pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.08125 · v3 · submitted 2025-11-11 · 📡 eess.SP · cs.IT· math.IT

DMA-Aided MU-MISO Systems for Power Splitting SWIPT via Lorentzian-Constrained Holography

Askin Altinoklu , Leila Musavian This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 23:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP cs.ITmath.IT
keywords SWIPTDMAMISObeamformingpower splittingLorentzian-constrained holographyenergy harvestingmetasurface antenna
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optimal beamforming and power splitting in DMA-aided SWIPT systems minimizes transmit power under SINR and energy harvesting constraints using Lorentzian-constrained holography.

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

The paper develops a design for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer in multiuser MISO systems assisted by dynamic metasurface antennas. It minimizes the total transmit power while ensuring each user meets minimum signal quality and harvested energy levels. The approach uses alternating optimization with semidefinite programming to tune the metasurface elements under Lorentzian constraints that limit amplitude and phase. Simulations demonstrate lower power use than standard methods, especially with adaptive-radius Lorentzian-constrained holography and careful power splitting between information and energy paths. This matters because it shows how metasurface antennas can make energy-efficient SWIPT practical by reducing hardware needs like RF chains.

Core claim

The paper shows that an alternating optimization framework based on semidefinite programming, incorporating Lorentzian-constrained holography schemes such as adaptive-radius LCH, enables significant reduction in transmit power for DMA-aided MU-MISO SWIPT systems while satisfying SINR and EH requirements for co-located users.

What carries the argument

Alternating optimization framework using semidefinite programming under Lorentzian-constrained holography (LCH) for metasurface tunability, with optimal power splitting at receivers.

If this is right

  • Transmit power can be reduced compared to baseline beamforming methods in DMA-assisted setups.
  • Optimal power splitting improves efficiency when combined with ARLCH for metasurface control.
  • Nonlinear energy harvesting models and circuit noise can be incorporated into the optimization without losing the power savings.
  • The design reduces reliance on traditional RF chains and phase shifters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Real-world DMA implementations might achieve similar efficiency gains if the holography model holds.
  • Extending this to distributed users or multi-cell scenarios could further cut overall network power consumption.
  • Testing with actual hardware prototypes would validate if the simulated power reductions translate to practice.

Load-bearing premise

The Lorentzian-constrained holography model accurately represents the behavior of real dynamic metasurface antenna elements in the system.

What would settle it

Measuring the actual transmit power required in a hardware testbed with DMA elements to meet the same SINR and EH targets, and checking if it matches or exceeds the simulated values from the proposed method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.08125 by Askin Altinoklu, Leila Musavian.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Transmitted power versus EH power requirement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Transmitted power vs. user separation distance for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Mean transmitted power vs. SINR for Monte Carlo realizations under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: These results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper presents an optimal power splitting and beamforming design for co-located simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT) users in Dynamic Metasurface Antenna (DMA)-aided multiuser multiple-input single-output (MISO) systems. The objective is to minimize transmit power while meeting users signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) and energy harvesting (EH) requirements. The problem is solved via an alternating optimization framework based on semidefinite programming (SDP), where metasurface tunability follows Lorentzian-constrained holography (LCH). In contrast to traditional beamforming architectures, DMA-assisted architectures reduce the need for RF chains and phase shifters but require optimization under the Lorentzian constraint limiting the amplitude and phase optimizations. Hence, the proposed method integrates several LCH schemes, including the recently proposed adaptive-radius LCH (ARLCH), and evaluates nonlinear EH models and circuit noise effects. Simulation results show that the proposed design significantly reduces transmit power compared with baseline methods, highlighting the efficiency of ARLCH and optimal power splitting in DMA-assisted SWIPT systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. This paper claims to develop an alternating optimization framework based on semidefinite programming (SDP) for minimizing the transmit power in Dynamic Metasurface Antenna (DMA)-aided multi-user MISO systems performing simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT) with power splitting. The optimization is subject to signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) and energy harvesting (EH) constraints, with the DMA elements tuned according to Lorentzian-constrained holography (LCH), including the adaptive-radius variant (ARLCH). The approach also considers nonlinear EH models and circuit noise, and simulation results are used to demonstrate reduced transmit power relative to baseline methods.

Significance. Should the simulation results be shown to correspond to feasible points satisfying all constraints, the proposed method could offer a valuable contribution to the design of hardware-efficient SWIPT systems. DMA architectures inherently lower the number of required RF chains, and the incorporation of optimal power splitting along with advanced LCH schemes addresses key practical challenges in balancing information decoding and energy harvesting under realistic constraints.

major comments (1)
  1. [Simulation Results] The central claim rests on simulation results showing lower transmit power than baselines. However, the manuscript provides no explicit post-optimization verification that every user meets its minimum SINR and EH requirements after applying the Lorentzian amplitude-phase constraint and any projection from the SDP relaxation. This verification is load-bearing, as the alternating optimization may return approximate solutions that violate the original non-convex constraints when circuit noise and nonlinear EH are accounted for.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to integration of 'several LCH schemes' but specifies only ARLCH in detail; a brief enumeration of the schemes evaluated would improve clarity for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested verification for improved rigor.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Simulation Results] The central claim rests on simulation results showing lower transmit power than baselines. However, the manuscript provides no explicit post-optimization verification that every user meets its minimum SINR and EH requirements after applying the Lorentzian amplitude-phase constraint and any projection from the SDP relaxation. This verification is load-bearing, as the alternating optimization may return approximate solutions that violate the original non-convex constraints when circuit noise and nonlinear EH are accounted for.

    Authors: We agree that explicit post-optimization verification strengthens the presentation of the results. The alternating SDP-based framework incorporates the SINR and EH constraints directly into the optimization, with Lorentzian-constrained holography (including ARLCH) applied at each iteration and rank-1 approximations handled via standard randomization or projection techniques. However, to make this explicit and address the concern about potential violations due to approximations, circuit noise, and nonlinear EH, we will add a dedicated verification subsection in the revised manuscript. This will include computed achieved SINR and EH values for each user across the simulated scenarios, confirming that all constraints are satisfied after applying the final Lorentzian amplitude-phase mapping and any SDP projections. We will also report the maximum constraint violation (if any) to quantify feasibility. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in optimization framework or performance claims

full rationale

The paper formulates a transmit power minimization problem subject to SINR and EH constraints, solved via alternating optimization with SDP relaxation under the Lorentzian amplitude-phase constraint on DMA elements. This is a standard numerical procedure applied to explicitly stated constraints and models, with results obtained from simulations comparing against baselines. No derivation step reduces a claimed prediction or result to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction; the ARLCH scheme is referenced as an existing approach integrated into the framework, but the central efficiency claims rest on independent simulation outputs rather than tautological redefinitions or load-bearing self-references.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that the Lorentzian response accurately models DMA tunability and that SDP relaxation yields feasible solutions for the non-convex problem. No free parameters or invented entities are identifiable from the abstract alone.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption DMA elements obey Lorentzian-constrained amplitude-phase response
    Invoked throughout the optimization framework and LCH schemes described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5500 in / 1150 out tokens · 32207 ms · 2026-05-17T23:53:41.909672+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Analysis of a waveguide-fed metasurface antenna,

    D. R. Smith, O. Yurduseven, L. P. Mancera, P. Bowen, and N. B. Kundtz, “Analysis of a waveguide-fed metasurface antenna,”Phys. Rev. Appl., vol. 8, p. 054048, Nov 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Beam focusing for near-field multiuser MIMO communications,

    H. Zhang, N. Shlezinger, F. Guidi, D. Dardari, M. F. Imani, and Y . C. Eldar, “Beam focusing for near-field multiuser MIMO communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 7476–7490, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Dynamic metasurface antennas for uplink massive MIMO systems,

    N. Shlezinger, O. Dicker, Y . C. Eldar, I. Yoo, M. F. Imani, and D. R. Smith, “Dynamic metasurface antennas for uplink massive MIMO systems,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 6829–6843, 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Wireless information and energy transfer in the era of 6G communica- tions,

    C. Psomas, K. Ntougias, N. Shanin, D. Xu, K. Mayer, N. M. Tran, L. Cottatellucci, K. W. Choi, D. I. Kim, R. Schober, and I. Krikidis, “Wireless information and energy transfer in the era of 6G communica- tions,”Proc. IEEE, vol. 112, no. 7, pp. 764–804, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    MIMO broadcasting for simultaneous wire- less information and power transfer,

    R. Zhang and C. K. Ho, “MIMO broadcasting for simultaneous wire- less information and power transfer,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1989–2001, 2013

    work page 1989

  6. [6]

    Multiuser MISO beamforming for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer,

    J. Xu, L. Liu, and R. Zhang, “Multiuser MISO beamforming for simultaneous wireless information and power transfer,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 62, no. 18, pp. 4798–4810, 2014

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Near-field beam focusing for wireless power transfer with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    H. Zhang, N. Shlezinger, F. Guidi, A. Guerra, D. Dardari, M. F. Imani, and Y . C. Eldar, “Near-field beam focusing for wireless power transfer with dynamic metasurface antennas,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 18 596–18 605, 2025

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Investigation of holographic beamform- ing via dynamic metasurface antennas in QoS guaranteed power efficient networks,

    A. Altinoklu and L. Musavian, “Investigation of holographic beamform- ing via dynamic metasurface antennas in QoS guaranteed power efficient networks,” in2025 Joint EuCNC and 6G Summit, 2025, pp. 542–547

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    MetaSWIPT: DMA-assisted multi-user MISO downlink simultaneous wireless information and power transfer,

    K. Huang, L. You, M. Qian, and X. Gao, “MetaSWIPT: DMA-assisted multi-user MISO downlink simultaneous wireless information and power transfer,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1048–1052, 2024

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    QoS-guaranteed mimo SWIPT assisted by dynamic metasurface antenna,

    K. Huang, L. You, M. Qian, B. Jiang, and X. Gao, “QoS-guaranteed mimo SWIPT assisted by dynamic metasurface antenna,”IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., pp. 1–6, 2025

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Optimizing polarizability distributions for metasurface apertures with Lorentzian-constrained radiators,

    P. T. Bowen, M. Boyarsky, L. M. Pulido-Mancera, D. R. Smith, O. Yurduseven, and M. Sazegar, “Optimizing polarizability distributions for metasurface apertures with Lorentzian-constrained radiators,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.02747, 2022

    work page arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    Lorentzian-constrained holo- graphic beamforming optimization in multi-user networks with dynamic metasurface antennas,

    A. Altinoklu and L. Musavian, “Lorentzian-constrained holo- graphic beamforming optimization in multi-user networks with dynamic metasurface antennas,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08356

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Path loss in reconfigurable intelligent surface-enabled channels,

    S. W. Ellingson, “Path loss in reconfigurable intelligent surface-enabled channels,” inProc. IEEE 32nd Annu. Int. Symp. Pers., Indoor Mobile Radio Commun. (PIMRC), Helsinki, Finland, Sep 2021, pp. 829–835

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Practical non- linear energy harvesting model and resource allocation for SWIPT systems,

    E. Boshkovska, D. Ng, N. Zlatanov, and R. Schober, “Practical non- linear energy harvesting model and resource allocation for SWIPT systems,”IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 2082 – 2085, 2015

    work page 2082

  15. [15]

    CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.1,

    M. Grant and S. Boyd, “CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.1,” https://cvxr.com/cvx, 2014

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Optimal and suboptimal transmit beamforming,

    M. Bengtsson and B. Ottersten, “Optimal and suboptimal transmit beamforming,” inHandbook of Antennas in Wireless Communications, L. C. Godara, Ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2001

    work page 2001

  17. [17]

    Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,

    Z.-q. Luo, W.-k. Ma, A. M.-c. So, Y . Ye, and S. Zhang, “Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,”IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 20–34, 2010

    work page 2010