Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Deep Learning-Based CSI Feedback for Wi-Fi Systems With Temporal Correlation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A learned angle codec with temporal differencing beats IEEE 802.11 CSI feedback in simulations.

desk verdict Solid NMSE contribution to DL-based CSI feedback for Wi-Fi, but the net-throughput table is built on a per-packet overhead assumption that collapses the advertised 3x gain. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23198 v2 pith:7WLNJKMD submitted 2025-05-29 eess.SP

Junyong Shin , Eunsung Jeon , Inhyoung Kim , Yo-Seb Jeon This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords CSIfeedbackdeeplearningvectorquantizationangle-differencetemporalcorrelationIEEE802.11beamformingchannelstateinformation
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 proposes replacing the IEEE 802.11 CSI feedback procedure—uniform quantization of Givens beamforming angles—with a learned autoencoder that compresses these angles into a finite-bit representation via a trainable vector-quantization codebook, jointly trained end-to-end. On top of this baseline, it adds an angle-difference feedback strategy: when the wrapped difference between consecutive angle frames is sparse, the STA sends the difference rather than the full angles, using either a parallel or a unified VQ design to prevent reconstruction errors from accumulating across time. It also adds an AP-side refinement module, built from a video-prediction network, that reconstructs the current angles using both current and past feedback. The combined framework is shown to outperform the standard IEEE 802.11 feedback and earlier DL-based Wi-Fi feedback methods in NMSE across synthetic and real channel datasets, and to raise net throughput in the simulated 802.11be setup. The relevance is practical: next-generation Wi-Fi needs accurate downlink channel knowledge at low feedback overhead, and the paper's central claim is that temporal correlation makes that feedback nearly free.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the angle-parameter matrix $\Phi_t = [\{\phi_{j,i}\}, \{\psi_{l,i}\}]$ per subcarrier, extracted from the SVD of the channel via Givens rotations exactly as in the IEEE 802.11 standard; using these angles as the encoder input (instead of the full beamforming matrix $\mathbf{V}$) shrinks the input and preserves the orthogonality structure without output constraints. Around this input, the paper trains an encoder–decoder pair with a product vector-quantization codebook (the VQ-VAE loss of Eq. (11)), a preprocessing map $h(\cdot)$ that wraps differences into $[-\pi, \pi)$ to handle angle periodicity, a sparsity trigger comparing the count of nonzero wrapped differences to thresholds $(\mu_{\mathrm{th}}, N_{\mathrm{th}})$, and two feedback architectures—parallel VQ, a two-stage codebook that spends $B_r$ bits on the previous latent residual, and unified VQ, which sums the previous residual latent into the current encoder output before a single quantizer, eliminating the $B_r$ hyperparameter. The refinement module is a SimVP-style fully convolutional predictor that maps the last $T$ reconstructed angle frames to a refined current frame, trained after freezing the feedback network and then recursively.

What would settle it

Retrain and evaluate the same framework on the same DeepMIMO and Wi-MIR datasets but with channel estimates corrupted by the estimator used in NDP-based 802.11 acquisition, such as least-squares with the same pilot structure and receiver noise; if, at equal feedback overhead, the NMSE gap over the standard 802.11 quantizer disappears or the angle-difference mode rarely triggers, the claim of consistent gains is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim is that CSI feedback for Wi-Fi can be treated as a learned compression problem on the Givens-rotation angle parameters $(\phi, \psi)$ that the standard already extracts, and that a codec trained with a product vector-quantization module in the latent space is strictly more efficient than the standard's uniform scalar quantization at equal feedback cost. The second claim is that because consecutive angle frames are temporally correlated, transmitting the preprocessed wrapped difference $h(\Phi_t - \Phi_{t-1})$ instead of the full angles, gated by a sparsity threshold, yields substantial additional gains, provided error propagation is suppressed by either the parallel VQ (which quantizes the previous residual with a reserved bit budget) or the unified VQ (which adds the previous residual latent to the current encoder output before the single codebook). The third claim is that an AP-side refinement module, using the SimVP CNN on the last $T$ reconstructed frames, further improves reconstruction NMSE, and a recursive variant that feeds refined outputs back into future refinement improves it further; the full system is reported to outperform standard IEEE 802.11 feedback (T0/T1) in both NMSE and net throughput on the DeepMIMO and Wi-MIR datasets.

Load-bearing premise

The entire pipeline assumes the STA's channel estimate is perfect; simulations feed noiseless channel matrices into SVD and angle extraction, so the learned codebooks and the sparse-difference assumption have not been tested against real channel estimation error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At the same feedback overhead, the learned VQ codec on angle parameters improves reconstruction NMSE over the IEEE 802.11 standard quantizer, with the angle-difference strategy adding roughly 4 dB of NMSE gain at 576 bits on the DeepMIMO dataset.
  • The unified VQ method outperforms both the naive angle-difference feedback and the parallel VQ method while using only one decoder and no bit-allocation hyperparameter, reducing AP computation.
  • The CSI refinement module improves NMSE over no refinement, and the full combination (angle-difference feedback plus refinement) yields the highest net throughput in the simulated 802.11be system, about 64.7 Mb/s at 577 feedback bits versus about 19.4 Mb/s for standard T0 feedback at 9984 bits.
  • The reported gains persist across STA speeds from 0.4 to 2.8 m/s and across 20–320 MHz bandwidth, indicating the mechanism does not rely on massive-MIMO angular-delay sparsity.
  • On the Wi-MIR real-measurement dataset, the proposed framework also outperforms the standard feedback, supporting the claim beyond purely synthetic channels.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Since the sparsity trigger determines when the angle-difference mode is used, the framework's gains should shrink as feedback rate falls or STA speed rises; an implicit bound is the point where the trigger never fires, making the system reduce to initial feedback, and the speed sweep suggests that knee lies above 2.8 m/s.
  • The paper freezes the feedback network before training the refinement module, so the AP can switch refinement on and off without retraining; jointly training feedback and refinement with a two-phase schedule might yield larger gains but risks degrading the no-refinement operating point.
  • The VQ codebook indices are transmitted as fixed-length codewords; applying entropy coding to them, as the paper mentions as future work, would reduce feedback bits further without changing reconstruction since the decoder only sees indices.
  • All results assume perfect channel estimation at the STA; with real NDP-based estimation noise, the angle differences would carry an extra error term that could break the sparsity assumption, so validating on noisy estimates is the most direct test.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a deep-learning-based CSI feedback framework for Wi-Fi systems. The STA compresses the IEEE 802.11 Givens-rotation angle parameters through an encoder and a trainable vector-quantization module, and the AP reconstructs them with a decoder. To exploit temporal correlation, the authors introduce an angle-difference feedback strategy (with a preprocessing step for angle periodicity and two VQ designs, parallel and unified) and a CSI refinement module, including a recursive refinement strategy, that operates on the AP side. The methods are evaluated with the DeepMIMO and Wi-MIR datasets in terms of NMSE, complexity, and net throughput, and are compared with standard 802.11 feedback, two prior DL-based Wi-Fi CSI feedback methods, and two prior refinement architectures.

Significance. If the reported results hold, the paper makes a useful contribution to the relatively underexplored area of DL-based CSI feedback for Wi-Fi systems, where prior work has not combined trainable vector quantization with temporal-correlation exploitation. The empirical methodology is a strength: two datasets are used, including a real-measured dataset; comparisons include standard and prior DL baselines; and complexity in parameters, FLOPs, and runtime is reported. The proposed angle-difference preprocessing and recursive refinement are concrete, falsifiable design choices. The central NMSE claims appear internally consistent with the described training procedures, but the net-throughput claim, the absence of statistical uncertainty, and the perfect-channel-estimation assumption require attention before the paper's conclusions can be fully accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. V-D, Eq. (28), Table VI] The net-throughput comparison is not tied to the stated feedback period. Table I sets the feedback frequency to 40 Hz, but Eq. (28) defines Ndata as the data-transmission duration and the implementation appears to set Ndata to the duration of a single 2000-byte packet. The implied overhead ratio in Table VI (standard T0: 19.37/162.5 = 0.119, so Noverhead is about 7.4 times Ndata) corresponds to feedback being transmitted roughly once per packet, i.e., thousands of times per second, not once per 25 ms. With the stated 40 Hz periodicity, the standard T0 net throughput would be about 158-160 Mb/s rather than 19.37 Mb/s, and the proposed 577-bit scheme would be about 161-162 Mb/s. The advertised 3.3x net-throughput gain over the standard therefore collapses to a few percent under the paper's own feedback-frequency setting. The net-throughput component of the central claim is not supported as currently described and must be corrected or removed.
  2. [Sec. II-A] The paper assumes perfect channel estimation at the STA. The entire pipeline, including SVD, angle extraction, threshold decisions in Eq. (13)-(14), and codebook training, is built on noiseless channels. In a real Wi-Fi system, channel estimation errors will alter the distribution of the angle parameters and may degrade the learned codebooks and the sparse-difference assumption. Since the central claim is about practical Wi-Fi systems, the authors should either quantify the sensitivity of the reported NMSE and throughput gains to estimation errors or clearly delimit the claims to the perfect-CSI setting.
  3. [Sec. V-A and Figs. 11-13, Tables III, VI] All reported NMSE and throughput values are point estimates. No error bars, confidence intervals, or multiple-seed results are provided, despite the stochastic nature of neural-network training and the small performance differences at higher feedback overheads (e.g., Table VI shows a 1-2% net-throughput difference between some schemes). Without this information, it is difficult to assess whether the claimed gains, especially the smaller ones, are statistically reliable. The authors should report the variance across at least a few independent training runs or justify why the reported differences are robust.
  4. [Sec. V-A and Sec. III-C] The sparsity thresholds (mu_th, N_th) are set separately for the two datasets with no stated criterion or sensitivity analysis. Because the indicator It in Eq. (14) determines whether the angle-difference feedback is used at all, the reported gains of the angle-difference strategy depend directly on these hand-tuned values. The authors should provide a sensitivity study or a principled selection rule to show that the conclusions do not hinge on the particular threshold choices.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III-A] The word "inital" in the first sentence should be "initial."
  2. [Sec. III-C] In the sentence after Eq. (13), "where mu_th is a threshold a threshold below which values are considered zero" contains a duplicated phrase.
  3. [Sec. V-D] The phrase "For the CSI feedback, which is corresponded to CBR" should read "which corresponds to CBR."
  4. [Sec. V-A] The hyperparameters D=16, B=8, and beta=0.25 are stated once; it would be helpful to also state the codebook size and the number of sub-vectors explicitly for reproducing the results.
  5. [Table VI] The table structure repeats the scheme names in each sub-block; a cleaner layout would improve readability, though this is purely presentational.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the framework's gains are empirical benchmark results, and the self-citations are background rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's claimed contributions are validated by end-to-end training and held-out NMSE/throughput comparisons, not by a derivation that reduces to its own inputs. The VQ losses in (11), (19), (22), and (24) are standard objective functions (external [15]), and no fitted parameter is later relabeled as a prediction. The angle-difference selection rule (13)-(14) is a conditional transmission decision based on the measured sparsity of the true difference; the reported gains in Figs. 11-12 and Table III are empirical comparisons, not identities forced by the decision rule. Self-citations appear ([16], [29], [31], [34]) but none is load-bearing: [16] motivates VQ but the paper also provides direct comparisons; product VQ is also supported by external Sabin-Gray [30]; Givens-rotation background is supported by external [32]-[33]; [29] is only an introductory pointer to the authors' prior angle-difference work and no technical claim depends on it. The Table VI throughput modeling concern raised by the skeptic (per-packet overhead vs. 40 Hz feedback timing) is a simulation-validity and parameter-consistency issue, not a circular reduction of the paper's equations. Overall, the central claims retain independent empirical content and no step was found in which an output is equivalent to an input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on a modest set of hand-chosen hyperparameters and domain assumptions, but no new physical entities. The main unstated burden is that the simulations' temporal-correlation model and perfect-CSI assumption carry the reported gains.

free parameters (6)
  • Codebook size B = 8 bits
    Chosen in Sec. V-A; quantizes each D=16-dimensional subvector and determines the feedback bit budget for all VQ methods.
  • Subvector dimension D = 16
    Set in Sec. V-A; affects latent dimension and codebook geometry.
  • Commitment loss weight beta (and beta1, beta2) = 0.25
    Hyperparameter in the VQ-VAE losses (11), (19), and (22).
  • Sparsity thresholds (mu_th, N_th) = (0.3π, 20) for DeepMIMO, (0.1π, 5) for Wi-MIR
    Chosen per dataset in Sec. V-A to decide when angle-difference feedback is used; directly controls which frames are fed back as differences.
  • Residual bit allocation B_r (parallel VQ) = not stated
    In Sec. III-D, B_r splits bits between the current difference and the previous residual. The paper does not report the value used in simulation, making the parallel VQ results difficult to reproduce exactly.
  • Refinement time window T = 3 or 5, depending on overhead
    Table IV; selected as the value that maximizes performance in the comparison.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Perfect channel estimation at the STA
    Sec. II-A: 'The channel estimation is assumed to be perfect in this work.' Whether angle parameters remain accurate under realistic estimation error is unexamined.
  • domain assumption Temporal correlation of channel angles sufficient to make differences sparse
    The angle-difference feedback gain rests on the premise that consecutive angle parameters are close after wrap-around preprocessing; the paper validates this by simulation on specific datasets but it is not proven for general Wi-Fi environments.
  • standard math The VQ-VAE loss (11) trains the codebook and networks appropriately
    Adopted as the training objective from van den Oord et al. [15]; the paper does not analyze convergence or codebook usage.
  • domain assumption The SimVP video prediction architecture [40] transfers to angle-parameter refinement
    Used for the CSI refinement module; the paper presents simulations but no theoretical justification for why a video-frame predictor is suitable for angle matrices.
  • domain assumption The channel datasets (DeepMIMO, Wi-MIR) represent relevant Wi-Fi conditions
    All conclusions are empirical and depend on the training and test distribution of these datasets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Deep Learning-Based CSI Feedback for Wi-Fi Systems With Temporal Correlation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7WLNJKMD

@misc{pith2026250523198,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Deep Learning-Based CSI Feedback for Wi-Fi Systems With Temporal Correlation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7WLNJKMD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23198}
}
read the original abstract

To achieve higher throughput in next-generation Wi-Fi systems, a station (STA) needs to efficiently compress channel state information (CSI) and feed it back to an access point (AP). In this paper, we propose a novel deep learning (DL)-based CSI feedback framework tailored for next-generation Wi-Fi systems. Our framework incorporates a pair of encoder and decoder neural networks to compress and reconstruct the angle parameters of the CSI. To enable an efficient finite-bit representation of the encoder output, we introduce a trainable vector quantization module, which is integrated after the encoder network and jointly trained with both the encoder and decoder networks in an end-to-end manner. Additionally, we further enhance our framework by leveraging the temporal correlation of the angle parameters. Specifically, we propose an angle-difference feedback strategy which transmits the difference between the current and previous angle parameters when the difference is sufficiently small. This strategy accounts for the periodicity of the angle parameters through proper preprocessing and mitigates error propagation effects using novel feedback methods. We also introduce a DL-based CSI refinement module for the AP, which improves the reconstruction accuracy of the angle parameters by simultaneously utilizing both the previous and current feedback information. Simulation results demonstrate that our framework outperforms the standard method employed in current Wi-Fi systems. Our results also demonstrate significant performance gains achieved by the angle-difference feedback strategy and the CSI refinement module.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23198 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An illustration of a communication protocol in Wi-Fi systems. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. An illustration of overall CSI feedback procedures for IEEE 802.11 standard and DL-based methods. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. An illustration of preprocessing on Φdiff t designed to capture the periodicity of angle parameters. higher input dimension and requires additional enforcement to ensure orthogonality in the output. This rationale is numerically justified in Sec. V-B. Ultimately, the proposed DL-based CSI feedback method replaces the uniform quantization used in the conventional standard with an encoder, VQ module, and decoder follo… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: An instance for the scaled image plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A structure of two-stage VQ-based CSI feedback strategy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: An illustration of VQ frameworks for angle-difference feedback. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: An illustration of overall structure of proposed CSI refinement module. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: An illustration of the proposed recursive refinement strategy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison of the NMSE (dB) performance of the angle-difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of the NMSE (dB) performance of the CSI feedback [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of the NMSE (dB) performance of various CSI refinement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Part 11: Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical Layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 8: Enhancements for extremely high throughput,

    IEEE 802.11be, “Part 11: Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical Layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 8: Enhancements for extremely high throughput,” 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Part 11: Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 4: Enhancements for very high throughput for operation in bands below 6GHz,

    IEEE 802.11ac, “Part 11: Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 4: Enhancements for very high throughput for operation in bands below 6GHz,” 2013

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Part 11:Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 1: Enhancements for high efficiency WLAN,

    IEEE 802.11ax, “Part 11:Wireless LAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. Amendment 1: Enhancements for high efficiency WLAN,” 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Overview of deep learning-based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems,

    J. Guo, C.-K. Wen, S. Jin, and G. Y . Li, “Overview of deep learning-based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 8017–8045, Dec. 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Deep learning for massive MIMO CSI feedback,

    C.-K. Wen, W.-T. Shih, and S. Jin, “Deep learning for massive MIMO CSI feedback,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 748–751, Oct. 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Convolutional neural network- based multiple-rate compressive sensing for massive MIMO CSI feedback: Design, simulation, and analysis,

    J. Guo, C.-K. Wen, S. Jin, and G. Y . Li, “Convolutional neural network- based multiple-rate compressive sensing for massive MIMO CSI feedback: Design, simulation, and analysis,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 2827–2840, Apr. 2020. TABLE V EVM COEFFICIENT γ SPECIFIED IN IEEE 802.11 be STANDARD [1]. EVM (dB) [-10, -13) [-13, -16) [-16, -...

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Multi-resolution CSI feedback with deep learning in massive MIMO system,

    Z. Lu, J. Wang, and J. Song, “Multi-resolution CSI feedback with deep learning in massive MIMO system,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. (ICC), Jun. 2020, pp. 1–6

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Deep learning and compressive sensing-based CSI feedback in FDD massive MIMO systems,

    P. Liang, J. Fan, W. Shen, Z. Qin, and G. Y . Li, “Deep learning and compressive sensing-based CSI feedback in FDD massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 9217–9222, Aug. 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Dilated convolution based CSI feedback compression for massive MIMO systems,

    S. Tang, J. Xia, L. Fan, X. Lei, W. Xu, and A. Nallanathan, “Dilated convolution based CSI feedback compression for massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 11216–11221, Oct. 2022

    2022

  2. [10]

    An overview of limited feedback in wireless communication systems,

    D. J. Love, R. W. Heath, Jr., V . K. Lau, D. Gesbert, B. D. Rao, and M. Andrews, “An overview of limited feedback in wireless communication systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. , vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1341–1365, Oct. 2008

    2008

  3. [11]

    Sparse representation for wireless communications: A compressive sensing approach,

    Z. Qin, J. Fan, Y . Liu, Y . Gao, and G. Y . Li, “Sparse representation for wireless communications: A compressive sensing approach,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 40–58, May 2018

    2018

  4. [12]

    An efficient deep learning framework for low rate massive MIMO CSI reporting,

    Z. Liu, L. Zhang, and Z. Ding, “An efficient deep learning framework for low rate massive MIMO CSI reporting,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 68, no. 8, pp. 4761–4772, Aug. 2020

    2020

  5. [13]

    Changeable rate and novel quantization for CSI feedback based on deep learning,

    X. Liang, H. Chang, H. Li, X. Gu, and L. Zhang, “Changeable rate and novel quantization for CSI feedback based on deep learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 10100–10114, Dec. 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Gersho and R

    A. Gersho and R. M. Gray, Vector Quantization and Signal Compression, USA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Ch. 10, 1991

    1991

  7. [15]

    Neural discrete representation learning,

    A. van den Oord, O. Vinyals, and K. Kavukcuoglu, “Neural discrete representation learning,” Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. , Dec. 2017, pp. 6306–6315

    2017

  8. [16]

    Vector quantization for deep-learning- based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems,

    J. Shin, Y . Kang, and Y .-S. Jeon, “Vector quantization for deep-learning- based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2382–2386, Jun. 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Error-robust deep learning-based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems: A multi-rate vector quantization approach,

    J. Shin and Y .-S. Jeon, “Error-robust deep learning-based CSI feedback in massive MIMO systems: A multi-rate vector quantization approach,” in Proc. 15th Int. Conf. on ICT Convergence (ICTC), Oct. 2024, pp. 1–3

    2024

  10. [18]

    Entropy-constrained VQ-V AE for deep- learning-based CSI feedback,

    J. Shin, J. Park, and Y .-S. Jeon, “Entropy-constrained VQ-V AE for deep- learning-based CSI feedback,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 9870–9875, Jun. 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Deep learning-based CSI feedback approach for time-varying massive MIMO channels,

    T. Wang, C.-K. Wen, S. Jin, and G. Y . Li, “Deep learning-based CSI feedback approach for time-varying massive MIMO channels,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 416–419, Apr. 2019

    2019

  12. [20]

    MIMO channel information feedback using deep recurrent network,

    C. Lu, W. Xu, H. Shen, J. Zhu, and K. Wang, “MIMO channel information feedback using deep recurrent network,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 188–191, Jan. 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    A markovian model-driven deep learning framework for massive MIMO CSI feedback,

    Z. Liu, M. del Rosario, and Z. Ding, “A markovian model-driven deep learning framework for massive MIMO CSI feedback,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1214–1228, Feb. 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Lightweight differential frameworks for CSI feedback in time-varying massive MIMO systems,

    Y . Zhang, X. Zhang, and Y . Liu, “Lightweight differential frameworks for CSI feedback in time-varying massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 73, no. 5, pp. 6878–6893, May 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Deep learning for partial MIMO CSI feedback by exploiting channel temporal correlation,

    Y .-C. Lin, T.-S. Lee, and Z. Ding, “Deep learning for partial MIMO CSI feedback by exploiting channel temporal correlation,” in Proc. 55th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst., Comput. , 2021, pp. 345–350

    2021

  16. [24]

    Deep learning-based CSI feedback for RIS-aided massive MIMO systems with time correlation,

    Z. Peng, Z. Li, R. Liu, C. Pan, F. Yuan, and J. Wang, “Deep learning-based CSI feedback for RIS-aided massive MIMO systems with time correlation,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 2060–2064, Aug. 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Deep learning based CSI feedback method exploiting channel correlation in massive MIMO,

    J. Yu, A. Chen, and W. Xu, “Deep learning based CSI feedback method exploiting channel correlation in massive MIMO,” in Proc. IEEE/CIC Int. Conf. Commun. China (ICCC). , 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

  18. [26]

    Long short-term memory,

    S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long short-term memory,” Neural Comput., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1735—1780, Nov. 1997

    1997

  19. [27]

    LB-SciFi: Online learning-based channel feedback for MU-MIMO in wireless LANs,

    P. K. Sangdeh, H. Pirayesh, A. Mobiny, and H. Zeng, “LB-SciFi: Online learning-based channel feedback for MU-MIMO in wireless LANs,” in Proc. IEEE 28th Int. Conf. Netw. Protocols (ICNP) , 2020, pp. 1–11

    2020

  20. [28]

    Deep learning-based CSI feedback in Wi-Fi systems,

    F. Qi, J. Guo, Y . Cui, X. Li, C.-K. Wen, and S. Jin, “Deep learning-based CSI feedback in Wi-Fi systems,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Comput. Eng. Intell. Commun. (ISCEIC) , Nov. 2024, pp. 1–6

    2024

  21. [29]

    Deep learning-based angle- difference feedback with vector quantization for MIMO WLAN systems,

    J. Shin, E. Jeon, J. Kim, and Y .-S. Jeon, “Deep learning-based angle- difference feedback with vector quantization for MIMO WLAN systems,” submitted to Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), Dec. 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    Product code vector quantizers for waveform and voice coding,

    M. Sabin and R. Gray, “Product code vector quantizers for waveform and voice coding,” IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 474–488, Jun. 1984

    1984

  23. [31]

    ESC-MVQ: End-to-end semantic communication with multi-codebook vector quantization,

    J. Shin, Y . Oh, J. Park, J. Park, and Y .-S. Jeon, “ESC-MVQ: End-to-end semantic communication with multi-codebook vector quantization,” 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.11709

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Efficient feedback of the channel information for closedloop beamforming in WLAN,

    J. Kim and C. Aldana, “Efficient feedback of the channel information for closedloop beamforming in WLAN,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), May 2006, pp. 2226–2230

    2006

  25. [33]

    802.11 WLAN: History and new enabling MIMO techniques for next generation standards,

    J. Kim and I. Lee, “802.11 WLAN: History and new enabling MIMO techniques for next generation standards,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 134–140, Mar. 2015

    2015

  26. [34]

    Machine learning-aided dual CSI feedback in next generation WLANs,

    E. Jeon, W. B. Lee, M. Ahn, J. W. Lee, S. Kim, I. Kim, and J. Kim, “Machine learning-aided dual CSI feedback in next generation WLANs,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC) , Jun. 2023, pp. 1-6

    2023

  27. [35]

    A rotation-based method for precoding in gaussian MIMOME channels,

    X. Zhang, Y . Qi, and M. Vaezi, “A rotation-based method for precoding in gaussian MIMOME channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 1189–1200, Feb. 2021

    2021

  28. [36]

    A rotation-based precoding for MIMO broadcast channels with integrated services,

    M. Vaezi, Y . Qi, and X. Zhang, “A rotation-based precoding for MIMO broadcast channels with integrated services,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett. , vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 1708–1712, Nov. 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    Wi-MIR: A CSI dataset for Wi-Fi based multi-person interaction recognition,

    M. S. Islam, M. H. Kabir, M. A. Hasan, and W. Shin, “Wi-MIR: A CSI dataset for Wi-Fi based multi-person interaction recognition,”IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 67256–67272, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Multi stage vector quantization for speech cod- ing,

    B.-H. Juang and A. Gray, “Multi stage vector quantization for speech cod- ing,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process. (ICASSP), May 1982, pp. 597–600

    1982

  31. [39]

    Learning variable-rate CSI compression with multi-stage vector quantization,

    J. Lee, J. Kim, and Y . Choi, “Learning variable-rate CSI compression with multi-stage vector quantization,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. (ICC), Jun. 2024, pp. 5123–5128

    2024

  32. [40]

    SimVP: Simpler yet better video prediction,

    Z. Gao, C. Tan, L. Wu, and S. Z. Li, “SimVP: Simpler yet better video prediction,” in Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Jun. 2022, pp. 3170–3180

    2022

  33. [41]

    DeepMIMO: A generic deep learning dataset for mil- limeter wave and massive MIMO applications,

    A. Alkhateeb, “DeepMIMO: A generic deep learning dataset for mil- limeter wave and massive MIMO applications,” 2019, arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.06435

    2019 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Tool release: Gathering 802.11n traces with channel state information,

    D. Halperin, W. Hu, A. Sheth, and D. Wetherall, “Tool release: Gathering 802.11n traces with channel state information,” ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 53–53, 2011

    2011

  35. [43]

    Spectral temporal graph neural network for multivariate time-series forecasting,

    D. Cao et al., “Spectral temporal graph neural network for multivariate time-series forecasting,” Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. , Dec. 2020, pp. 17766–17778

    2020

  36. [44]

    Spectral temporal graph neural network for massive MIMO CSI prediction,

    S. Mourya, P. Reddy, S. Amuru, and K. K. Kuchi, “Spectral temporal graph neural network for massive MIMO CSI prediction,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1399–1403, May 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Attention model for massive MIMO CSI compression feedback and recovery,

    Q. Cai, C. Dong, and K. Niu, “Attention model for massive MIMO CSI compression feedback and recovery,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC), Apr. 2019, pp. 1–5

    2019

  38. [46]

    Deep learning-based implicit CSI feedback in massive MIMO,

    M. Chen, J. Guo, C.-K. Wen, S. Jin, G. Y . Li, and A. Yang, “Deep learning-based implicit CSI feedback in massive MIMO,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 935–950, Feb. 2022

    2022

  39. [47]

    Multi-domain correlation- aided implicit CSI feedback using deep learning,

    C. Jiang, J. Guo, C.-K. Wen, and S. Jin, “Multi-domain correlation- aided implicit CSI feedback using deep learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 13344–13358, Oct. 2024

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.