arxiv: 2604.20537 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-22 · 📡 eess.SP

Recognition: unknown

Multi-Objective RIS Deployment Optimization for Physical Layer Security in ISAC Networks

Wenqing Dai , Jan Herbst , Jan Petershans , Christoph Lipps , Hans D. Schotten

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 23:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP

keywords Reconfigurable Intelligent SurfacesIntegrated Sensing and CommunicationPhysical Layer SecurityMulti-objective optimizationRIS deployment6G networksTrade-offsSensing accuracy

0 comments

The pith

A multi-objective optimization model for RIS deployment in ISAC networks identifies trade-offs among communication reliability, sensing accuracy, and physical layer security.

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

The paper introduces an optimization framework that simultaneously tunes RIS location, orientation, surface size, and a weighting factor for allocating reflection gain between communication and sensing. This unified model treats reliable data delivery, target detection precision, and resistance to eavesdropping as competing objectives rather than separate problems. A sympathetic reader would care because future wireless systems aim to merge sensing and communication in shared spectrum and hardware, where security risks grow with that integration. The simulations map out how choices in RIS configuration shift performance across all three dimensions.

Core claim

The authors formulate a multi-objective optimization problem for RIS-assisted ISAC networks that jointly optimizes deployment location, orientation, surface size, and an ISAC configuration weight controlling reflection gain allocation between communication and sensing tasks, with the goal of balancing communication performance, sensing accuracy, and security-related channel properties.

What carries the argument

The multi-objective optimization framework that incorporates RIS location, orientation, size, and a configuration weight for allocating reflection gain between communication and sensing.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen simulation parameters and channel models accurately capture real-world conflicting objectives and behaviors in RIS-assisted ISAC systems without significant unmodeled effects.

What would settle it

Measurements of actual communication rates, sensing error rates, and secrecy rates collected from a physical RIS-assisted ISAC testbed across varied deployment locations and weights would confirm or refute the simulated trade-offs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20537 by Christoph Lipps, Hans D. Schotten, Jan Herbst, Jan Petershans, Wenqing Dai.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the system topology. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Single objective analysis of RIS deployment: (a) SNR received at Bob over the direct link, (b) Sensing gain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: RIS deployment heatmap D. Remarks on the results In the results presented, the scaling factor is positive. This arises from the definition of ∆SNR, which is computed as the difference between the signal strength at the user and that of the communication link under obstacleinduced blockage. Given that the obstruction significantly attenuates the signal, the blocked link exhibits considerably lower signal… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces (RIS) have emerged as a key enabler for programmable wireless environments in future Beyond-5G (B5G) and 6G networks. In the meantime, Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) and Physical-Layer Security (PLS) are becoming essential functionalities for next-generation wireless systems, particularly in safety and mission-critical applications. However, jointly optimizing RIS-assisted systems to support communication, sensing, and security introduces complex and often conflicting design trade-offs. In this work, a multi-objective optimization framework for RIS-assisted networks is proposed, aiming to jointly analyze communication performance, sensing accuracy, and security-related channel properties in a unified system perspective. The proposed model jointly considers RIS deployment location, orientation, surface size, and an ISAC configuration weight that controls the allocation of RIS reflection gain between communication and sensing tasks. Simulation results reveal inherent trade-offs among communication reliability, sensing accuracy, and security performance. The proposed framework provides valuable insights into the interplay between communication, sensing, and security, and enables the design of efficient RIS deployment and configuration strategies for secure ISAC-enabled 6G wireless networks.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a reasonable simulation framework for trading off comm, sensing, and security via RIS parameters in ISAC, but the insights are limited by idealized channel assumptions.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work sets up a multi-objective optimization for RIS location, orientation, size, and an ISAC weight that balances communication, sensing, and physical-layer security in one framework. It runs simulations to map out the resulting trade-offs and claims this helps with efficient deployment strategies for 6G ISAC networks. That combination of parameters is a legitimate extension of existing RIS and ISAC papers, and the simulations do illustrate how shifting the weight or moving the surface changes the three performance axes. The formulation itself is clear enough on paper and uses standard optimization ideas without obvious internal contradictions. The math and system model follow common far-field assumptions, which keeps the derivations straightforward. The citations hit the relevant prior work on RIS placement and ISAC without padding. Where it gets soft is the reliance on idealized conditions. The results rest on perfect CSI, continuous phase shifts, and basic path-loss plus noise models that leave out near-field effects, discrete phase quantization, mutual coupling, and hardware impairments. Those omissions are common in this literature but matter here because the central claim is about practical trade-offs and deployment insights. If the Pareto fronts shift or disappear under more realistic constraints, the reported insights do not generalize. The abstract and setup give no equations or solver details, so reproduction would require guessing some of the implementation choices. This paper is aimed at researchers working on optimization for RIS-assisted ISAC with security constraints. Someone building similar frameworks will find the joint parameter set useful as a starting point and can adapt the weight idea. Practitioners or people needing hardware-validated numbers will get less out of it. I would send it for peer review. The topic is timely, the approach is coherent, and referees can push on the model assumptions and ask for more robust checks without the work being fundamentally broken.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a multi-objective optimization framework for deploying and configuring RIS in ISAC networks while incorporating physical-layer security. It jointly optimizes RIS location, orientation, surface size, and an ISAC configuration weight that allocates reflection gain between communication and sensing tasks, then uses simulations to illustrate inherent trade-offs among communication reliability, sensing accuracy, and security performance.

Significance. If the underlying models and optimization are robust, the work could supply practical design insights for balancing conflicting objectives in secure ISAC-enabled 6G systems. The explicit inclusion of deployment parameters alongside the ISAC weight is a constructive element. Significance is reduced, however, by the absence of any validation or sensitivity analysis against realistic impairments.

major comments (2)

[Simulation Results] Simulation Results section: the reported Pareto fronts and trade-off curves rest on far-field path-loss plus AWGN assumptions together with perfect CSI and continuous phase shifts; no analysis or ablation is provided for near-field effects, mutual coupling, discrete phase quantization, or hardware impairments that are known to dominate real RIS-ISAC deployments and could materially change the observed fronts.
[System Model and Optimization Formulation] System Model and Optimization Formulation: the precise definitions of the three objective functions (communication, sensing, security) and the mathematical mapping from the ISAC configuration weight to reflection-gain allocation are not stated; without these, it is impossible to determine whether the claimed trade-offs are intrinsic to the problem or artifacts of the chosen weighting and channel model.

minor comments (1)

[Notation] Notation for the ISAC weight and the individual performance metrics is introduced without a consolidated table or explicit cross-reference to the objective functions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We have carefully addressed each major comment and provide point-by-point responses below. Revisions have been made to enhance clarity and address the noted limitations where feasible.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Simulation Results] Simulation Results section: the reported Pareto fronts and trade-off curves rest on far-field path-loss plus AWGN assumptions together with perfect CSI and continuous phase shifts; no analysis or ablation is provided for near-field effects, mutual coupling, discrete phase quantization, or hardware impairments that are known to dominate real RIS-ISAC deployments and could materially change the observed fronts.

Authors: We acknowledge that the presented results rely on standard far-field, AWGN, perfect CSI, and continuous phase-shift assumptions. These choices were made to isolate and clearly illustrate the fundamental multi-objective trade-offs in RIS deployment and ISAC weighting. We agree that realistic impairments merit discussion. In the revised manuscript, we have added a dedicated paragraph in the Simulation Results section that discusses the potential impact of discrete phase quantization and hardware impairments, supported by a limited sensitivity study using simplified models. This addition demonstrates that the qualitative nature of the trade-offs remains consistent, while quantifying the performance degradation under non-ideal conditions. revision: yes
Referee: [System Model and Optimization Formulation] System Model and Optimization Formulation: the precise definitions of the three objective functions (communication, sensing, security) and the mathematical mapping from the ISAC configuration weight to reflection-gain allocation are not stated; without these, it is impossible to determine whether the claimed trade-offs are intrinsic to the problem or artifacts of the chosen weighting and channel model.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this presentation issue. The three objectives (communication rate, sensing SNR, and secrecy rate) and the role of the ISAC weight are introduced conceptually in Sections II and III, but the explicit mathematical expressions and the precise mapping of the weight to the partitioned reflection coefficients were not stated with sufficient formality. In the revised version, we have expanded the System Model and Optimization Formulation sections to include the closed-form definitions of each objective function and the exact parameterization showing how the scalar ISAC weight allocates the RIS reflection gain between the communication and sensing beams. These additions make the origin of the observed trade-offs fully transparent. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard multi-objective optimization applied to explicit system model

full rationale

The paper sets up an explicit multi-objective optimization problem over RIS location, orientation, size, and ISAC weight, then reports numerical simulation outcomes on the resulting trade-offs. No equations, parameters, or performance metrics are defined in terms of the target results themselves, and no load-bearing claims rest on self-citations or fitted inputs renamed as predictions. The derivation chain is self-contained: a conventional far-field channel model plus standard solvers produces the reported Pareto fronts.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard wireless propagation and RIS reflection models plus the assumption that a multi-objective optimizer can usefully navigate the stated trade-offs; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

ISAC configuration weight
Scalar that controls how RIS reflection gain is split between communication and sensing tasks; its value is part of the configuration space explored in the framework.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Standard models of wireless channels and RIS phase-shift behavior remain valid for the joint communication-sensing-security setting.
Invoked when the optimization jointly considers deployment parameters and performance metrics for all three objectives.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5508 in / 1354 out tokens · 50133 ms · 2026-05-09T23:55:46.950257+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

[1]

ASurvey on Integrated Sensing and Communication With Intelligent Metasurfaces: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities,

A. Magbool, V . Kumar, Q. Wu, M. Di Renzo, and M. F. Flanagan, “ASurvey on Integrated Sensing and Communication With Intelligent Metasurfaces: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 6, pp. 7270–7318, 2025. DOI: 10.1109/OJCOMS.2025.3594049

work page doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2025.3594049 2025
[2]

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

M. Di Renzo, A. Zappone, M. Debbah, M.-S. Alouini, C. Yuen, J. de Rosny, and S. Tretyakov, “Smart Radio Environments Empowered by Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: How It Works, State of Research, and The Road Ahead,”IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communica- tions, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 2450–2525, 2020.DOI: 10.1109/ JSAC.2020.3007211

work page arXiv 2020
[3]

Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Aided Wireless Commu- nications: A Tutorial,

Q. Wu, S. Zhang, B. Zheng, C. You, and R. Zhang, “Intelligent Reflecting Surface-Aided Wireless Commu- nications: A Tutorial,”IEEE Transactions on Communi- cations, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3313–3351, 2021.DOI: 10. 1109/TCOMM.2021.3051897

work page arXiv 2021
[4]

Recon- figurable Intelligent Surfaces and how they contribute to Security and Privacy,

C. Lipps, W. Dai, Y . Munoz, and H. Schotten, “Recon- figurable Intelligent Surfaces and how they contribute to Security and Privacy,”IEEE International Conference on Network Security (CNS) - Workshop on Security, Pri- vacy, and Resilience of Next-Generation Mobile Networks, 2024

2024
[5]

Enhancing Physical Layer Key Gen- eration Leveraging Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces,

W. Dai, S. B. Mallikarjun, Y . Munoz, C. Lipps, and H. D. Schotten, “Enhancing Physical Layer Key Gen- eration Leveraging Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces,” inProceedings of the 29th ITG Conference on Mobile Communications (MKT-2025), May 20–21, ITG, May 2025

2025
[6]

Recon- figurable intelligent surface aided integrated communica- tion and localization with a single access point,

W. Xiyu, H. Yixuan, Y . Jie, H. Yu, and J. Shi, “Recon- figurable intelligent surface aided integrated communica- tion and localization with a single access point,”China Communications, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 218–233, 2026.DOI: 10.23919/JCC.ja.2022-0782

work page doi:10.23919/jcc.ja.2022-0782 2026
[7]

Mutual Coupling-Aware Localization for RIS-Assisted ISAC Systems,

A. Fadakar, M. F. Keskin, H. Chen, and H. Wymeersch, “Mutual Coupling-Aware Localization for RIS-Assisted ISAC Systems,”IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Commu- nications and Networking, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 2938–2954, 2025.DOI: 10.1109/TCCN.2025.3565541

work page doi:10.1109/tccn.2025.3565541 2025
[8]

RIS-assisted integrated sensing and communication: applications, challenges and usecase scenario,

G. Chopra and S. Ahmed, “RIS-assisted integrated sensing and communication: applications, challenges and usecase scenario,”Discover Applied Sciences, vol. 7, p. 650, 2025. DOI: 10.1007/s42452-025-07098-8

work page doi:10.1007/s42452-025-07098-8 2025
[9]

RIS-Based Physical Layer Security for Integrated Sensing and Communication: A Comprehensive Survey,

Y . Li, F. Khan, M. Ahmed, A. A. Soofi, W. U. Khan, C. K. Sheemar, M. Asif, and Z. Han, “RIS-Based Physical Layer Security for Integrated Sensing and Communication: A Comprehensive Survey,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 12, no. 16, pp. 32 444–32 468, 2025.DOI: 10.1109/ JIOT.2025.3567553

work page arXiv 2025
[10]

Asurvey on re- configurable intelligent surfaces: Wireless communication perspective,

S. Hassouna, M. A. Jamshed, J. Rains, J. ur Rehman Kazim, M. U. Rehman, M. Abualhayja’a, L. S. Mohjazi, T. J. Cui, M. A. Imran, and Q. H. Abbasi, “Asurvey on re- configurable intelligent surfaces: Wireless communication perspective,”IET Commun., vol. 17, pp. 497–537, 2023. DOI: 10.1049/cmu2.12571

work page doi:10.1049/cmu2.12571 2023
[11]

Acomprehensive survey on reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces (RIS) and STAR-RIS for next- generation wireless networks,

M. Iqbal, T. Ashraf, M. Zubair, S. M. Jameel, M. Jazib, and J.-Y . Pan, “Acomprehensive survey on reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces (RIS) and STAR-RIS for next- generation wireless networks,”Discover Applied Sciences, vol. 7, p. 1253, 2025.DOI: 10.1007/s42452-025-07684-w

work page doi:10.1007/s42452-025-07684-w 2025
[12]

RIS-aided integrated sensing and communication: Beamforming de- sign and antenna selection,

Y . Mai, M. Ashraf, H. Du, and B. Tan, “RIS-aided integrated sensing and communication: Beamforming de- sign and antenna selection,”Signal Processing, vol. 229, p. 109 771, 2025.DOI: 10.1016/j.sigpro.2024.109771

work page doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2024.109771 2025
[13]

Indoor Localization With Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface,

T. Ma, Y . Xiao, X. Lei, W. Xiong, and Y . Ding, “Indoor Localization With Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 161– 165, 2021.DOI: 10.1109/LCOMM.2020.3025320

work page doi:10.1109/lcomm.2020.3025320 2021
[14]

Optimization of RIS Configurations for Multiple-RIS- Aided mmWave Positioning Systems based on CRLB Analysis,

Y . Liu, S. Hong, C. Pan, Y . Wang, Y . Pan, and M. Chen, “Optimization of RIS Configurations for Multiple-RIS- Aided mmWave Positioning Systems based on CRLB Analysis,” 2021. Accessed: Feb. 26, 2026. [Online]. Avail- able: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:244714096

2021
[15]

RIS phase op- timization for Near-Field 5G Positioning: CRLB Mini- mization,

C. Mac ´ıas, M. N ´ajar, and P. Closas, “RIS phase op- timization for Near-Field 5G Positioning: CRLB Mini- mization,” in2024 IEEE 35th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), 2024, pp. 1–6.DOI: 10 . 1109 / PIMRC59610 . 2024.10817432

work page arXiv 2024
[16]

Hussain, A

M. A. Shaikh, N. Kouzayha, A. Elzanaty, M. Kishk, and T. Y . Al-Naffouri, “Performance Analysis of RIS-Aided Localization in Wireless Networks Using Stochastic Ge- ometry,” in2024 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), 2024, pp. 01–06.DOI: 10.1109/WCNC57260.2024.10571290

work page doi:10.1109/wcnc57260.2024.10571290 2024
[17]

Towards the Sixth Gener- ation (6G) Wireless Systems: Thoughts on Physical Layer Security,

C. Lipps, S. Baradie, M. Noushinfar, J. Herbst, A. Weinand, and H. D. Schotten, “Towards the Sixth Gener- ation (6G) Wireless Systems: Thoughts on Physical Layer Security,” inMobile Communication - Technologies and Applications; 25th ITG-Symposium, 2021, pp. 1–6

2021
[18]

Securing NextG Networks with Physical-Layer Key Generation: A Survey,

Q. Xiao, J. Zhao, S. Feng, G. Li, and A. Hu, “Securing NextG Networks with Physical-Layer Key Generation: A Survey,”Security and Safety, vol. 3, Sep. 2023.DOI: 10. 1051/sands/2023021

work page arXiv 2023
[19]

Joint Precoding and Phase Shift Design in Reconfigurable In- telligent Surfaces-Assisted Secret Key Generation,

T. Lu, L. Chen, J. Zhang, C. Chen, and A. Hu, “Joint Precoding and Phase Shift Design in Reconfigurable In- telligent Surfaces-Assisted Secret Key Generation,”IEEE Transactions on Information F orensics and Security, vol. 18, pp. 3251–3266, 2023.DOI: 10.1109/TIFS.2023. 3268881

work page doi:10.1109/tifs.2023 2023
[20]

Intelligent Reflecting Surface- Assisted Wireless Key Generation for Low-Entropy En- vironments,

P. Staat, H. Elders-Boll, M. Heinrichs, R. Kronberger, C. Zenger, and C. Paar, “Intelligent Reflecting Surface- Assisted Wireless Key Generation for Low-Entropy En- vironments,” in2021 IEEE 32nd Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Com- munications (PIMRC), 2021, pp. 745–751.DOI: 10.1109/ PIMRC50174.2021.9569556

work page arXiv 2021
[21]

Connectivity in the era of the (I)IoT: about security, features and limiting factors of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

C. Lipps, J. Herbst, S. Klingel, et al., “Connectivity in the era of the (I)IoT: about security, features and limiting factors of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,”Discover Internet of Things, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 16, 2023.DOI: 10. 1007/s43926-023-00046-1

2023
[22]

Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: A Physical Layer Security Perspective,

C. Lipps, J. Herbst, R. Reddy, L. Franke, S. Becker, M. Rahm, and H. Dieter Schotten, “Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces: A Physical Layer Security Perspective,” in2022 4th International Conference on Data Intelligence and Security (ICDIS), 2022, pp. 174–181.DOI: 10 . 1109 / ICDIS55630.2022.00034

work page arXiv 2022