Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 27 references

Jointly optimizing a drone's route, beams, and fluid antenna positions shrinks the average Cramér–Rao bound for multi-target sensing below fixed-antenna baselines.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

A joint trajectory, beamforming, and fluid-antenna-position optimization is proposed to minimize the average Cramér-Rao bound for multi-target sensing from a UAV.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection A competent but fatally flawed multi-target FAS paper: Eq. (6) models each target as an independent observation, so the optimized average CRB ignores inter-target interference and the claimed gains are not established. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2509.22497 v2 pith:LZOXKKNQ submitted 2025-09-26 cs.IT eess.SPmath.IT

UAV-Enabled Fluid Antenna Systems for Multi-Target Wireless Sensing over LAWCNs

Xuhui Zhang , Wenchao Liu , Chunjie Wang , Jinke Ren , Huijun Xing , Shuqiang Wang , Yanyan Shen This is my paper
classification cs.IT eess.SPmath.IT MSC 94A1290C2690C59
keywords fluid antenna systemUAV trajectory designmulti-target wireless sensingCramér–Rao boundtransmit beamformingalternating optimizationlow-altitude wireless networksparticle swarm optimization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a UAV-based wireless sensing system can estimate several ground targets more accurately if the drone can reposition its transmit and receive antennas continuously while flying, instead of using a fixed antenna array. The authors measure estimation error through the Cramér–Rao bound (CRB), the lowest variance any unbiased estimator can achieve, and minimize the average CRB over all targets and time slots. They propose an alternating optimization algorithm that iteratively improves the UAV trajectory, the transmit beamforming covariance, and the positions of the transmit and receive fluid antennas. Simulation results show that this joint design converges to lower average CRB values than fixed-position-antenna benchmarks, especially as transmit power or the antenna motion range grows. If correct, the work suggests that antenna-position agility is a practical resource for low-altitude sensing missions, not just a theoretical option.

Core claim

The central claim is that the average CRB for multi-target estimation is minimized by jointly optimizing four coupled quantities: the UAV trajectory q[n], the transmit beamforming covariance R[n], the transmit fluid antenna positions x[n], and the receive fluid antenna positions y[n]. The objective is the time- and target-averaged CRB, and the paper proves convergence of its alternating optimization scheme by showing that the reciprocal objective is non-decreasing across iterations while remaining bounded. The receive fluid antennas contribute to the CRB through a quadratic form that measures their spread about the array centroid, while the transmit side enters through the beamforming gain a

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the simplified CRB expression (Eq. 10). For target k, it separates the roles of the optimization variables: the trajectory affects the distance and vertical angle, the transmit beamforming shapes the steering gain, the transmit FA positions enter through the transmit steering vector, and the receive FA positions enter only via a quadratic spread term. The algorithm decouples the non-convex problem into three subproblems solved alternately: the trajectory update becomes convex after fixing the steering vectors, the beamforming update is convex per time slot, and the FA positions are updated with particle swarm optimization plus projection onto the feasible antenna

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes each target's echo is observed separately with independent noise (Y_k = W_k X + N), whereas a real receiver sees the sum of all target echoes; if inter-target interference is not negligible, the minimized average of per-target CRBs may not reflect actual multi-target estimation accuracy.

What would settle it

Run the same joint optimization on a model in which the receiver observes the sum of all target echoes, Y[n] = Σ_k W_k[n]X[n] + N[n], and compute the CRB matrix for joint estimation of all target angles. If the optimized fluid-antenna system does not achieve a lower average CRB than the fixed-antenna baseline under this summed-echo model, the paper's central gain is an artifact of the per-target observation model.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the central claim is correct, a UAV can match or beat a larger fixed array by actively repositioning a small number of antennas during flight, trading mechanical agility for hardware cost.
  • The monotone convergence result means the alternating algorithm is dependable as an iterative design tool: each full iteration keeps or improves the sensing objective.
  • Larger fluid-antenna motion regions and higher transmit power both lower the average CRB in the simulations, giving system designers concrete levers for accuracy.
  • As the number of targets increases, the average CRB rises because beamforming energy is spread more thinly, quantifying a trade-off between target load and per-target accuracy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The per-target observation model (Eq. 6) treats each echo as separately received, so the minimized average CRB does not yet capture inter-target interference; testing the same algorithm on the summed-echo model Y = Σ_k W_k X + N would show whether the positioning gains survive true multi-target reception.
  • Because the receive-FA contribution to the CRB is a quadratic form measuring only the spread of the receive antennas, a design shortcut would be to optimize the aperture spread directly, potentially yielding sparse receive layouts with comparable accuracy.
  • The same alternating structure is a natural template for integrated sensing and communication: adding communication-rate constraints to the CRB objective would let one drone both sense targets and serve users, the paper's stated future direction.
  • Replacing the PSO antenna update with a step that exploits the quadratic receive term could reduce per-iteration cost, making the scheme more plausible for real-time trajectory control.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper considers a UAV equipped with transmit and receive fluid antenna arrays performing multi-target wireless sensing in low-altitude networks. It formulates an optimization problem (P1) to minimize the average CRB over targets and time slots by jointly designing the UAV trajectory, transmit beamforming, and the positions of the transmit/receive FAs. An alternating optimization (AO) algorithm is proposed: the trajectory subproblem (P3.l) is claimed to be convex, the beamforming subproblem (P4.n) is decomposed per time slot, and the FA-position subproblem (P5.n) is handled by particle swarm optimization. Simulations compare the proposed scheme against fixed-position antenna baselines and show lower average CRB. The abstract claims enhanced sensing performance and effective interference suppression via FAS repositioning.

Significance. If the central claims were correct, the paper would offer a useful contribution to UAV-enabled integrated sensing and communication, particularly for low-altitude economy scenarios. The authors address a timely problem and provide numerical comparisons. However, the performance metric is derived from an observation model that decouples targets, so the optimized average CRB is not a valid multi-target estimation bound. In addition, the claimed convexity of the trajectory subproblem is incorrect, and the convergence proof relies on unverified improvement assumptions for the PSO step. These issues are load-bearing: they affect the core contribution, not just the presentation. The paper does not provide machine-checked proofs or reproducible code, and several algorithmic claims rest on prior self-cited work.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III-A, Eq. (6)] The received-signal model is per-target: Y_k[n] = W_k[n]X[n] + N[n]. In a physical multi-target scenario the UAV observes the superposition Y[n] = Σ_k W_k[n]X[n] + N[n]. The paper never specifies orthogonal waveforms, per-target receive beamforming, or interference cancellation that would justify decoupling. Consequently, the CRB in (9)-(10) is the CRB for K independent single-target estimation problems, and the average CRB minimized in (P1) does not capture inter-target interference. The claimed 'effective interference suppression via the flexible FAS antenna repositioning' is therefore not modeled or verified by the simulations. This is not a minor modeling shortcut; it invalidates the multi-target sensing performance claim.
  2. [Section IV-A, P3.l] Problem P3.l is stated to be 'a standard convex optimization problem' without proof. With a_k[n] fixed from the previous iteration, the objective is a sum of terms proportional to 1/(||q[n]-q_k||^2 + H^2) (see (19) and the definition of d_k^2). The function f(q)=1/(||q-q_k||^2+H^2) is not convex on R^2; its Hessian has both positive and negative eigenvalues in general. Thus P3.l is not a standard convex problem, and the statement is incorrect. This also undermines the interior-point complexity claim in Proposition 2 (Eq. (34)).
  3. [Appendix B, Proposition 1] The convergence proof assumes that each subproblem solution produces a non-decreasing objective in problem P2. This is not established. First, P3.l is not convex, so the 'convex optimizer' is not guaranteed to return an improving point. Second, the PSO step in Algorithm 1 is stochastic and the fitness function (33) includes a penalty term; improvement in the penalized fitness does not necessarily imply improvement in the original objective C(q,R,x,y). The proof in Appendix B therefore does not establish Proposition 1. The numerical convergence in Fig. 3 is not a substitute for a proof.
  4. [Section IV-D, Proposition 2] The claimed worst-case complexity O(l_max[(2N)^{3.5} + (N M_t^2)^{3.5}] log(1/ε) + N tmax P(M_t+M_r)) relies on the convexity of P3.l and on the interior-point method for a nonconvex problem, and on the PSO complexity cited from [2]. Since P3.l is not convex, the interior-point complexity formula is not applicable. The complexity analysis is therefore not supported by the derivations in the paper.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General notation] The manuscript uses inconsistent notation for the numbers of transmit and receive FAs: M_t/M_r in Section III, N_t/N_r in Eq. (18) and Section V, and N_r in Eq. (10). This should be unified.
  2. [Fig. 3 and Fig. 5] Fig. 3 shows only 8 iterations without specifying lmax or the stopping threshold ε. Fig. 5's caption says 'Achievable beampattern gains of selected targets' but the figure shows CRB values; the caption should match the content.
  3. [Algorithm 1] The projection Proj_D in (32) is not defined precisely; it projects onto the region D but the minimum-distance constraints (11d)-(11e) are only handled via the penalty term. The penalty factor η and the constraint-violation function V(·) are not specified, and no sensitivity analysis is provided.
  4. [Section IV-A labeling] The label 'P3.l' is confusing; it would be clearer to use superscript notation like P3^{(l)} to indicate the iteration index, consistent with the approximation in (18)-(19).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; minor self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The CRB objective (Eq. 10) is derived from standard estimation theory (Ref. [25]) and the system model (Eq. 6); the optimization directly minimizes this CRB without hidden fitted parameters. The alternating optimization uses standard SCA linearization (Eq. 18) and PSO, with convergence proof based on objective monotonicity. The only reliance on overlapping-author works is for computational complexity expressions (Refs. [19], [2]) and the SCA convention, which are not central to the physical claims. The simulation comparisons evaluate the same objective under different antenna configurations, which is a self-consistent assessment rather than a circular reduction. A modeling concern exists: Eq. (6) treats each target's echo as an independent observation, removing inter-target interference, but this is a validity issue, not circularity, since the CRB is not defined in terms of the claimed interference suppression.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several modeling simplifications: single-path channels, per-target echo separation, and known target parameters. The per-target echo separation is the most consequential because it removes inter-target interference from the CRB. The convexity of P3.l is also an unproven enabler of the proposed solution approach.

free parameters (2)
  • PSO penalty factor eta = unspecified large positive value
    In Eq. (33), a large penalty factor is introduced ad hoc to enforce FA position constraints; its value is not specified and affects whether infeasible particles are rejected.
  • PSO hyperparameters = c1=1.5, c2=1.5, omega_max=0.9, omega_min=0.4, Tmax=50, P=50
    Chosen by hand for the simulations; they are not fitted to data but they affect solution quality and are not derived from the problem structure.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Single-path channel propagation: multipath reflections are neglected.
    Section III-A says 'we model the channel model between the UAV and the targets as the single-path propagation model', justified by an attenuation claim from [23].
  • ad hoc to paper Per-target echo separation: Eq. (6) defines Y_k = W_k X + N for each target independently, omitting superposition of echoes from all K targets.
    This is necessary for the simple per-target CRB in Eq. (10) but is not stated as an assumption and removes inter-target interference.
  • domain assumption Known target locations and RCS: q_k and alpha_k are inputs to the optimization.
    The CRB objective in Eq. (10) uses d_k, theta_k, and alpha_k; the design presupposes target positions and RCS are known, even though the goal is to sense them.
  • standard math Large number of frames: R_x is approximated by R in Eq. (8).
    The sample covariance of the transmitted signal is replaced by the true covariance, a standard asymptotic simplification when the number of frames is large.
  • ad hoc to paper P3.l is convex: the paper states it is a standard convex optimization problem.
    Section IV-A, around Eq. (22), asserts convexity without proof. The objective contains terms 1/||q-q_k||^2 which are not generally concave, so this is an unproven assumption on which the algorithm design rests.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UAV-Enabled Fluid Antenna Systems for Multi-Target Wireless Sensing over LAWCNs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LZOXKKNQ

@misc{pith2026250922497,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UAV-Enabled Fluid Antenna Systems for Multi-Target Wireless Sensing over LAWCNs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LZOXKKNQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.22497}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Fluid antenna system (FAS) is emerging as a key technology for enhancing spatial flexibility and sensing accuracy in future wireless systems. This paper investigates an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-enabled FAS for multi-target wireless sensing in low-altitude wireless consumer networks (LAWCNs) for achieving the low-altitude economy (LAE) missions. We formulate an optimization problem aimed at minimizing the average Cram\'er-Rao bound (CRB) for multiple target estimations. To tackle this non-convex problem, an efficient alternating optimization (AO) algorithm is proposed, which jointly optimizes the UAV trajectory, the antenna position of the transmit fluid antennas (FAs) and the receive FAs, and the transmit beamforming at the UAV. Simulation results demonstrate significant performance improvements in estimation accuracy and sensing reliability compared to conventional schemes, e.g., the fixed position antenna scheme. The proposed system achieves enhanced sensing performance through adaptive trajectory design and beamforming, alongside effective interference suppression via the flexible FAS antenna repositioning, underscoring its practical potential for precision sensing in the UAV-enabled LAWCNs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.22497 by Chunjie Wang, Huijun Xing, Jinke Ren, Shuqiang Wang, Wenchao Liu, Xuhui Zhang, Yanyan Shen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The UAV-enable FAS for multi-target wireless [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Algorithm procedure of the proposed scheme. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Achievable beampattern gains of selected targets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Achievable beampattern gains at time slot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Average CRB value versus normalized region size. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Average CRB value versus the number of targets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Low-altitude wireless networks: A survey,

    J. Wu, Y . Y ang, W. Y uan, W. Liu, J. Wang, T. Mao, L. Zhou, Y . C ui, F. Liu, G. Sun et al., “Low-altitude wireless networks: A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.11607, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Movable-antenna array empowered ISAC systems for low-alt itude economy,

    Z. Kuang, W. Liu, C. Wang, Z. Jin, J. Ren, X. Zhang, and Y . Sh en, “Movable-antenna array empowered ISAC systems for low-alt itude economy,” in Proc. IEEE/CIC Int. Conf. Commun. China W orkshops (ICCC W orkshops), Hangzhou, China, Aug. 2024, pp. 776–781

    2024

  3. [3]

    Networked ISAC for lo w- altitude economy: Coordinated transmit beamforming and UA V trajec- tory design,

    G. Cheng, X. Song, Z. Lyu, and J. Xu, “Networked ISAC for lo w- altitude economy: Coordinated transmit beamforming and UA V trajec- tory design,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 73, no. 8, pp. 5832–5847, Aug. 2025

    2025

  4. [4]

    Joint AoI-aware UA Vs trajec tory planning and data collection in UA V-based IoT systems: A dee p rein- forcement learning approach,

    X. Xiao, X. Wang, and W. Lin, “Joint AoI-aware UA Vs trajec tory planning and data collection in UA V-based IoT systems: A dee p rein- forcement learning approach,” IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. , vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 6484–6495, Nov. 2024

    2024

  5. [5]

    Late ncy minimization for multi-AA V-enabled ISCC systems with mova ble an- tenna,

    Y . Chen, W. Liu, C. Wang, Y . Wu, X. Zhang, and Y . Shen, “Late ncy minimization for multi-AA V-enabled ISCC systems with mova ble an- tenna,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.05574 , 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Age of inform ation minimization in UA V-enabled IoT networks via federated rei nforcement learning,

    X. Zhang, H. Xing, Y . Shen, J. Xu, and S. Cui, “Age of inform ation minimization in UA V-enabled IoT networks via federated rei nforcement learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 7923–7939, Sep. 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Integrated sensing and communication for low altitude economy: Opportunities and challenges,

    Y . Jiang, X. Li, G. Zhu, H. Li, J. Deng, K. Han, C. Shen, Q. Sh i, and R. Zhang, “Integrated sensing and communication for low altitude economy: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , to appear, 2025

    2025

  8. [8]

    Movable ant ennas meet low-altitude wireless networks: Fundamentals, oppor tunities, and future directions,

    W. Liu, X. Zhang, C. Wang, J. Ren, and W. Y uan, “Movable ant ennas meet low-altitude wireless networks: Fundamentals, oppor tunities, and future directions,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.13250 , 2025

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Average age of sensi ng in wireless powered sensor networks,

    Y . Zheng, J. Hu, Y . Zhao, and K. Y ang, “Average age of sensi ng in wireless powered sensor networks,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 9265–9281, Aug. 2024

    2024

  10. [10]

    Training-fr ee energy beamforming assisted by wireless sensing,

    L. Zhang, Y . Fang, Z. Ren, L. Qiu, and J. Xu, “Training-fr ee energy beamforming assisted by wireless sensing,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Networking Conf. (WCNC) , Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Apr. 2024, pp. 1–6

    2024

  11. [11]

    F luid antenna systems,

    K.-K. Wong, A. Shojaeifard, K.-F. Tong, and Y . Zhang, “F luid antenna systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1950–1962, Mar. 2021

    1950

  12. [12]

    Fluid antenna system—part I: Preliminaries,

    K.-K. Wong, W. K. New, X. Hao, K.-F. Tong, and C.-B. Chae, “Fluid antenna system—part I: Preliminaries,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1919–1923, Aug. 2023

    1919

  13. [13]

    Fluid antenna s ystem—part II: Research opportunities,

    K.-K. Wong, K.-F. Tong, and C.-B. Chae, “Fluid antenna s ystem—part II: Research opportunities,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1924–1928, Aug. 2023

    1924

  14. [14]

    UA V-enabled wirele ss networks for integrated sensing and learning-oriented communicati on,

    W. Zhuang, X. He, Y . Mao, and J. Liu, “UA V-enabled wirele ss networks for integrated sensing and learning-oriented communicati on,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 340–344, Feb. 2025

    2025

  15. [15]

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

    W. Mao, Y . Lu, G. Pan, and B. Ai, “UA V-assisted communica tions in SAGIN-ISAC: Mobile user tracking and robust beamforming,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 186–200, Jan. 2025

    2025

  16. [16]

    Radio frequ ency- based UA V sensing using novel hybrid lightweight learning n etwork,

    Q. Wang, P . Y ang, X. Y an, H.-C. Wu, and L. He, “Radio frequ ency- based UA V sensing using novel hybrid lightweight learning n etwork,” IEEE Sensors J. , vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 4841–4850, Feb. 2024

    2024

  17. [17]

    UA V-relay assisted RSMA fluid anten na system: Outage probability analysis,

    F. Rostami Ghadi, M. Kaveh, F. Hernando-Gallego, D. Mar t´ ın, K.- K. Wong, and C.-B. Chae, “UA V-relay assisted RSMA fluid anten na system: Outage probability analysis,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 2907–2911, Sep. 2025

    2025

  18. [18]

    Dynamic channel modeling of fluid antenna systems in UA V com - munications,

    H. Jiang, W. Shi, Z. Chen, Z. Zhang, K.-K. Wong, and H. Shi n, “Dynamic channel modeling of fluid antenna systems in UA V com - munications,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , to appear, 2025

    2025

  19. [19]

    UA V -enabled wireless networks with movable-antenna array: Flexible be amforming and trajectory design,

    W. Liu, X. Zhang, H. Xing, J. Ren, Y . Shen, and S. Cui, “UA V -enabled wireless networks with movable-antenna array: Flexible be amforming and trajectory design,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 566–570, Mar. 2025

    2025

  20. [20]

    Movable-antenna empowered AA V-enabled data collection o ver low- altitude wireless networks,

    X. Zhang, W. Liu, J. Ren, C. Wang, H. Xing, Y . Shen, and S. C ui, “Movable-antenna empowered AA V-enabled data collection o ver low- altitude wireless networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15515 , 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Compressive sensing based UA V communication and sensing MIMO system with movabl e antenna,

    Y . Li, Z. Wan, Z. Li, Y . Wang, C. Sun, and Z. Gao, “Compressive sensing based UA V communication and sensing MIMO system with movabl e antenna,” in Proc. IEEE/CIC Int. Conf. Commun. China W orkshops (ICCC W orkshops), Shanghai, China, Aug. 2025, pp. 1–6

    2025

  22. [22]

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

    Z. Lyu, G. Zhu, and J. Xu, “Joint maneuver and beamformin g design for UA V-enabled integrated sensing and communication,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2424–2440, Apr. 2022

    2022

  23. [23]

    Fluid antenna system liberating multiuser MIMO for I SAC via deep reinforcement learning,

    C. Wang, G. Li, H. Zhang, K.-K. Wong, Z. Li, D. W. K. Ng, and C.-B. Chae, “Fluid antenna system liberating multiuser MIMO for I SAC via deep reinforcement learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 10 879–10 894, Sep. 2024

    2024

  24. [24]

    Integrate d sensing and communication-assisted orthogonal time frequency spa ce transmis- sion for vehicular networks,

    W. Y uan, Z. Wei, S. Li, J. Y uan, and D. W. K. Ng, “Integrate d sensing and communication-assisted orthogonal time frequency spa ce transmis- sion for vehicular networks,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1515–1528, Nov. 2021

    2021

  25. [25]

    Cr am´ er-Rao bound optimization for joint radar-communication beamfor ming,

    F. Liu, Y .-F. Liu, A. Li, C. Masouros, and Y . C. Eldar, “Cr am´ er-Rao bound optimization for joint radar-communication beamfor ming,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 70, pp. 240–253, Dec. 2022

    2022

  26. [26]

    Multiuse r commu- nications with movable-antenna base station: Joint antenn a positioning, receive combining, and power control,

    Z. Xiao, X. Pi, L. Zhu, X.-G. Xia, and R. Zhang, “Multiuse r commu- nications with movable-antenna base station: Joint antenn a positioning, receive combining, and power control,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 19 744–19 759, Dec. 2024

    2024

  27. [27]

    Movable antenna-aided se cure full-duplex multi-user communications,

    J. Ding, Z. Zhou, and B. Jiao, “Movable antenna-aided se cure full-duplex multi-user communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2389–2403, Mar. 2025

    2025

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.