Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) for Wireless Communications: Architecture, Modeling, Algorithm, and Prototyping

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Differentially shifting a small transmissive metasurface over a larger fixed one synthesizes distinct beam patterns while all phase shifts remain static, and a prototype steers beams over ±45° at 12.2 GHz.

desk verdict A real prototype and a sensible new architecture for beam-steering static metasurfaces, but the SNR gains rest on an unvalidated no-coupling two-layer model and some unfair element-count comparisons. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19071 v1 pith:4P3K343Q submitted 2024-12-26 eess.SP

Ziyuan Zheng , Qingqing Wu , Wen Chen , Xiangming Wu , Weiren Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords Movableintelligentsurfacereconfigurablemetasurfacedifferentialpositionshiftingbeampatternsynthesisstaticphaseshiftsmanifoldoptimizationworst-caseSNR
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

The paper introduces a Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS): two closely stacked transmissive metasurfaces, a larger fixed layer and a smaller movable layer, both with static phase shifts. By sliding the small layer to discrete positions, the two phase profiles overlap in different ways and the composite aperture emits different beam patterns, a mechanism the authors call differential position shifting. The central claim is that this position-based reconfiguration replaces element-wise phase tuning, so a passive static surface can still steer beams and improve worst-case coverage SNR. If the claim holds, RIS beamforming can trade a slow mechanical movement for the hardware and control cost of thousands of tunable phase shifters.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the binary selection matrices $\{S_u\}$ and padding vectors $\{e_u\}$: $S_u$ marks which MS 1 elements are covered by MS 2 at shift $u$, and $e_u$ adds a unit phase to the uncovered elements, turning the two static phase profiles into the single position-dependent phase vector $\bar{\theta}_u \odot \phi$. The optimization is lifted onto a product manifold $\mathcal{R}_\phi \times \mathcal{R}_\theta \times \mathcal{R}_X$, with unit-modulus phase vectors on complex circle manifolds and the relaxed row-stochastic beam-pattern schedule on a multinomial manifold; log-sum-exponential smoothing approximates the non-smooth max-min objective, and Riemannian conjugate gradient updates all variables together.

What would settle it

Mount the fabricated two-layer MIS in a full-wave simulator or an anechoic chamber, shift MS 2 through the designed discrete positions, and measure the transmitted amplitude and phase at each element; compare the measured composite response with $\phi_m\bar{\theta}_{u,m}$ predicted by the pointwise-product model. Any deviation beyond the measurement error, especially in beam angle or gain at the larger shifts, would falsify the central mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the composite phase profile of the stacked pair is $\bar{\theta}_u \odot \phi$, where $\phi$ is the static phase vector of MS 1 and $\bar{\theta}_u = S_u \theta + e_u$ is the static phase vector of MS 2 mapped onto MS 1 at shift $u$ through a binary selection matrix $S_u$ and a binary padding vector $e_u$. Each discrete position therefore yields a different equivalent aperture, producing $U=(M_r-N_r+1)(M_c-N_c+1)$ beam patterns from two passive layers. The authors claim that choosing which position serves which user is a new beam-pattern scheduling degree of freedom, and they jointly optimize the static phases and the position schedule to maximize the worst-case SNR over a target area. Their numerical results show that a movable layer with even a few elements improves worst-case SNR over a single static layer, and their fabricated 12.2 GHz prototype steers a beam over $\pm 45^\circ$ with less than 3 dB gain fluctuation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the two closely stacked layers interact only as a pointwise product of their phase profiles, with negligible coupling, reflections, and layer thickness; if the 1 mm gap between the 40-by-40 layers produces noticeable mutual coupling at 12.2 GHz, the synthesized patterns and the reported SNR gains would differ from the model.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With both phase profiles static, a MIS can generate $U=(M_r-N_r+1)(M_c-N_c+1)$ beam patterns, making reconfigurability a matter of movement rather than per-element electronics.
  • Numerically, a small to moderate allocation of elements to the movable layer raises worst-case SNR by up to roughly 47% over a single-layer static surface with the same total element count.
  • The 12.2 GHz prototype confirms one-dimensional beam steering over $\pm 45^\circ$ with gain fluctuation within -3 dB, supporting the position-shifting mechanism as a physical reality.
  • The product-manifold algorithm gives a practical way to handle the mixed-integer, non-smooth max-min problem, with worst-case complexity dominating at $O(T_{\rm out}T_{\rm inn}KM^2N)$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: differential shifting should extend to rotation of circular layers, non-rectangular shapes, or more than two layers, and the paper notes these paths but does not model or optimize them.
  • Beyond the paper: because mechanical repositioning is slow, the natural deployment is for quasi-static coverage, scheduled beams, or a hybrid where a fast tunable layer handles fast variations while the movable layer provides coarse beam switching.
  • Beyond the paper: the model's predictive power could be stress-tested by measuring the two-layer transmission response at every shift position and checking it against $\bar{\theta}_u \odot \phi$; such a measurement would also reveal how much coupling the 1 mm stacking introduces.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) architecture consisting of two closely stacked transmissive metasurfaces: a large fixed MS 1 and a smaller movable MS 2 with static phase shifts. By shifting MS 2 as a whole over MS 1, the composite phase profile changes, so different beam patterns can be synthesized without element-wise phase tuning. The authors model the two-layer interaction through binary selection matrices and padding vectors, yielding a pointwise product of phase-shift matrices in the received-signal model (Eq. (6)). They then formulate a worst-case SNR maximization problem over the MS phase shifts, the beam-pattern scheduling variables, and the MS 2 position, and solve it with a Riemannian conjugate gradient method after LSE smoothing and multinomial-manifold relaxation of the binary variables. The paper reports a fabricated 40x40 prototype at 12.2 GHz, with measured normalized patterns showing one-dimensional beam steering of about +/-45 degrees in 2-unit (12 mm) steps, and numerical results claiming worst-case SNR gains of roughly 11-27% for a single-element MS 2 and up to 47% for moderate allocations to MS 2.

Significance. If the underlying two-layer signal model is valid, the MIS concept is a meaningful alternative to dynamic RIS designs: it replaces element-wise phase reconfiguration with a single mechanical position shift, which is a genuinely low-cost mechanism for obtaining multiple beam patterns from static metasurfaces. The prototype measurement is a real asset and provides physical evidence that shifting MS 2 changes the radiated beam direction. The paper also offers a complete algorithm with stated complexity and a reasonable set of numerical insights about element allocation. The main significance risk is that all quantitative performance claims are derived from an unvalidated pointwise-multiplication model for two metasurface layers separated by 1 mm at 12.2 GHz; the experiment demonstrates steerability but does not yet confirm that the model predicts the actual composite transmission response.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III-A and Eq. (6); see also Section II-A] The central signal model treats the two stacked MS layers as pointwise phase multipliers: Eq. (6) writes the received signal as h_k^T diag(bar_theta_u) diag(phi) G w, with bar_theta_u defined in Eq. (4) via selection matrices. Section III-A justifies this by stating that the inter-layer propagation distance is negligible and the layer thickness is minimal. At the prototype's 1 mm separation and 12.2 GHz carrier (wavelength about 24.6 mm), the two periodic structures are only about 0.04 lambda apart, so multiple reflections and near-field coupling are not automatically negligible. The assertion in Section II-A that the architecture 'avoids coupling effects' is made without full-wave simulation or measured S-parameters. The measured normalized patterns in Fig. 5(d) are not compared against patterns predicted by the pointwise model, so they demonstrate beam steering but not model validity. Because all SNR gains in Section V-B (Figs. 6-9) are computed under this model, the manuscript's quantitative claims need either full-wave validation of the two-layer transmission response or an explicit error bound showing that the model is accurate at the prototype spacing.
  2. [Section IV-B, paragraph following Eq. (14)] The relaxation step claims that the optimal relaxed scheduling variables 'inherently converge to binary values with only a trivial gap,' with the explanation that the objective favors setting x_{k,u}=1 for the beam pattern with the highest gamma_{k,u}. This is not a proof. For fixed phases, g_k in Eq. (10) is linear in X, and the LSE-smoothed objective f in Eq. (9) is a concave function of X; maximizing a concave function over the relative interior of a simplex does not generally produce extreme points (for example, max min(x,1-x) over [0,1] occurs at x=0.5). If the relaxed solution is far from binary, the thresholding step in Algorithm 1 (line 16) may return an infeasible or poor schedule. Please provide a bound on the binary gap or numerical evidence that the relaxed solutions are near binary for the reported configurations.
  3. [Section V-A, Figs. 4-5] The prototype experiment is a genuine proof of concept, but the quantitative support for the model is incomplete. Only normalized radiation patterns are shown, with no overlay of patterns predicted by Eq. (6) or by full-wave simulation, and no S-parameters or insertion-loss data that would quantify coupling between the two layers. In addition, the claimed 'gain fluctuation of less than -3 dB' should be defined relative to a specific reference (e.g., the peak gain of the broadside pattern) and over which angular range. Without these data, the experiment demonstrates steerability but cannot confirm the pointwise-multiplication model that underlies the numerical gains in Section V-B.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (3c)] The array response h_k is defined with L_r and L_c, but it should use the MS dimensions M_r and M_c; as written, the length of h_k does not match the number of MIS elements M used in Eq. (6).
  2. [Eqs. (3a)-(3c)] The phase exponents contain a duplicated factor, e.g., 'ej2pi 2pi d/lambda' in (3b) and 'ej2pi 2pi d/lambda' in (3c); please correct the typo.
  3. [Section V-B, Fig. 9] The definitions of 'Scheme 1' and 'Scheme 2' appear only in the text; please add a short explanation in the figure caption so the two allocation strategies are readable from the figure itself.
  4. [Section V-B, first paragraph] The notation uses psi_k for both elevation (psi_k = pi/4) and azimuth (psi_k in [-pi/3, pi/3]) in the same sentence; please clarify the angle convention, as the same symbol is used for both in Eq. (3).
  5. [Section II-B] The statement that the total number of available beam patterns is U = U_r U_c assumes a rectangular grid and no rotational movement; this is fine, but it should be stated explicitly as a restriction of the considered architecture.
  6. [Section V-A] Please state whether the measured patterns are co-polarized only and whether cross-polarization was recorded, since the unit cell uses orthogonal gratings and the polarization purity is relevant to the beam-steering claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the MIS beam-steering mechanism and SNR gains are either externally prototype-supported or straightforward optimization outcomes, not predictions that reduce to their inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that differentially shifting a smaller MS 2 over a larger fixed MS 1 changes the composite phase profile and thereby synthesizes distinct beam patterns. This follows from the model in Eqs. (4)-(6), where the equivalent MS-2 phase vector theta_bar_u = S_u theta + e_u changes with the shift index u by construction; the beam-pattern claim is a design mechanism rather than a first-principles prediction. Importantly, the paper supplies an external proof-of-concept: the fabricated prototype in Sec. V-A demonstrates 1D beam steering over ±45 degrees at 12.2 GHz with less than -3 dB gain fluctuation, so the central physical mechanism does not rest solely on the model. The numerical worst-case SNR gains in Sec. V-B are obtained by solving the same max-min SNR optimization (P1) over the MIS variables; reporting the optimized objective as a gain over the single-layer SMS baseline is a standard optimization evaluation, not a fitted-input-called-prediction. The SMS baseline is a special case of the MIS formulation (N=0, U=1), so the feasible set of the MIS problem contains the SMS feasible set; the nonnegative gain is an optimization property, not an empirical prediction derived from fitted parameters. The pointwise-multiplication model (Eq. (6)) assumes negligible inter-layer propagation and minimal thickness; this assumption is unvalidated at the 1 mm/12.2 GHz prototype spacing and is a correctness risk, but it is not circular because the model is an input assumption, not a result derived from the target conclusion. References [22] and [26] are self-citations by the authors, but they are used only for contextual motivation (limitations of static surfaces and movable-antenna positioning requirements), and neither carries the load of the paper's architecture, algorithm, or prototype result. No uniqueness theorem is imported, no ansatz is smuggled in via citation, and no known result is merely renamed. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the experimental validation provides independent support for the load-bearing beam-steering claim, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests less on fitted parameters than on modeling simplifications. There are no data-fitted constants; the main borrowed inputs are LoS array response models, the two-layer pointwise phase product, and the algorithm's smoothing schedule. The least supported ingredient is the no-coupling, negligible-spacing assumption for stacked transmissive metasurfaces.

free parameters (2)
  • Prototype phase distributions of MS1 and MS2 = not disclosed
    The fabricated inner metal layer has a 'properly designed phase distribution with rotational symmetry' (Section V-A.1), but the actual phase values are not given, so the measured beam steering cannot be independently reconstructed from the text.
  • Smoothing parameter schedule for LSE objective = not specified; δ=2 typical
    The algorithm uses an initial smoothing parameter µ(0) and update rate δ (Section IV-A) chosen by hand. These affect numerical results and convergence but not the physical beam steering mechanism.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The channel is LoS-dominated and modeled as G = a_MIS a_BS^T and h_k as LoS array responses.
    Section III-A uses deterministic LoS channels for the optimization and all numerical results, ignoring scattering and multipath.
  • ad hoc to paper The two stacked metasurface layers have negligible propagation distance and no mutual coupling, so their combined effect is pointwise multiplication of diagonal phase-shift matrices.
    Section III-A and the signal model in (6) rely on this simplification, but it is not validated with full-wave simulation or coupling measurements.
  • domain assumption Perfect knowledge of the cascaded channel ck is available during design.
    The optimization problem (P1) in Section III-C requires known ck for all users; channel estimation is not addressed.
  • domain assumption Phase shifts are continuous valued.
    Section II-A footnote 4 assumes continuous phase shifts, while practical metasurfaces may have discrete states; the authors note discrete phases as future work.
  • ad hoc to paper Relaxed beam scheduling variables converge to binary values with a trivial gap.
    Section IV-B asserts convergence without proof, and Algorithm 1 applies binary thresholding at the end, so the relaxation gap is unquantified.
invented entities (1)
  • Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) architecture independent evidence
    purpose: Two-layer transmissive metasurface where a smaller movable MS2 slides over a larger fixed MS1 to synthesize multiple beam patterns from static phase shifts.
    The prototype at 12.2 GHz measured ±45° beam steering, providing hardware evidence that the mechanism exists. The detailed model assumptions about zero coupling remain under-validated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) for Wireless Communications: Architecture, Modeling, Algorithm, and Prototyping." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4P3K343Q

@misc{pith2026241219071,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) for Wireless Communications: Architecture, Modeling, Algorithm, and Prototyping},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4P3K343Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19071}
}
read the original abstract

Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces enhance wireless systems by reshaping propagation environments. However, dynamic metasurfaces (MSs) with numerous phase-shift elements incur undesired control and hardware costs. In contrast, static MSs (SMSs), configured with static phase shifts pre-designed for specific communication demands, offer a cost-effective alternative by eliminating element-wise tuning. Nevertheless, SMSs typically support a single beam pattern with limited flexibility. In this paper, we propose a novel Movable Intelligent Surface (MIS) technology that enables dynamic beamforming while maintaining static phase shifts. Specifically, we design a MIS architecture comprising two closely stacked transmissive MSs: a larger fixed-position MS 1 and a smaller movable MS 2. By differentially shifting MS 2's position relative to MS 1, the MIS synthesizes distinct beam patterns. Then, we model the interaction between MS 2 and MS 1 using binary selection matrices and padding vectors and formulate a new optimization problem that jointly designs the MIS phase shifts and selects shifting positions for worst-case signal-to-noise ratio maximization. This position selection, equal to beam pattern scheduling, offers a new degree of freedom for RIS-aided systems. To solve the intractable problem, we develop an efficient algorithm that handles unit-modulus and binary constraints and employs manifold optimization methods. Finally, extensive validation results are provided. We implement a MIS prototype and perform proof-of-concept experiments, demonstrating the MIS's ability to synthesize desired beam patterns that achieve one-dimensional beam steering. Numerical results show that by introducing MS 2 with a few elements, MIS effectively offers beamforming flexibility for significantly improved performance. We also draw insights into the optimal MIS configuration and element allocation strategy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19071 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of MIS-enabled wireless communication systems. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. An example of the proposed MIS architecture and its dynamic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of the MIS-aided coverage extension scenario. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Fabricated prototypes of MS 1, MS 2, and a patch antenna; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Case study on the beam pattern of a MIS configured with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimental devices in a compact range anechoic chamber [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Normalized worst-case SNR gain of the proposed MIS scheme over the single-layer SMS with varying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Worst-case SINR γmin versus the number of users K in the target coverage area with different 1D and 2D MIS configurations. performance of the proposed MIS system under two element allocation schemes: Scheme 1 fixes the rows of MS 1 and the columns of MS 2 while dividi…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Worst-case SNR performance of the MIS scheme under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Secure Energy-Efficient Uplink Transmission in Movable-Element RIS-aided Systems with Movable Antennas and Artificial Noise

    eess.SP 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Joint optimization of movable base-station antennas, movable-RIS elements, and artificial noise is claimed to improve secure energy efficiency in a full-duplex uplink; the proposed H-GML meta-optimizer outperforms an ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Smart radio environments empowered by reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces: How it works, state of research, and the road ahead,

    M. Di Renzo et al., “Smart radio environments empowered by reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces: How it works, state of research, and the road ahead,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 2450–2525, Nov. 2020

    2020

  2. [2]

    Towards smart and reconfigurable environment: Intelligent reflecting surface aided wireless network,

    Q. Wu and R. Zhang, “Towards smart and reconfigurable environment: Intelligent reflecting surface aided wireless network,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 106–112, Jan. 2020

    2020

  3. [3]

    Intelligent reflecting surface-aided wireless communications: A tutorial,

    Q. Wu, S. Zhang, B. Zheng, C. You, and R. Zhang, “Intelligent reflecting surface-aided wireless communications: A tutorial,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3313–3351, May 2021

    2021

  4. [4]

    Intelligent reflecting surface-aided wireless networks: From single-reflection to multireflection design and optimization,

    W. Mei et al. , “Intelligent reflecting surface-aided wireless networks: From single-reflection to multireflection design and optimization,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 110, no. 9, pp. 1380–1400, Sep. 2022

    2022

  5. [5]

    Pan et al., ”An overview of signal processing techniques for RIS/IRS- aided wireless systems,” IEEE J

    C. Pan et al., ”An overview of signal processing techniques for RIS/IRS- aided wireless systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. , vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 883–917, Aug. 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Intelligent surfaces empowered wireless network: Recent advances and the road to 6G,

    Q. Wu et al., “Intelligent surfaces empowered wireless network: Recent advances and the road to 6G,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 112, no. 7, pp. 724–763, Jul. 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    Reconfigurable intelli- gent surface (RIS) assisted wireless coverage extension: RIS orientation and location optimization,

    S. Zeng, H. Zhang, B. Di, Z. Han, and L. Song, “Reconfigurable intelli- gent surface (RIS) assisted wireless coverage extension: RIS orientation and location optimization,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 269–273, Jan. 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Chen and Q

    G. Chen and Q. Wu, ”Fundamental limits of intelligent reflecting surface aided multiuser broadcast channel,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 5904–5919, Oct. 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    RIS-aided hotspot capacity enhancement for multibeam satellite systems,

    Z. Zheng et al., “RIS-aided hotspot capacity enhancement for multibeam satellite systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 3648–3664, Apr. 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Two-timescale transmission design for RIS-aided cell-free massive MIMO systems,

    J. Dai et al., “Two-timescale transmission design for RIS-aided cell-free massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 6498–6517, Jun. 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Cooperative multi-satellite and multi-RIS beamform- ing: Enhancing LEO SatCom and mitigating LEO-GEO intersystem interference,

    Z. Zheng et al. , “Cooperative multi-satellite and multi-RIS beamform- ing: Enhancing LEO SatCom and mitigating LEO-GEO intersystem interference,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , early access, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Intelligent Reflecting Surface Enhanced Wireless Network via Joint Active and Passive Beamforming,

    Q. Wu and R. Zhang, “Intelligent Reflecting Surface Enhanced Wireless Network via Joint Active and Passive Beamforming,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 5394-5409, Nov. 2019

    2019

  5. [13]

    Transmissive RIS transceiver enabled multi-stream com- munication systems: Design, optimization and analysis,

    Z. Li et al. , “Transmissive RIS transceiver enabled multi-stream com- munication systems: Design, optimization and analysis,” IEEE Internet Things J., early access, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Simultaneously transmitting and reflecting (STAR) RIS aided wireless communications,

    X. Mu et al. , “Simultaneously transmitting and reflecting (STAR) RIS aided wireless communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 3083–3098, May 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    Intelligent omni-surfaces: Simultaneous refraction and reflection for full-dimensional wireless communications,

    H. Zhang and B. Di, “Intelligent omni-surfaces: Simultaneous refraction and reflection for full-dimensional wireless communications,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1997–2028, 4th Quart. 2022

    1997

  8. [16]

    Beyond diagonal reconfigurable intelli- gent surfaces: From transmitting and reflecting modes to single-, group-, and fully-connected architectures,

    H. Li, S. Shen, and B. Clerckx, “Beyond diagonal reconfigurable intelli- gent surfaces: From transmitting and reflecting modes to single-, group-, and fully-connected architectures,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2311–2324, Apr. 2023

    2023

  9. [17]

    Stacked intelligent MSs for efficient holographic MIMO communications in 6G,

    J. An et al. , “Stacked intelligent MSs for efficient holographic MIMO communications in 6G,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 2380–2396, Aug. 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    A path to smart radio environments: An industrial viewpoint on reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

    R. Liu, Q. Wu, M. Di Renzo, and Y . Yuan, “A path to smart radio environments: An industrial viewpoint on reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,” IEEE Wireless Commun. , vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 202–208, Feb. 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Intelligent reflecting surface enhanced wireless networks: Two-timescale beamforming opti- mization,

    M.-M. Zhao, Q. Wu, M.-J. Zhao, and R. Zhang, “Intelligent reflecting surface enhanced wireless networks: Two-timescale beamforming opti- mization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 2–17, Jan. 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Coverage area optimized static reflecting surfaces,

    H. Al-Tous and O. Tirkkonen, “Coverage area optimized static reflecting surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 9375–9388, Aug. 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Aerial intelligent reflecting surface: Joint placement and passive beamforming design with 3D beam flattening,

    H. Lu et al. , “Aerial intelligent reflecting surface: Joint placement and passive beamforming design with 3D beam flattening,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 4128–4143, Jul. 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Static IRS meets distributed MIMO: A new architecture for dynamic beamform- ing,

    G. Chen, Q. Wu, C. Wu, M. Jian, Y . Chen, and W. Chen, “Static IRS meets distributed MIMO: A new architecture for dynamic beamform- ing,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1866–1870, Nov. 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Movable antennas for wireless com- munication: Opportunities and challenges,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wireless com- munication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , early access, Oct. 16, 2023, doi: 10.1109/mcom.001.2300212

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Fluid antenna systems,

    K.-K. Wong, A. Shojaeifard, K.-F. Tong, and Y . Zhang, “Fluid antenna systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1950–1962, Mar. 2021

    1950

  17. [25]

    Movable-antenna array enhanced beam- forming: Achieving full array gain with null steering,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable-antenna array enhanced beam- forming: Achieving full array gain with null steering,” IEEE Commun. Lett., early access, Oct. 11, 2023, doi: 10.1109/lcomm.2023.3323656

    2023

  18. [27]

    Throughput maximization for movable antenna systems with movement delay consideration,

    H. Wang et al., “Throughput maximization for movable antenna systems with movement delay consideration,” arXiv:2411.13785, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.13785

    2024 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Algorithms with adaptive smoothing for finite minimax problems,

    E. Polak, J. O. Royset, and R. S. Womersley, “Algorithms with adaptive smoothing for finite minimax problems,” J. Optim. Theory Appl. , vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 459–484, Dec. 2003

    2003

  20. [29]

    Manopt, a Matlab toolbox for optimization on manifolds,

    N. Boumal et al. , “Manopt, a Matlab toolbox for optimization on manifolds,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 15, no. 42, pp. 1455–1459, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.manopt.org

    2014

  21. [30]

    Efficient projections onto the ℓ1-ball for learning in high dimensions,

    J. Duchi, S. Shalev-Shwartz, Y . Singer, and T. Chandra, “Efficient projections onto the ℓ1-ball for learning in high dimensions,” in Proc. 25th Int. Conf. Mach. Learn. (ICML) , 2008, pp. 272–279

    2008

  22. [2024]

    Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05912

    [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05912

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.