Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

A base station that rotates its sectors and moves its antennas along a circular track can be optimized in closed form, with the optimal antenna count per sector growing linearly in the number of users in that sector.

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 13:36 UTC pith:B5FYRZG3

load-bearing objection A clean analytical framework for sectorized 6DMA with verified math; the no-interference sector pattern is the load-bearing idealization, and the log2 B gain is a best-case bound. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.26086 v3 pith:B5FYRZG3 submitted 2025-09-30 cs.NI

Flexible-Sector 6DMA Base Station: Modeling and Design

Yunli Li , Xiaoming Shi , Xiaodan Shao , Jie Xu , Rui Zhang This is my paper
classification cs.NI
keywords flexible-sector base stationsix-dimensional movable antenna (6DMA)sector rotationantenna allocationzero-forcing receiversum-rate maximizationangular-domain user distributionPoisson point process
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.

This paper tries to establish that a base station whose directional sector antennas can be rotated together and physically moved along a circular track can be modeled and optimized in closed form, not just by simulation. The central result is that, for a given sector alignment, the number of antennas that maximizes the multiuser sum rate grows linearly with the number of users in the sector, with a small correction that vanishes as the antenna budget grows. The authors derive an analytical lower bound on the achievable rate using zero-forcing reception and Wishart-matrix statistics, and on top of it solve the joint sector-rotation and antenna-allocation problem with a two-step algorithm. If the analysis is right, the design principle is simple: point the sector boundaries at the lopsided user distribution and pour antennas into the crowded sectors. The paper also shows that the best-case gap between the most favorable and the least favorable user distributions is exactly log2(B) bits per user, where B is the number of sectors.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that the average sum rate of a flexible-sector base station with zero-forcing combining is governed by the lower bound R = sum_b Q_b log2(1 + B*gamma0*(N_b - Q_b)^+), where Q_b is the number of users and N_b the antennas in sector b, B is the directional antenna gain per sector, and gamma0 is the normalized SNR. This expression makes the design problem convex, and the optimal antenna allocation becomes N_b* = (Q_b/K)(N + 1/gamma0) - 1/(B*gamma0) whenever the per-user minimum-rate constraint is inactive. Two consequences follow: antennas should be allocated in proportion to each sector's user load, and, under the most favorable user distribution (all

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the lower-bound sum-rate formula of Eq. (19), R(n,z0) = sum_b Q_b log2(1 + B*gamma0*(N_b - Q_b)^+), which converts a random-matrix zero-forcing problem into a separable concave optimization. It comes from Lemma 1, where the expectation of the inverse Wishart matrix gives E[((G^H G)^{-1})_{k,k}] = B/(N_b - Q_b), so the ergodic per-user rate collapses to a function of the antenna-user surplus. On top of that, the water-filling-type solution of Eq. (25) — and its closed-form version Eq. (32) when the minimum-rate constraints are inactive — carries the allocation design, and the convex program (P4) over user counts shows that concentrating users in one sector maximizes

Load-bearing premise

The result hinges on the per-sector rate being a function only of the surplus N_b - Q_b, which holds only if the sector antennas have zero gain outside their nominal beamwidth (so sectors never interfere) and if the per-zone user counts are treated as fixed, known numbers rather than random fluctuations; if either idealization fails, the additive form of the sum rate breaks.

What would settle it

Take a realistic sector antenna pattern with nonzero sidelobes, draw actual user counts from the Poisson process instead of fixing them at their means, and re-run the optimization; if the maximizer no longer follows the linear rule N_b proportional to Q_b (or the simulated gap drops below log2(B) as N grows), the paper's central design principle fails in that regime. A simpler calculation: with B=2 and one hotspot, simulate the zero-forcing rate at N=200 with a finite antenna pattern and compare the per-user gap to log2(2).

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, a system designer can compute near-optimal antenna counts per sector by a simple closed-form rule, without exhaustive search or simulation.
  • The sum rate under the most favorable user distribution exceeds the uniform baseline by log2(B) per user when N is large, so the value of sector rotation grows only logarithmically with the number of sectors.
  • More sectors help whenever users are angularly non-uniform; splitting a sector in two cannot hurt, and strictly helps if the two halves have unequal user counts.
  • The design inherits the standard massive-MIMO insight that the surplus N - K, not N alone, sets the rate, so the flexible-sector architecture is most effective when the base station is antenna-rich.
  • A fixed-sector or rotation-only benchmark is strictly dominated by jointly optimizing rotation and allocation, and the gap widens with spatial clustering.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • An implication left implicit by the paper is that the same linear-allocation rule could be applied adaptively over time by tracking slowly varying angular hotspots, since only the per-sector user counts enter the formula; a practical scheduler would need to feed those counts to the antenna-position controller.
  • A natural stress test is to relax the truncated-sector pattern: if real antennas have sidelobes and sectors are not perfectly isolated, the sum rate will no longer be additive in sectors, and the optimal allocation will need to account for inter-sector interference. The closed-form rule would then be an approximation, with error growing with antenna sidelobe level.
  • The rate gap log2(B) compares extremes of user distribution; for finite N the gap is smaller, and a testable extension is to characterize the finite-N gap for arbitrary user distributions, e.g., by replacing Q_b with realized counts and averaging over the Poisson draws.
  • Because the lower bound is used for design, the actual system may achieve slightly higher rates than the paper reports; a useful follow-up is to quantify how much performance is left on the table by designing on the bound rather than the true expectation.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a flexible-sector 6DMA base-station architecture in which sector antennas can rotate by a common azimuth angle and antennas can be reallocated between sectors along a circular track. For uplink transmission with ZF reception and channel-inversion power control, it derives a lower bound on the per-user rate in each sector (Lemma 1), leading to the separable sum-rate expression R(n,z0)=Σ_b Q_b log2(1+Bγ0(N_b-Q_b)^+) in Eq. (19). Based on this expression, the authors formulate a joint antenna-allocation and sector-rotation problem (P1), solve it via a two-step algorithm, and obtain the closed-form linear allocation N_b^*=Q_b/K(N+1/γ0)-1/(Bγ0) in Eq. (32) when the minimum-rate constraints are inactive. They further study the effect of user distribution, show that the extremal per-user rate gap between the most favorable and uniform user distributions is log2 B (Theorem 1), and validate the design numerically for quasi-uniform and clustered user distributions.

Significance. The paper's main analytical contribution is a tractable mean-field model of a sectorized 6DMA BS, replacing Monte-Carlo evaluation with closed-form expressions. I verified the key derivations: Lemma 1 follows from the inverse-Wishart diagonal expectation E[(G^H G)^{-1}]=Q/(N-Q) and the standard ZF identity E[|w^H h|^2]=B(N_b-Q_b+1); Proposition 1 is a correct KKT/water-filling solution; the algebra leading to Eqs. (31), (32), (35), (41), and (45) checks out. If the idealized sector-isolation and deterministic-user-count assumptions are acceptable, the results provide a clear and useful design rule—more antennas in sectors with more users, with a linear proportional relationship—and the two-step algorithm is simple and computationally attractive. The paper also gives constructive numerical comparisons against conventional fixed-sector, rotation-only, and allocation-only benchmarks. However, the headline log2 B gain and the optimality of the closed-form allocation rest on strong idealizations that need to be made explicit and stress-tested.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II-A, Eq. (1); Section III, Eq. (19); Theorem 1, Eq. (46)] The separable sum-rate lower bound (19) and all subsequent closed-form results—the water-filling allocation (25), the linear allocation (32), and the log2 B gap in (46)—rely on the truncated antenna pattern in Eq. (1), which has zero gain outside the sector span, and on footnote 4 ('There is no interference among sectors due to the use of directional antennas'). With a physical sector antenna (finite sidelobes), a user in sector b' couples to antennas in sector b with non-negligible gain, and the per-sector ZF combiner (9) only nulls intra-sector users. The SINR of user k in sector b then contains an inter-sector interference term Σ_{b'≠b} Σ_{j∈Q_b'} |w_k^H h_{j,b'}|² that depends on the whole allocation vector n, so (19) no longer separates, the water-filling solution is no longer optimal, and the extremal comparison leading to (46) is not exact for the system. The paper acknowledges th
  2. [Section II-B, Eqs. (3)-(5), footnote 2; Section III, Eq. (19)] The 'average sum rate' is computed using the deterministic per-zone mean counts K_z, not by averaging over the Poisson point process. For random user counts Q_b, E[Σ_b Q_b log2(1+Bγ0(N_b-Q_b)^+)] is not equal to (19) with Q_b replaced by its mean; the paper does not show concentration or an exact expectation. Consequently, the objective used in (P1)-(P3) is a mean-field approximation, and the antenna allocation that maximizes it is not necessarily the allocation that maximizes the true PPP-averaged sum rate. This should be stated explicitly, and the approximation should be justified either analytically (e.g., by a concentration argument for large K_z) or numerically by comparing against Monte-Carlo PPP realizations.
  3. [Section VI-B, Theorem 1, Eqs. (39)-(46); Abstract] The log2 B 'rate gain' in Theorem 1 is the gap between the flexible-sector BS's maximum sum rate when all users are concentrated in one sector (39) and its minimum sum rate when users are uniformly distributed across sectors (43). These are two different user distributions. The abstract and introduction present this as a gain of the proposed architecture 'compared to the conventional fixed-sector BS with equal user distribution over sectors,' but (46) as stated is an extremal spread of the flexible-sector BS across user distributions, not a same-distribution comparison of two architectures. The numerical benchmarks in Section VII do provide same-distribution comparisons, but the analytical claim is framed differently. Please clarify whether Theorem 1 is an extremal bound or an architecture gain, and consider adding the same-clustered-distribution comparison with a fixed-sector BS (with N
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section VII, paragraph after Fig. 6] The text says 'we only need to consider z0 ∈ {1, · · ·, B/Z}'; this should be Z/B (since c=Z/B zones per sector).
  2. [Section III, Lemma 1 proof, Appendix A] The proof cites [47, Theorem 1.1] for the upper bound in Lemma 1, but [47] is an optimization paper (Marks and Wright) and appears unrelated to the Wishart/ZF rate bound. Please replace with the correct reference or remove the citation.
  3. [Section V, Algorithm 1, Eq. (27)] The rounding step N_b^* ← floor(N_b^*) can leave up to B-1 antennas unused. Since the objective is increasing in each N_b, the integer solution can be improved by allocating leftover antennas to any sector (e.g., the sector with the largest marginal gain). The loss is small for large N, but the algorithm as stated is not the exact integer optimum. Please note this or add a simple surplus-redistribution step.
  4. [Section VI-B, Eq. (39) and text] The 'most favorable user distribution' in (39) has Q_j=0 for all j≠i, which violates the earlier assumption K_z≥1 and the constraint Q_b≥1 used in (P4). The paper says the constraint 'can be safely omitted,' but this should be explicitly flagged as an idealized limiting case; the feasible optimum with Q_b≥1 is (37), not (39).
  5. [Throughout] Eq. (19) is a lower bound on the sum rate, but it is often referred to as 'the average sum rate' or 'the sum rate' without qualification (e.g., in the abstract of Section IV and in Eq. (28)). For consistency, please use 'lower bound on the sum rate' in these places, or state once that the lower bound is used as the design metric.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained; central claims are analytic consequences of an external Wishart-based rate bound, not of fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing derivations do not reduce to their inputs. Lemma 1 obtains the per-sector rate bounds in Eqs. (16)-(17) from Jensen's inequality and the standard Wishart expectation E[tr((G^H G)^{-1})] = Q/(N-Q), citing the external Tulino-Verdú random matrix theory [48]; the lower bound (17), which is the expression actually used for all subsequent optimization, is derived rather than assumed. The closed-form antenna allocation in Eq. (32) follows from the KKT conditions of the convex relaxation (P3), with ν determined by the budget equation (26); it is not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The linear-in-Q_b structure is an algebraic consequence of the concave objective, not a restatement of the model. Theorem 1's log2(B) per-user gain is obtained by comparing R_max in Eq. (41) and R_min in Eq. (45), both of which are direct evaluations of the paper's own lower-bound sum-rate expression (19); this is an analytic implication, not circular reasoning. The self-citations to [29], [34], [35], and [46] are contextual/background or are used only for the upper-bound side (16) in the proof of Lemma 1; the downstream optimization relies on the independently derived lower bound, so these self-citations are not load-bearing. No uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked, and no fitted input is called a prediction. The sector-isolation assumption in Eq. (1) is an idealization that could affect robustness to realistic antenna sidelobes, but it is a modeling assumption rather than a circular step: the algebra is internally consistent given that assumption, and the concern belongs to correctness/engineering validity rather than circularity of the derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data; the analysis is parameter-free given the model. The main modeling freedom is the angular user distribution K_z (a scenario input, and the object optimized over in Section VI-B to produce the best/worst-case rate bounds). The theory rests on standard Wishart/random-matrix results plus strong domain idealizations: zero-leakage sector patterns, perfect CSI, channel-inversion power control, deterministic user counts, and unconstrained antenna packing. Rmax, Rmin, and the log2(B) theorem are derived from the paper's own lower-bound rate expression (19). No new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Per-zone average user counts K_z (or densities λ_z) = Distribution-I: 3 users/zone in zones 16–25, 1 elsewhere; Distribution-II: concentrated in zones 16–25 (Figs. 4–5)
    Scenario-defining inputs rather than fitted constants, but they encode the user distribution the optimization adapts to. In Section VI-B the sector-level counts Q_b are freely optimized, and the extreme distribution Q_i=K, Q_j=0 is what produces the log2(B) theorem.
axioms (7)
  • standard math Random-matrix results for complex Wishart matrices: E[tr((G^H G)^{-1})] = Q/(N−Q) and E[1/[(G^H G)^{-1}]_{k,k}] = N−Q+1 (Tulino–Verdu Lemma 2.10, [47, Thm 1.1])
    Used in Appendix A to derive the per-sector rate bounds (16)–(17); standard results, correctly applied.
  • domain assumption Sector antenna gain is exactly B inside the sector span and exactly 0 outside (Eq. 1), giving perfect inter-sector isolation and no interference between sectors
    Load-bearing: makes the sum rate additive over sectors so each sector depends only on (N_b, Q_b); real directional antennas have sidelobes and sector-edge leakage.
  • domain assumption Perfect instantaneous CSI at the BS for all users in each sector (Section III)
    ZF combining requires exact channel knowledge; no channel estimation overhead or error is modeled.
  • domain assumption Channel-inversion power control P_k = P0/ζ_k with no peak-power constraint (Section II-C)
    Causes distance/path-loss information to cancel entirely so only angular user counts matter; requires arbitrarily high transmit power for users with small ζ_k.
  • domain assumption Per-zone user counts K_z are deterministic averages (K_z ≥ 1, Q_b(z0) ≥ 1) rather than random PPP realizations; the FHPPP is used only to set the averages (footnote 2, Section II-B)
    The rate formulas use Q_b as a known integer; randomness of realized user counts is not propagated through the rate expectation. Acknowledged by the authors.
  • domain assumption N_b ≥ Q_b for all b (ZF feasibility) and K < N (Section III and Eq. (22))
    Required for the Wishart expectations and for the maximum-rate constraint; restricts the analysis to the antenna-rich massive-MIMO regime where the log2(B) asymptote lives.
  • domain assumption Antennas can be freely aggregated onto a single sector span on the circular track with no minimum-separation, packing, or movement-cost constraints (Section II-A)
    The optimal solutions (39)–(40) place all N antennas in one sector and zero in others; physical antenna size and actuator constraints are not modeled.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 17813 in / 27355 out tokens · 219033 ms · 2026-08-04T13:36:50.261500+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Flexible-Sector 6DMA Base Station: Modeling and Design." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B5FYRZG3

@misc{pith2026250926086,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Flexible-Sector 6DMA Base Station: Modeling and Design},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B5FYRZG3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.26086}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Six-dimensional movable antenna (6DMA) has emerged as a promising new technology for future wireless networks, which can adaptively adjust the three-dimensional (3D) positions and 3D rotations of antennas/antenna arrays for performance enhancement. This paper proposes a novel cost-effective 6DMA-based base station (BS) architecture, termed the \textit{flexible-sector} BS, which allows the deployed antennas to flexibly rotate and move along a circular track, thus enabling common sector rotation and flexible antenna allocation across sectors to adapt to the spatial user distribution efficiently. In particular, we focus on the uplink transmission in a single-cell system, where the flexible-sector BS receives independent messages from multiple users. We introduce an angular-domain user distribution model, which captures the users' spatial clustering or hot-spot distribution effectively. Assuming the zero-forcing (ZF) based receiver applied at the BS to decode multiuser signals, we derive the average sum rate achievable for the users as a function of the common rotation of sectors and the antenna allocation over them. Moreover, we develop a two-step algorithm to jointly optimize the common sector rotation and antenna allocation to maximize the average sum rate of all users. It is shown that the optimal antenna number in each sector linearly increases with the number of users in it. It is also revealed that under the most favorable user distribution, the achievable sum rate gain increases in the order of $\log_{2}(B)$ in the regime of asymptotically large number of antennas, where $B$ denotes the number of sectors. Numerically results also show that as $B$ increases, the proposed flexible-sector BS achieves higher sum rate, and it outperforms other benchmark schemes, such as the traditional fixed-sector BS as well as the BS with sector rotation or antenna allocation optimization only.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.26086 by Jie Xu, Rui Zhang, Xiaodan Shao, Xiaoming Shi, Yunli Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of the flexible-sector BS and angular zone-based user distribution. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Simulated user achievable rate versus the number of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Illustration of the solution given in (25). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: User distribution-I. 0° 30° 60° 90° 120° 150° 180° 210° 240° 270° 300° 330° 0 10 20 30 40 50 (a) Polar illustration. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (b) Angular-domain illustration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: User distribution-II. the value of z0 is necessary for achieving the maximum sum rate. For instance, when B = 3, z0 = 1 needs to be selected to achieve the maximum sum rate. This is attributed to the rotational flexibility of the sector boundaries to achieve more favorable user distributions over sectors. In contrast, for user distribution-II, it is observed that there exists a performance gap between the … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Average sum rate versus z0 under different user distributions. 100 150 200 250 300 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 (a) User distribution-I. 100 150 200 250 300 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 (b) User distribution-II [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Performance comparison of the flexible-sector BS with other benchmarks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Multi-Cell 6DMA: Cooperative Interference Management and Antenna Rotation Optimization

    cs.IT 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Distributed two-timescale design for joint short-term precoder optimization and long-term 6DMA rotation updates in multi-cell systems using inter-cell interference power constraint coordination to maximize average wei...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Capacity of multi-antenna Gaussian channels,

    E. Telatar, “Capacity of multi-antenna Gaussian channels,”Eur. Trans. Telecommun., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 585–595, Nov. 1999

    1999

  2. [2]

    R. W. Heath Jr and A. Lozano,Foundations of MIMO communication. Cambridge University Press, 2018

    2018

  3. [3]

    Broadband MIMO-OFDM wireless communications,

    G. Stuber, J. Barry, S. McLaughlin, Y . Li, M. Ingram, and T. Pratt, “Broadband MIMO-OFDM wireless communications,”Proc. IEEE, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 271–294, Feb. 2004

    2004

  4. [4]

    An overview of MIMO communications-A key to gigabit wireless,

    A. J. Paulraj, D. A. Gore, R. U. Nabar, and H. Bolcskei, “An overview of MIMO communications-A key to gigabit wireless,”Proc. IEEE, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 198–218, Feb. 2004

    2004

  5. [5]

    An overview of massive MIMO: Benefits and challenges,

    L. Lu, G. Y . Li, A. L. Swindlehurst, A. Ashikhmin, and R. Zhang, “An overview of massive MIMO: Benefits and challenges,”IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 742–758, Oct. 2014

    2014

  6. [6]

    Millimeter-wave massive MIMO communication for future wireless systems: A survey,

    S. A. Busari, K. M. S. Huq, S. Mumtaz, L. Dai, and J. Rodriguez, “Millimeter-wave massive MIMO communication for future wireless systems: A survey,”IEEE Commun. Sur. Tuts., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 836– 869, 2nd Quart. 2017

    2017

  7. [7]

    Terahertz massive MIMO with holographic reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

    Z. Wan, Z. Gao, F. Gao, M. Di Renzo, and M.-S. Alouini, “Terahertz massive MIMO with holographic reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 69, no. 7, pp. 4732–4750, Jul. 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Massive MIMO: An introduction,

    T. L. Marzetta, “Massive MIMO: An introduction,”Bell Labs Tech. J., vol. 20, pp. 11–22, 2015

    2015

  9. [9]

    Massive MIMO detection techniques: A survey,

    M. A. Albreem, M. Juntti, and S. Shahabuddin, “Massive MIMO detection techniques: A survey,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 3109–3132, 4th Quart. 2019

    2019

  10. [10]

    Massive MIMO is a reality—What is next?: Five promising research directions for antenna arrays,

    E. Bj ¨ornson, L. Sanguinetti, H. Wymeersch, J. Hoydis, and T. L. Marzetta, “Massive MIMO is a reality—What is next?: Five promising research directions for antenna arrays,”Digit. Signal Process., vol. 94, pp. 3–20, Nov. 2019

    2019

  11. [11]

    Massive MIMO for next generation wireless systems,

    E. G. Larsson, O. Edfors, F. Tufvesson, and T. L. Marzetta, “Massive MIMO for next generation wireless systems,”IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 186–195, Feb. 2014

    2014

  12. [12]

    MIMO integrated sensing and commu- nication: CRB-rate tradeoff,

    H. Hua, T. X. Han, and J. Xu, “MIMO integrated sensing and commu- nication: CRB-rate tradeoff,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 2839–2854, Aug. 2023

    2023

  13. [13]

    A tutorial on extremely large-scale MIMO for 6G: Fundamentals, signal processing, and applications,

    Z. Wang, J. Zhang, H. Du, D. Niyato, S. Cui, B. Ai, M. Debbah, K. B. Letaief, and H. V . Poor, “A tutorial on extremely large-scale MIMO for 6G: Fundamentals, signal processing, and applications,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1560–1605, Jan. 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    A tutorial on near-field XL-MIMO communications toward 6G,

    H. Lu, Y . Zeng, C. You, Y . Han, J. Zhang, Z. Wang, Z. Dong, S. Jin, C.-X. Wang, T. Jianget al., “A tutorial on near-field XL-MIMO communications toward 6G,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2213–2257, Apr. 2024

    2024

  15. [15]

    Near-field integrated sensing and communication with extremely large-scale antenna array,

    H. Hua, J. Xu, and R. Zhang, “Near-field integrated sensing and communication with extremely large-scale antenna array,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., Early Access, 2025

    2025

  16. [16]

    Communicating with extremely large-scale ar- ray/surface: Unified modeling and performance analysis,

    H. Lu and Y . Zeng, “Communicating with extremely large-scale ar- ray/surface: Unified modeling and performance analysis,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 4039–4053, Jun. 2021

    2021

  17. [17]

    Mmwave massive-MIMO-based wireless backhaul for the 5G ultra- dense network,

    Z. Gao, L. Dai, D. Mi, Z. Wang, M. A. Imran, and M. Z. Shakir, “Mmwave massive-MIMO-based wireless backhaul for the 5G ultra- dense network,”IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 13–21, Oct. 2015

    2015

  18. [18]

    Fast near-field beam training for extremely large-scale array,

    Y . Zhang, X. Wu, and C. You, “Fast near-field beam training for extremely large-scale array,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 2625–2629, Dec. 2022

    2022

  19. [19]

    Shifting the MIMO paradigm,

    D. Gesbert, M. Kountouris, R. W. Heath, C.-B. Chae, and T. Salzer, “Shifting the MIMO paradigm,”IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 36–46, Sep. 2007

    2007

  20. [20]

    MU-MIMO in LTE systems,

    J. Duplicy, B. Badic, R. Balraj, R. Ghaffar, P. Horv ´ath, F. Kaltenberger, R. Knopp, I. Z. Kov ´acs, H. T. Nguyen, D. Tanduret al., “MU-MIMO in LTE systems,”EURASIP J. Wireless Commun. Netw., vol. 2011, pp. 1–13, Mar. 2011

    2011

  21. [21]

    Task-oriented semantic communication over rate splitting enabled wireless control systems for URLLC services,

    C. Zeng, J.-B. Wang, M. Xiao, C. Ding, Y . Chen, H. Yu, and J. Wang, “Task-oriented semantic communication over rate splitting enabled wireless control systems for URLLC services,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 722–739, Feb. 2023

    2023

  22. [22]

    Double-IRS assisted multi-user MIMO: Cooperative passive beamforming design,

    B. Zheng, C. You, and R. Zhang, “Double-IRS assisted multi-user MIMO: Cooperative passive beamforming design,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 4513–4526, Jul. 2021

    2021

  23. [23]

    A tutorial on fluid antenna system for 6G networks: Encompassing communication theory, optimization methods and hardware designs,

    W. K. New, K.-K. Wonget al., “A tutorial on fluid antenna system for 6G networks: Encompassing communication theory, optimization methods and hardware designs,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 2325–2377, Aug. 2024

    2024

  24. [24]

    A tutorial on movable antennas for wireless networks,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, W. Mei, Y . Zeng, Q. Wu, B. Ning, Z. Xiao, X. Shao, J. Zhang, and R. Zhang, “A tutorial on movable antennas for wireless networks,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., Early Access, 2025

    2025

  25. [25]

    Performance analysis and optimization for movable antenna aided wideband communications,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, Z. Xiao, and R. Zhang, “Performance analysis and optimization for movable antenna aided wideband communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 18 653–18 668, Dec. 2024

    2024

  26. [26]

    Exploiting moving arrays for near-field sensing,

    Y . Chen, Z. Ren, X. Yu, L. Liu, and J. Xu, “Exploiting moving arrays for near-field sensing,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 601–605, Mar. 2025

    2025

  27. [27]

    Movable-antenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,

    W. Mei, X. Wei, B. Ning, Z. Chen, and R. Zhang, “Movable-antenna po- sition optimization: A graph-based approach,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1853–1857, Jul. 2024

    2024

  28. [28]

    Near-field communication with massive movable antennas: A functional perspective,

    S. Liu, X. Yu, J. Xu, and R. Zhang, “Near-field communication with massive movable antennas: A functional perspective,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.01201, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    6D movable antenna based on user distribution: Modeling and optimization,

    X. Shao, Q. Jiang, and R. Zhang, “6D movable antenna based on user distribution: Modeling and optimization,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 355–370, Jan. 2025

    2025

  30. [30]

    A tutorial on six-dimensional movable an- tenna for 6G networks: Synergizing positionable and rotatable antennas,

    X. Shao, W. Mei, C. You, Q. Wu, B. Zheng, C.-X. Wang, J. Li, R. Zhang, R. Schober, L. Zhuet al., “A tutorial on six-dimensional movable an- tenna for 6G networks: Synergizing positionable and rotatable antennas,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., Early Access, 2025

    2025

  31. [31]

    6D movable antenna en- hanced wireless network via discrete position and rotation optimization,

    X. Shao, R. Zhang, Q. Jiang, and R. Schober, “6D movable antenna en- hanced wireless network via discrete position and rotation optimization,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., Early Access, 2024

    2024

  32. [32]

    6DMA enhanced wireless network with flexible antenna position and rotation: Opportunities and challenges,

    X. Shao and R. Zhang, “6DMA enhanced wireless network with flexible antenna position and rotation: Opportunities and challenges,”IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 121–128, 2025

    2025

  33. [33]

    Distributed channel estimation and optimization for 6D movable an- tenna: Unveiling directional sparsity,

    X. Shao, R. Zhang, Q. Jiang, J. Park, T. Q. S. Quek, and R. Schober, “Distributed channel estimation and optimization for 6D movable an- tenna: Unveiling directional sparsity,”IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 349–365, Mar. 2025

    2025

  34. [34]

    Hierarchically tunable 6DMA for wireless communication and sensing: Modeling and performance optimization,

    H. Hua, Y . Zhou, W. Mei, J. Xu, and R. Zhang, “Hierarchically tunable 6DMA for wireless communication and sensing: Modeling and performance optimization,”arXiv:2503.01317, 2025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    6DMA-aided cell-free massive MIMO communication,

    X. Shi, X. Shao, B. Zheng, and R. Zhang, “6DMA-aided cell-free massive MIMO communication,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 1361–1365, May. 2025

    2025

  36. [36]

    What will 5G be?

    J. G. Andrews, S. Buzzi, W. Choi, S. V . Hanly, A. Lozano, A. C. K. Soong, and J. C. Zhang, “What will 5G be?”IEEE J. Sel. Areas in Commun., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1065–1082, Jun. 2014

    2014

  37. [37]

    An overview of using directional antennas in wireless networks,

    H.-N. Dai, K.-W. Ng, M. Li, and M.-Y . Wu, “An overview of using directional antennas in wireless networks,”Int. J. Commun. Syst, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 413–448, Apr. 2013

    2013

  38. [38]

    A primer on cellular network analysis using stochastic geometry,

    J. G. Andrews, A. K. Gupta, and H. S. Dhillon, “A primer on cellular network analysis using stochastic geometry,”arXiv:1604.03183, 2016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    Haenggi,Stochastic Geometry for Wireless Networks

    M. Haenggi,Stochastic Geometry for Wireless Networks. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012

    2012

  40. [40]

    Stoyan, W

    D. Stoyan, W. S. Kendal, and J. Mecke,Stochastic geometry and its applications. New York, NY , USA: Wiley, 1995, 1987, vol. 69

    1995

  41. [41]

    Analysis of IRS-assisted downlink wireless networks over generalized fading,

    Y . Li and Y . J. Chun, “Analysis of IRS-assisted downlink wireless networks over generalized fading,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 10 182–10 197, Aug. 2024

    2024

  42. [42]

    Geometric view on integrated cascaded channel of IRS-aided communications,

    Y . Li and Y . J. Chun, “Geometric view on integrated cascaded channel of IRS-aided communications,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 11 662–11 677, Sep. 2024

    2024

  43. [43]

    C. A. Balanis,Antenna theory: analysis and design. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2016

    2016

  44. [44]

    UA V-aided offloading for cellular hotspot,

    J. Lyu, Y . Zeng, and R. Zhang, “UA V-aided offloading for cellular hotspot,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 3988–4001, Jun. 2018

    2018

  45. [45]

    Goldsmith,Wireless communications

    A. Goldsmith,Wireless communications. U.K.: Cambridge Univ., 2005

    2005

  46. [46]

    CoMP in the sky: UA V placement and movement optimization for multi-user communications,

    L. Liu, S. Zhang, and R. Zhang, “CoMP in the sky: UA V placement and movement optimization for multi-user communications,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 5645–5658, Aug. 2019

    2019

  47. [47]

    A general inner approximation algorithm for nonconvex mathematical programs,

    B. R. Marks and G. P. Wright, “A general inner approximation algorithm for nonconvex mathematical programs,”Oper. Res., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 681–683, 1978

    1978

  48. [48]

    Random matrix theory and wireless communications,

    A. M. Tulino, S. Verd ´uet al., “Random matrix theory and wireless communications,”Foundations and Trends® in Communications and Information Theory, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–182, 2004

    2004