Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

The Field-based Model: A New Perspective on RF-based Material Sensing

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read WiField is a COTS-WiFi sensing system that claims to be the first to simultaneously identify multiple wavelength-scale targets of different materials placed at arbitrary positions in a sensing area, with reported average accuracy above 97…

desk verdict A promising but overclaimed attempt at multi-target wavelength-level WiFi material sensing; the central blind-identification claim is undermined by a likely label-leakage step in Eq. 11 and by an evaluation split that the abstract glosses over. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05640 v1 pith:EEUIWE75 submitted 2024-12-07 eess.SP

Fei Shang , Haocheng Jiang , Panlong Yang , Dawei Yan , Haohua Du , Xiang-Yang Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP MSC 78A4665N21
keywords WiFisensingmaterialidentificationinversescatteringBornapproximationphaselessCSIdeeplearningwavelength-leveltargetselectromagneticfieldmodel
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 presents WiField, a WiFi-based material sensing system built from commercial off-the-shelf devices, and claims it is the first such system to identify several wavelength-scale targets of different materials at the same time, regardless of where the targets are placed in the sensing area. The authors argue that existing RF material identification either fixes the target position, handles only one target, or requires targets much larger than the wavelength, and they set out to remove all three restrictions at once. Their route is a 'field-based' model: instead of tracking individual rays or links, they model the whole scattered electric field over the sensing domain using Maxwell's equations, then invert it from amplitude-only WiFi measurements. If the reported accuracy of over 97% for one to three small targets (5 cm x 10 cm, below the 12.5 cm wavelength) in a 1.05 m x 1.05 m area holds, then cheap WiFi hardware could deliver multi-object material identification for smart-home and ubiquitous-sensing applications without position constraints.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the discretized field sensing model: the sensing domain is split into an $N \times N$ grid, and the total field at each receiving antenna is written as the incident field plus a superposition of scattered fields from every grid cell, with the Green's function as the coupling kernel (Eq. 4). The key approximation is the Born approximation, which replaces the total field inside the target by the known incident field, linearizing the relation between permittivity and scattered field. To work with noisy WiFi data, the inverse step minimizes a mean-normalized amplitude discrepancy between the predicted and measured fields, with a binary cross-entropy regularization term that uses the target location map $\mathbf{I}$ to pull the solution toward the known support of the targets; Painter-Net, a convolutional encoder-decoder network originally designed for image segmentation, then maps the blurry recovered permittivity image to clean material labels.

What would settle it

Take a held-out set of target position combinations that were never seen in training, run the full WiField pipeline with the regularization term's target map $\mathbf{I}$ removed or estimated from the measured data itself rather than from labels, and compare the material identification accuracy to the reported 97%. If accuracy falls to near chance or drops far below the reported position-split number (71% at 80% training data), the claim that the system identifies multiple wavelength-level targets at arbitrary positions without knowing where they are is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that material identification can be treated as an inverse scattering problem over the whole sensing domain, not as a per-link reflection estimate, and that this formulation allows simultaneous identification of multiple near-wavelength targets at arbitrary positions from phaseless WiFi CSI. WiField builds a discretized forward model of the total electric field (incident plus scattered) based on Maxwell's equations, uses the Born approximation for weakly conducting everyday materials, and solves a regularized least-squares problem whose constraint compares normalized amplitude distributions rather than complex fields, so severe carrier-frequency-offset phase noise can be ignored. The preliminary permittivity map from this optimization is then fed to Painter-Net, a complex-valued U-Net trained with weighted focal loss to sharpen the blurry inverse solution into discrete material labels. The paper reports average identification accuracy above 97% across wood, glass, and rubber targets (5 cm x 10 cm each) with one to three targets randomly placed in a 1.05 m x 1.05 m area, and interprets this as evidence that diffraction and multi-target scattering, which defeat ray-tracing models at wavelength scale, are captured by the field model.

Load-bearing premise

The system's pre-identifying step is regularized by a map of where the targets are, and the paper does not say where that map comes from when target positions are unknown; if that map is only available from labeled ground truth, the claimed position-free inverse mapping cannot be run as described.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single WiFi setup could identify multiple small objects such as books, bottles, and containers simultaneously without requiring the objects to be at fixed spots.
  • Amplitude-only processing means the approach can work with single-antenna, low-cost devices, not just multi-antenna arrays.
  • The field-based formulation gives a unified way to handle diffraction and multiple scattering, which ray tracing cannot, so it should extend to other sub-6 GHz frequencies with adjusted wavelengths.
  • With more output classes and training data, the same network could distinguish a wider range of materials, since the forward model is material-agnostic.
  • If the 71.1% accuracy reported under position-based split with 80% training data reflects the true position generalization, then dense coverage of position combinations is needed before the 'arbitrary position' claim is reliable at the reported level.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The unresolved status of the target map $\mathbf{I}$ suggests a testable two-stage design: first estimate target locations from the amplitude data alone, then re-run the regularization with that estimated map; the gap between the two runs would quantify how much of the reported accuracy rests on knowing where the targets are.
  • Because the optimization compares normalized amplitude distributions, the system should be relatively robust to unknown transmit power and antenna gains beyond the single calibration step, a property that could make deployments across different rooms or device placements easier.
  • The same Maxwell-equation inverse framework, with different discretization and network output heads, could be adapted to related inverse problems such as through-wall imaging or gesture sensing where multiple scattering objects occupy the domain.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes WiField, a WiFi-based material identification system built from 44 COTS ESP32 devices. The system discretizes a 1.05 m x 1.05 m sensing domain into a 40 x 40 permittivity grid, applies a Born-approximation forward model, solves a phaseless inverse-scattering optimization that matches normalized amplitude distributions, and then feeds the resulting permittivity image to Painter-Net, a U-Net-style complex-valued network, for per-pixel material classification into air/wood/glass/rubber. The authors claim that this is the first WiFi sensing system to simultaneously identify multiple wavelength-level targets placed anywhere in the sensing area, reporting an average identification accuracy of over 97% for one to three targets of size 5 cm x 10 cm. The paper also argues that a field-based model is necessary because ray tracing fails for wavelength-scale targets.

Significance. If the claims were substantiated, this would be a notable advance in RF-based material sensing: a low-cost COTS deployment that handles multiple wavelength-scale targets at arbitrary positions, using amplitude-only WiFi data to avoid phase noise. The forward model is standard inverse scattering, and the idea of combining a physical-model-based solver with a learned enhancer is reasonable and potentially useful. However, the central claim of blind, position-free sensing is undermined by two load-bearing issues: the pre-identifying optimization in Eq. (11) uses the ground-truth target mask I as a regularization prior, with no inference-time procedure for obtaining it, and the headline accuracy is produced by a data split that leaks positions across training and test sets. Because these issues directly affect the validity of the main result, the paper cannot be recommended in its current form.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5.2, Eq. (11)] The regularization term in Eq. (11) is alpha * L_b(fn(abs.(epsilon), I)), where I is explicitly defined as the binary vector over the sensing domain that is 1 wherever a target is located and 0 otherwise. The paper never describes how I is obtained at inference time, when target positions are unknown. Section 5 states that the labeled data are generated in a supervised manner, and Fig. 6 lists 'Position information' as an input to the Pre-identifying block. As written, the pre-identifying step cannot be executed in the claimed 'place anywhere' scenario; it is an oracle-aided inversion that requires the very information the system claims to infer. This is load-bearing because the inverse problem has 1600 unknown permittivity cells and only dozens of links, so the location mask is what stabilizes the optimization. The absence of an ablation without I means the reported accuracy may largely reflect label leakage rather than blind sensing.
  2. [Sec. 7.2, Table 2 and Table 3] The 97.9% accuracy in Table 2 is obtained by five-fold cross-validation over the 197 material/position combinations, each with 20 repeated acquisitions. Because the folds are drawn from individual acquisitions rather than from distinct position/material combinations, identical positions can appear in both the training and test sets. The authors themselves acknowledge this in the 'Position flexibility' paragraph and re-split by combination in Table 3. Under that split, accuracy drops to 71.1% at an 80/20 training/test ratio and 84.8% at 90/10, not the claimed 97%. The paper's central claim of position flexibility is therefore not supported by the reported evaluation, and the headline accuracy should be attributed only to the placement-dependent setting.
  3. [Sec. 7.2, ablation baselines] The baseline comparison in Table 2 is not a fair blind comparison. The paper states that for KNN, decision tree, SVM, and random forest, the authors 'first binarize the truth value ... and then multiply with the pre-imaging results,' meaning the ground-truth target mask is used to binarize and mask the pre-imaging output before feature extraction. This gives the classical baselines access to the target locations, making them oracle-aided rather than blind predictors. Consequently, the large gap between these baselines and Painter-Net does not establish that Painter-Net's nonlinear enhancement is responsible for the improvement; a properly blinded baseline would not use the truth-value mask.
  4. [Sec. 5.2, Sec. 7.2] The paper does not provide an ablation or sensitivity analysis for the regularization parameter alpha in Eq. (11), the Focal loss weight alpha_i and focusing parameter gamma in Eq. (13), or the iteration count k of the GOM algorithm mentioned in Sec. 5.3. Since these parameters directly control the trade-off between the data-consistency term and the label-dependent regularization term, the results may be sensitive to their values. At minimum, the chosen values and a brief sensitivity study should be reported to show that the high accuracy is not an artifact of a particular parameter setting.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 6 heading] The section title 'Impalement' appears to be a typo for 'Implementation.'
  2. [Sec. 6.2] The abstract and Sec. 6.2 state the target size as 5 cm x 10 cm, but Sec. 6.2 specifies glass as 5 cm x 5 cm; the discrepancy should be resolved.
  3. [Sec. 5.3] The phrase 'Truth value is indeed' appears to be a typo; it should likely read 'Truth value is hard to obtain.'
  4. [Table 2] The header 'Accurcay' should be 'Accuracy.'
  5. [Fig. 5] The label 'raw data mo ving average' in Fig. 5(b) is missing a space; it should read 'raw data moving average.'
  6. [Sec. 5.3, Eq. (13)] The values of gamma and alpha_i used for the Focal loss are not provided; the text mentions only the coefficient list 0.005, 0.995, 0.995, 0.995, which is insufficient to reproduce the training.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Eq. 11's regularization term uses the ground-truth target mask I, so the headline accuracy encodes label leakage rather than blind position-free identification.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 1 (solution paragraph), Sec. 5 intro, Sec. 5.2 Eq. (11), Fig. 6]
    "we design an optimization method ... and introduce the position information of the target as a regularization term to constrain the solution space. ... + αLb (fn(abs.(ϵ), I)) ... I is the the binary vector corresponding to the sensing domain S (where the target is located as 1, otherwise as 0). ... we first generate an N × N matrix corresponding to the discretized sensing domain S, and label each element with the corresponding material."

    The inverse step that produces the permittivity estimate fed to Painter-Net is Eq. 11. Its regularization term is αLb(fn(abs.(ϵ), I)), where I is the binary target-location mask. The paper claims targets can be 'placed anywhere', so at inference their locations are the very quantity to be inferred; yet no procedure is given for computing I from the phaseless CSI. The only described source of I is the supervised N×N material matrix generated for each collection, i.e., ground-truth positions. With 1600 unknown permittivity cells and only dozens of links, this mask is what stabilizes the underdetermined inversion; removing or estimating it is not ablated.

full rationale

The forward model (Eqs. 1-10) is a standard Maxwell/Green's-function scattering formulation with external textbook citations; it is not circular. The Born approximation is an external approximation, not fitted here. Painter-Net training with material labels is ordinary supervised learning and is not itself circular; the position-flexibility re-split (Table 3) is an honest acknowledgment that the random five-fold split leaks repeated acquisitions. However, that re-split does not repair the Eq. 11 problem: the pre-identifying objective consumed the ground-truth target mask I for every test sample as well. The paper's declaration in Sec. 1 that they 'introduce the position information of the target as a regularization term' confirms that target positions are an input to the inversion, not an output. Consequently the central claim—simultaneous identification of multiple wavelength-level targets placed anywhere—reduces in part to a supervised classification conditioned on the supplied location mask. Self-citations to the authors' prior systems (LiqRay, LiquImager, Wi-Painter) are contextual and not load-bearing for the derivation. Score 6, not 8-10, because the Maxwell forward model and the material-class labels retain independent content; the circularity is a partial, though central, input-to-prediction leakage.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard scattering physics, a weakly-scattering approximation, and a supervised deep network. No new physical entities are introduced. The most serious ledger item is the ground-truth mask I in Eq. 11, which is an unstated label input to the reconstruction.

free parameters (3)
  • alpha in Eq. 11
    Regularization weight in the phaseless least-squares objective; no value is reported.
  • Focal loss gamma
    Focusing parameter in Eq. 13; no value is reported.
  • GOM iteration count k
    Painter-Net input is described as the result after k rounds of iteration, but k is not specified.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Maxwell's equations and the free-space Green's function discretization describe the scattering field.
    Equations (2)-(5) rely on standard electromagnetic scattering theory from refs [8, 11, 12].
  • domain assumption Glass, wood, and rubber are weak scatterers, so the Born approximation (Et approximately Ei) is valid.
    Sec. 3.1 uses the Born approximation after arguing these materials do not strongly scatter EM waves.
  • domain assumption A 2D scalar model with z-polarized thin-straight antennas adequately represents the sensing domain.
    Sec. 2 and Fig. 3 consider a 2D top-down surface perpendicular to the antenna; no validation of this reduction is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper The binary target map I used in Eq. 11 is available during the optimization.
    Eq. 11 regularizes with ground-truth target locations, but no inference-time source for I is described.
  • domain assumption The 197 collected position/material combinations are representative enough for Painter-Net to generalize to arbitrary positions.
    The paper argues sparsity is handled by physical constraints, but Table 3 shows strong degradation on held-out positions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Field-based Model: A New Perspective on RF-based Material Sensing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EEUIWE75

@misc{pith2026241205640,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Field-based Model: A New Perspective on RF-based Material Sensing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EEUIWE75}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05640}
}
read the original abstract

This paper introduces the design and implementation of WiField, a WiFi sensing system deployed on COTS devices that can simultaneously identify multiple wavelength-level targets placed flexibly. Unlike traditional RF sensing schemes that focus on specific targets and RF links, WiField focuses on all media in the sensing area for the entire electric field. In this perspective, WiField provides a unified framework to finely characterize the diffraction, scattering, and other effects of targets at different positions, materials, and numbers on signals. The combination of targets in different positions, numbers, and sizes is just a special case. WiField proposed a scheme that utilizes phaseless data to complete the inverse mapping from electric field to material distribution, thereby achieving the simultaneous identification of multiple wavelength-level targets at any position and having the potential for deployment on a wide range of low-cost COTS devices. Our evaluation results show that it has an average identification accuracy of over 97% for 1-3 targets (5 cm * 10 cm in size) with different materials randomly placed within a 1.05 m * 1.05 m area.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05640 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Characterizing the overall effect of different target combinations on the electric field in a unified framework. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Scattering field. (a) The scattering field intensity of the antenna is inversely proportional to the distance. (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The total electric field at the receiving antenna is the superposition of the incident field and the scattered field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The ground truth permittivity distribution (a) and the reconstructed permittivity distribution (b) using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The amplitude of WiFi signals is more stable than the phase after smoothing. (a) Amplitude. (b) Phase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: System overview. 3.2 Practical issues In practical applications, it is difficult to directly employ the sensing approach described above. There are three practical issues that need to be addressed first. (1) The intermediate parameters required for equation solving are…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The ground truth permittivity distribution (a) and the results (b) using pre-identifying. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The structure of the network. where E[·] denotes the expectation, Eˆ p t is the assignment of CSI which is from the p-th transmitting antenna to the received antennas, α is the regularization parameter, Lb is the binary cross entropy (BCE) loss, fn(·) represents the ma…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Experimental Setup. We use multiple inexpensive WiFi devices as transmitters and receivers, with a total cost [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Recognition accuracy over 97%. 6 Impalement 6.1 Hardware and software. We used 44 ESP32 modules for signal receiving and transmitting, with 4 of them for signal transmitting and 40 for signal receiving. Each ESP32 module has only one antenna and costs about 2.75 $. Th…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Visualization of material recognition For Painter-Net, we set the number of input channels Ntone to 30 (30 different subcarriers, with the same numbering as CSI TOOLS [21]), and the number of output channels Nclass to 4. The label values corresponding to air, wood, gl…

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. Vision Meets WiFi: Physics-Grounded Estimation of Volumetric Mechanical Properties

    cs.CV 2026-08 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    ViWi uses material slots and a simulated RF descriptor to predict voxel-level Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, and density, reporting gains over prior work on a synthetic benchmark.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    TagScan: Simulta- neous Target Imaging and Material Identification with Commodity RFID Devices

    Ju Wang, Jie Xiong, Xiaojiang Chen, Hongbo Jiang, Rajesh Krishna Balan, and Dingyi Fang. TagScan: Simulta- neous Target Imaging and Material Identification with Commodity RFID Devices. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking , pages 288–300. ACM

    work page

  2. [2]

    LiquID: A Wireless Liquid IDentifier

    Ashutosh Dhekne, Mahanth Gowda, Yixuan Zhao, Haitham Hassanieh, and Romit Roy Choudhury. LiquID: A Wireless Liquid IDentifier. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, MobiSys ’18, pages 442–454. ACM. 13 arXiv Template A PREPRINT

    work page

  3. [3]

    LiqRay: Non-invasive and fine-grained liquid recognition system

    Fei Shang, Panlong Yang, Yubo Yan, and Xiang-Yang Li. LiqRay: Non-invasive and fine-grained liquid recognition system. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing And Networking , MobiCom ’22, pages 296–309. ACM

    work page

  4. [4]

    WiMi: Target Material Identification with Commodity Wi-Fi Devices

    Chao Feng, Jie Xiong, Liqiong Chang, Ju Wang, Xiaojiang Chen, Dingyi Fang, and Zhanyong Tang. WiMi: Target Material Identification with Commodity Wi-Fi Devices. In 2019 IEEE 39th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS) , pages 700–710. IEEE

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    FG-LiquID: A Contact-less Fine-grained Liquid Identifier by Pushing the Limits of Millimeter-wave Sensing

    Yumeng Liang, Anfu Zhou, Huanhuan Zhang, Xinzhe Wen, and Huadong Ma. FG-LiquID: A Contact-less Fine-grained Liquid Identifier by Pushing the Limits of Millimeter-wave Sensing. 5(3):1–27

    work page

  6. [6]

    LiquImager: Fine-grained Liquid Identification and Container Imaging System with COTS WiFi Devices

    Fei Shang, Panlong Yang, Dawei Yan, Sijia Zhang, and Xiang-Yang Li. LiquImager: Fine-grained Liquid Identification and Container Imaging System with COTS WiFi Devices. 8(1):1–29

    work page

  7. [7]

    Wi-Painter: Fine-grained Material Identification and Image Delineation Using COTS WiFi Devices

    Dawei Yan, Panlong Yang, Fei Shang, Weiwei Jiang, and Xiang-Yang Li. Wi-Painter: Fine-grained Material Identification and Image Delineation Using COTS WiFi Devices. 7(4):1–25

    work page

  8. [8]

    Griffiths and Colin Inglefield

    David J. Griffiths and Colin Inglefield. Introduction to Electrodynamics. 73(6):574–574

    work page

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Marhefka

    John Daniel Kraus and Ronald J. Marhefka. Antennas for All Applications

  2. [10]

    Electromagnetic Waves and Antennas

    Sophocles J Orfanidis. Electromagnetic Waves and Antennas. Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ

  3. [11]

    Deep-Learning Schemes for Full-Wave Nonlinear Inverse Scattering Problems

    Zhun Wei and Xudong Chen. Deep-Learning Schemes for Full-Wave Nonlinear Inverse Scattering Problems. 57(4):1849–1860

  4. [12]

    Computational Methods for Electromagnetic Inverse Scattering

    Xu Dong Chen. Computational Methods for Electromagnetic Inverse Scattering . John Wiley & Sons

  5. [13]

    PackquID: In-packet liquid identification using RF signals. page 28

  6. [14]

    A. J. Devaney. Inverse-scattering theory within the Rytov approximation. 6(8):374

  7. [15]

    Slaney, A.C

    M. Slaney, A.C. Kak, and L.E. Larsen. Limitations of Imaging with First-Order Diffraction Tomography. 32(8):860–874

  8. [16]

    Dual-Module NMM-IEM Machine Learning for Fast Electromagnetic Inversion of Inhomogeneous Scatterers With High Contrasts and Large Electrical Dimensions

    Li-Ye Xiao, Jiawen Li, Feng Han, Wei Shao, and Qing Huo Liu. Dual-Module NMM-IEM Machine Learning for Fast Electromagnetic Inversion of Inhomogeneous Scatterers With High Contrasts and Large Electrical Dimensions. 68(8):6245–6255

  9. [17]

    U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation

  10. [18]

    Self-supervised Visual Feature Learning with Deep Neural Networks: A Survey

    Longlong Jing and Yingli Tian. Self-supervised Visual Feature Learning with Deep Neural Networks: A Survey

  11. [19]

    DrWatson: The perfect sidekick for your scientific inquiries

    George Datseris, Jonas Isensee, Sebastian Pech, and Tamás Gál. DrWatson: The perfect sidekick for your scientific inquiries. 5(54):2673

  12. [20]

    Optimization.jl: A Unified Optimization Package

    Vaibhav Kumar Dixit and Christopher Rackauckas. Optimization.jl: A Unified Optimization Package

  13. [21]

    Tool release: Gathering 802.11n traces with channel state information

    Daniel Halperin, Wenjun Hu, Anmol Sheth, and David Wetherall. Tool release: Gathering 802.11n traces with channel state information. 41(1):53

  14. [22]

    Wi-drone: Wi-fi-based 6-DoF tracking for indoor drone flight control

    Guoxuan Chi, Zheng Yang, Jingao Xu, Chenshu Wu, Jialin Zhang, Jianzhe Liang, and Yunhao Liu. Wi-drone: Wi-fi-based 6-DoF tracking for indoor drone flight control. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services , pages 56–68. ACM

  15. [23]

    Widar2.0: Passive Human Tracking with a Single Wi-Fi Link

    Kun Qian, Chenshu Wu, Yi Zhang, Guidong Zhang, Zheng Yang, and Yunhao Liu. Widar2.0: Passive Human Tracking with a Single Wi-Fi Link. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services , pages 350–361. ACM

  16. [24]

    mD-track: Leveraging multi-dimensionality for passive indoor wi-fi tracking

    Ya Xiong Xie, Jie Xiong, Mo Li, and Kyle Jamieson. mD-track: Leveraging multi-dimensionality for passive indoor wi-fi tracking. In The 25th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking , pages 1–16

  17. [25]

    WiFi-Sleep: Sleep Stage Monitoring Using Commodity Wi-Fi Devices

    Bohan Yu, Yuxiang Wang, Kai Niu, Youwei Zeng, Tao Gu, Leye Wang, Cuntai Guan, and Daqing Zhang. WiFi-Sleep: Sleep Stage Monitoring Using Commodity Wi-Fi Devices. 8(18):13900–13913

  18. [26]

    Wi-Cyclops: Room-Scale WiFi Sensing System for Respiration Detection Based on Single-Antenna

    Youwei Zhang, Feiyu Han, Panlong Yang, Yuanhao Feng, Yubo Yan, and Ran Guan. Wi-Cyclops: Room-Scale WiFi Sensing System for Respiration Detection Based on Single-Antenna. 20(4):1–24

  19. [27]

    WiFi CSI-based device-free sensing: From Fresnel zone model to CSI-ratio model

    Dan Wu, Youwei Zeng, Fusang Zhang, and Daqing Zhang. WiFi CSI-based device-free sensing: From Fresnel zone model to CSI-ratio model. 4(1):88–102

  20. [28]

    Karanam, Hong Cai, and Yasamin Mostofi

    Belal Korany, Chitra R. Karanam, Hong Cai, and Yasamin Mostofi. XModal-ID: Using WiFi for Through-Wall Person Identification from Candidate Video Footage. In The 25th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, pages 1–15. ACM. 14 arXiv Template A PREPRINT

  21. [29]

    See through walls with WiFi! In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2013 Conference on SIGCOMM, pages 75–86

    Fadel Adib and Dina Katabi. See through walls with WiFi! In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2013 Conference on SIGCOMM, pages 75–86. ACM

    2013

  22. [30]

    {LiveTag}: Sensing {human-Object} interaction through passive chipless {WiFi} tags

    Chu Han Gao, Yi Long Li, and Xin Yu Zhang. {LiveTag}: Sensing {human-Object} interaction through passive chipless {WiFi} tags. pages 533–546. USENIX Association

  23. [31]

    Wi-fi see it all: Generative adversarial network-augmented versatile wi-fi imaging

    Chenning Li, Zheng Liu, Yuguang Yao, Zhichao Cao, Mi Zhang, and Yunhao Liu. Wi-fi see it all: Generative adversarial network-augmented versatile wi-fi imaging. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pages 436–448. ACM

  24. [32]

    Wiffract: A new foundation for RF imaging via edge tracing

    Anurag Pallaprolu, Belal Korany, and Yasamin Mostofi. Wiffract: A new foundation for RF imaging via edge tracing. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing And Networking , pages 255–267. ACM

  25. [33]

    Contactless and Fine-Grained Liquid Identification Utilizing Sub-6 GHz Signals

    Fei Shang, Panlong Yang, Yubo Yan, and Xiang-Yang Li. Contactless and Fine-Grained Liquid Identification Utilizing Sub-6 GHz Signals. 23(5):4992–5008

  26. [34]

    Wi-Fruit: See Through Fruits with Smart Devices

    Yutong Liu, Landu Jiang, Linghe Kong, Qiao Xiang, Xue Liu, and Guihai Chen. Wi-Fruit: See Through Fruits with Smart Devices. 5(4):1–29

  27. [35]

    Chenshu Wu, Feng Zhang, Beibei Wang, and K. J. Ray Liu. mSense: Towards Mobile Material Sensing with a Single Millimeter-Wave Radio. 4(3):1–20

  28. [36]

    LiqDetector: Enabling Container-Independent Liquid Detection with mmWave Signals Based on a Dual-Reflection Model

    Zhu Wang, Yifan Guo, Zhihui Ren, Wenchao Song, Zhuo Sun, Chao Chen, Bin Guo, and Zhiwen Yu. LiqDetector: Enabling Container-Independent Liquid Detection with mmWave Signals Based on a Dual-Reflection Model. 7(4):1–24

  29. [37]

    Contact- less Material Identification with Millimeter Wave Vibrometry

    Hailan Shanbhag, Sohrab Madani, Akhil Isanaka, Deepak Nair, Saurabh Gupta, and Haitham Hassanieh. Contact- less Material Identification with Millimeter Wave Vibrometry. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services , pa...

  30. [38]

    Mmtaster: A Mobile System for Fine-Grained and Robust Alcohol Sensing

    Yumeng Liang, Pu Shi, Zixin Zheng, Lingyu Pu, Anfu Zhou, and Huadong Ma. Mmtaster: A Mobile System for Fine-Grained and Robust Alcohol Sensing. 23(7):7830–7847. 15

Pith tools

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