Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Adaptive Source-Channel Coding for Bi-static Integrated Sensing and Semantic Communications

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that jointly choosing the semantic source-coding rate and transmit beamforming for both tasks enlarges the achievable region of an integrated sensing and semantic communication (ISSC) system.

desk verdict The HCRB under imperfect timing sync is the real contribution; the E2E distortion surrogate is an unvalidated fit and the abstract overclaims it as an upper bound. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10898 v1 pith:VKJYO6QK submitted 2026-08-11 eess.SP

Haotian Wang , Dan Wang , Xiaodong Xu , Chuan Huang , Hao Chen , Nan Ma , Ping Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords semanticcommunicationintegratedsensingandadaptivesource-channelcodingCramér-Raoboundbeamformingdesignbi-staticISSCtimesynchronizationerror
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that in a bi-static integrated sensing and semantic communication (ISSC) system, the source-coding rate for a deep semantic image codec and the transmit beamforming for both communication and sensing should be chosen together, not separately. The proposed sensing-aware adaptive source-channel coding (SA-ASCC) framework fits an end-to-end semantic distortion function to a logistic curve, derives a hybrid Cramér-Rao bound (HCRB) for target-position estimation under imperfect time synchronization, and minimizes distortion subject to an HCRB threshold, channel-use, and power constraints. Numerical results show SA-ASCC exceeds the DJSCC-WF-ZF and BPG-WF-ZF baselines in MS-SSIM across power budget and bandwidth settings, and consistently achieves lower HCRB. If correct, this demonstrates that jointly coupling rate adaptation with sensing accuracy requirements enlarges the achievable region between the two tasks.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the regression-fitted distortion surrogate, Eq. (12), a generalized logistic function of $\log_{10}\rho_b$ at each discrete source rate $R_s$, which turns reconstruction quality into a smooth function of coding rates and SINR. The second object is the hybrid Fisher information matrix $J(\chi)=J_D(\chi)+J_B(\chi)$, where $J_D$ is the observed FIM with entries proportional to $\operatorname{Tr}(\zeta_j\Sigma)$ and $J_B$ contributes the prior $1/\sigma_T^2$ for the time-synchronization error; the HCRB for target position is the upper-left block of $J(\chi)^{-1}$, split by the Woodbury identity into the perfect-synchronization CRB plus an additional TS-induced error. These two objects make reconstruction distortion and sensing accuracy comparable in a single objective and a single constraint. The algorithm then alternates exhaustive search over a bank of $G=20$ source-rate models with successive convex approximation and fractional programming for the continuous variables.

What would settle it

Run Algorithm I on a fixed channel realization, take its chosen $R_s$, $R_c$, $w_c$, and $w_0$, then measure the actual MS-SSIM or MSE of the DNN codec at that operating point by transmitting real images with the specified BER; if the measured distortion does not match Eq. (12)'s predicted ordering, for example if a neighboring source rate yields lower actual distortion than the algorithm's chosen rate, then the claimed gains rest on the surrogate rather than on the true codec.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that there exists a joint design variable, namely the pair of source and channel coding rates together with the two transmit beamforming vectors, whose optimization gives a larger achievable (distortion, HCRB) region than separate design. The paper approximates the SemCom distortion as the sum of a source-distortion part and a channel-distortion part, fits Eq. (12) to measurements on the CUB-200-2011 dataset, models the time-synchronization error as a Gaussian nuisance parameter, and derives the HCRB as the block inversion of the sum of the observed and prior Fisher information matrices. An alternating optimization algorithm solves the resulting mixed-integer non-convex problem by exhaustive search over discrete source-rate models and convexified joint rate and beamforming subproblems. The reported consequence is that SA-ASCC outperforms DJSCC-WF-ZF and BPG-WF-ZF in MS-SSIM at low signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio and requires less bandwidth for the same reconstruction quality, while also achieving a lower HCRB.

Load-bearing premise

The whole rate and beamforming optimization treats Eq. (12), a logistic curve fitted on bird images, as the true end-to-end distortion of the semantic codec at every BER and source rate, and the fitting error is not reported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The optimal source-coding rate is no longer a function of channel state alone: the HCRB threshold shifts the chosen $R_s$, $R_c$, and beam emphasis, so sensing requirements must enter rate adaptation.
  • At fixed power, resources moved to sensing do not cost one-for-one in reconstruction quality, because SemCom retains high MS-SSIM in the low-SINR regime; the paper's reported 24.1 percent bandwidth saving at equal MS-SSIM is one manifestation.
  • Imperfect time synchronization shrinks the achievable region, so bi-static designs that ignore TS error will overestimate positioning accuracy and should include the prior Fisher information term.
  • The decomposition into model selection and joint rate and beamforming subproblems makes the mixed-integer program tractable with exhaustive search over a discrete model bank plus standard convex tools.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The regression fit is the fulcrum: the method's portability to other image datasets, codecs, or tasks is untested, and a biased fit at low SINR would shift the operating point even if the true codec performs better there; the paper does not report the fitting error or validation curves.
  • A direct extension would be to replace the fitted surrogate with the actual measured distortion at each candidate operating point; if the two orderings diverge, the claimed region gains would need to be re-evaluated.
  • The HCRB assumes the time-synchronization error variance is known, so an adaptive estimator of $\sigma_T$ or a robust worst-case bound would be a natural continuation of the framework.
  • Exhaustive search scales linearly with the number of pretrained models, so a continuous or learned rate-selection module would be needed when the DNN model library grows large.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a sensing-aware adaptive source-channel coding (SA-ASCC) framework for a bi-static integrated sensing and semantic communication (ISSC) system. The transmitter superimposes SemCom and sensing symbols via beamforming; the receiver tasks are image reconstruction at the communication RE and target position estimation at the sensing RE under imperfect time synchronization. The paper approximates the E2E semantic distortion by a logistic regression fit (Eq. 12), derives a hybrid Cramér-Rao bound for target position (Propositions 3.1 and 3.2), and formulates a mixed-integer, non-convex optimization problem (P3.1) that minimizes E2E distortion subject to HCRB, bandwidth, and power constraints. An alternating optimization algorithm (Algorithm I) is proposed, combining exhaustive model selection, successive convex approximation, and fractional programming. Numerical results compare the proposed scheme with DJSCC-WF-ZF and BPG-WF-ZF benchmarks in terms of MS-SSIM and HCRB.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a useful resource-allocation formulation for bi-static ISSC that couples semantic source-channel rate selection with sensing-aware beamforming. The HCRB derivation in Appendix A is careful and self-contained, and the SCA/FP reformulations in Section IV are nontrivial and largely plausible. The main value is in extending adaptive source-channel coding from communication-only settings to an integrated sensing and semantic communication setting. However, the central performance claim rests on the unvalidated fitted surrogate in Eq. (12), and the simulation evidence is presented without error bars or code. The contribution is therefore significant but conditional on the surrogate being a faithful model over the operating region used by the optimizer.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III-A, Eq. (12); Algorithm I] The E2E distortion surrogate is introduced as a logistic regression fit on the CUB-200-2011 dataset, not as a derived upper bound as stated in the abstract and Section I. The fitting parameters \hat d_s^o, \hat d_c^o, a_1^{\mathrm{mse}}, a_2^{\mathrm{mse}}, the number of fitted points per (R_s, \rho_b), and the goodness-of-fit are not reported. Because this surrogate is used in every decision of Algorithm I (P4.1 model selection, P4.3/P4.4 rate optimization, P4.5/P4.6 beamforming), a bias in the low-SINR or high-BER regime would directly invalidate the claimed gains over the benchmarks in Figs. 3 and 4. Please report the fitting quality and provide a validation comparing surrogate-predicted distortion with actual decoded MSE and MS-SSIM at the operating points selected by the algorithm, including off-grid BER values.
  2. [Section V-A, Figs. 3 and 4] The simulation results are reported as single curves without confidence intervals or multiple random seeds, and the text makes quantitative claims such as a 2.68% MS-SSIM improvement and a 24.1% bandwidth reduction. In addition, the BPG-WF-ZF baseline uses fixed channel coding rates R_c=2.3 and R_c=1.9 without explaining how these values are chosen or whether they are optimized for fairness. Without error bars and a clear baseline rate-selection procedure, the statistical significance of the performance comparison is not established. Please add confidence intervals and describe how the baseline rates and power allocations are set.
  3. [Section IV-B, P4.3-P4.6] The transformation from the BER minimization problem to SINR maximization relies on the monotonicity of the fitted logistic curve in \rho_b (Eq. 12) and on Lemma 4.2. The paper argues that all constraints in P4.3 must be active at the optimum, but only constraints (32) and (33) are forced to equality by monotonicity of the objective with respect to \hat\rho_b and e^\nu; constraint (24), R_c \le C(\gamma), need not be active. This imprecision does not necessarily break the algorithm, but the equivalence argument in Section IV-B1 should be restated more carefully, and the convexity claims for the resulting feasible set should be verified explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section V, parameter settings] The parameter list states that the HCRB threshold is set to \Pi=0.01, but the captions of Figs. 3 and 4 report \Pi=0.06 and \Pi=0.065, respectively. Please reconcile these values.
  2. [Appendix C, Eq. (84)] The displayed expression for d\hat\gamma/d\gamma in Eq. (84) does not appear to be the correct derivative of \hat\gamma=\ln2\sqrt{L(C(\gamma)-R_c)}/\sqrt{1-1/(1+\gamma)^2}; the denominator and numerator differ from a direct differentiation. The monotonicity conclusion may still be true, but the derivation should be corrected.
  3. [Algorithm I, line 19] The output variable w_o^\star should be w_0^\star to match the notation used elsewhere; this appears to be a typographical error.
  4. [Section III-A, Fig. 2] Figure 2 is described as showing log_{10}D_o versus log_{10}\rho_b for different R_s, but the axis ticks and legend are not reproduced in the text, making it difficult to assess the claimed sigmoidal behavior or the number of fitted models.
  5. [Section V] No code or data repository is referenced; given that the distortions in Eq. (12) are obtained from a fitted model, releasing the fitting code and the simulation code would substantially improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: HCRB is derived from the signal model, final MS-SSIM is measured on actually decoded images, and the fitted distortion surrogate is a model-accuracy risk rather than a by-construction equivalence.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is self-contained. The HCRB in Proposition 3.1-3.2 is obtained from the likelihood model via the Slepian-Bangs formula and the prior FIM of the TS error; it is not assumed, fitted, or imported from the authors' prior work. The BER model in Eq. (7) is a standard finite-blocklength normal approximation; although cited to arXiv [15] with overlapping authors, it is parameter-free and externally verifiable, so it does not make the argument circular. The main potential concern is that the E2E distortion objective in Eq. (12) is a logistic regression fitted on the CUB-200-2011 dataset and the same codec family used in the simulations, so Algorithm I selects rates and beamforming against this surrogate. However, the paper's headline SemCom results in Figs. 3-4 are MS-SSIM values computed on actually decoded images, and the HCRB results in Figs. 5-6 come from the derived bound, not from the surrogate; the reported gains are therefore not the fitted function evaluated on itself. Any mismatch between the surrogate and true decoded-image distortion would be a validation or robustness issue, not a circularity, because the final evaluation does not reduce to the fitted objective by construction. Self-citations to [7], [14]-[16] provide architecture context and were not invoked as proof of the optimization results.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central machinery pulls three classes of inputs from outside the paper: a fitted logistic distortion model with unreported parameters, a Gaussian prior for time-synchronization error, and a set of modeling and algorithmic choices including additive distortion, finite-blocklength BER approximation, a discrete rate set, and penalty parameters. No new physical entity is introduced. The HCRB itself is derived from these inputs.

free parameters (3)
  • Logistic distortion fitting parameters per source rate R_s = Not reported
    Eq. (12) introduces d_hat_s^o, d_hat_c^o, a_1_mse, and a_2_mse fitted to CUB-200-2011 distortion-vs-BER data; these define the objective in Problem (P3.1).
  • Discrete source-rate model set R_s and model count G = G=20, R_s from 1.3e3 to 5.7e4
    The model selection subproblem searches only this hand-chosen set, so the reported results depend on its coverage and density.
  • AO penalty and step-size parameters = kappa(0) unreported, iota=0.8, thresholds 1e-3 and 1e-6
    Algorithm I uses these hand-set constants; they affect convergence and solution quality but are not fitted to physical data.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption E2E distortion decomposes as a sum of source and channel distortion: D_o is approximately D_s^o(R_s) plus D_c^o(R_s, rho_b).
    Eq. (10), Section III-A; adopted from reference [7] and not proven for the specific DNN codec.
  • ad hoc to paper The fitted generalized logistic form in Eq. (12) accurately represents true E2E distortion over the operating region.
    Section III-A; if the fit is inaccurate, all downstream rate and beamforming decisions are biased.
  • domain assumption Time-synchronization error is a zero-mean Gaussian random variable with known variance sigma_T^2 and is independent of target position.
    Eq. (9) and Section II-B2; needed to construct the prior Fisher information and the HCRB.
  • standard math The finite-blocklength normal approximation for BER in Eq. (7) is accurate at blocklength L=256.
    Section II-B1; this is an established approximation from finite-blocklength information theory, not an exact expression.
  • domain assumption Block-fading line-of-sight channel model with perfect channel knowledge at the transmitter.
    Section II; beamforming optimization treats h_c and H_0 as known, with no CSI error model.
  • domain assumption Constellations are rotationally invariant with zero mean and unit power.
    Eq. (3), Section II-A; used to simplify the power covariance expressions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Adaptive Source-Channel Coding for Bi-static Integrated Sensing and Semantic Communications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VKJYO6QK

@misc{pith2026260810898,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Adaptive Source-Channel Coding for Bi-static Integrated Sensing and Semantic Communications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VKJYO6QK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10898}
}
read the original abstract

Semantic communication (SemCom) has emerged as a new paradigm to facilitate the performance of integrated sensing and communication systems in 6G, due to its potential to enhance transmission efficiency by transmitting task-relevant semantic features rather than raw bits. However, most of the existing works mainly focus on sensing data compression to reduce the subsequent communication overheads, without considering the integrated transmission framework for both the SemCom and sensing tasks. This paper proposes a sensing-aware adaptive source-channel coding (SA-ASCC) and beamforming design framework for bi-static integrated sensing and SemCom (ISSC) systems by jointly optimizing the coding rate for SemCom task and the transmit beamforming for both the SemCom and sensing tasks. Specifically, an end-to-end semantic distortion function is approximated by deriving an upper bound composing of source and channel coding induced components, and then a hybrid Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound (HCRB) is derived for target position under imperfect time synchronization due to the transceiver deployed at different places in our considered bi-static ISSC system. To characterize the achievable region between SemCom and sensing performance, a distortion minimization problem is formulated by considering the HCRB threshold, channel uses, and power budget, which is non-convex due to the coupled design variables and the mixed-integer program. Subsequently, an alternating optimization (AO) algorithm is proposed to decompose this problem into the model selection and joint rate and beamforming optimization subproblems, which are solved by the exhaustive search method and the combination of successive convex approximation and fractional programming, respectively. Finally, simulation results demonstrate that the proposed scheme outperforms the DJSCC-WF-ZF and BPG-WF-ZF benchmarks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10898 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Framework of the ISSC System. ing rate. To investigate the impact of TS errors on ISSC performance, we also derive the hybrid CRB (HCRB) for target position under imperfect TS by modeling the TS error as a real-valued random variable with a known prior distribution. • Finally, to characterize the achievable region between SemCom and sensing, an E2E distortion minimization problem is formulated by considering the HCR… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. E2E distortion Do with respect to ρb under different Rs. where ˆd s o (Rs), ˆd c o (Rs), −a mse 1 (Rs), and a mse 2 (Rs) are the fitting parameters to be determined. Remark 3.1: As illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. MS-SSIM comparison under different PT . -70 -65 -60 -55 -50 s 2 (dBm) 0.88 0.89 0.90 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1.0 MS-SSIM SA-ASCC, ABR=0.063 SA-ASCC, ABR=0.053 DJSCC-WF-ZF, ABR=0.063 DJSCC-WF-ZF, ABR=0.053 BPG-WF-ZF, Rc =1.9, ABR=0.063 BPG-WF-ZF, Rc =1.9, ABR=0.053 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: MS-SSIM comparison under different σ 2 s . channel conditions, while zero-forcing (ZF) is adopted for beamforming to suppress inter-user interference. For brevity, the comparison benchmark schemes are denoted as DJSCC-WF-ZF and BPG-WF-ZF, respectively. A. Image Reconst…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: MS-SSIM comparison versus HCRB. 0.024 0.026 0.028 0.030 0.032 HCRB Threshold 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Power Allocation Ratio SemCom (SA-ASCC) Sensing (SA-ASCC) SemCom (DJSCC-WF-ZF) Sensing (DJSCC-WF-ZF) SemCom (BPG-WF-ZF) Sensing (BPG-WF-ZF) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_f…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: power allocation versus sensing accuracy requireme [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Integ rated sensing and semantic communication with adaptive source-c hannel coding,

    H. Wang, D. Wang, X. Xu, C. Huang, H. Chen, and N. Ma, “Integ rated sensing and semantic communication with adaptive source-c hannel coding,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC) , Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2026, accepted for publication

    work page 2026

  2. [2]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-func tional wire- less networks for 6g and beyond,

    F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, Y . C. Eldar, an d S. Buzzi, “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-func tional wire- less networks for 6g and beyond,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, June. 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Performance tra de-off of integrated sensing and communications for multi-user ba ckscatter systems,

    Y . Tian, D. Wang, C. Huang, and W. Zhang, “Performance tra de-off of integrated sensing and communications for multi-user ba ckscatter systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 17 310– 17 323, Nov. 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Intelligent semant ic commu- nication scheme integrating isac for low-altitude intelli gent networks,

    S. Liu, H. Y ang, W. Xie, and M. Zheng, “Intelligent semant ic commu- nication scheme integrating isac for low-altitude intelli gent networks,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 74, no. 12, pp. 3018–3033, Dec. 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Ove rview of the high efficiency video coding (hevc) standard,

    G. J. Sullivan, J.-R. Ohm, W.-J. Han, and T. Wiegand, “Ove rview of the high efficiency video coding (hevc) standard,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1649–1668, Dec. 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Joint task and data-oriented semantic communications: A deep separate so urce-channel coding scheme,

    J. Huang, D. Li, C. Huang, X. Qin, and W. Zhang, “Joint task and data-oriented semantic communications: A deep separate so urce-channel coding scheme,” IEEE Internet Things J. , vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 2255–2272, Jan. 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    F un- damental limitation of semantic communications: Neural es timation for rate-distortion,

    D. Li, J. Huang, C. Huang, X. Qin, H. Zhang, and P . Zhang, “F un- damental limitation of semantic communications: Neural es timation for rate-distortion,” J. Commun. Inf. Networks. , vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 303–318, Dec. 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Joint source–channel coding: Fundamentals and recent progress i n practical designs,

    D. G¨ und¨ uz, M. A. Wigger, T.-Y . Tung, P . Zhang, and Y . Xia o, “Joint source–channel coding: Fundamentals and recent progress i n practical designs,” Proc. IEEE. , vol. 113, no. 9, pp. 1–32, Sept. 2025

    work page 2025

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    An introduction to deep learnin g for the physical layer,

    T. O’Shea and J. Hoydis, “An introduction to deep learnin g for the physical layer,” IEEE Trans. Cognit. Commun. Networking., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 563–575, Dec. 2017

    2017

  2. [10]

    Deep learning e nabled semantic communication systems,

    H. Xie, Z. Qin, G. Y . Li, and B.-H. Juang, “Deep learning e nabled semantic communication systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 2663–2675, Apr. 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    A multi-task orient ed semantic communication framework for autonomous vehicles,

    E. Eldeeb, M. Shehab, and H. Alves, “A multi-task orient ed semantic communication framework for autonomous vehicles,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 3469–3473, Dec. 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Deepjscc- q: Constellation constrained deep joint source-channel co ding,

    T.-Y . Tung, D. B. Kurka, M. Jankowski, and D. G¨ und¨ uz, “ Deepjscc- q: Constellation constrained deep joint source-channel co ding,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Inf. Theory. , vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 720–731, Dec. 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Joint coding-modula tion for digital semantic communications via variational autoenco der,

    Y . Bo, Y . Duan, S. Shao, and M. Tao, “Joint coding-modula tion for digital semantic communications via variational autoenco der,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 72, no. 9, pp. 5626–5640, Sept. 2024. 14

    2024

  6. [14]

    D 2-jscc: Digital deep joint source-channel coding for semantic communications,

    J. Huang, K. Y uan, C. Huang, and K. Huang, “D 2-jscc: Digital deep joint source-channel coding for semantic communications, ” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 1246–1261, Apr. 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Adaptive source-channel coding for semantic com munica- tions,

    D. Li, K. Y uan, J. Huang, C. Huang, X. Qin, S. Cui, and P . Zhang, “Adaptive source-channel coding for semantic com munica- tions,” arXiv:2508.07958, Aug. 2025

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Adaptiv e source- channel coding for multi-user semantic and data communicat ions,

    K. Y uan, D. Li, J. Huang, H. Zhang, and C. Huang, “Adaptiv e source- channel coding for multi-user semantic and data communicat ions,” arXiv:2509.24247, Sept. 2025

    2025

  9. [17]

    Perception enhanced multi modal multitask semantic communication and resource management for uav- assisted isac systems,

    Z. Guo, D. Liu, and Z. Zhang, “Perception enhanced multi modal multitask semantic communication and resource management for uav- assisted isac systems,” IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol. , vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 11 051–11 065, Jun. 2026

    2026

  10. [18]

    Jo int optimization of digital semantic communication and radar s ensing for enhanced isac,

    O. Huan, C. Liu, N. Y ang, Z. Zhang, T. Luo, and M. Chen, “Jo int optimization of digital semantic communication and radar s ensing for enhanced isac,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 25, pp. 16 730– 16 744, May 2026

    2026

  11. [19]

    An overview of signal processing techniques for joint communication and radar sensing,

    J. A. Zhang, F. Liu, C. Masouros, R. W. Heath, Z. Feng, L. Z heng, and A. Petropulu, “An overview of signal processing techniques for joint communication and radar sensing,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. , vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1295–1315, Nov. 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Priorit y-based sensing strategy for isac systems with primary and secondary target s,

    L. Du, Z. Ma, Q. Liang, P . Fan, and E. Panayirci, “Priorit y-based sensing strategy for isac systems with primary and secondary target s,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 73, no. 11, pp. 12 502–12 517, Nov. 2025

    2025

  13. [21]

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

    F. Liu, Y .-F. Liu, A. Li, C. Masouros, and Y . C. Eldar, “Cr am´ er-rao bound optimization for joint radar-communication beamfor ming,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 240–253, Dec. 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    To- ward dual-functional radar-communication systems: Optim al waveform design,

    F. Liu, L. Zhou, C. Masouros, A. Li, W. Luo, and A. Petropu lu, “To- ward dual-functional radar-communication systems: Optim al waveform design,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 66, no. 16, pp. 4264–4279, Aug. 2018

    2018

  15. [23]

    Bistatic mi mo dfrc system waveform design via symbol distance/direction disc rimination,

    B. Guo, J. Liang, B. Tang, L. Li, and H. C. So, “Bistatic mi mo dfrc system waveform design via symbol distance/direction disc rimination,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 3996–4010, Oct. 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Sensing and communication optimal trade- off for mimo bistatic systems,

    F. Zabini and A. Giorgetti, “Sensing and communication optimal trade- off for mimo bistatic systems,” IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 4218–4233, Sept. 2026

    2026

  17. [25]

    Optimal coordin ated transmit beamforming for networked integrated sensing and communi- cations,

    G. Cheng, Y . Fang, J. Xu, and D. W. K. Ng, “Optimal coordin ated transmit beamforming for networked integrated sensing and communi- cations,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 8200–8214, Aug. 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Coordi nated transmit beamforming for networked isac with imperfect csi and time synchronization,

    X. Y ang, Z. Wei, J. Xu, Y . Fang, H. Wu, and Z. Feng, “Coordi nated transmit beamforming for networked isac with imperfect csi and time synchronization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 18 019–18 035, Dec. 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Semantic-based channel state information feedb ack for aav- assisted isac systems,

    G. Zhu, Y . Liu, S. Li, K. Mao, Q. Zhu, C. Briso-Rodr´ ıguez , J. Liang, and X. Y e, “Semantic-based channel state information feedb ack for aav- assisted isac systems,” IEEE Internet Things J. , vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 4981– 4991, March. 2025

    2025

  20. [28]

    Infrastructure-assisted collaborative perception in au tomated valet park- ing: A safety perspective,

    Y . Jia, J. Zhang, S. Lu, B. Fan, R. Mao, S. Zhou, and Z. Niu, “Infrastructure-assisted collaborative perception in au tomated valet park- ing: A safety perspective,” arXiv:2403.15156, March. 2024

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Semantic-aware vision-assisted integrated sensing and c ommunication: Architecture and resource allocation,

    Y . Lu, W. Mao, H. Du, O. A. Dobre, D. Niyato, and Z. Ding, “Semantic-aware vision-assisted integrated sensing and c ommunication: Architecture and resource allocation,” IEEE Wireless Commun. , vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 302–308, June. 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Nonlinear transform coding,

    J. Ball´ e, P . A. Chou, D. Minnen, S. Singh, N. Johnston, E . Agustsson, S. J. Hwang, and G. Toderici, “Nonlinear transform coding,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. , vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 339–353, Feb. 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Arithmetic co ding for data compression,

    I. H. Witten, R. M. Neal, and J. G. Cleary, “Arithmetic co ding for data compression,” Commun. ACM , vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 520–540, Jun. 1987

    1987

  24. [32]

    R eceiver selection and transmit beamforming for multi-static integ rated sensing and communications,

    D. Wang, Y . Tian, C. Huang, H. Chen, X. Xu, and P . Zhang, “R eceiver selection and transmit beamforming for multi-static integ rated sensing and communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 74, no. 11, pp. 1237– 1252, Nov. 2025

    2025

  25. [33]

    Sensing with communication signals : From information theory to signal processing,

    F. Liu, Y .-F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, S. Buzzi, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Jin, “Sensing with communication signals : From information theory to signal processing,” arXiv:2502.10819, Feb. 2025

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    V ariational image compression with a scale hyperprior,

    J. Ball´ e, D. Minnen, S. Singh, S. J. Hwang, and N. Johnst on, “V ariational image compression with a scale hyperprior,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Repres. (ICLR) , V ancouver, BC, Canada, May 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Identifiability an alysis of local oscillator phase self-calibration based on hybrid cram´ er –rao bound in mimo radar,

    P . Sun, J. Tang, S. Wan, and N. Zhang, “Identifiability an alysis of local oscillator phase self-calibration based on hybrid cram´ er –rao bound in mimo radar,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 62, no. 22, pp. 6016– 6031, Nov. 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    CVX: Matlab software for discipli ned convex programming,

    CVX Research, Inc., “CVX: Matlab software for discipli ned convex programming,” Austin, Texas Toolbox V ersion 2.1, March. 20 17. [Online]. Available: http://cvxr.com/cvx/

  29. [37]

    Ris-assisted joint sens ing and communications via fractionally constrained fractional p rogramming,

    Y . Liu, K. M. Attiah, and W. Y u, “Ris-assisted joint sens ing and communications via fractionally constrained fractional p rogramming,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1674–1689, Jan. 2026

    2026

  30. [38]

    Stars enabled integrated sen sing and communications,

    Z. Wang, X. Mu, and Y . Liu, “Stars enabled integrated sen sing and communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 6750–6765, Oct. 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    Dee p joint source- channel coding for wireless image transmission,

    E. Bourtsoulatze, D. Burth Kurka, and D. G¨ und¨ uz, “Dee p joint source- channel coding for wireless image transmission,” IEEE Trans. Cogn. Commun. Netw., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 567–579, Sept. 2019

    2019

  32. [40]

    Data fr eshness op- timization in relaying network operating with finite blockl ength codes,

    X. Y uan, Y . Zhu, H. Jiang, Y . Hu, and A. Schmeink, “Data fr eshness op- timization in relaying network operating with finite blockl ength codes,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM) , Madrid, Spain, Dec. 2021, pp. 1–6

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.