield the same optimum, an equivalence the appendix demonstrates only for a generic convex problem rather than for the coupled rate objective of problem (45).

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, a multi-UAV network can integrate users who would otherwise be dropped near overloaded UAVs, because coalition-game load balancing reassigns them to underused UAVs.
  • Direction planning based on Fermat points lets the network reach a stable achievable rate roughly one frame earlier than a network without direction planning, while maintaining a higher final rate.
  • The predicted beam coverage constraint gives a concrete recipe for robust beamforming under sensing uncertainty: widen the beam in the first slots and rely on EKF convergence to shrink it by around the fourth slot.
  • Distributing the beam optimization across UAVs keeps the computational load per UAV bounded and makes the scheme more plausible for real-time deployment, since each UAV only solves its own rank-minimization subproblem.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension the paper does not explore is applying the same predicted-beam-coverage constraint to ground vehicles or robots, since the constraint is stated in angle coordinates and does not depend on UAV-specific kinematics.
  • If the equivalence between the centralized and distributed SCA formulations holds in practice, the decomposition should scale to larger swarms with little added per-UAV cost; a direct check of equality between problem (45) and the concatenated subproblems (47) would confirm this before field deployment.
  • The sharpening of the confidence ellipse by slot 4 suggests the frame length could be adapted: after convergence, slots could shorten or skip the omnidirectional search phase, trading robustness for latency.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a multi-UAV ISAC framework for emergency communications, built around a temporal-assisted frame structure that interleaves omnidirectional search, EKF-based tracking, and directional communication/sensing beams. The core contribution is the formulation of problem (39), which maximizes the total achievable rate by jointly optimizing UAV beamforming, user-load assignment, and mobile-UAV directions under a predicted beam-coverage constraint. The problem is decomposed into three steps: an SCA-IRM beamforming algorithm (with a claimed distributed implementation), a coalition-game load-allocation scheme, and a Fermat-point direction-planning method. Simulations demonstrate internal gains for dynamic load allocation and direction planning, and show that the confidence-ellipse beam coverage shrinks as tracking converges. The abstract and conclusion claim improvements over conventional UAV-assisted ISAC designs, but the evidence presented is limited to ablations of the proposed framework.

Significance. If the technical claims were fully established, the paper would offer a useful engineering framework for integrating search, tracking, and communication in multi-UAV emergency networks. The problem formulation is detailed and the use of EKF prediction with explicit beam-coverage constraints is a reasonable, practically motivated design. The decomposition into beamforming, load balancing, and direction planning is sensible, and the internal simulation results are suggestive. However, the central comparative claim is not supported by the current experiments, and the distributed-equivalence proof is not valid as written. No code or machine-checked artifacts are provided, so the numerical results are not independently reproducible from the manuscript alone.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-A and Appendix, Eqs. (45)-(47)] The claimed equivalence between the last iteration of the centralized SCA problem (45) and the set of per-user problems (47) is not proved. The Appendix's Theorem 2 argument shows only that if (X1*, X2*) is globally optimal in a generic convex program, then X2* is also optimal for the subproblem obtained by fixing X1 at X1*. That does not imply that independently solving each coordinate subproblem (47), which additionally imposes the trace constraint (47a), yields a global optimum of (45); coordinate-wise optimizers need not combine to a global optimum when subproblems have multiple solutions, and the objective in (47) is the SCA lower-bound surrogate rather than the original objective. Since the distributed SCA-IRM contribution rests on this equivalence, the authors should either provide a rigorous proof under explicit uniqueness/Slater assumptions or reclassify the distributed scheme as a heuristic and compare its output with the centralized CVX solution on small instances.
  2. [Section V, Figs. 4-6 and Conclusion] The abstract's claim that the proposed scheme 'significantly improves communication capacity, fairness, and sensing accuracy compared to conventional UAV-assisted ISAC designs' is unsupported by the simulations. All reported comparisons are internal ablations: fixed vs. dynamic load matrix, different Kmax values, and with/without direction planning. No independent baseline from the cited literature appears in any plot or table. The Conclusion states that the results improve 'compare to [12]', but no comparison to [12] is shown anywhere. Please add at least one conventional UAV-assisted ISAC baseline (e.g., from [13], [18], or [24]) or revise the abstract and conclusion to claim only the internal gains demonstrated.
  3. [Section IV-A, Eq. (48)] The IRM rank-one recovery is presented as a heuristic but without the necessary caveats. The text states that as r(q) approaches 0 condition (48e) is necessary and sufficient for M to be rank-one, and that a sufficiently large weight w_q drives r(q) small, but no convergence proof, stopping criterion, or choice rule for w_q is given. The recovered M is described only as 'approximately' rank-one. Because constraint (39c) is essential for mapping W back to a beamforming vector, the reported rates may not correspond to feasible rank-one beamformers. Please provide a rank-recovery step with numerical rank verification (e.g., eigenvalue gap reporting and, if needed, Gaussian randomization) or explicitly state this limitation.
  4. [Sections IV-B and IV-C] The load-optimization and direction-planning steps are described in strong optimality language that the algorithms do not support. The Fermat-point search uses MATLAB fminsearch, a local method, yet it is described as finding 'the optimal global location' for mobile UAVs; the coalition-game transfer rule cites [42] for stability but no proof is given that the proposed utilitarian order converges to a stable matching under the specific constraints (39f)-(39g). If these are heuristics, the text should say so explicitly and report convergence behavior; if optimality is claimed, proofs or formal convergence arguments are needed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section III, after (39)] The assertion that problem (39) is NP-hard is not supported by a reduction; integer constraints alone and the remark that direction planning 'likely falls into local optima' do not constitute NP-hardness. Either provide a reference or a reduction, or soften the wording to 'highly non-convex and combinatorial'.
  2. [Section II-A, Notations] The notation line says '∥·∥ stands for modulus of a vector', but the symbol is a norm; also α is used both as a scalar coefficient in (4) and as a dB-valued path-loss in (5), which is confusing.
  3. [Section II-B-2, Eqs. (23)-(24)] The CRLBs for delay and Doppler are stated without derivation or citation; since they feed the EKF covariance Qm, please cite the derivation or include it in an appendix.
  4. [Section V, Figs. 4-6] Figures 4 and 6 show curves without error bars or confidence intervals, and Fig. 5 reports a CCDF from 100 Monte Carlo runs but no dispersion measure is given. Please add error bars or shaded regions and state the number of runs for each figure.
  5. [Section IV-A, after (47)] The description 'K sub-problems assigned to different UAVs' is ambiguous because each subproblem indexed by user c still involves the sum over all UAVs u in (47); please clarify the distributed assignment across UAVs.
  6. [Section IV-A, Eq. (46)] The text switches between ar{h}_{u,k} and h_{u,k} without explanation; please make the predicted-channel notation consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the core optimization and simulation chain is self-contained, and the only self-citation (reference [12]) is a rhetorical comparison baseline rather than a load-bearing derivation step.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular in the technical sense. Problem (39) combines a standard downlink rate objective with beam-coverage constraints derived from EKF covariance and CRLB expressions taken from external sources ([24], [26]); none of these quantities is defined in terms of the final rate/fairness/sensing claims. The SCA lower bound (43), the rank-minimization reformulation (48), the coalition-game transfer rule (51), and the Fermat-point direction search are all standard constructions applied to a fixed objective, and the Appendix's equivalence argument relies on textbook KKT theory rather than on a conclusion of this paper. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then reported as a prediction of the same data. The only self-citation is the concluding sentence 'Numerical results demonstrate significant improvements ... compare to [12]', where [12] is the authors' own prior IEEE TCOM paper. That sentence is not used to construct any equation or simulation curve; Section V's figures compare only the paper's own ablations (fixed versus dynamic load, with versus without direction planning, different Kmax). The absence of an actual external baseline makes the abstract's 'compared to conventional UAV-assisted ISAC designs' claim empirically unsupported, but that is a correctness/evidence gap, not a circular derivation. Accordingly, the circularity score is 1, reflecting only a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

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

The central claim rests on several domain assumptions: LoS channels, Gaussian noise models, constant-velocity motion, and convexity of the SCA sub-problem. Two algorithm hyperparameters (B_k, w_q) are left unspecified. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • B_k (gain mismatch coefficient)
    Appears in constraint (39h) but no value or tuning procedure is given. The beam coverage constraint depends on this coefficient.
  • w_q (IRM weight)
    In problem (48), the weight w_q is said to be 'sufficiently large'; no specific schedule is provided, yet the rank-one recovery depends on it.
  • Beam coverage confidence level = 0.99
    Hand-chosen in Section II-B; the size of the beam coverage ellipse, and thus constraint (39h), depends on this value.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption All UAV-user links are line-of-sight and interference between UAVs is eliminated via FDMA.
    Stated in Section II-A. The optimization and rate calculations depend on this channel model; in real disaster scenarios, buildings and clutter may block links.
  • domain assumption Measurement noise and prediction errors are Gaussian, with variances given by CRLB.
    Section II-B, equations (14), (17), (21). The beam coverage confidence ellipse is derived from this Gaussianity assumption; real errors may be non-Gaussian.
  • domain assumption User motion follows a near-constant velocity model with small process noise within a slot.
    Equation (11) and (31). Assumes speed and direction are approximately constant over the prediction interval.
  • standard math The SCA sub-problem (45) is convex, so KKT conditions are necessary and sufficient for global optimality, and fixing a subset of variables preserves optimality of the remaining ones.
    The equivalence proof in the Appendix relies on this. The step that fixes a subset of variables and claims optimality of the remaining variables is not generally valid for non-separable objectives.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Beamforming-based Achievable Rate Maximization in ISAC System for Multi-UAV Networking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H5GNRSII

@misc{pith2026250721895,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Beamforming-based Achievable Rate Maximization in ISAC System for Multi-UAV Networking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H5GNRSII}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21895}
}
read the original abstract

Airborne mobile Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) base stations have garnered significant attention recently, with ISAC technology being a crucial application for 6G networks. Since ISAC can sense potential mobile communication users, this paper studies an effective scheme for a multi-UAV network tailored for emergency communication. In this paper, we develop a temporal-assisted frame structure utilizing integrated omnidirectional and directional beampattern to facilitate efficient and frequent searching, with extended Kalman filtering (EKF) as an aid to beam alignment. Further, we address an optimization problem to maximize the total achievable rate per slot by jointly designing UAV beamforming, load management, and UAV direction planning, all while adhering to the constraints of the predicted beam coverage. Given the problem NP-hard, we introduce three robust mechanisms for its resolution: an enhanced distributed Successive Convex Approximation (SCA)-Iterative Rank Minimization (IRM) algorithm, an coalition game approach, and a Fermat point search method. In particular, the proposed SCA-IRM algorithm decomposes the original complex optimization problem into several sub-problems and assigns them equally to each UAV, so as to realize distributed computing and improve computational efficiency. Our proposed simulations demonstrate the improved system performance in terms of communication rate, fairness, and sensing accuracy, providing design guidelines of UAV-assisted emergency communication networking.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21895 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Multi-UAV ISAC system model. In this section, we first introduce the application scenario of the multi-UAV network and two categories of UAVs. Subsequently, we provide an discussion of relevant models. A. Multi-UAV ISAC Network As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Evolution model. 1) Evolution Model: To obtain high precision tracking, we predict the motion parameters of users. For notational convenience, we focus on the tracking of one user by a single UAV. The elevation angle, azimuth angle, distance of the user relative to the UAV, as well as its own speed and travel direction can be expressed as: θn, φn, dn, vn and φ v n , respectively. In addition, the height of all UAVs … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Bird’s eye view of load change in multi-UAV network optimization process, where (a) denotes stage of initial load, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Total achievable rate under various numbers of users [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The CCDF curves of achievable rate at slot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of network achievable rate with or without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Variation of confidence ellipse in different slots [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [12]

    Temporal-assisted beamform- ing and trajectory prediction in sensing-enabled UA V communications,

    S. Zhou, H. Yang, L. Xiang, and K. Yang, “Temporal-assisted beamform- ing and trajectory prediction in sensing-enabled UA V communications,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , pp. 1–1, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [13]

    Joint maneuver and beamforming design for UA V-enabled integrated sensing and communication,

    Z. Lyu, G. Zhu, and J. Xu, “Joint maneuver and beamforming design for UA V-enabled integrated sensing and communication,” IEEE Trans- actions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2424–2440, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [18]

    Constrained utility maximization in dual-functional radar-communication multi-UA V networks,

    X. Wang, Z. Fei, J. A. Zhang, J. Huang, and J. Yuan, “Constrained utility maximization in dual-functional radar-communication multi-UA V networks,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 2660–2672, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [24]

    Radar-assisted predictive beamforming for vehicular links: Communication served by sensing,

    F. Liu, W. Yuan, C. Masouros, and J. Yuan, “Radar-assisted predictive beamforming for vehicular links: Communication served by sensing,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 7704–7719, 2020

    work page 2020

  5. [42]

    A generic approach to coalition formation,

    K. R. Apt and A. Witzel, “A generic approach to coalition formation,” International Game Theory Review , vol. 11, no. 03, pp. 347–367, 2009

    work page 2009

  6. [1]

    SensCAP: A systematic sensing capability performance metric for 6G ISAC,

    G. Liu, L. Ma, Y . Xue, L. Han, R. Xi, Z. Han, H. Wang, J. Dong, M. Lou, J. Jin, Q. Wang, and Y . Yuan, “SensCAP: A systematic sensing capability performance metric for 6G ISAC,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 11, no. 18, pp. 29438–29454, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [2]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,

    F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Buzzi, “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [3]

    Full-duplex communication for ISAC: Joint beamforming and power optimization,

    Z. He, W. Xu, H. Shen, D. W. K. Ng, Y . C. Eldar, and X. You, “Full-duplex communication for ISAC: Joint beamforming and power optimization,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 2920–2936, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 44 references
  1. [4]

    SIMAC: A semantic-driven integrated multimodal sensing and communication framework,

    Y . Peng, L. Xiang, K. Yang, F. Jiang, K. Wang, and D. O. Wu, “SIMAC: A semantic-driven integrated multimodal sensing and communication framework,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.08726

    2025 arXiv

  2. [5]

    Integrated scheduling of sensing, communication, and control for mmWave/THz communications in cellular connected UA V networks,

    B. Chang, W. Tang, X. Yan, X. Tong, and Z. Chen, “Integrated scheduling of sensing, communication, and control for mmWave/THz communications in cellular connected UA V networks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 2103–2113, 2022

    2022

  3. [6]

    Performance of joint sensing-communication cooperative sensing UA V network,

    X. Chen, Z. Feng, Z. Wei, F. Gao, and X. Yuan, “Performance of joint sensing-communication cooperative sensing UA V network,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 15545–15556, 2020

    2020

  4. [7]

    ISAC from the sky: UA V trajectory design for joint communication and target localization,

    X. Jing, F. Liu, C. Masouros, and Y . Zeng, “ISAC from the sky: UA V trajectory design for joint communication and target localization,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , pp. 1–1, 2024

    2024

  5. [8]

    ISAC enabled cooperative detection for cellular-connected UA V net- work,

    Y . Wang, K. Zu, L. Xiang, Q. Zhang, Z. Feng, J. Hu, and K. Yang, “ISAC enabled cooperative detection for cellular-connected UA V net- work,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1541–1554, 2025

    2025

  6. [9]

    Taking drones to the next level: Cooperative distributed unmanned- aerial-vehicular networks for small and mini drones,

    J. Wang, C. Jiang, Z. Han, Y . Ren, R. G. Maunder, and L. Hanzo, “Taking drones to the next level: Cooperative distributed unmanned- aerial-vehicular networks for small and mini drones,” IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 73–82, 2017. 13

    2017

  7. [10]

    A tutorial on UA Vs for wireless networks: Applications, challenges, and open problems,

    M. Mozaffari, W. Saad, M. Bennis, Y .-H. Nam, and M. Debbah, “A tutorial on UA Vs for wireless networks: Applications, challenges, and open problems,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 2334–2360, 2019

    2019

  8. [11]

    Accessing from the sky: A tutorial on UA V communications for 5G and beyond,

    Y . Zeng, Q. Wu, and R. Zhang, “Accessing from the sky: A tutorial on UA V communications for 5G and beyond,” Proceedings of the IEEE , vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 2327–2375, 2019

    2019

  9. [14]

    UA V-enabled integrated sensing and communication: Opportunities and challenges,

    K. Meng, Q. Wu, J. Xu, W. Chen, Z. Feng, R. Schober, and A. L. Swindlehurst, “UA V-enabled integrated sensing and communication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 97–104, 2024

    2024

  10. [15]

    UA V-assisted communications in SAGIN-ISAC: Mobile user tracking and robust beamforming,

    W. Mao, Y . Lu, G. Pan, and B. Ai, “UA V-assisted communications in SAGIN-ISAC: Mobile user tracking and robust beamforming,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 186– 200, 2025

    2025

  11. [16]

    Radar-communication spectrum sharing and integration: Overview and prospect,

    L. Fan, Y . Weijie, Y . Jinhong, Z. J. Andrew, F. Zesong, and Z. Jianming, “Radar-communication spectrum sharing and integration: Overview and prospect,” 2020

    2020

  12. [17]

    5G mmWave positioning for vehicular networks,

    H. Wymeersch, G. Seco-Granados, G. Destino, D. Dardari, and F. Tufvesson, “5G mmWave positioning for vehicular networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 80–86, 2017

    2017

  13. [19]

    Joint trajectory and communication design for multi-UA V enabled wireless networks,

    Q. Wu, Y . Zeng, and R. Zhang, “Joint trajectory and communication design for multi-UA V enabled wireless networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 2109–2121, 2018

    2018

  14. [20]

    User association and power control for UA V- enabled cellular networks,

    M. Sami and J. N. Daigle, “User association and power control for UA V- enabled cellular networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 267–270, 2020

    2020

  15. [21]

    Cognitive chaotic UWB-MIMO detect-avoid radar for autonomous UA V navigation,

    Y . A. Nijsure, G. Kaddoum, N. Khaddaj Mallat, G. Gagnon, and F. Gagnon, “Cognitive chaotic UWB-MIMO detect-avoid radar for autonomous UA V navigation,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Trans- portation Systems, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 3121–3131, 2016

    2016

  16. [22]

    Distributed path optimization of multiple UA Vs for AOA target localization,

    S. Xu, K. Doganc ¸ay, and H. Hmam, “Distributed path optimization of multiple UA Vs for AOA target localization,” in2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) , pp. 3141–3145, 2016

    2016

  17. [23]

    Radar aided beam alignment in MmWave V2I communications supporting antenna diversity,

    N. Gonz ´alez-Prelcic, R. M ´endez-Rial, and R. W. Heath, “Radar aided beam alignment in MmWave V2I communications supporting antenna diversity,” in2016 Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA), pp. 1–7, 2016

    2016

  18. [25]

    Bayesian predictive beamforming for vehicular networks: A low-overhead joint radar-communication approach,

    W. Yuan, F. Liu, C. Masouros, J. Yuan, D. W. K. Ng, and N. Gonz ´alez- Prelcic, “Bayesian predictive beamforming for vehicular networks: A low-overhead joint radar-communication approach,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1442–1456, 2021

    2021

  19. [26]

    Ve- hicular connectivity on complex trajectories: Roadway-geometry aware ISAC beam-tracking,

    X. Meng, F. Liu, C. Masouros, W. Yuan, Q. Zhang, and Z. Feng, “Ve- hicular connectivity on complex trajectories: Roadway-geometry aware ISAC beam-tracking,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, pp. 1–1, 2023

    2023

  20. [27]

    Integrated sensing and communications for V2I networks: Dynamic predictive beamforming for extended vehicle targets,

    Z. Du, F. Liu, W. Yuan, C. Masouros, Z. Zhang, S. Xia, and G. Caire, “Integrated sensing and communications for V2I networks: Dynamic predictive beamforming for extended vehicle targets,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 3612–3627, 2023

    2023

  21. [28]

    Integrated sensing and communication-assisted orthogonal time frequency space transmission for vehicular networks,

    W. Yuan, Z. Wei, S. Li, J. Yuan, and D. W. K. Ng, “Integrated sensing and communication-assisted orthogonal time frequency space transmission for vehicular networks,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing , vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1515–1528, 2021

    2021

  22. [29]

    Sensing as a service in 6G perceptive networks: A unified framework for ISAC resource allocatio,

    F. Dong, F. Liu, Y . Cui, W. Wang, K. Han, and Z. Wang, “Sensing as a service in 6G perceptive networks: A unified framework for ISAC resource allocatio,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 3522–3536, 2023

    2023

  23. [30]

    Fast channel estimation and beam tracking for millimeter wave vehic- ular communications,

    S. Shaham, M. Ding, M. Kokshoorn, Z. Lin, S. Dang, and R. Abbas, “Fast channel estimation and beam tracking for millimeter wave vehic- ular communications,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 141104–141118, 2019

    2019

  24. [31]

    Codebook-based training beam sequence design for millimeter-wave tracking systems,

    D. Zhang, A. Li, M. Shirvanimoghaddam, P. Cheng, Y . Li, and B. Vucetic, “Codebook-based training beam sequence design for millimeter-wave tracking systems,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Com- munications, vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 5333–5349, 2019

    2019

  25. [32]

    Angle domain hybrid precoding and channel tracking for millimeter wave massive MIMO systems,

    J. Zhao, F. Gao, W. Jia, S. Zhang, S. Jin, and H. Lin, “Angle domain hybrid precoding and channel tracking for millimeter wave massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 6868–6880, 2017

    2017

  26. [33]

    Throughput maximization for UA V-enabled integrated periodic sensing and com- munication,

    K. Meng, Q. Wu, S. Ma, W. Chen, K. Wang, and J. Li, “Throughput maximization for UA V-enabled integrated periodic sensing and com- munication,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 671–687, 2023

    2023

  27. [34]

    Dynamic ISAC beamforming design for UA V-enabled vehicular networks,

    X. Pang, S. Guo, J. Tang, N. Zhao, and N. Al-Dhahir, “Dynamic ISAC beamforming design for UA V-enabled vehicular networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , pp. 1–1, 2024

    2024

  28. [35]

    UA V aided integrated sensing and communica- tions,

    K. Zhang and C. Shen, “UA V aided integrated sensing and communica- tions,” in 2021 IEEE 94th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2021- Fall), pp. 1–6, 2021

    2021

  29. [36]

    Age of informa- tion in a cellular internet of UA Vs: Sensing and communication trade- off design,

    S. Zhang, H. Zhang, Z. Han, H. V . Poor, and L. Song, “Age of informa- tion in a cellular internet of UA Vs: Sensing and communication trade- off design,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 6578–6592, 2020

    2020

  30. [37]

    Drone detection and radar-cross-section measurements by RAD-DAR,

    A. D. d. Quevedo, F. I. Urzaiz, J. G. Menoyo, and A. L ´opez, “Drone detection and radar-cross-section measurements by RAD-DAR,” IET Radar, Sonar & Navigation , vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 1437–1447, 2019

    2019

  31. [38]

    S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of statistical signal processing: estimation theory. USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1993

    1993

  32. [39]

    MIMO radar with colocated antennas,

    J. Li and P. Stoica, “MIMO radar with colocated antennas,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 106–114, 2007

    2007

  33. [40]

    CVX: MATLAB software for disciplined convex program- ming,

    M. Grant, “CVX: MATLAB software for disciplined convex program- ming,” http://cvxr.com/cvx, 2008

    2008

  34. [41]

    Coalitional game theory for communication networks,

    W. Saad, Z. Han, M. Debbah, A. Hjorungnes, and T. Basar, “Coalitional game theory for communication networks,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 77–97, 2009

    2009

  35. [43]

    Boyd and L

    S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization. Convex Optimiza- tion, 2004

    2004

  36. [44]

    D. P. Bertsekas, Nonlinear Programming: 2nd Edition . 1999

    1999

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.