Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Thermodynamically Consistent Hybrid and Permutation-Invariant Neural Yield Functions for Anisotropic Plasticity

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A permutation-invariant input-convex neural network can learn convex anisotropic yield functions from just 12 uniaxial samples and generalize better than classical Hill-48 and Yld2004-18p criteria.

desk verdict The abstract promises a useful sparse-data yield-function method, but the submitted full text is an unrelated beamforming paper, so there is nothing to review yet. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.15923 v1 pith:G7VTARP3 submitted 2025-08-21 cs.CE

Asghar A. Jadoon , Ravi G. Patel , Brian N. Granzow , Reese E. Jones , D. Thomas Seidl , Jan N. Fuhg This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CE
keywords anisotropicplasticityyieldfunctioninputconvexneuralnetworkpermutationinvarianceLankfordratiosthermodynamicconsistencysparsedatacross-validation
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 tries to show that anisotropic metal plasticity can be learned from extremely sparse experiments if the neural network's architecture enforces the right physics. It builds two frameworks: a hybrid that corrects the Hill yield criterion with an Input Convex Neural Network, and a permutation-invariant ICNN (PI-ICNN) that learns an isotropic yield function in principal-stress space and injects anisotropy through linear stress transformations. Both are convex by construction, so the yield surface is thermodynamically admissible without post-processing. Trained on 12 uniaxial samples of Al-7079 with measured yield stresses and Lankford ratios (width-to-thickness strain ratios), the PI-ICNN frameworks generalize better across nine k-fold splits than Hill-48, Yld2004-18p, pure ICNNs, and the hybrid, even beating Yld2004-18p on held-out data. If true, this means accurate, consistent yield surfaces and Lankford ratios can be obtained from minimal data, cutting the experimental cost of calibrating forming simulations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the permutation-invariant Input Convex Neural Network (PI-ICNN): an ICNN whose output is convex in the input stress via non-negative weights and convex activations, and symmetric under permutations of the principal stresses. Convexity is what enforces thermodynamic consistency of the yield surface, while permutation invariance encodes the indistinguishability of principal stress axes; anisotropy is then embedded by feeding the network a linearly transformed stress tensor. The same convex machinery appears in the hybrid model, where an ICNN correction is added to the Hill-48 criterion, but the paper's comparative results single out the PI-ICNN as the version that general

What would settle it

Run the same PI-ICNN against a larger experimental campaign on the same Al-7079 that includes biaxial and plane-strain yield stresses and Lankford ratios not among the 12 uniaxial samples. If the network's predicted yield locus at those unseen stress states is no closer to measurement than Hill-48's, or if the k-fold advantage over Yld2004-18p shrinks as sample size grows, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that permutation invariance plus convexity, not network capacity or fitting power, is what lets a neural yield function generalize from sparse data. The PI-ICNN first represents a convex isotropic yield function in principal-stress space, making the response invariant to swapping principal stresses, then applies a learned linear transformation to the stress tensor to represent anisotropy. Because input convexity guarantees the yield surface is convex, the function is thermodynamically admissible by construction. Against 12 experimental samples and nine k-fold splits, the PI-ICNN variants outperform the classical Hill-48 and Yld2004-18p criteria, whi

Load-bearing premise

The entire comparison depends on 12 uniaxial samples, one yield stress and one Lankford ratio each, containing enough directional information to pin down a six-dimensional anisotropic yield surface, so that nine k-fold splits of those samples measure real generalization rather than noise; the paper also assumes that convexity is the only thermodynamic-consistency condition the yield function must satisfy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Convex, thermodynamically admissible yield surfaces can be calibrated from as few as a dozen uniaxial tests rather than from large biaxial or cruciform test campaigns.
  • On held-out folds, PI-ICNNs predict yield loci and Lankford ratios more accurately than classical Hill-48 and Yld2004-18p, so classical criteria are not the automatic default for sparse-data calibration.
  • Because convexity is architectural rather than enforced after the fact, no correction or projection step is needed to keep the yield surface admissible during training or use.
  • The same framework can be extended to coupled hardening laws and microstructure-informed inputs, potentially enabling rapid constitutive-model generation for forming simulations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The apparent advantage over Yld2004-18p may be driven by the architecture's strong inductive biases, an isotropy prior plus convexity, rather than by the data; if so, adding more samples of different loading modes should matter less than choosing the right prior, and that is a testable hypothesis.
  • The linear-transformation embedding suggests transfer across textures: re-fitting only the transformation matrix to new orientation data may adapt a previously learned yield function to a different anisotropy state.
  • The same permutation-invariant convex construction could be adapted to pressure-dependent yield in polymers or geomaterials, or to other material symmetries, by changing the transformation group, though the paper does not test this.
  • A practical extension would fuse active learning with the k-fold evaluation to choose which sample orientations are most informative, since 12 samples are too sparse to guarantee coverage of six-dimensional stress space.
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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The submission, as identified by the abstract, proposes hybrid and permutation-invariant input-convex neural network (PI-ICNN) yield functions for anisotropic plasticity, calibrated on 12 uniaxial Al-7079 samples, and claims better generalization than Hill-48, Yld2004-18p, pure ICNNs, and a Hill+ICNN hybrid under k-fold cross-validation. However, the full text supplied for arXiv:2508.15923 is a completely different paper, 'Tri-Hybrid Beamforming for Radiation-Center Reconfigurable Antenna Array' (arXiv:2508.15924). None of the claimed methods, equations, figures, dataset details, or results appear in the full text. The report therefore cannot evaluate the technical content of the claimed plasticity contribution.

Significance. If the claimed PI-ICNN results were supported, the work would be potentially significant for constitutive modeling: thermodynamically consistent convex yield functions learned from sparse data, and outperforming classical criteria, would be a useful contribution. The abstract's honest acknowledgment that pure ICNN and hybrid approaches overfit is a positive sign. However, with no inspectable method or results, the contribution cannot be assessed. The mismatch is not a presentation issue; the manuscript body is unrelated to its abstract, so the central claim is unsupported in the provided record.

major comments (2)
  1. [Full Text (all sections)] The full text is arXiv:2508.15924, a beamforming paper. It contains no ICNN architecture, no linear stress transformations, no principal-stress representation, no Hill-48/Yld2004-18p comparison, no Al-7079 dataset, and no k-fold validation/test losses. The abstract's central claims are therefore unsupported by any inspectable evidence. This is a load-bearing failure: the manuscript cannot be reviewed as a plasticity paper.
  2. [Abstract (comparison claims)] Even taking the abstract at face value, it reports no quantitative validation/test losses, no error bars, no hyperparameters, and no per-fold results. The claimed advantage over Yld2004-18p cannot be independently checked. A proper manuscript would need tables of losses with standard deviations, exact data splits, and parameter counts; these are entirely absent. The absence of this information compounds the full-text mismatch.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract (data description)] The abstract states 'nine datasets were generated using k-fold cross-validation' from 12 uniaxial samples, but the relationship between the 12 samples and the nine folds is unspecified. If a corrected manuscript is provided, this should be clarified.
  2. [References] All references in the full text are wireless-communications references. There is no citation to yield-function literature, ICNN literature, or Lankford-ratio data sources. This is consistent with the full-text mismatch.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity identifiable: the submitted full text is an unrelated beamforming paper, so no derivation chain from yield-function premises to predictions can be inspected or reduced.

full rationale

No circular step can be established from the available record. The abstract describes calibrating PI-ICNN and hybrid yield-function models on 12 Al-7079 uniaxial samples and evaluating them with k-fold cross-validation; that structure is a normal fit-then-validate design, not a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. However, the full text supplied for arXiv:2508.15923 is actually the article 'Tri-Hybrid Beamforming for Radiation-Center Reconfigurable Antenna Array' (arXiv:2508.15924), containing only beamforming equations, optimization algorithms, and simulation results for mmWave communications. There are no equations, sections, or figures on yield loci, Lankford ratios, input-convex neural networks, Hill-48, Yld2004-18p, or the Al-7079 dataset. Consequently, the claimed derivation chain from thermodynamic consistency and permutation invariance to the reported generalization results is not present in the manuscript text, and no equation-level equivalence, self-citation reliance, or renamed fit can be quoted. The mismatch is a serious evidentiary/support defect and makes the central claim unverifiable from the supplied document, but it is not itself a circularity defect, and the reviewer rules prohibit scoring circularity on speculation.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is incomplete by necessity: the supplied full text is an unrelated article, so only assumptions visible in the abstract can be listed. The dominant parameters are the fitted network weights and transformation matrices, which are calibrated to one sparse dataset and not reported in the abstract.

free parameters (4)
  • ICNN weights (pure and hybrid networks)
    All network parameters are calibrated to the 12-sample Al-7079 dataset; no values, regularization, or architecture details appear in the abstract.
  • Hill-48 coefficients in the hybrid model
    The hybrid augments the Hill criterion with an ICNN; the Hill coefficients are fitted to the measured yield stresses and Lankford ratios.
  • Linear stress transformation matrices (PI-ICNN)
    Anisotropy is embedded through linear transformations of principal stress; the transformation entries are fitted to the data.
  • k-fold split configuration = 9 folds over 12 samples
    Nine datasets are generated by k-fold cross-validation; fold composition and seeds are not given, and all comparisons depend on this choice.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Thermodynamic consistency requires convexity of the yield function.
    The abstract states that constraints 'such as convexity' are 'dictated by thermodynamic consistency'; this is standard in rate-independent plasticity but not proven in the abstract.
  • domain assumption The 12 uniaxial Al-7079 samples with yield stresses and Lankford ratios are sufficient to identify the anisotropic yield surface.
    All calibration and the reported comparisons rest on this dataset; representativeness and measurement uncertainty are not discussed in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Hill-48 and Yld2004-18p are valid and correctly implemented baselines.
    The comparison treats these two classical criteria as references; correct implementation cannot be verified from the abstract.
  • domain assumption Anisotropy can be represented by linear transformations of an isotropic yield function in principal stress space.
    This Barlat-style construction is the mechanical core of the PI-ICNN approach and is asserted in the abstract without derivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermodynamically Consistent Hybrid and Permutation-Invariant Neural Yield Functions for Anisotropic Plasticity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G7VTARP3

@misc{pith2026250815923,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermodynamically Consistent Hybrid and Permutation-Invariant Neural Yield Functions for Anisotropic Plasticity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G7VTARP3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.15923}
}
read the original abstract

Plastic anisotropy in metals remains challenging to model. This is partly because conventional phenomenological yield criteria struggle to combine a highly descriptive, flexible representation with constraints, such as convexity, dictated by thermodynamic consistency. To address this gap, we employ architecturally-constrained neural networks and develop two data-driven frameworks: (i) a hybrid model that augments the Hill yield criterion with an Input Convex Neural Network (ICNN) to get an anisotropic yield function representation in the six-dimensional stress space and (ii) a permutation-invariant input convex neural network (PI-ICNN) that learns an isotropic yield function representation in the principal stress space and embeds anisotropy through linear stress transformations. We calibrate the proposed frameworks on a sparse Al-7079 extrusion experimental dataset comprising 12 uniaxial samples with measured yield stresses and Lankford ratios. To test the robustness of each framework, nine datasets were generated using k-fold cross-validation. These datasets were then used to quantitatively compare Hill-48, Yld2004-18p, pure ICNNs, the hybrid approach, and the PI-ICNN frameworks. While ICNNs and hybrid approaches can almost perfectly fit the training data, they exhibit significant over-fitting, resulting in high validation and test losses. In contrast, both PI-ICNN frameworks demonstrate better generalization capabilities, even outperforming Yld2004-18p on the validation and test data. These results demonstrate that PI-ICNNs unify physics-based constraints with the flexibility of neural networks, enabling the accurate prediction of both yield loci and Lankford ratios from minimal data. The approach opens a path toward rapid, thermodynamically consistent constitutive models for advanced forming simulations and future exploration of coupled hardening or microstructure-informed design.

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. Probabilistic Forecasting Cryptocurrencies Volatility: From Point to Quantile Forecasts

    q-fin.ST 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    The abstract proposes QRS and probabilistic stacking for quantile forecasts of cryptocurrency realized variance, claiming QRS with linear models performs best, but the supplied full text is unrelated.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Tri-hybrid beamforming for radiation-center re- configurable antenna array,

    Y . Li and C. Qi, “Tri-hybrid beamforming for radiation-center re- configurable antenna array,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), accepted, Taipei, Taiwan, Dec. 2025, pp. 1–6

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    A vision of 6G wireless systems: Applications, trends, technologies, and open research problems,

    W. Saad, M. Bennis, and M. Chen, “A vision of 6G wireless systems: Applications, trends, technologies, and open research problems,” IEEE Netw., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 134–142, May 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    6G wireless communication systems: Applications, requirements, technolo- gies, challenges, and research directions,

    M. Z. Chowdhury, M. Shahjalal, S. Ahmed, and Y . M. Jang, “6G wireless communication systems: Applications, requirements, technolo- gies, challenges, and research directions,” IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc., vol. 1, pp. 957–975, Jul. 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Acquisition of channel state information for mmWave massive MIMO: Traditional and machine learning-based approaches,

    C. Qi, P. Dong, W. Ma, H. Zhang, Z. Zhang, and G. Y . Li, “Acquisition of channel state information for mmWave massive MIMO: Traditional and machine learning-based approaches,” Sci. China Inf. Sci. , vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 1–16, Aug. 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    A tutorial on extremely large-scale MIMO for 6G: Fundamentals, signal processing, and applications,

    Z. Wang, J. Zhang, H. Du, D. Niyato, S. Cui, B. Ai, M. Debbah, K. B. Letaief, and H. V . Poor, “A tutorial on extremely large-scale MIMO for 6G: Fundamentals, signal processing, and applications,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1560–1605, 3rd Quart. 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Degrees of freedom of MIMO cellular networks: Decomposition and linear beamforming design,

    G. Sridharan and W. Yu, “Degrees of freedom of MIMO cellular networks: Decomposition and linear beamforming design,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 3339–3364, June 2015. 13

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Joint beamforming and antenna selection for sum rate maximization in cognitive radio networks,

    V .-D. Nguyen, C. T. Nguyen, H. V . Nguyen, and O.-S. Shin, “Joint beamforming and antenna selection for sum rate maximization in cognitive radio networks,” IEEE Commun. Lett. , vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1369–1372, June 2017

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Massive MIMO with antenna selection: Fundamental limits and applications,

    S. Asaad, A. M. Rabiei, and R. R. M ¨uller, “Massive MIMO with antenna selection: Fundamental limits and applications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 8502–8516, Dec. 2018

    work page 2018

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Joint antenna selection and beamforming for massive MIMO-enabled over-the-air federated learning,

    S. Asaad, H. Tabassum, C. Ouyang, and P. Wang, “Joint antenna selection and beamforming for massive MIMO-enabled over-the-air federated learning,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 8603–8618, Aug. 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Movable antennas for wireless communication: Opportunities and challenges,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wireless communication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114–120, June 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    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, Nov. 2020

    1950

  4. [12]

    Modeling and performance analysis for movable antenna enabled wireless communications,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Modeling and performance analysis for movable antenna enabled wireless communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 6234–6250, June 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Antenna positioning and beamforming design for fluid antenna-assisted multi- user downlink communications,

    H. Qin, W. Chen, Z. Li, Q. Wu, N. Cheng, and F. Chen, “Antenna positioning and beamforming design for fluid antenna-assisted multi- user downlink communications,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1073–1077, Apr. 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Beam-steering surface wave fluid antennas for MIMO applications,

    Y . Shen, K.-F. Tong, and K.-K. Wong, “Beam-steering surface wave fluid antennas for MIMO applications,” in Proc. IEEE Asia–Pacific Microw. Conf. (APMC), Dec. 2020, pp. 634–636

    2020

  7. [15]

    Flexible antenna arrays for wireless communications: Mod- eling and performance evaluation,

    S. Yang, J. An, Y . Xiu, W. Lyu, B. Ning, Z. Zhang, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Flexible antenna arrays for wireless communications: Mod- eling and performance evaluation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 4937–4951, June 2025

    2025

  8. [16]

    Em- bracing reconfigurable antennas in the tri-hybrid MIMO architecture for 6G,

    M. R. Castellanos, S. Yang, C.-B. Chae, and R. W. Heath Jr, “Em- bracing reconfigurable antennas in the tri-hybrid MIMO architecture for 6G,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.16610 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive MIMO communications,

    N. Shlezinger, G. C. Alexandropoulos, M. F. Imani, Y . C. Eldar, and D. R. Smith, “Dynamic metasurface antennas for 6G extreme massive MIMO communications,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 106–113, Apr. 2021

    2021

  10. [18]

    DBRAA: Sub-6 GHz and millimeter wave dual-band reconfigurable antenna array for ISAC,

    K. Chen, C. Qi, and O. A. Dobre, “DBRAA: Sub-6 GHz and millimeter wave dual-band reconfigurable antenna array for ISAC,” IEEE Trans. Commun., early access, pp. 1–16, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Design of polarization reconfigurable antenna using metasurface,

    H. L. Zhu, S. W. Cheung, X. H. Liu, and T. I. Yuk, “Design of polarization reconfigurable antenna using metasurface,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 2891–2898, June 2014

    2014

  12. [20]

    Parasitic layer-based radiation pattern reconfigurable antenna for 5G communications,

    M. A. Hossain, I. Bahceci, and B. A. Cetiner, “Parasitic layer-based radiation pattern reconfigurable antenna for 5G communications,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 6444–6452, Dec. 2017

    2017

  13. [21]

    Design of frequency-reconfigurable antenna on dielectric and magnetic meta- material composite substrate,

    M. Al-Omari, H. Attia, K. K. Qureshi, and S. I. M. Sheikh, “Design of frequency-reconfigurable antenna on dielectric and magnetic meta- material composite substrate,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett. , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 943–947, Apr. 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Frequency, radiation pattern and polarization reconfigurable antenna using a parasitic pixel layer,

    D. Rodrigo, B. A. Cetiner, and L. Jofre, “Frequency, radiation pattern and polarization reconfigurable antenna using a parasitic pixel layer,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 3422–3427, June 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Reconfigurable massive MIMO: Harnessing the power of the electromagnetic domain for enhanced information transfer,

    K. Ying, Z. Gao, S. Chen, X. Gao, M. Matthaiou, R. Zhang, and R. Schober, “Reconfigurable massive MIMO: Harnessing the power of the electromagnetic domain for enhanced information transfer,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 125–132, June 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Analog precoding using highly reconfigurable antennas,

    Y . Li, Y . Zhang, Z. Han, S. Tang, L. Jing, C.-Y . Chiu, and R. Murch, “Analog precoding using highly reconfigurable antennas,” IEEE Wire- less Commun. Lett. , vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 648–652, May 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    REMAA: Reconfigurable pixel antenna-based electronic movable-antenna arrays for multiuser communications,

    K. Chen, C. Qi, Y . Hong, and C. Yuen, “REMAA: Reconfigurable pixel antenna-based electronic movable-antenna arrays for multiuser communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun., early access, pp. 1–16, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Toward 6G carbon-neutral cellular networks,

    Y . Zhong and X. Ge, “Toward 6G carbon-neutral cellular networks,” IEEE Netw., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 174–181, Sep. 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Near-field multiuser communications based on sparse arrays,

    K. Chen, C. Qi, G. Y . Li, and O. A. Dobre, “Near-field multiuser communications based on sparse arrays,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 619–632, May 2024

    2024

  20. [28]

    Movable antennas for wireless communication: Opportunities and challenges,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wireless communication: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114–120, Oct. 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Holographic MIMO surfaces for 6G wireless networks: Opportunities, challenges, and trends,

    C. Huang, S. Hu, G. C. Alexandropoulos, A. Zappone, C. Yuen, R. Zhang, M. Di Renzo, and M. Debbah, “Holographic MIMO surfaces for 6G wireless networks: Opportunities, challenges, and trends,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 118–125, Oct. 2020

    2020

  22. [30]

    A novel pixel-based reconfigurable antenna applied in fluid antenna systems with high switching speed,

    J. Zhang, J. Rao, Z. Li, Z. Ming, C.-Y . Chiu, K.-K. Wong, K.-F. Tong, and R. Murch, “A novel pixel-based reconfigurable antenna applied in fluid antenna systems with high switching speed,” IEEE Open J. Antennas Propag., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 212–228, Feb. 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    Design and optimization of multiport pixel antennas,

    S. Soltani, P. Lotfi, and R. D. Murch, “Design and optimization of multiport pixel antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 2049–2054, Apr. 2018

  24. [32]

    Rethinking WMMSE: Can its complexity scale linearly with the number of BS antennas?

    X. Zhao, S. Lu, Q. Shi, and Z.-Q. Luo, “Rethinking WMMSE: Can its complexity scale linearly with the number of BS antennas?” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 71, pp. 433–446, Feb. 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Penalty dual decomposition method for non- smooth nonconvex optimization—Part I: Algorithms and convergence analysis,

    Q. Shi and M. Hong, “Penalty dual decomposition method for non- smooth nonconvex optimization—Part I: Algorithms and convergence analysis,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 68, pp. 4108–4122, June 2020

    2020

  26. [34]

    Maximum ratio transmission,

    T. Lo, “Maximum ratio transmission,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 1458–1461, Oct. 1999

    1999

  27. [35]

    Alternating mini- mization algorithms for hybrid precoding in millimeter wave MIMO systems,

    X. Yu, J.-C. Shen, J. Zhang, and K. B. Letaief, “Alternating mini- mization algorithms for hybrid precoding in millimeter wave MIMO systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process. , vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 485– 500, Apr. 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    Fractional programming for communication systems—Part I: Power control and beamforming,

    K. Shen and W. Yu, “Fractional programming for communication systems—Part I: Power control and beamforming,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2616–2630, May 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    Energy efficiency of mmwave massive MIMO precoding with low-resolution DACs,

    L. N. Ribeiro, S. Schwarz, M. Rupp, and A. L. F. de Almeida, “Energy efficiency of mmwave massive MIMO precoding with low-resolution DACs,”IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 298–312, May 2018

    2018

  30. [38]

    Hybrid archi- tectures with few-bit ADC receivers: Achievable rates and energy-rate tradeoffs,

    J. Mo, A. Alkhateeb, S. Abu-Surra, and R. W. Heath, “Hybrid archi- tectures with few-bit ADC receivers: Achievable rates and energy-rate tradeoffs,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 2274– 2287, Apr. 2017

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.