Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing Over Wideband Doubly-Dispersive Channels With Time-Scaling Effects

Chau Yuen; Haiyan Wang; Miaowen Wen; Xiangxiang Li; Xiaohong Shen; Yao Ge; Yong Liang Guan

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing Over Wideband Doubly-Dispersive Channels With Time-Scaling Effects

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read One optimized chirp parameter keeps the AFDM channel sparse under wideband time-scaling Doppler and outperforms four rival modulations in simulation.

desk verdict Wideband AFDM paper with a useful detector and a serious algebra error in the sparsity analysis; the c1 design is built on the wrong ψ coefficient. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.03537 v1 pith:JJ2EF3KS submitted 2025-07-04 cs.PF cs.ITmath.IT

Xiangxiang Li , Haiyan Wang , Yao Ge , Xiaohong Shen , Yong Liang Guan , Miaowen Wen , Chau Yuen This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.PFcs.ITmath.IT

keywords affinefrequencydivisionmultiplexingwidebanddoubly-dispersivechannelstime-scalingeffectsDopplersquintchirpparameteroptimizationcross-domaindistributedOAMPsparsechannelequalizationOTFScomparison

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 establish that affine frequency division multiplexing can be made to work in wideband doubly-dispersive channels where the Doppler effect scales time rather than just shifting frequency. The authors add a chirp-periodic prefix and suffix so AFDM symbols stay chirp-periodic under time scaling, derive the input-output relation in the discrete affine Fourier domain, and choose the chirp parameter $c_1$ so that different propagation paths occupy disjoint bins. They also design a cross-domain distributed OAMP detector and analyze its state evolution. If the claims hold, AFDM with the optimized chirp parameter would beat OFDM, OCDM, OTFS, and narrowband AFDM in such channels at the same SNR.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the AFDM chirp parameter $c_1$, which controls the quadratic phase in both the inverse DAF transform and the received channel matrix. In this wideband model the Doppler scale $\alpha_i$ enters the channel as a time-dependent delay, so $c_1$ must absorb a term proportional to $\alpha_i n^2$; the optimized value in (45) is chosen so that the POSP-derived support intervals of distinct paths do not overlap. The CPP and CPS prefixes keep the received AFDM symbol chirp-periodic inside the observation window, while the CD-D-OAMP detector alternates a distributed LMMSE estimate in the sparse time domain with symbol-by-symbol detection in the DAF domain, using the unitary DAF transform to cross between them.

What would settle it

Compute the exact DAF-domain channel matrix for a small block, say $N=32$, with two paths whose delays differ by one sample and $\alpha_{\max}=10^{-4}$, and check whether the support intervals predicted by (30)-(32) contain the actually nonzero entries; if the paths overlap in the exact matrix under the $c_1$ of (45), the no-overlap premise fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in time-scaled wideband doubly-dispersive channels, an AFDM system equipped with the CPP/CPS frame and the chirp parameter $c_1$ of (45) keeps a sparse discrete affine Fourier domain channel and thereby retains full path diversity. With narrowband parameters, Doppler scaling smears each path across many delay-Doppler bins; the optimized $c_1$ makes the per-path support intervals $[Q_{\ell_i,\alpha_i},\tilde{Q}_{\ell_i,\alpha_i}]$ disjoint for resolvable paths. The paper supports this by a stationary-phase approximation of the channel coefficients, a pairwise-error-probability bound whose slope matches maximum-likelihood simulations, and BER comparisons showing the proposed system below OFDM, OCDM, OTFS, and narrowband AFDM in underwater and THz wideband settings.

Load-bearing premise

The whole parameter design assumes that the stationary-phase approximation, imported without derivation, correctly predicts which delay-Doppler bins each path occupies; if that approximation is inaccurate for finite block sizes, the optimized chirp parameter will not separate paths and the claimed diversity gain disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

With the optimized $c_1$ and CPP/CPS framing, wideband Doppler scaling no longer destroys DAF-domain sparsity: each resolvable path lands in its own support interval, so path diversity can be collected.
The PEP bound in (61)-(62) gives a full-diversity slope in SNR for the proposed parameters; the paper verifies it with ML detection for $P=2,3,4$ paths.
The CD-D-OAMP detector with $C$ groups reduces per-iteration complexity from $O(N^3)$ to $O(CN_c^3 + CN_c^2|D_c| + N\log N + NQ)$, with only a small BER penalty as $C$ grows.
In simulations, AFDM with the wideband-optimized $c_1$ achieves lower BER than OFDM, OCDM, OTFS, and narrowband AFDM under both underwater acoustic ($\alpha_{\max}=10^{-4}$) and THz wireless ($\alpha_{\max}=4.6\cdot10^{-7}$) channels.
The design constraint (51) tells the system designer the usable range of $N$ for given $\alpha_{\max}$ and delay spread; beyond it, the path supports become too wide to separate.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: if the POSP support intervals remain accurate for finite $N$, the same single-parameter design recipe could be applied to other chirp-based waveforms, by picking $c_1$ so that the $\alpha_i$-dependent support widths are disjoint.
Beyond the paper: the CD-D-OAMP idea is not tied to AFDM's specific transform; any unitary cross-domain pair with one sparse domain could use the same distributed LMMSE plus symbol-wise projection loop, so the detector recipe may transfer to other wideband waveforms.
Beyond the paper: a stress test the paper does not run is to push $\alpha_{\max}$ toward $1/(4N)$, where (46) binds, and check whether the BER advantage over OTFS disappears at the predicted block size.
Beyond the paper: the paper treats $\alpha_{\max}$ as small (at most $10^{-4}$ in its examples); at larger Doppler scale factors the support width $L_i$ grows linearly in $N$, so the authors' own formula implies that either $N$ must shrink or the sparsity-based receiver will lose its edge.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things you should know about arXiv:2507.03537. First, it is the first paper I know that takes AFDM into wideband doubly-dispersive channels with time-scaling effects, and it comes with a concrete chirp-parameter design and a distributed detector. Second, the sparsity analysis that supports the whole design has a specific algebraic error you can verify in ten minutes.

What is genuinely new: the CPP/CPS frame structure is a sensible adaptation of chirp-periodic AFDM to time-scaled channels, and the CD-D-OAMP detector is a reasonable extension of cross-domain OAMP with parallel-computing advantages. The state-evolution verification is honest—the authors admit the Monte Carlo approximation of f_D. The BER comparisons against OFDM, OCDM, OTFS, and narrowband AFDM are thorough, and the complexity analysis is useful.

The soft spot is Eq. (20). The exponent contains ψ_{m,t'_i} with an m that does not appear as a summation index in a channel-matrix entry; presumably m should be q, but as written the expression is not a well-defined function of (p,q). More seriously, carrying the continuous chirp-periodic basis (7)-(8) through the time-scaled sampling (13) gives a ψ coefficient proportional to (1+α_i)N, not α_i N. With α_i ≤ 10^-4, that is a factor of 10^4. The stationary-phase support intervals (30)-(32) and the strengthened bounds (32) inherit this error, so the interval width L_i in (34) is off by roughly 1/α_i. The chirp-parameter design in (42)-(45) is built on those intervals. If the correct coefficient is (1+α_i)N, the DAF channel is not sparse in the claimed sense, and the PEP/diversity argument in Section IV does not follow from the stated mechanism. The paper's own note that POSP derivations are omitted 'due to space limitation' is a warning sign when that step is load-bearing. Fig. 2 shows a good match in one example, but that does not fix an equation error.

The detector contribution may survive a correction, and the wideband-AFDM idea is worth exploring. I would not desk-reject this. Send it to referees with a specific request to check Eq. (20) and the support bounds; the authors need to redo the c1 derivation. The paper is aimed at the AFDM/OTFS community and people working on wideband underwater and THz links. A careful reader will get a useful detector and a good example of why stationary-phase approximations need to be checked against the discrete model. I would not cite it until the sparsity analysis is corrected.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an affine frequency division multiplexing (AFDM) transmission scheme for wideband doubly-dispersive channels with time-scaling Doppler effects. It introduces a chirp-periodic prefix/suffix (CPP/CPS) frame structure, derives a discrete affine Fourier (DAF)-domain input-output relation, uses the principle of stationary phase (POSP) to claim sparsity of the DAF-domain channel, optimizes the AFDM chirp parameter c1, derives a pairwise error probability (PEP) bound, and proposes a cross-domain distributed orthogonal approximate message passing (CD-D-OAMP) detector with a state-evolution analysis. The claims are supported by simulations for underwater acoustic and terahertz channels, comparing the proposed AFDM with OFDM, OCDM, OTFS, and narrowband-AFDM.

Significance. The problem is well motivated: time-scaling effects are known to break the standard narrowband Doppler model, and most existing AFDM/OTFS analyses ignore them. If the derivation is made rigorous, the paper would be a solid contribution: it provides a concrete CPP/CPS frame structure, a closed-form chirp parameter design, a low-complexity distributed detector with a useful complexity table, and broad simulation evidence. The PEP and state-evolution analyses are useful complements. However, the central technical claim—that the optimized chirp parameter in Eq. (45) separates paths and yields sparsity and diversity—depends on the POSP-based support intervals in Eqs. (30)-(32), and those are not yet rigorously established. The significance is therefore conditional on fixing the derivation.

major comments (4)

[II-B/II-C, Eqs. (9), (10), (20), (24c)] The derivation of the DAF-domain channel is not reproducible as written. The piecewise function ψ_{m,t} in Eq. (9) is defined through breakpoints indexed by ρ = 1, ..., \tilde C with \tilde C = 2Nc1 in Eq. (10), but the optimized c1 in Eq. (45) is not guaranteed to make 2Nc1 an integer. In Eq. (20), F_i(p,q) contains ψ_{m,t'_i} with no definition of m and no summation over m, so F_i(p,q) is not a well-defined function of (p,q). The same undefined symbol enters θ_{p,q}(n) in Eq. (24c), the stationary point in Eq. (26), and the support bounds in Eqs. (31)-(32). The authors should define the sampled ψ term explicitly, including the correct summation index and the correct coefficient, and should either restrict c1 to values for which 2Nc1 is integer or re-derive the piecewise construction for non-integer c1.
[II-C/II-D, Eqs. (23)-(34)] The POSP approximation is imported from continuous-time radar analysis and applied to the discrete quadratic-phase sum in Eq. (23) without a proof that it is valid for this discrete, finite-length sum. The approximations in Eqs. (27)-(28) and the resulting support intervals in Eqs. (29)-(32) are load-bearing for the chirp parameter design in Section III, but no validity condition on K = 2c1(α_i^2 + 2α_i), N, c1, or α_i is provided. The single illustration in Fig. 2 for one row and one channel realization is not sufficient. A derivation, or at least a systematic numerical verification over the parameter ranges used in Figs. 3, 4, 10, 11, and 13, should be supplied.
[III, Eqs. (42)-(45)] The transition from the general no-overlap condition (41a) to the closed-form c1 in Eq. (45) relies on the additional assumption min(ℓ_j − ℓ_i) = 1, which is described as the dense-delay case. This assumption is not derived from the channel model and is not stated as an explicit system condition in the simulation setup. If the actual minimum delay separation differs from one sample, the formula may not give the intended separation guarantee; and if the POSP intervals are inaccurate, the no-overlap condition in Eq. (40) may not be sufficient at all. The paper should state this assumption explicitly and verify that the simulated channels satisfy it.
[IV, Eqs. (60)-(61)] The PEP bound in Eq. (61) is only meaningful if the rank R of Ω_{x,\hat x} is known; in particular, the diversity claim requires R to equal the number of resolvable paths P (or at least to be established). The paper does not prove that the optimized c1 in Eq. (45) achieves R = P for the time-scaled wideband channel. Without this rank analysis, the diversity conclusion drawn from Figs. 3 and 4 is not established by the PEP argument. Please add a rank analysis or state clearly the conditions under which Eq. (61) holds.

minor comments (5)

[IV, Eq. (60)] The Chernoff bound should read Q(x) ≤ exp(−x^2/2); as printed, the exponent '1/2x2' has the wrong sign.
[Abstract] The phrase 'in the literatures' should be 'in the literature'.
[II-D, Eq. (33)] The significant-region width Nv is introduced without a quantitative selection criterion, and it directly affects the optimized c1 in Eq. (45). Please state how Nv is chosen in the simulations.
[Table I] The symbol |\tilde D_c| in the D-OAMP complexity row should be defined in the table caption or immediately before the table, since the definition currently appears only in the body text.
[V-B, Eq. (83)] The state-evolution analysis uses a Monte Carlo approximation for the nonlinear function f_D; this is acknowledged in the text, but the limitation should also be stated in the conclusion where the state-evolution result is summarized.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the chirp parameter is solved analytically from POSP-approximated support intervals and then tested against the exact simulated channel, so the central comparison is not circular; the main weaknesses are non-circular proof gaps in Eq. (20) and the POSP support derivation.

full rationale

The claimed derivation is not circular in the sense of fitting a quantity and then predicting that same quantity. The optimized chirp parameter c1 in (45) is obtained analytically from the POSP-approximated support intervals (30)-(32): the interval separation constraint (40)-(42) is solved for c1, not fitted to BER data. The BER comparisons in Figs. 4, 10, 11, and 13 use the exact wideband channel model in (1)/(11)/(13) and the exact DAF transform, not the POSP support approximation; Fig. 2 separately checks the POSP support against the exact channel. Hence the central 'prediction' (sparse DAF-domain channel and diversity gain) is tested against an independent numerical channel, not against the same approximate model that generated c1. The state-evolution analysis uses a Monte Carlo estimate of f_D in (83), explicitly acknowledged as a simplification following [39]; this is not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The load-bearing weak points are non-circular correctness gaps: Eq. (20) contains ψ_{m,t'_i} with an undefined index m, and the support bounds (30)-(32) are imported from the unproved POSP assertion in Section II-C ('we directly apply the conclusions of the POSP method and omit the mathematical derivations'). Self-citations ([14], [31], [28], [29]) appear in background comparisons and are not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to forbid alternatives. Accordingly, no circular reduction is exhibited, and the score is low, reflecting only minor self-citation/background usage and acknowledged derivation gaps rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central design depends on the POSP approximation for the channel sparsity and on the standard wideband channel model; both are imported without independent verification in this paper. The free parameters are the hand-chosen significant-region width Nv and the arbitrary chirp phase c2 inherited from narrowband AFDM. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)

Nv (significant-region width in DAF domain) = 2 (used in all simulations)
In Eq. (33), Nv defines how many channel coefficients around the POSP-predicted interval are kept as significant. It enters the c1 bounds in (42)-(48) and therefore directly shapes the optimized chirp parameter; the paper sets it without a systematic rule.
c2 (second AFDM chirp parameter) = arbitrary irrational number (not numerically specified)
Following the narrowband AFDM design of [9], c2 is chosen as an arbitrary irrational number to ensure full diversity; it only adds phase shifts to the channel and is not optimized here.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption POSP approximation is accurate for the discrete chirp sum in Eq. (23)
Section II-C: 'we directly apply the conclusions of the POSP method and omit the mathematical derivations'; the resulting support intervals (30)-(34) are the basis for the c1 optimization in Section III.
domain assumption Wideband channel model g(t,τ) with time-dependent delays τ_i - α_i t (Eq. (1))
Taken from [1]; all subsequent input-output relations and simulations assume this model, including the frequency-dependent Doppler shift in Eq. (2).
domain assumption CPP and CPS of lengths Tcpp > τmax/(1-αmax) and Tcps > αmax T/(1+αmax) restore periodicity inside the observation window
Section II-B uses this to write the sampled received signal in Eq. (13) as a sum over scaled transmitted samples; the claim that these lengths are sufficient is asserted, not proven.
ad hoc to paper Minimum resolvable delay separation of 1 sample in dense-delay scenarios
In Eq. (45), the simplification c1 formula replaces (ℓ_˜j - ℓ_˜i) by 1, assuming dense delays; if the actual minimum separation differs, the derived c1 is suboptimal or violates constraints.
domain assumption Typical Doppler scales satisfy |2α_i| > α_i^2 and αmax small enough for α^2 terms to be dropped
Used to move from (29) to (32) and then to the simplified bounds in (45)-(48); valid for the simulated αmax values (≤1e-4) but presented as a general result.
standard math High-SNR PEP bound using Q(x) ≤ exp(-x²/2)
Standard Chernoff-type bound used in Section IV to derive (60)-(61).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing Over Wideband Doubly-Dispersive Channels With Time-Scaling Effects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JJ2EF3KS

@misc{pith2026250703537,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Affine Frequency Division Multiplexing Over Wideband Doubly-Dispersive Channels With Time-Scaling Effects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JJ2EF3KS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.03537}
}

read the original abstract

The recently proposed affine frequency division multiplexing (AFDM) modulation has been considered as a promising technology for narrowband doubly-dispersive channels. However, the time-scaling effects, i.e., pulse widening and pulse shortening phenomena, in extreme wideband doubly-dispersive channels have not been considered in the literatures. In this paper, we investigate such wideband transmission and develop an efficient transmission structure with chirp-periodic prefix (CPP) and chirp-periodic suffix (CPS) for AFDM system. We derive the input-output relationship of AFDM system under time-scaled wideband doubly-dispersive channels and demonstrate the sparsity in discrete affine Fourier (DAF) domain equivalent channels. We further optimize the AFDM chirp parameters to accommodate the time-scaling characteristics in wideband doubly-dispersive channels and verify the superiority of the derived chirp parameters by pairwise error probability (PEP) analysis. We also develop an efficient cross domain distributed orthogonal approximate message passing (CD-D-OAMP) algorithm for AFDM symbol detection and analyze its corresponding state evolution. By analyzing the detection complexity of CD-D-OAMP detector and evaluating the error performance of AFDM systems based on simulations, we demonstrate that the AFDM system with our optimized chirp parameters outperforms the existing competitive modulation schemes in time-scaled wideband doubly-dispersive channels. Moreover, our proposed CD-D-OAMP detector can achieve the desirable trade-off between the complexity and performance, while supporting parallel computing to significantly reduce the computational latency.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.03537 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Comparison between DAF domain equivalent channel wi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** AFDM performance with different numbers of resolvab [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (7 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Equivalent channel structure for DAF domain and time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Proposed cross domain distributed detection struct [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Distributed input-output relationship with three g [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: State evolution verification of the proposed CD-D-OA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Complexity comparison of different detectors. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: BER performance analysis with different modulatio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Convergence analysis with different iteration num [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

[1]

Multicarrier communication over underwater acoustic channels with nonu niform Doppler shifts,

B. Li, S. Zhou, M. Stojanovic, L. Freitag, and P . Willett, “Multicarrier communication over underwater acoustic channels with nonu niform Doppler shifts,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng ., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1638–1649, Apr. 2008

work page 2008
[2]

Spar se channel estimation for multicarrier underwater acoustic communic ation: From subspace methods to compressed sensing,

C. R. Berger, S. Zhou, J. C. Preisig, and P . Willett, “Spar se channel estimation for multicarrier underwater acoustic communic ation: From subspace methods to compressed sensing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process ., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 1708–1721, Mar. 2010

work page 2010
[3]

Orthogonal delay scale space modulation: A new technique for wideband time-varying chan nels,

K. P . Arunkumar and C. R. Murthy, “Orthogonal delay scale space modulation: A new technique for wideband time-varying chan nels,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process ., vol. 70, pp. 2625–2638, May 2022

work page 2022
[4]

Perfo rmance degradation of OFDM systems due to Doppler spreading,

T. Wang, J. G. Proakis, E. Masry, and J. R. Zeidler, “Perfo rmance degradation of OFDM systems due to Doppler spreading,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1422–1432, Jun. 2006

work page 2006
[5]

Orthogonal time frequency space modul ation,

R. Hadani et al., “Orthogonal time frequency space modul ation,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC), San Francisco, CA, USA, Mar. 2017, pp. 1–6. 15

work page 2017
[6]

A unifying view of OTFS and its many variants,

Q. Deng, Y . Ge, and Z. Ding, “A unifying view of OTFS and its many variants,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts ., early access, 2025

work page 2025
[7]

Orthogonal chirp division multip lexing,

X. Ouyang and J. Zhao, “Orthogonal chirp division multip lexing,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 3946–3957, Sep. 2016

work page 2016
[8]

AFDM: A full div ersity next generation waveform for high mobility communications ,

A. Bemani, N. Ksairi, and M. Kountouris, “AFDM: A full div ersity next generation waveform for high mobility communications ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. W orkshops (ICC W orkshops) , Montreal, QC, Canada, Jun. 2021, pp. 1–6

work page 2021

Show all 46 references

[9]

Afﬁne frequenc y division multiplexing for next generation wireless communications ,

A. Bemani, N. Ksairi, and M. Kountouris, “Afﬁne frequenc y division multiplexing for next generation wireless communications ,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 8214–8229, Nov. 2023

2023
[10]

Afﬁne frequency division multiplexing (A FDM) for wire- less communications

Ali Bemani. “Afﬁne frequency division multiplexing (A FDM) for wire- less communications.” Networking and Internet Architectu re [cs.NI]. Sorbonne Universit´ e, 2023. English. NNT: 2023SORUS610. t el- 04606502

2023
[11]

Integrated se nsing and communications with afﬁne frequency division multiplexin g,

A. Bemani, N. Ksairi, and M. Kountouris, “Integrated se nsing and communications with afﬁne frequency division multiplexin g,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett ., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1255–1259, May 2024

2024
[12]

Afﬁne frequency divis ion multiplex- ing: Extending OFDM for scenario-ﬂexibility and resilienc e,

H. Yin, Y . Tang, A. Bemani et al., “Afﬁne frequency divis ion multiplex- ing: Extending OFDM for scenario-ﬂexibility and resilienc e,” arXiv: 2502.04735, 2024

2024 arXiv
[13]

H. S. Rou et al., “From orthogonal time-frequency space to afﬁne frequency-division multiplexing: A comparative study of n ext-generation waveforms for integrated sensing and communications in dou bly disper- sive channels,” IEEE Sig. Proc. Mag ., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 71–86, Sep. 2024

2024
[14]

A fﬁne frequency division multiplexing with index modulation: Fu ll diversity condition, performance analysis, and low-complexity dete ction,

Y . Tao, M. Wen, Y . Ge, J. Li, E. Basar, and N. Al-Dhahir, “A fﬁne frequency division multiplexing with index modulation: Fu ll diversity condition, performance analysis, and low-complexity dete ction,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun ., vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 1041-1055, Apr. 2025

2025
[15]

Diagonally reconstructed channel estimation for MIMO-AFDM with inter-doppler interference in doubly selective channels,

H. Yin, X. Wei, Y . Tang, and K. Y ang, “Diagonally reconstructed channel estimation for MIMO-AFDM with inter-doppler interference in doubly selective channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun ., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 14066-14079, Oct. 2024

2024
[16]

Joint channel, data, and radar parameter estimatio n for AFDM systems in doubly-dispersive channels,

K. R. R. Ranasinghe, H. S. Rou, G. T. F. de Abreu, T. Takaha shi, and K. Ito, “Joint channel, data, and radar parameter estimatio n for AFDM systems in doubly-dispersive channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1602–1619, Feb. 2025

2025
[17]

Effect of Doppler spr ead in OFDM- based UWB systems,

I. R. Capoglu, Y . Li, and A. Swami, “Effect of Doppler spr ead in OFDM- based UWB systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 2559–2567, Sep. 2007

2007
[18]

Multipl e-resampling receiver design for OFDM over Doppler-distorted underwate r acoustic channels,

K. Tu, T. Duman,M. Stojanovic, and J. Proakis, “Multipl e-resampling receiver design for OFDM over Doppler-distorted underwate r acoustic channels,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng .,vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 333–345, Apr. 2013

2013
[19]

On the Doppler squi nt effect in OTFS systems over doubly-dispersive channels: Mo deling and evaluation,

X. Wang, X. Shi, J. Wang, and J. Song, “On the Doppler squi nt effect in OTFS systems over doubly-dispersive channels: Mo deling and evaluation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun ., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 8781–8796, Dec. 2023

2023
[20]

Doppler interferenc e analysis for OTFS-based LEO satellite systems,

R. He, X. Zhang, Q. Cui, and X. Tao, “Doppler interferenc e analysis for OTFS-based LEO satellite systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun ., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 75–89, Jan. 2025

2025
[21]

Analysis of Doppler and multip ath on or- thogonal chirp division multiplexing in shallow water acou stic channel,

B. Yiqi and H. Chuanlin, “Analysis of Doppler and multip ath on or- thogonal chirp division multiplexing in shallow water acou stic channel,” IEEE Access , vol. 10, pp. 95928–95935, 2022

2022
[22]

Underwater acousti c commu- nications based on OCDM for Internet of Underwater Things,

B. Wang, Y . Wang, Y . Li, and X. Guan, “Underwater acousti c commu- nications based on OCDM for Internet of Underwater Things,” IEEE Internet Things J ., vol. 10, no. 24, pp. 22128–22142, Dec. 2023

2023
[23]

Performance analys is of ZF and MMSE equalizers for MIMO systems: An in-depth study of the hi gh SNR regime,

Y . Jiang, M. K. V aranasi, and J. Li, “Performance analys is of ZF and MMSE equalizers for MIMO systems: An in-depth study of the hi gh SNR regime,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol . 57, no. 4, pp. 2008–2026, Apr. 2011

2008
[24]

Low complexity LMMSE re- ceiver for OTFS,

S. Tiwari, S. S. Das, and V . Rangamgari, “Low complexity LMMSE re- ceiver for OTFS,” IEEE Commun. Lett ., vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 2205–2209, Dec. 2019

2019
[25]

Interf erence can- cellation and iterative detection for orthogonal time freq uency space modulation,

P . Raviteja, K. T. Phan, Y . Hong, and E. Viterbo, “Interf erence can- cellation and iterative detection for orthogonal time freq uency space modulation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun ., vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 6501–6515, Oct. 2018

2018
[26]

Receiver design for OTFS with a fractionally spaced sampling approach,

Y . Ge, Q. Deng, P . C. Ching, and Z. Ding, “Receiver design for OTFS with a fractionally spaced sampling approach,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 4072–4086, Jul. 2021

2021
[27]

Orthogonal time frequency s pace detection via low-complexity expectation propagation

Y . Shan, F. Wang and Y . Hao, “Orthogonal time frequency s pace detection via low-complexity expectation propagation”, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 10887-10901, Dec. 2022

2022
[28]

OTFS signaling f or uplink NOMA of heterogeneous mobility users,

Y . Ge, Q. Deng, P . C. Ching, and Z. Ding, “OTFS signaling f or uplink NOMA of heterogeneous mobility users,” IEEE Trans. Commun ., vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3147–3161, May 2021

2021
[29]

O TFS signaling for SCMA with coordinated multi-point vehicle co mmunica- tions

Y . Ge, Q. Deng, D. Gonz´ alez, G., Y . L. Guan and Z. Ding, “O TFS signaling for SCMA with coordinated multi-point vehicle co mmunica- tions”, IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol ., vol. 72, no. 7, pp. 9044-9057, Jul. 2023

2023
[30]

Message pass ing algo- rithms for compressed sensing: I motivation and constructi on,

D. L. Donoho, A. Maleki, and A. Montanari, “Message pass ing algo- rithms for compressed sensing: I motivation and constructi on,” in Proc. Inf. Theory W orkshop Inf. Theory , 2010, pp. 1–5

2010
[31]

Message feedba ck inter- ference cancellation aided UAMP iterative detector for OTF S systems,

X. Li, H. Wang, Y . Ge, X. Shen and J. Zhao, “Message feedba ck inter- ference cancellation aided UAMP iterative detector for OTF S systems,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett. , vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 924-928, Apr. 2024

2024
[32]

Orthogonal AMP ,

J. Ma and L. Ping, “Orthogonal AMP ,” IEEE Access , vol. 5, pp. 2020–2033, 2017

2020
[33]

V ector appr oximate message passing,

S. Rangan, P . Schniter, and A. K. Fletcher, “V ector appr oximate message passing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process ., vol. 65, no. 10, pp. 6664–6684, Oct. 2019

2019
[34]

Large-scale MIMO detection for 3GPP LTE: Algorithms and FP GA implementations,

M. Wu, B. Yin, G. Wang, C. Dick, J. R. Cavallaro, and C. Stu der, “Large-scale MIMO detection for 3GPP LTE: Algorithms and FP GA implementations,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process ., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 916–929, Oct. 2014

2014
[35]

A low complexity signal detec- tion scheme based on improved Newton iteration for massive M IMO systems,

F. Jin, Q. Liu, H. Liu, and P . Wu, “A low complexity signal detec- tion scheme based on improved Newton iteration for massive M IMO systems,” IEEE Commun. Lett ., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 748–751, Apr. 2019

2019
[36]

Low-com plexity soft-output signal detection based on Gauss Seidel method f or uplink multiuser large-scale MIMO systems,

L. Dai, X. Gao, X. Su, S. Han, C. L. I, and Z. Wang, “Low-com plexity soft-output signal detection based on Gauss Seidel method f or uplink multiuser large-scale MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 4839–4845, Oct. 2015

2015
[37]

Steepest de scent method based soft-output detection for massive MIMO uplink ,

Y . Xue, C. Zhang, S. Zhang, Z. Wu, and X. Y ou, “Steepest de scent method based soft-output detection for massive MIMO uplink ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. W orkshop Signal Process. Syst ., 2016, pp. 273–278

2016
[38]

Conjugate gradient based soft-output detection and precoding in massive MIMO s ystems,

B. Yin, M. Wu, J. R. Cavallaro, and C. Studer, “Conjugate gradient based soft-output detection and precoding in massive MIMO s ystems,” in Proc. IEEE Glob. Telecommun. Conf ., Dec. 2014, pp. 3696–3701

2014
[39]

Cross domain iterati ve detection for orthogonal time frequency space modulation,

S. Li, W. Y uan, Z. Wei, and J. Y uan, “Cross domain iterati ve detection for orthogonal time frequency space modulation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 2227–2242, Sep. 2021

2021
[40]

Zhou and Z

S. Zhou and Z. Wang, OFDM for Underwater Acoustic Communica- tions. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2014

2014
[41]

Residual D oppler ef- fect analysis of the FBMC/OQAM communication system in unde rwater acoustic channel,

G. Qiao, X. Liu, L. Ma, S. Mazhar, and Y . Zhao, “Residual D oppler ef- fect analysis of the FBMC/OQAM communication system in unde rwater acoustic channel,” IEEE Commun. Lett ., vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 3090–3093, Sep. 2021

2021
[42]

Iterative p er-vector equal- ization for orthogonal signal-division multiplexing over time-varying underwater acoustic channels,

J. Han, S. P . Chepuri, Q. Zhang, and G. Leus, “Iterative p er-vector equal- ization for orthogonal signal-division multiplexing over time-varying underwater acoustic channels,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng ., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 240–255, Jan. 2019

2019
[43]

Discrete time -scale character- ization of wideband time-varying systems,

Y . Jiang and A. Papandreou-Suppappola, “Discrete time -scale character- ization of wideband time-varying systems,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 1364–1375, Apr. 2006

2006
[44]

Wideband channel estimation for THz m assive MIMO,

J. Tan and L. Dai, “Wideband channel estimation for THz m assive MIMO,” China Commun ., vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 66–80, May 2021

2021
[45]

OTFS-based CV -QKD s ystems for doubly selective THz channels,

X. Liu, C. Xu, S. X. Ng, and L. Hanzo, “OTFS-based CV -QKD s ystems for doubly selective THz channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun., early access, 2025

2025
[46]

M. A. Richards, Fundamentals of Radar Signal Processing . NewY ork, NY , USA: McGraw-Hill, 2005

2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Multicarrier communication over underwater acoustic channels with nonu niform Doppler shifts,

B. Li, S. Zhou, M. Stojanovic, L. Freitag, and P . Willett, “Multicarrier communication over underwater acoustic channels with nonu niform Doppler shifts,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng ., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1638–1649, Apr. 2008

work page 2008

[2] [2]

Spar se channel estimation for multicarrier underwater acoustic communic ation: From subspace methods to compressed sensing,

C. R. Berger, S. Zhou, J. C. Preisig, and P . Willett, “Spar se channel estimation for multicarrier underwater acoustic communic ation: From subspace methods to compressed sensing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process ., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 1708–1721, Mar. 2010

work page 2010

[3] [3]

Orthogonal delay scale space modulation: A new technique for wideband time-varying chan nels,

K. P . Arunkumar and C. R. Murthy, “Orthogonal delay scale space modulation: A new technique for wideband time-varying chan nels,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process ., vol. 70, pp. 2625–2638, May 2022

work page 2022

[4] [4]

Perfo rmance degradation of OFDM systems due to Doppler spreading,

T. Wang, J. G. Proakis, E. Masry, and J. R. Zeidler, “Perfo rmance degradation of OFDM systems due to Doppler spreading,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1422–1432, Jun. 2006

work page 2006

[5] [5]

Orthogonal time frequency space modul ation,

R. Hadani et al., “Orthogonal time frequency space modul ation,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC), San Francisco, CA, USA, Mar. 2017, pp. 1–6. 15

work page 2017

[6] [6]

A unifying view of OTFS and its many variants,

Q. Deng, Y . Ge, and Z. Ding, “A unifying view of OTFS and its many variants,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tuts ., early access, 2025

work page 2025

[7] [7]

Orthogonal chirp division multip lexing,

X. Ouyang and J. Zhao, “Orthogonal chirp division multip lexing,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 3946–3957, Sep. 2016

work page 2016

[8] [8]

AFDM: A full div ersity next generation waveform for high mobility communications ,

A. Bemani, N. Ksairi, and M. Kountouris, “AFDM: A full div ersity next generation waveform for high mobility communications ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. W orkshops (ICC W orkshops) , Montreal, QC, Canada, Jun. 2021, pp. 1–6

work page 2021