pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.21801 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-25 · 📡 eess.SP

Superimposed Cross-Pilots: Addressing Fractional Shifts in DoA-Aided OTFS

Mauro Marchese , Pietro Savazzi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 19:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords OTFSsuperimposed pilotsfractional delay-Doppler estimationmatched filterdirection of arrivalbit error ratepeak-to-average power ratio
0
0 comments X

The pith

Superimposed cross-pilots allow direct averaging of delay-Doppler matrices to estimate fractional parameters in multi-antenna OTFS without iterative cancellation.

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

The paper introduces a superimposed cross-pilots scheme for OTFS systems that use a large receive array. After angular separation of paths with a matched filter, averaging the received delay-Doppler matrix along each axis produces integrated profiles. This averaging reduces data interference on the pilots, so fractional delay and Doppler can be estimated directly. The result is a simpler receiver that achieves lower bit error rates than earlier superimposed-pilot methods while trading off peak-to-average power.

Core claim

The proposed superimposed cross-pilots scheme, once multipath components are angularly isolated by a matched filter, permits the received delay-Doppler matrix to be averaged across the Doppler axis to obtain an integrated delay profile and across the delay axis to obtain an integrated Doppler profile. These averaged profiles suppress data-to-pilot interference without requiring iterative cancellation, enabling a matched-filter-based algorithm for fractional delay-Doppler estimation.

What carries the argument

The superimposed cross-pilots arrangement that supports axis-wise averaging of the delay-Doppler matrix to suppress interference after angular matched filtering.

If this is right

  • Integrated delay and Doppler profiles can be obtained directly by averaging the received matrix along each axis.
  • Data-to-pilot interference is reduced by the averaging step itself.
  • No iterative cancellation stage is needed for the fractional-parameter estimator.
  • The resulting matched-filter algorithm yields lower bit error rates in simulation.
  • The scheme exhibits a measurable trade-off between peak-to-average power ratio and communication performance.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same averaging principle might simplify pilot design in other high-mobility multicarrier waveforms that suffer fractional shifts.
  • Because angular separation precedes averaging, the method could be combined with existing direction-of-arrival trackers to further refine path isolation.
  • The PAPR penalty suggests that power-efficient variants could be obtained by adjusting the cross-pilot amplitudes.
  • In systems where array size is limited, replacing the matched filter with a super-resolution angular estimator might extend the approach.

Load-bearing premise

A large uniform linear array at the receiver is available so that a matched filter can separate the multipath components in the angular domain.

What would settle it

Measurements in which the bit-error-rate curve of the proposed scheme fails to fall below those of existing superimposed-pilot OTFS schemes at the same SNR, or in which iterative cancellation is still required for acceptable performance, would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.21801 by Mauro Marchese, Pietro Savazzi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: System model of the proposed DoA-aided OTFS receiver with superimposed cross-pilots. The single-antenna transmitter sends an OTFS frame [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Pilot matrix Xp ∈ CM×N in the delay-Doppler (DD) domain (M = 64 delay bins, N = 16 Doppler bins) for the superimposed pilot configurations compared in this work: (a) multiple superimposed pilot scheme of [20], where pilots are placed at Np isolated DD grid locations {(m (i) p , n (i) p )} Np i=1; (b) proposed superimposed cross-pilot scheme, where pilots are allocated on a full delay row (index mp, across … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Simulation results for the proposed cross-pilot OTFS scheme and the baseline superimposed-pilot method of [20], evaluated over a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work, a novel superimposed pilot scheme, named superimposed cross-pilots, is proposed for fractional parameter estimation in multi-antenna orthogonal time frequency space (OTFS) receivers. Assuming a large uniform linear array (ULA) size at the receiver, the multipath components are separated in the angular domain through a matched filter (MF). It is then shown that the proposed superimposed pilot scheme enables the computation of integrated delay and Doppler profiles by averaging the received delay-Doppler matrix across the Doppler and delay axes, respectively. This procedure helps reduce data-to-pilot interference via data averaging, eliminating the need for iterative cancellation schemes. Based on this, a fractional parameter estimation algorithm, which exploits MFs, is derived. Simulation results show that the proposed approach outperforms existing OTFS superimposed pilot schemes, achieving a lower bit error rate (BER) while exhibiting a trade-off between peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) and communication performance.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a superimposed cross-pilots scheme for fractional delay-Doppler estimation in multi-antenna OTFS receivers. Assuming a large ULA at the receiver, multipath components are separated angularly via matched filtering; the scheme then computes integrated delay and Doppler profiles by averaging the received DD matrix across the respective axes. This averaging is claimed to suppress data-to-pilot interference sufficiently to eliminate iterative cancellation, enabling a non-iterative MF-based fractional parameter estimator. Simulations report lower BER than prior superimposed-pilot OTFS schemes at the cost of a PAPR trade-off.

Significance. If the averaging step demonstrably removes the need for iteration under the large-ULA regime, the scheme would reduce receiver complexity for high-mobility OTFS links while preserving estimation accuracy. The explicit trade-off between PAPR and BER is a useful practical observation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §III] Abstract and §III (Proposed Scheme): the claim that axis-wise averaging of the DD matrix eliminates the need for iterative cancellation rests on perfect angular separation. With finite N_r the MF beams possess non-zero sidelobes, so unresolved paths leak into the same angular bin; the residual interference power after averaging then scales with the number of unresolved paths rather than vanishing. No expression for post-averaging SINR as a function of N_r is derived, nor is a minimum N_r threshold provided.
  2. [§IV] §IV (Simulation Results): BER curves are shown only for the large-ULA case; no curves or tables quantify performance degradation for moderate N_r (e.g., 8–16) where sidelobe leakage becomes material. This leaves the practical scope of the “elimination of iterative cancellation” claim unverified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§III] Notation for the superimposed cross-pilot matrix should be introduced with an explicit equation rather than only descriptive text.
  2. [§IV] The PAPR definition and the exact pilot-to-data power ratio used in the simulations should be stated in a table or equation for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We appreciate the referee's detailed review and valuable suggestions. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make to address them.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract and §III (Proposed Scheme): the claim that axis-wise averaging of the DD matrix eliminates the need for iterative cancellation rests on perfect angular separation. With finite N_r the MF beams possess non-zero sidelobes, so unresolved paths leak into the same angular bin; the residual interference power after averaging then scales with the number of unresolved paths rather than vanishing. No expression for post-averaging SINR as a function of N_r is derived, nor is a minimum N_r threshold provided.

    Authors: We thank the referee for pointing this out. The manuscript explicitly assumes a large ULA at the receiver to achieve effective angular separation via matched filtering, as stated in the abstract and Section III. Under this assumption, the axis-wise averaging sufficiently suppresses data-to-pilot interference to allow non-iterative estimation. However, we agree that providing an analytical expression for the post-averaging SINR in terms of N_r would clarify the regime of validity. In the revised version, we will include a derivation of an approximate SINR expression that shows the interference scaling with the number of unresolved paths and N_r, along with a discussion of the minimum N_r for which the approximation holds with acceptable error. This will be added to Section III. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §IV (Simulation Results): BER curves are shown only for the large-ULA case; no curves or tables quantify performance degradation for moderate N_r (e.g., 8–16) where sidelobe leakage becomes material. This leaves the practical scope of the “elimination of iterative cancellation” claim unverified.

    Authors: We concur that simulations for moderate array sizes are necessary to assess the practical limitations. The current simulations focus on the large-ULA regime to demonstrate the potential of the scheme. To address this, we will add new simulation results in the revised Section IV, including BER curves for N_r = 8, 16, and 32 under the same channel conditions. These will show the performance degradation due to sidelobe leakage and indicate the array sizes where the non-iterative approach remains advantageous compared to iterative methods. This will better define the scope of the proposed technique. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation follows directly from scheme definition and large-ULA assumption without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper defines a superimposed cross-pilot scheme, applies MF angular separation under the explicit large-ULA assumption, and then states that axis-wise averaging of the resulting DD matrix yields integrated profiles that reduce data-to-pilot interference. This sequence is a direct algebraic consequence of the construction once the separation assumption is granted; it does not redefine any quantity in terms of itself, rename a fitted parameter as a prediction, or rest on a self-citation chain. No equations in the abstract or described chain equate an output to an input by construction. The claim is therefore self-contained and externally falsifiable via simulation or finite-N_r analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that a sufficiently large ULA permits clean angular separation of multipaths via matched filtering, after which simple averaging suffices to suppress data interference.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Large ULA size permits angular-domain separation of multipath components via matched filter
    Explicitly stated as the starting assumption in the abstract.
invented entities (1)
  • superimposed cross-pilots scheme no independent evidence
    purpose: Enable averaging of delay-Doppler matrix to obtain integrated profiles without iterative data cancellation
    Newly introduced construction whose performance is claimed to exceed prior superimposed pilot designs.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5462 in / 1285 out tokens · 48272 ms · 2026-05-15T19:39:16.622634+00:00 · methodology

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

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Angle-Domain Approach for Parameter Estimation in High-Mobility OFDM With Fully/Partly Cali- brated Massive ULA,

    Y . Ge, W. Zhang, F. Gao, and H. Minn, “Angle-Domain Approach for Parameter Estimation in High-Mobility OFDM With Fully/Partly Cali- brated Massive ULA,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 591–607, 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    High-Mobility OFDM Downlink Transmission With Large-Scale Antenna Array,

    W. Guo, W. Zhang, P. Mu, and F. Gao, “High-Mobility OFDM Downlink Transmission With Large-Scale Antenna Array,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 8600–8604, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    6G OFDM Communications with High Mobility Transceivers and Scatterers via Angle-Domain Processing and Deep Learning,

    M. Marchese, M. F. Keskin, H. Wymeersch, and P. Savazzi, “6G OFDM Communications with High Mobility Transceivers and Scatterers via Angle-Domain Processing and Deep Learning,” 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.12970

    work page arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    OTFS Based Receiver Scheme with Multi-Antennas in High-Mobility V2X Systems,

    J. Cheng, C. Jia, H. Gao, W. Xu, and Z. Bie, “OTFS Based Receiver Scheme with Multi-Antennas in High-Mobility V2X Systems,” in2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops), 2020, pp. 1–6

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Mod- ulation,

    R. Hadani, S. Rakib, M. Tsatsanis, A. Monk, A. J. Goldsmith, A. F. Molisch, and R. Calderbank, “Orthogonal Time Frequency Space Mod- ulation,” in2017 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Con- ference (WCNC), 2017, pp. 1–6

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    OTFS: A New Generation of Modulation Addressing the Challenges of 5G,

    R. Hadani and A. Monk, “OTFS: A New Generation of Modulation Addressing the Challenges of 5G,” 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    OTFS—A Mathematical Foundation for Communication and Radar Sensing in the Delay-Doppler Domain,

    S. K. Mohammed, R. Hadani, A. Chockalingam, and R. Calderbank, “OTFS—A Mathematical Foundation for Communication and Radar Sensing in the Delay-Doppler Domain,”IEEE BITS the Information Theory Magazine, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 36–55, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Overview and Performance Analysis of Various Waveforms in High Mobility Scenarios,

    Y . Zhou, H. Yin, J. Xiong, S. Song, J. Zhu, J. Du, H. Chen, and Y . Tang, “Overview and Performance Analysis of Various Waveforms in High Mobility Scenarios,” in2024 7th International Conference on Communication Engineering and Technology (ICCET), 2024, pp. 35–40

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    Delay–Doppler Communications: Opportuni- ties and Challenges,

    Y . Hong and E. Viterbo, “Delay–Doppler Communications: Opportuni- ties and Challenges,”IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, pp. 1–6, 2026

    work page 2026

  10. [10]

    Towards Standardizing OTFS: A Candidate Waveform for Next-Generation Wireless Networks,

    M. Nie, R. Chong, S. Li, A. Farhang, F. G ¨ottsch, D. W. K. Ng, M. Matthaiou, and Y . Li, “Towards Standardizing OTFS: A Candidate Waveform for Next-Generation Wireless Networks,” 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15048

    work page arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Embedded Pilot-Aided Channel Estimation for OTFS in Delay–Doppler Channels,

    P. Raviteja, K. T. Phan, and Y . Hong, “Embedded Pilot-Aided Channel Estimation for OTFS in Delay–Doppler Channels,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 4906–4917, 2019

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    A Low-Complexity OTFS Chan- nel Estimation Method for Fractional Delay-Doppler Scenarios,

    I. A. Khan and S. K. Mohammed, “A Low-Complexity OTFS Chan- nel Estimation Method for Fractional Delay-Doppler Scenarios,”IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 1484–1488, 2023

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Low-Complexity Delay- Doppler Channel Estimation in Discrete Zak Transform Based OTFS,

    V . Yogesh, S. R. Mattu, and A. Chockalingam, “Low-Complexity Delay- Doppler Channel Estimation in Discrete Zak Transform Based OTFS,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 672–676, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Channel and Radar Parameter Estimation With Fractional Delay-Doppler Using OTFS,

    S. P. Muppaneni, S. R. Mattu, and A. Chockalingam, “Channel and Radar Parameter Estimation With Fractional Delay-Doppler Using OTFS,”IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 1392–1396, 2023

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Progressive Inter-Path Interference Cancellation Algorithm for Channel Estimation Using Orthogonal Time–Frequency Space,

    M. Marchese, H. Wymeersch, P. Spallaccini, and P. Savazzi, “Progressive Inter-Path Interference Cancellation Algorithm for Channel Estimation Using Orthogonal Time–Frequency Space,”Sensors, vol. 24, no. 4414,

    work page

  16. [16]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/s24134414

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/s24134414

    work page doi:10.3390/s24134414

  17. [17]

    Disjoint Delay-Doppler Estimation in OTFS ISAC with Deep Learning-aided Path Detection,

    M. Marchese, M. F. Keskin, P. Savazzi, and H. Wymeersch, “Disjoint Delay-Doppler Estimation in OTFS ISAC with Deep Learning-aided Path Detection,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2504.20659

    work page arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Data-Aided Channel Estimation for OTFS Systems With a Superimposed Pilot and Data Transmission Scheme,

    W. Yuan, S. Li, Z. Wei, J. Yuan, and D. W. K. Ng, “Data-Aided Channel Estimation for OTFS Systems With a Superimposed Pilot and Data Transmission Scheme,”IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 1954–1958, 2021

    work page 1954

  19. [19]

    OTFS Channel Estimation and Data Detection Designs With Superimposed Pilots,

    H. B. Mishra, P. Singh, A. K. Prasad, and R. Budhiraja, “OTFS Channel Estimation and Data Detection Designs With Superimposed Pilots,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 2258–2274, 2022

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Sparse Superimposed Pilot Based Channel Estimation in OTFS Systems,

    F. Jesbin, S. Rao Mattu, and A. Chockalingam, “Sparse Superimposed Pilot Based Channel Estimation in OTFS Systems,” in2023 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), 2023, pp. 1–6

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Superimposed Pilot-Based OTFS: Will It Work?

    Y . Kanazawa, H. Iimori, C. Pradhan, S. Malomsoky, and N. Ishikawa, “Superimposed Pilot-Based OTFS: Will It Work?”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 4192–4204, 2026

    work page 2026

  22. [22]

    Robust 6G OFDM High-Mobility Communications Using Delay-Doppler Superimposed Pilots,

    M. Marchese and P. Savazzi, “Robust 6G OFDM High-Mobility Communications Using Delay-Doppler Superimposed Pilots,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.16496

    work page arXiv 2025