Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Doubly-Dispersive Continuous MIMO Systems: Channel Modeling and Beamforming Design

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives a doubly dispersive continuous MIMO channel model for continuous aperture arrays and claims closed-form transmit and receive beamformers, obtained by calculus of variations, that maximize received power and resemble class

desk verdict Solid DDC channel model, but the CoV optimality proof collapses: P3 is unbounded and (71)→(72) invents λ_t without justification. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.00964 v2 pith:DIMFWYSD submitted 2025-08-31 eess.SP

Kuranage Roche Rayan Ranasinghe , Zhaolin Wang , Hyeon Seok Rou , Giuseppe Thadeu Freitas de Abreu , Emil Björnson This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords continuousaperturearraysdoublydispersivechannelsMIMObeamformingcalculusofvariationsmatchedfilterOFDMOTFS
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that a MIMO system whose transmit and receive arrays are continuous surfaces—not discrete antenna elements—can be modeled and optimized directly in the continuous domain over doubly dispersive (high-mobility multipath) channels. It derives a continuous channel response from scattering-matrix and dyadic-Green's-function principles, and shows that OFDM, OTFS, and AFDM all share the same effective channel structure once the continuous spatial beamformers are factored out. On that foundation, it claims closed-form transmit and receive beamformers, obtained by calculus of variations, that maximize received power and are structurally the same as classical matched filters. If correct, this would mean optimal CAPA beamforming can be computed with simple quadrature integrals instead of large basis-function expansions or huge discrete antenna arrays, and the same beamformers work across the three waveforms.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the calculus-of-variations functional derivative on L²(S, C^{3×M}). The paper expands the squared Frobenius norm of the integral operator A[J] = ∫∫ J_R^H H J_T ds dr, sets the first variation to zero, invokes the fundamental lemma of the calculus of variations to obtain an integral stationarity condition, and then converts that condition into an eigenvalue equation because the double integral à is constant in s. The resulting expressions are matched-filter-like integral equations: the optimal TX beamformer is, up to normalization, the channel Hermitian-transposed and integrated against the RX beamformer; the optimal RX beamformer is the same operation with roles

What would settle it

Evaluate the paper's own stationarity condition at its claimed optimal transmit beamformer J̄_T(s), using η = J̄_T as the perturbation direction: the directional derivative equals 2‖∫∫ J_R^H H J̄_T dsdr‖²_F, which is positive for any nonzero received-power level. A direct numerical evaluation in the paper's simulation setup would show this derivative is not zero, contradicting Theorem 1's necessary condition and showing the eigenvalue step does not follow from the calculus of variations.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central object is a continuous-space channel response between a transmit point s and receive point r, modeled as H(r,s;τ,t) = Σ_{ℓ=1}^L h_ℓ Ξ_ℓ δ(τ−τ_ℓ) e^{−j2πν_ℓ t} e^{j(2π/λ_c)k_{R,ℓ}^T r} e^{j(2π/λ_c)k_{T,ℓ}^T s}. Built from a scattering-matrix response and dyadic Green's functions under far-field and wideband approximations, this response is then used to derive effective channels for OFDM, OTFS, and AFDM, all of the common form H̄ = Σ_ℓ (Ȟ_ℓ ⊗ Ḡ_ℓ), where Ȟ_ℓ is the continuous spatial beamforming matrix and Ḡ_ℓ is the waveform-dependent delay-Doppler matrix. The paper formulates received-power maximization as a functional optimization over beamformer functions J_T(s) and J

Load-bearing premise

The entire optimality argument assumes the unconstrained transmit-beamforming problem has a finite maximizer, but that problem is unbounded: scaling the transmit beamformer multiplies the received-power objective by the square of the scale factor, so the stationarity condition used to derive the matched-filter solution cannot identify a maximizer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The beamformer design is independent of the choice among OFDM, OTFS, and AFDM, because the objective depends only on the spatial matrices Ȟ_ℓ; the waveform matrices Ḡ_ℓ factor out.
  • CAPA systems can approximate very large discrete MIMO arrays with a fraction of the complexity: the paper's simulations show the continuous solution matching a 1089×1089 conventional MIMO array.
  • Increasing aperture size gives continuous gains in received power, whereas conventional discretized arrays gain only when the aperture grows enough to add another antenna.
  • The alternating algorithm converges in a few iterations, with per-iteration cost set by the quadrature grid, not the number of antennas.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the matched-filter form survives a properly constrained derivation, similar closed forms should hold for any waveform whose effective channel factors as Ȟ_ℓ ⊗ Ḡ_ℓ; the proof only uses that factorization, so the design may extend to other DD-robust modulations.
  • The unboundedness of the unconstrained problem suggests the eigenvalue λ_t is not determined by the stationarity condition alone; a constrained derivation, such as a Rayleigh quotient with the power constraint, would be needed to pin it down, and the paper's closed forms may still emerge as stationary points of that quotient.
  • A testable consequence of the waveform-independence claim is that in a CAPA link running the same physical beamformers, switching from OFDM to OTFS or AFDM should leave the achieved receive power nearly unchanged, apart from channel-estimation and overhead effects.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a continuous-aperture MIMO (CAPA) channel model for doubly dispersive (DD) channels, derives input-output relations for OFDM, OTFS, and AFDM waveforms, and then formulates transmit/receive beamforming problems that maximize received power. The beamforming section claims to obtain low-complexity, closed-form optimal solutions via calculus of variations, with expressions closely related to classical matched filters (Theorems 2 and 4), and it proposes an iterative algorithm (Algorithm 1) with claimed convergence guarantees. The channel-modeling part (Sections II-III) is a plausible extension of existing DD models to continuous apertures, but the beamforming optimality proofs are the advertised central contribution.

Significance. If the beamforming result were correct, it would be a significant contribution: provably optimal, low-complexity matched-filter-like beamformers for CAPA systems over DD channels would be an important step for holographic MIMO in high-mobility scenarios. The channel-modeling portion (Section II) and the waveform I/O relations (Section III) also have standalone value, as they extend prior discrete-array DD models to continuous apertures under clear far-field and narrowband assumptions. However, the paper's main claim of proven closed-form optimality is not established: the unconstrained problems are unbounded, the eigenvalue step is unjustified, and the resulting expressions are circular fixed-point equations rather than closed forms. The modeling contribution is useful, but the central beamforming claim as stated is unsupported.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-B, Lemma 2 (Eqs. (61)-(62))] Lemma 2 assumes the existence of an optimal solution to the unconstrained functional P3. This assumption is false. The objective is ||A_t[J_T]||_F^2, and for any J_T with A_t[J_T] != 0, scaling J_T -> alpha J_T multiplies the objective by alpha^2. The supremum over the unconstrained space is +infinity, so no nonzero maximizer exists; J_T = 0 is the only finite critical point and gives objective 0. Consequently, the rescaling argument in Eq. (62) is vacuous, and Lemma 2 cannot establish equivalence between P2 and P3. Lemma 4 for the RX side (P5) has exactly the same flaw.
  2. [Section IV-B, Eqs. (71)-(72)] The first-order condition (71) is derived by applying Theorem 1 to a nonexistent maximizer and is vacuous. Moreover, the sentence 'The condition then becomes an eigenvalue problem' introduces lambda_t with no derivation. A zero product of the form (integral) * A_t = 0 does not imply an eigenvalue equation (integral) * A_t = lambda_t J_T(s). The correct stationarity condition for the constrained problem P2 would require a Lagrange multiplier for the power constraint. Since Eq. (72) is the basis of Theorem 2, Theorem 2 is unsupported; Theorem 4 relies on the analogous unjustified step (89).
  3. [Section IV-B/C, Theorems 2 and 4 (Eqs. (73) and (90))] The claimed closed-form solutions are not closed forms. In Eq. (73), the matrix \tilde{A} is defined (Eq. (72)) as the double integral involving the unknown J_T(s'), so the right-hand side depends on the solution it is supposed to define. Similarly, \tilde{B} in Eq. (90) depends on the unknown J_R(r'). The quantities \lambda_t and \lambda_r are also left unspecified. At best, Eqs. (73) and (90) are fixed-point equations; they cannot be evaluated directly from problem data. This directly contradicts the abstract's claim of 'novel low-complexity, closed-form solutions.'
  4. [Section IV-D, Eq. (99) and Algorithm 1] The convergence proof in Eq. (99) states that O(J_T^{(i+1)}, J_R^{(i+1)}) >= O(J_T^{(i)}, J_R^{(i)}) 'follows from the global optimality described in Lemma 2 and Lemma 4.' Since Lemmas 2 and 4 are invalid, no monotonicity is established. Steps 2-3 of Algorithm 1 set \tilde{A} = \tilde{B} = the current objective matrix and \lambda_t = \lambda_r = max SVD of that matrix; these assignments are not derived from any optimization principle. The numerical convergence in Fig. 6 does not substitute for a proof, especially because the algorithm may converge to a fixed point of an unjustified update.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figures 2-6] The y-axis label 'dB7W' appears to be a typo (likely 'dBW' or 'dBm'). Please correct.
  2. [Eqs. (96)-(97)] The statements that J_T^*(s) and J_R^*(r) are '4-D tensors' and then defining per-element beamformers J_T^*(s_x,s_y), J_R^*(r_x,r_y) are confusing; the beamformers are matrix-valued functions on 2-D surfaces. Also, the coordinate notation (s_x,s_y) should be (s_x,s_z).
  3. [Eq. (30)] The displayed equation has a formatting issue with '≜ ˇH_ℓ' inside the sum; please clarify the definition.
  4. [Algorithm 1, Step 3] The notation max(SVD(O)) is ambiguous. If the largest singular value is intended, please state it explicitly; if the whole matrix is meant, clarify.
  5. [Lemma 1] The proof says the scaled solution achieves a 'higher maximum objective' but should say a higher objective value for the fixed functional; as written the wording is imprecise.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The 'closed-form' TX/RX beamformers are fixed-point equations containing the unknown beamformer inside the normalization/objective matrices, and Lemma 2 assumes an optimizer for an unbounded functional; the claimed optimality reduces to these self-referential premises.

  1. other [Section IV-B, Lemma 2, eqs. (61)-(62); symmetric RX version in Lemma 4, eqs. (79)-(80)]
    "Let ¯JT(s) denote an optimal solution to the functional maximization problem P3 : max JT(s) || ∫ SR ∫ ST J H R (r)H(r, s)JT(s)dsdr ||2 F . ... An optimal solution to problem P2 in equation (57) can then be expressed as JT(s) = sqrt( PT / ∫ ST || ¯JT(s)||2 ds ) ¯JT(s)."

    P3 (eq. 61) has no nonzero maximizer: replacing JT by αJT multiplies the objective by α², so the supremum is +∞ and the only stationary point is JT=0. Lemma 2 therefore assumes an optimizer whose existence the objective itself rules out, then scales it to obtain the constrained solution. The necessary condition Theorem 1 (eq. 66) is applied to this nonexistent object, and the passage from the stationarity equation (71) to the eigenvalue equation (72) introduces λt with no Lagrange multiplier. Thus the proof of Theorem 2 does not derive optimality; it assumes a solution and re-derives it, i.e., begs the question. The analogous RX Lemma 4 (eq. 79-80) inherits the same problem.

  2. self definitional [Section IV-B, Theorem 2, eqs. (72)-(73); symmetric RX version in Theorem 4, eqs. (89)-(90)]
    "J⋆ T(s) = ¯A( ∫ SR H H (r, s)JR(r)dr ) ˜A λt , (73) where ¯A and ˜A are constant matrices selected to satisfy the power constraint. ... Since the double integral is a constant matrix ˜A, we have ∫ SR H H (r, s)JR(r)dr ˜A = λt ¯JT(s). This implies that ¯JT(s) = ( ∫ SR H H (r, s)JR(r)dr ) ˜A λt ."

    In (72), ilde A = ∫∫ J_R^H(r')H(r',s')J_T(s')ds'dr', i.e., it is a functional of the very beamformer being solved for. Substituting that definition into (73) yields an equation of the form J_T = F(J_T,J_R); the 'solution' is only an implicit fixed-point equation and depends on the unknown objective matrix ilde A. The same is true for Theorem 4 with ilde B = ∫∫ J_T^H(s')H^H(r',s')J_R(r')ds'dr' in (89)-(90). Consequently, the announced closed-form TX/RX beamformers are self-referential by construction; Algorithm 1 iterates this self-reference rather than evaluating a closed form.

full rationale

The circularity is concentrated in the beamforming-design section, while the channel-modeling and waveform sections have independent, externally grounded content. Section II's DD channel model is built from standard Green's-function and far-field approximations, and Section III's OFDM/OTFS/AFDM input-output relations follow the cited waveform literature [10], [11], [13], [15]; those parts are not circular. The beamforming claim, however, reduces to its own assumptions. Lemma 2/4 assume an optimal solution to an unconstrained functional P3/P5 that is unbounded under scaling, so the proposed equivalence is existence-begging. The resulting Theorem 2/4 expressions contain ilde A/ ilde B, which are defined in terms of the unknown beamformers, making them fixed-point equations rather than closed-form solutions. The eigenvalue step (71)→(72) is not derived from the constrained problem, so the central optimality proof rests on a self-referential premise. There is no load-bearing self-citation chain: the references to prior work by the same group support the externally grounded channel/waveform parts, not the circular fixed-point step. If the beamforming proof were the whole paper the score would be higher; because the modeling contributions stand alone, the overall circularity is partial, hence 6.

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

The channel model uses standard Green's functions, scattering matrices, and far-field assumptions; no new physical entities are introduced. The beamforming derivation, however, implicitly relies on two unsupported assumptions about the optimization problem, which are listed as ad hoc axioms.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The scattering response C(q,p) is a sum of L Dirac impulses at discrete scatterer positions (eq. 5).
    Standard ray-tracing model; ignores diffuse scattering and distributed scattering.
  • domain assumption Far-field plane-wave approximations hold: linear phase across aperture, constant amplitude, and transverse-projector dyadic operator (eqs. 10-12).
    Required to get a tractable H(r,s;tau,t); valid only for small bandwidth-aperture product and small time-bandwidth product.
  • ad hoc to paper The unconstrained functional P3 has an optimal solution (Lemma 2).
    P3 is unbounded; scaling J_T increases the objective without limit, so no maximizer exists.
  • ad hoc to paper A zero product can be converted into an eigenvalue equation (eqs. 71-72).
    From [∫ H^H J_R] A_t = 0 one cannot conclude [∫ H^H J_R] A_t = lambda_t J_T without adding a Lagrange multiplier.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Doubly-Dispersive Continuous MIMO Systems: Channel Modeling and Beamforming Design." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DIMFWYSD

@misc{pith2026250900964,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Doubly-Dispersive Continuous MIMO Systems: Channel Modeling and Beamforming Design},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DIMFWYSD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.00964}
}
read the original abstract

We address the modeling and optimal beamforming (BF) design for multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) continuous aperture array (CAPA) systems operating over doubly-dispersive (DD) channels. First, a comprehensive DD continuous MIMO (DDC MIMO) channel model that incorporates CAPAs at both the transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX) is derived, which is used to obtain explicit input-output (I/O) relations for various waveforms well suited to integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) and robust to DD channels, namely orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM), orthogonal time frequency space (OTFS), and affine frequency division multiplexing (AFDM). Then, functional optimization problems are formulated for the design of TX and RX BF matrices that maximize received power, in which novel low-complexity, closed-form solutions are obtained via the calculus of variations (CoV) method, yielding expressions closely related to the classical matched filter commonly used in conventional MIMO systems. Simulation results confirm that the proposed TX/RX BF designs with CAPAs provide significant performance and computational complexity gains over conventional MIMO systems in DD channels.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.00964 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the point-to-point DDC MIMO system. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Receive power vs. transmit power for the proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Receive power vs. transmit power for the proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Receive power vs. number of algorithm iterations for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Receive power vs. number of data streams for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. AFDM: Evolving OFDM Towards 6G+

    eess.SP 2026-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    AFDM is presented as an OFDM-backward-compatible 6G+ waveform whose added transceiver cost is two O(N) chirp rotations, supported by a generalized pulse-shaped FDFD channel formulation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [10]

    H. S. Rou et al. , “From Orthogonal Time–Frequency Space to Affine Frequency-Division Multiplexing: A comparative study of next- generation waveforms for integrated sensing and communications in doubly dispersive channels,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag. , vol. 41, no. 5, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    Advanced Learning Algorithms for Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) Systems in 6G and Beyond: A Comprehensive Survey,

    N. C. Luong et al. , “Advanced Learning Algorithms for Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) Systems in 6G and Beyond: A Comprehensive Survey,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut. , 2025

    work page 2025

  3. [2]

    Toward 6G- Based Metaverse: Supporting Highly-Dynamic Deterministic Multi-User Extended Reality Services,

    H. Yu, M. Shokrnezhad, T. Taleb, R. Li, and J. Song, “Toward 6G- Based Metaverse: Supporting Highly-Dynamic Deterministic Multi-User Extended Reality Services,” IEEE Netw., vol. 37, no. 4, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [3]

    6G Wireless Communication Systems: Applications, Requirements, Technologies, Challenges, and Research Directions,

    M. Z. Chowdhury et al. , “6G Wireless Communication Systems: Applications, Requirements, Technologies, Challenges, and Research Directions,” IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc. , vol. 1, 2020

    work page 2020

  5. [4]

    A Flexible Design Framework for Integrated Communication and Computing Receivers,

    K. R. R. Ranasinghe et al. , “A Flexible Design Framework for Integrated Communication and Computing Receivers,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.05944

    arXiv 2025

  6. [5]

    Space-air-ground integrated network (SAGIN) for 6G: Requirements, architecture and challenges,

    H. Cui et al. , “Space-air-ground integrated network (SAGIN) for 6G: Requirements, architecture and challenges,” China Communications , vol. 19, no. 2, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [6]

    Reconfigurable Holographic Surfaces for Ultra-Massive MIMO in 6G: Practical Design, Optimization and Implementation,

    R. Deng et al., “Reconfigurable Holographic Surfaces for Ultra-Massive MIMO in 6G: Practical Design, Optimization and Implementation,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 41, no. 8, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Network-Aided Intelligent Traffic Steering in 6G O-RAN: A Multi-Layer Optimization Framework,

    V .-D. Nguyen et al. , “Network-Aided Intelligent Traffic Steering in 6G O-RAN: A Multi-Layer Optimization Framework,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 42, no. 2, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 46 references
  1. [8]

    D. W. Bliss and S. Govindasamy. Cambridge University Press, 2013

    2013

  2. [9]

    Performance degra- dation of ofdm systems due to doppler spreading,

    T. Wang, J. G. Proakis, E. Masry, and J. R. Zeidler, “Performance degra- dation of ofdm systems due to doppler spreading,” IEEE Transactions on wireless communications , vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1422–1432, 2006

    2006

  3. [11]

    Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Modulation,

    R. Hadani et al. , “Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Modulation,” in IEEE Wirel. Commun. and Net. Conf. (WCNC) , 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    Orthogonal time-frequency space modulation: A promising next-generation waveform,

    Z. Wei, W. Yuan, S. Li, J. Yuan, G. Bharatula, R. Hadani, and L. Hanzo, “Orthogonal time-frequency space modulation: A promising next-generation waveform,” IEEE wireless communications , vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 136–144, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing for Next Generation Wireless Communications,

    A. Bemani, N. Ksairi, and M. Kountouris, “Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing for Next Generation Wireless Communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 22, no. 11, 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    Affine frequency division multiplexing (afdm) for 6g: Properties, features, and challenges,

    H. S. Rou, K. R. R. Ranasinghe, V . Savaux, G. T. F. de Abreu, C. Ma- souros et al. , “Affine frequency division multiplexing (afdm) for 6g: Properties, features, and challenges,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.21704 , 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Joint Channel, Data, and Radar Parameter Estimation for AFDM Systems in Doubly-Dispersive Channels,

    K. R. R. Ranasinghe et al. , “Joint Channel, Data, and Radar Parameter Estimation for AFDM Systems in Doubly-Dispersive Channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 2, 2025

    2025

  8. [16]

    From otfs to dd-isac: Integrating sensing and communications in the delay doppler domain,

    W. Yuan, L. Zhou, S. K. Dehkordi, S. Li, P. Fan, G. Caire, and H. V . Poor, “From otfs to dd-isac: Integrating sensing and communications in the delay doppler domain,” IEEE Wireless Communications , 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Enabling 6G Performance in the Upper Mid-Band by Transitioning From Massive to Gigantic MIMO,

    E. Bj ¨ornson et al. , “Enabling 6G Performance in the Upper Mid-Band by Transitioning From Massive to Gigantic MIMO,” IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc. , vol. 6, 2025

    2025

  10. [18]

    Smart Radio Environments Empowered by Re- configurable Intelligent Surfaces: How It Works, State of Research, and The Road Ahead,

    M. Di Renzo et al. , “Smart Radio Environments Empowered by Re- configurable Intelligent Surfaces: How It Works, State of Research, and The Road Ahead,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 38, no. 11, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Target Detection and Positioning Aided by Recon- figurable Surfaces: Reflective or Holographic?

    X. Zhang et al. , “Target Detection and Positioning Aided by Recon- figurable Surfaces: Reflective or Holographic?” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 12, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces for Multiuser Downlink Beamforming in the Wave Domain,

    J. An, M. Di Renzo, M. Debbah, H. Vincent Poor, and C. Yuen, “Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces for Multiuser Downlink Beamforming in the Wave Domain,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 7, 2025

    2025

  13. [21]

    Doubly-Dispersive MIMO Channels with Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces: Modeling, Parametrization, and Receiver Design,

    K. R. R. Ranasinghe et al. , “Doubly-Dispersive MIMO Channels with Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces: Modeling, Parametrization, and Receiver Design,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501. 07724

    2025

  14. [22]

    Flexible intelligent metasurfaces for downlink multiuser miso communications,

    J. An et al. , “Flexible intelligent metasurfaces for downlink multiuser miso communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , 2025

    2025

  15. [23]

    Flexible Intelligent Metasurfaces in High-Mobility MIMO Integrated Sensing and Communications,

    K. R. R. Ranasinghe et al. , “Flexible Intelligent Metasurfaces in High-Mobility MIMO Integrated Sensing and Communications,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.18793, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Beamforming Optimization for Continuous Aperture Array (CAPA)-Based Communications,

    Z. Wang, C. Ouyang, and Y . Liu, “Beamforming Optimization for Continuous Aperture Array (CAPA)-Based Communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 6, 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    Beamforming Design for Continuous Aperture Array (CAPA)- Based MIMO Systems,

    ——, “Beamforming Design for Continuous Aperture Array (CAPA)- Based MIMO Systems,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.00181 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Linear Receive Beam- forming for CAPA Systems,

    C. Ouyang, Z. Wang, X. Zhang, and Y . Liu, “Linear Receive Beam- forming for CAPA Systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , 2025

    2025

  19. [27]

    Diversity and Multiplexing for Continuous-Aperture Array (CAPA)-Based Communications,

    ——, “Diversity and Multiplexing for Continuous-Aperture Array (CAPA)-Based Communications,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.,2025

    2025

  20. [28]

    Degrees of freedom in multiple-antenna channels: a signal space approach,

    A. Poon et al. , “Degrees of freedom in multiple-antenna channels: a signal space approach,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory , vol. 51, no. 2, 2005

    2005

  21. [29]

    A stochastic multipath channel model including path directions for indoor environments,

    T. Zwick, C. Fischer, and W. Wiesbeck, “A stochastic multipath channel model including path directions for indoor environments,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 20, no. 6, 2002

    2002

  22. [30]

    Electromagnetic Information Theory for Holographic MIMO Communications,

    L. Wei et al. , “Electromagnetic Information Theory for Holographic MIMO Communications,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2405.10496

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    A 3D Continuous-Space Electromagnetic Channel Model for 6G Tri-Polarized Multi-User Communications,

    Y . Yang et al. , “A 3D Continuous-Space Electromagnetic Channel Model for 6G Tri-Polarized Multi-User Communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 11, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    Electromagnetic Channel Modeling and Capacity Anal- ysis for HMIMO Communications,

    L. Wei et al. , “Electromagnetic Channel Modeling and Capacity Anal- ysis for HMIMO Communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 5, 2025

    2025

  25. [33]

    Elec- tromagnetic Effective Degree of Freedom of an MIMO System in Free Space,

    S. S. A. Yuan, Z. He, X. Chen, C. Huang, and W. E. I. Sha, “Elec- tromagnetic Effective Degree of Freedom of an MIMO System in Free Space,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 21, no. 3, Mar. 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Near-Field Localization and Sensing With Large-Aperture Arrays: From signal modeling to processing,

    Z. Wang, P. Ramezani, Y . Liu, and E. Bj¨ornson, “Near-Field Localization and Sensing With Large-Aperture Arrays: From signal modeling to processing,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag. , vol. 42, no. 1, Jan. 2025

    2025

  27. [35]

    M. A. Richards et al. , Fundamentals of radar signal processing . New York, NY , USA: McGraw-Hill Educ., 2005, vol. 1

    2005

  28. [36]

    Spatial- and Frequency- Wideband Effects in Millimeter-Wave Massive MIMO Systems,

    B. Wang, F. Gao, S. Jin, H. Lin, and G. Y . Li, “Spatial- and Frequency- Wideband Effects in Millimeter-Wave Massive MIMO Systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 66, no. 13, Jul. 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    Hybrid Arrays: How Many RF Chains are Required to Prevent Beam Squint?

    H. Do, N. Lee, R. W. Heath, and A. Lozano, “Hybrid Arrays: How Many RF Chains are Required to Prevent Beam Squint?” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 9, Sep. 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    A Novel Intercarrier-Interference Free Signal Processing Scheme for OFDM Radar,

    G. Hakobyan and B. Yang, “A Novel Intercarrier-Interference Free Signal Processing Scheme for OFDM Radar,”IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 67, no. 6, Jun. 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    MIMO-OFDM Joint Radar-Communications: Is ICI Friend or Foe?

    M. F. Keskin, H. Wymeersch, and V . Koivunen, “MIMO-OFDM Joint Radar-Communications: Is ICI Friend or Foe?” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 15, no. 6, 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    On non-WSSUS wireless fading channels,

    G. Matz, “On non-WSSUS wireless fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 4, no. 5, 2005

    2005

  33. [41]

    Joint Channel Estimation and Data Detection for AFDM Receivers With Oversampling,

    K. R. Rayan Ranasinghe et al. , “Joint Channel Estimation and Data Detection for AFDM Receivers With Oversampling,” in Int. Conf. on Comp., Net. and Commun. (ICNC) , 2025

    2025

  34. [42]

    Interference Can- cellation and Iterative Detection for Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Modulation,

    P. Raviteja, K. T. Phan, Y . Hong, and E. Viterbo, “Interference Can- cellation and Iterative Detection for Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Modulation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 17, no. 10, 2018

    2018

  35. [43]

    Pattern-Division Multiplexing for Multi-User Continuous-Aperture MIMO,

    Z. Zhang and L. Dai, “Pattern-Division Multiplexing for Multi-User Continuous-Aperture MIMO,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 41, no. 8, 2023

    2023

  36. [44]

    I. M. Gelfand and R. A. Silverman, Calculus of V ariations. Little Falls, NJ, USA: Courier Corporation, 2000

    2000

  37. [45]

    F. W. J. Olver et al. , The NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions . Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010

    2010

  38. [46]

    Wavenumber-Division Multiplexing in Line-of-Sight Holographic MIMO Communications,

    L. Sanguinetti, A. A. D’Amico, and M. Debbah, “Wavenumber-Division Multiplexing in Line-of-Sight Holographic MIMO Communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 22, no. 4, 2023

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.