Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 43 references

Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces-Aided eVTOL Delay Sensitive Communications

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper derives the first probabilistic end-to-end delay bound for stacked-intelligent-metasurface eVTOL links and shows that optimizing SIM phase shifts reduces the bound while raising the transmission rate.

desk verdict First SNC-based delay bound for SIM-aided eVTOL links, but the load-bearing service-curve assumption ignores Rician fading, so the headline guarantee is not valid as stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.06632 v1 pith:NE5J3AI4 submitted 2025-07-09 cs.NI

Liyuan Chen , Kai Xiong , Yujie Qin , Hanqing Yu , Supeng Leng , Chau Yuen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.NI
keywords advancedairmobilityeVTOLcommunicationsstackedintelligentmetasurfacesstochasticnetworkcalculusprobabilisticdelayboundsemidefiniterelaxationholographicMIMOultra-reliablelow-latencycommunication
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that in an eVTOL-to-eVTOL link whose aircraft carry stacked intelligent metasurfaces (SIM), the probability that end-to-end packet delay exceeds a threshold can be bounded by a closed-form expression involving only the SIM-dependent transmission rate, the packet load, and the allowed delay budget. It derives this bound using stochastic network calculus, modeling the data service as a deterministic rate-latency curve whose rate is the Shannon rate of the SIM-shaped channel. It then folds the bound into an optimization problem that tunes the SIM phase shifts to maximize the rate and minimize the propagation delay, solved by block coordinate descent with semidefinite relaxation. A sympathetic reader would care because this turns an abstract "ultra-reliable low-latency" requirement for aerial vehicles into a computable, optimizable quantity that system designers can act on.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is stochastic network calculus, specifically the min-plus convolution inequality that bounds the complementary cumulative distribution function of a sum of delays by the convolution of their individual bounding functions. The service process is modeled as a deterministic rate-latency server $\beta_{\rm data}(t) = v_{\rm data} B t$ with zero latency and bounding function $g(x)=0$, while arrivals are Poisson with exponentially distributed packet sizes, giving the exponential bounding functions used in Theorem 1. The SIM itself is modeled as a stack of phase-shift matrices $\Phi_l$ and $\Psi_k$ interleaved with transmission-coefficient matrices $W_l$ and $U_k$, producing end-to-end channel $H = YGX$; the rate $v_{\rm data}$ is the Shannon capacity of that channel. Optimization uses semidefinite relaxation of a rank-one phase-shift problem followed by Gaussian randomization to recover feasible phase configurations.

What would settle it

Run a Monte Carlo simulation of the exact Rician fading channel with the Table I parameters, Poisson arrivals, exponentially distributed packet sizes, and the SIM phase outputs of the BCD-SDR algorithm. If the empirical $P\{D > T\}$ exceeds the right-hand side of (23) for any delay threshold $T$, the deterministic service-curve assumption is falsified. More directly, record the instantaneous rate process: any fading realization in which the service rate falls below $v_{\rm data}B$ for that channel violates the precondition of the bound.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the end-to-end delay violation probability for a SIM-aided eVTOL communication link is bounded by a simple exponential sum. Specifically, Theorem 1 states that $$\bar D = \inf_{t_b + t_d = T - D_2}\left( $e^{{-\frac{v_{\rm data}}$B - \delta_d l_d}{l_d} t_b} + $e^{{-\frac{v_{\rm data}}$B}{S l_d} t_d} \right),$$ where $v_{\rm data}$ is the SIM-dependent spectral efficiency, $B$ is the bandwidth, $S$ is the number of data streams, $l_d$ is the mean packet size, $\delta_d$ is the arrival rate, $T$ is the delay threshold, and $D_2$ is the fixed transmission delay. The bound decomposes into a queueing-delay term and a propagation-delay term joined by min-plus convolution. Because $v_{\rm data}$ is determined by the phase configuration of the layered metasurfaces, the phase shifts directly govern a probabilistic delay guarantee. The paper further claims that its BCD-SDR phase optimization raises the average transmission rate by 51.47% over the low-complexity alternating-optimization baseline under identical meta-atom settings, and that the optimized propagation delay follows a closed-form expression.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the fading SIM link behaves like a fixed-rate server at rate $v_{\rm data}B$ with zero latency and an exponentially tailed packet size, so if the instantaneous link rate ever dips below that Shannon rate, the derived bound can understate the true delay-violation probability.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Theorem 1 is correct, any SIM phase configuration yields a computable probabilistic delay guarantee before deployment, simply by evaluating $v_{\rm data}$ from the channel matrix and the load parameters.
  • The closed-form bound is convex in $t_d$, giving a closed-form optimal propagation delay $t_d = -\frac{S l_d}{v_{\rm data}B}\ln\!\left(\frac{\rho S l_d}{v_{\rm data}B}\right)$, so the total delay budget can be allocated optimally between queueing and propagation.
  • Because $v_{\rm data}$ appears exponentially in the bound, the SDR-based phase optimization that raises the rate also lowers the delay-violation probability, so throughput and reliability are optimized jointly rather than traded off.
  • Simulation results in the paper indicate that increasing the number of data streams $S$ and the number of metasurface layers $L$ raises $v_{\rm data}$ and lowers the propagation delay and regret, suggesting the bound rewards spatial reuse and layer count under the model's assumptions.
  • For AAM safety, operators could use the bound to check whether a candidate SIM configuration keeps the delay-violation probability below a target before committing to it.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not verify the bound against a fading-channel Monte Carlo simulation; a natural test would compare the empirical $P\{D > T\}$ under Rician fading with the right-hand side of (23) for the same $v_{\rm data}$. Because the service curve is deterministic at rate $v_{\rm data}B$, any time the instantaneous rate dips below that value the bound is optimistic, so a fading-aware stochastic s
  • The infimal-convolution structure of the bound suggests a direct multi-hop generalization: if each hop contributes an independent exponential term of the same form, the end-to-end bound becomes a sum of such terms optimized over per-hop delay splits, which the paper does not explore.
  • The parameter $\delta_d$, the arrival rate that enters the stability condition and the queueing bound, is never listed in Table I; fixing it explicitly would make the reported delay-violation curves reproducible by other researchers.
  • The 51.47% improvement is an average over the simulated meta-atom configurations, not a worst-case or theoretical guarantee; readers should interpret it as a simulation-specific comparison rather than a general statement about BCD versus AO.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a SIM-assisted HMIMO communication system for eVTOL/eV2V links in Advanced Air Mobility, with two main contributions. First, using stochastic network calculus, it derives a probabilistic upper bound on the end-to-end delay D = D1 + D2 + D3, expressed as an infimum over the queueing and propagation delay budgets of two exponentials controlled by the SIM-dependent rate v_data (Theorem 1, eq. (23)). Second, it formulates a non-convex optimization problem that jointly minimizes this delay bound and the propagation delay, and solves it with a BCD-SDR algorithm with Gaussian randomization. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm improves the transmission rate by 51.47% on average over an AO baseline and study how the delay bound varies with load and total delay threshold.

Significance. If Theorem 1 were valid for the modeled fading channel, the paper would provide a genuinely useful first bridge between SIM phase configuration and computable probabilistic delay guarantees for safety-critical eVTOL communications. The network-calculus derivation is transparent, the bound structure in Theorem 1 is standard, and the BCD-SDR formulation is a reasonable engineering approach with a clear numerical comparison to AO. However, the central probabilistic guarantee rests on a deterministic-service simplification that is not justified by the Rician fading model, and the optimization in Section VI contains a derivation error that invalidates the reported 'optimal' propagation delay. Both issues are load-bearing for the paper's main claims, though they appear fixable within the manuscript's scope.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A, eqs. (51)-(52); Section V, eqs. (31) and (34)] The proof of Theorem 1 sets the stochastic service curve's bounding function to g(x)=0 and takes beta_data(t)=v_data B t as a deterministic service curve for the HMIMO link. This is not justified: the channel in eq. (31) is Rician fading with finite kappa, and v_data in eq. (34) is the Shannon rate for a specific realization H of that fading channel. The instantaneous link rate can fall below v_data B with positive probability, so beta_data(t) is not a valid lower service curve for the actual fading link, and eq. (23) is not an upper bound on the delay-violation probability for the modeled channel. The authors need either to construct a stochastic service curve with g(x)>0 that accounts for the fading, or to explicitly restrict the claim to a fixed/quasi-static channel realization and state that the bound is conditional on H. Without this, the central probabilistic delay guarantee is optimistic.
  2. [Section VI, P3, eqs. (37)-(38)] In P3, the constraint t_d = T - D2 - t_b makes t_b a function of t_d (t_b = T - D2 - t_d). The first term C2 = exp(-((v_data B - delta_d l_d)/l_d) t_b) therefore depends on t_d, but eq. (38) differentiates only the second exponential plus rho t_d while treating C2 as constant. The closed-form t_d in eq. (38) consequently does not minimize P3 as stated, and the propagation delay curves in Fig. 4a are not the claimed optima. In addition, P1's objective contains '+ t_d' while P2 and P3 use '+ rho t_d', and rho is never defined in Table I or in the text; the problem formulation needs to be made consistent before the BCD iterations can be meaningfully evaluated.
  3. [Section VI, P1, eq. (35)] The roles of t_b and T in P1 are not well defined. Table I fixes the expected waiting time t_b = 0.5 s, but P1 presents t_b as an optimization-related quantity through the constraint t_d = T - D2 - t_b. If t_b is fixed, the constraint merely determines T from t_d; if t_b is variable, the objective also depends on it through the first exponential. The manuscript alternates between these interpretations without stating which variables are optimization variables in P1, which makes the subsequent BCD decomposition and the meaning of the 'optimal total delay T' unclear.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table I and Section IV-A] The packet arrival rate delta_d, which enters the stability condition and Lemma 2 through eq. (6), is never specified in Table I or in the simulation setup. Since the numerical delay bounds in Figs. 9 and 10 depend on delta_d, the results are not reproducible without this value.
  2. [Section V, text after eq. (25)] In the definition of the phase-shift vector, 'Phi_1 = diag[Phi 1]' should presumably be diag[phi_1]; the same notational confusion appears elsewhere when uppercase and lowercase phi are used interchangeably.
  3. [Section III, system assumptions] The text says 'we make the following red three assumptions'; this appears to be a typo for 'following three assumptions'.
  4. [Section IV-C, Lemma 4] D3 is called the 'propagation delay' but is modeled as S l_d / (v_data B), which is a transmission/service time over the HMIMO channel rather than a physical propagation delay. The terminology should be aligned with the formula, or the formula should be revised to include the actual propagation distance.
  5. [Section VII, Fig. 10 caption] The caption states that Fig. 10 provides a 'three-dimensional illustration', but Fig. 10 has two two-dimensional subfigures; the 3D description appears to refer to Fig. 9.
  6. [Section II-C and Definition 1] Definition 1 calls ar{D} = P{D1+D2+D3 > T} an 'upper bound', but it is the violation probability itself; the subsequent theorem provides the upper bound. The wording should be corrected for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the delay bound follows from explicit traffic and service assumptions, and the self-citations are contextual rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

We walked the derivation from the Poisson/exponential traffic model (Eq. (5)) through Lemma 2 (Eq. (7)) to Theorem 1 (Eq. (23)). The queueing bound uses the stability-optimal parameter mu = (v_data B - delta_d l_d)/(v_data B l_d), which is a closed-form minimizer of the bounding function, not a fitted parameter; the propagation bound (Eq. (21)) follows from the exponential packet-size distribution; and the convolution inequality (Eq. (22)) is a standard stochastic network calculus result. The rate v_data is the Shannon rate (Eq. (34)) for a given channel realization, and the optimization problems P1-P8 maximize that rate and choose t_d via a derived first-order condition; nothing in this chain is fit to output data or defined in terms of the end-to-end delay. The self-citations to SIM modeling works [19], [20], [34], [38] provide the physical channel model and are contextual; the delay analysis itself is self-contained given that model. The g(x) = 0 simplification in Appendix A, after Eq. (52), is a modeling limitation that can affect the validity of Eq. (23) for a fading channel, but it is an explicit assumption about the service process, not a circular reduction of the claimed result to its inputs. No quoted equation reduces to its own input, and the 51.47% rate improvement is an algorithmic comparison, not a prediction from fitted data. Thus the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The bound rests on a standard SNC inequality, a Poisson/exponential traffic model, stability, a deterministic rate-latency service curve at the Shannon rate, and a standard SDR recovery; no new physical entities are introduced. The main burden is the deterministic service assumption, which excludes fading randomness, and unspecified parameters (ρ, δ_d) that control the reported numbers.

free parameters (4)
  • ρ (weight on propagation delay in P3) = unspecified (effectively 1 in the simulations)
    Appears in P3 and eq. (38) as the weight of t_d in the objective; never given in Table I. Its value changes the claimed optimal t_d.
  • t_b (expected queueing delay budget) = 0.5 s (Table I)
    Chosen by hand; enters the bound exponent linearly, so all delay-bound numbers shift with it.
  • δ_d (packet arrival rate) = unspecified in Table I
    Required by the stability condition δ_d l_d < v_data B and by Lemma 2's exponent; its absence means the queueing delay bound and Fig. 10 curves are not fully reproducible.
  • t_d initial value = 0.6 s (Algorithm 1)
    Hand-set initialization; final t_d depends on the iteration path of the unspecified one-dimensional optimizer.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Min-plus convolution CCDF inequality (Lemma 5)
    The union-bound-based inequality P{X+Y > x} ≤ f ⊗ g(x) from [39]; used in Theorem 1.
  • domain assumption Poisson arrivals with exponentially distributed packet sizes
    Assumed in Section III and IV-A; the exponential martingale bound for the stochastic arrival curve (5) depends on this traffic model.
  • ad hoc to paper Deterministic service curve β(t) = v_data B t with g(x) = 0
    Appendix A and Section IV-A; treats the fading HMIMO channel as a constant-rate server at the Shannon rate, excluding fading randomness from the bound. This is optimistic and is not derived from the fading statistics.
  • domain assumption Stability: service rate exceeds arrival rate
    Assumption (iii), Section III; needed for the queueing bound and the μ choice in (6).
  • standard math Phase-shift-only optimization with unit-modulus constraints; SDR rank-one relaxation followed by Gaussian randomization recovers a feasible solution
    Sections VI-C; standard SDR machinery, solution quality approximate.
  • domain assumption Shannon achievable rate formula (34) for the SIM channel
    The rate v_data = log2 det(I + HZH^H/(N_0 B)) is taken from [41]; used as the service rate in all delay bounds.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces-Aided eVTOL Delay Sensitive Communications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NE5J3AI4

@misc{pith2026250706632,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces-Aided eVTOL Delay Sensitive Communications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NE5J3AI4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.06632}
}
read the original abstract

With rapid urbanization and increasing population density, urban traffic congestion has become a critical issue, and traditional ground transportation methods are no longer sufficient to address it effectively. To tackle this challenge, the concept of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) has emerged, aiming to utilize low-altitude airspace to establish a three-dimensional transportation system. Among various components of the AAM system, electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft plays a pivotal role due to their flexibility and efficiency. However, the immaturity of Ultra Reliable Low Latency Communication (URLLC) technologies poses significant challenges to safety-critical AAM operations. Specifically, existing Stacked Intelligent Metasurfaces (SIM)-based eVTOL systems lack rigorous mathematical frameworks to quantify probabilistic delay bounds under dynamic air traffic patterns, a prerequisite for collision avoidance and airspace management. To bridge this gap, we employ network calculus tools to derive the probabilistic upper bound on communication delay in the AAM system for the first time. Furthermore, we formulate a complex non-convex optimization problem that jointly minimizes the probabilistic delay bound and the propagation delay. To solve this problem efficiently, we propose a solution based on the Block Coordinate Descent (BCD) algorithm and Semidefinite Relaxation (SDR) method. In addition, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of how various factors impact regret and transmission rate, and explore the influence of varying load intensity and total delay on the probabilistic delay bound.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.06632 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the SIM-Aided A2A Communication between eVTOLs. Considering data freshness as a key requirement for flight safety, the communication delay during data packet transmis￾sion must be constrained within a reasonable range to avoid potential collision risks. Therefore, in this work, we aim to derive a probabilistic delay bound, P{D > T}, defined as the probability that the packet delay D exceeds a given t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the End-to-End Packet Delivery Mechanism for eV2V Communication. As illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The relationship between the number of iterations and the data transmission rate vdata under varying numbers of data streams. The solid curves represent the performance of the proposed BCD algorithm, whereas the dashed curves correspond to the results obtained using the low-complexity AO algorithm. As illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Relationship between the number of iterations and propa￾gation delay td/regret f(vdata, td) under different numbers of data streams. optimization results for td. In contrast, when S = 5, the propa￾gation delay is reduced by approximately 0.1s compared to the case of S …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relationship between regret and the number of meta-atoms per metasurface layer under different numbers of data streams. 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Number of Transmit metasurface layers 0 50 100 150 200 Transmission rate [bit/s/Hz] S=1 S=2 S=3 S=4 S=5 S=1 S=2 S=3 S=4 S…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Relationship between the number of metasurface layers and the transmission rate vdata under different numbers of data streams. Solid lines present the results obtained using the BCD algorithm, while dashed lines show the performance of the low-complexity AO algorithm …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Relationship between total delay (T)/load (ld) and proba￾bilistic delay bound under different load. is observed that when L = K = 2, the regret values across different data stream configurations remain close. As the number of metasurface layers increases to L = K = 3 …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: 3D illustration of the probabilistic delay bound with respect to the delay requirement and system load. less efficient interference management. In this case, fewer data streams lead to lower interference, and the optimization algorithm has limited flexibility, slowing …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Urban air mobility: His- tory, ecosystem, market potential, and challenges,

    A. P. Cohen, S. A. Shaheen, and E. M. Farrar, “Urban air mobility: His- tory, ecosystem, market potential, and challenges,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 6074–6087, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    6g for uam communications: Challenges and visions,

    B. Kim and H. Kim, “6g for uam communications: Challenges and visions,” in 2022 13th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC), 2022, pp. 1526–1528

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Autonomous advanced aerial mobil- ity—an end-to-end autonomy framework for uavs and beyond,

    S. Mishra and P. Palanisamy, “Autonomous advanced aerial mobil- ity—an end-to-end autonomy framework for uavs and beyond,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 136 318–136 349, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Evaluation of uav path planning approaches for urban air mobility,

    T. Pasha, S. H. M, S. K R, B. S. D, and J. R. Munavalli, “Evaluation of uav path planning approaches for urban air mobility,” in 2025 International Conference on Intelligent and Innovative Technologies in Computing, Electrical and Electronics (IITCEE) , 2025, pp. 1–6

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Development of candidate airspace procedures for urban air mobility in the dallas area,

    R. W. Ghatas, R. H. Mogford, S. A. Verma, R. D. Wood, G. M. R. Torres, and A. H. Farrahi, “Development of candidate airspace procedures for urban air mobility in the dallas area,” in 2024 AIAA DATC/IEEE 43rd Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC) , 2024, pp. 1–7. 13

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Au- tonomous navigation for evtol: Review and future perspectives,

    H. Wei, B. Lou, Z. Zhang, B. Liang, F.-Y . Wang, and C. Lv, “Au- tonomous navigation for evtol: Review and future perspectives,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 4145–4171, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Autonomous air traffic management scheduling system,

    S. R. Yelisetty and A. Kuriakose, “Autonomous air traffic management scheduling system,” in 2024 IEEE International Conference on Electron- ics, Computing and Communication Technologies (CONECCT) , 2024, pp. 1–6

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    evtol commu- nications and networking in uam: Requirements, key enablers, and challenges,

    A. A. Zaid, B. E. Y . Belmekki, and M.-S. Alouini, “evtol commu- nications and networking in uam: Requirements, key enablers, and challenges,” IEEE Communications Magazine , vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 154– 160, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    A study on communication technologies for urban air mobility,

    J. Bae, H. Lee, and H. Lee, “A study on communication technologies for urban air mobility,” in 2022 13th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC), 2022, pp. 2235–2240

    2022

  2. [10]

    Communication network architecture with 6g capabilities for urban air mobility,

    S. Al-Rubaye, C. Conrad, and A. Tsourdos, “Communication network architecture with 6g capabilities for urban air mobility,” in 2024 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE) , 2024, pp. 1–6

    2024

  3. [11]

    Combined airspace and non-terrestrial 6g networks for advanced air mobility,

    A. Manzoor, M. Ozger, D. Schupke, and C. Cavdar, “Combined airspace and non-terrestrial 6g networks for advanced air mobility,” in 2024 20th International Conference on the Design of Reliable Communication Networks (DRCN), 2024, pp. 47–53

    2024

  4. [12]

    Reconfigurable holographic surfaces for ultra-massive mimo in 6g: Practical design, optimization and implementation,

    R. Deng, Y . Zhang, H. Zhang, B. Di, H. Zhang, H. V . Poor, and L. Song, “Reconfigurable holographic surfaces for ultra-massive mimo in 6g: Practical design, optimization and implementation,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 2367–2379, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Two-timescale beamforming optimization for downlink multi-user holographic mimo surfaces,

    H. Wu, Y . Chen, Y . Ming, and Z. Wang, “Two-timescale beamforming optimization for downlink multi-user holographic mimo surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology , vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 4476–4481, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Holographic mimo communications: Theoretical foundations, enabling technologies, and future directions,

    T. Gong, P. Gavriilidis, R. Ji, C. Huang, G. C. Alexandropoulos, L. Wei, Z. Zhang, M. Debbah, H. V . Poor, and C. Yuen, “Holographic mimo communications: Theoretical foundations, enabling technologies, and future directions,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials , vol. 26, ...

    2024

  7. [15]

    Holographic mimo for leo satellite communications aided by reconfigurable holographic surfaces,

    R. Deng, B. Di, H. Zhang, H. V . Poor, and L. Song, “Holographic mimo for leo satellite communications aided by reconfigurable holographic surfaces,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 3071–3085, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Beyond massive mimo: The potential of positioning with large intelligent surfaces,

    S. Hu, F. Rusek, and O. Edfors, “Beyond massive mimo: The potential of positioning with large intelligent surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 1761–1774, 2018

    2018

  9. [17]

    Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces for energy efficiency in wireless communication,

    C. Huang, A. Zappone, G. C. Alexandropoulos, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces for energy efficiency in wireless communication,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communica- tions, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 4157–4170, 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces for wireless communica- tions: Principles, challenges, and opportunities,

    M. A. ElMossallamy, H. Zhang, L. Song, K. G. Seddik, Z. Han, and G. Y . Li, “Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces for wireless communica- tions: Principles, challenges, and opportunities,” IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 990–1002, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Stacked intelligent metasurfaces for efficient holographic mimo communications in 6g,

    J. An, C. Xu, D. W. K. Ng, G. C. Alexandropoulos, C. Huang, C. Yuen, and L. Hanzo, “Stacked intelligent metasurfaces for efficient holographic mimo communications in 6g,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 2380–2396, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Stacked intelligent metasurface-aided mimo transceiver design,

    J. An, C. Yuen, C. Xu, H. Li, D. W. K. Ng, M. Di Renzo, M. Debbah, and L. Hanzo, “Stacked intelligent metasurface-aided mimo transceiver design,” IEEE Wireless Communications , vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 123–131, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Determining delay bounds for a chain of virtual network functions using network calculus,

    Z. Wang, J. Zhang, and T. Huang, “Determining delay bounds for a chain of virtual network functions using network calculus,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 2550–2553, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Packet loss and delay analysis for a wireless fading channel using stochastic network calculus,

    P. Li, Y . Wei, N. Li, T. Huang, and N. Jin, “Packet loss and delay analysis for a wireless fading channel using stochastic network calculus,” in 2022 14th International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing (WCSP), 2022, pp. 1070–1074

    2022

  15. [23]

    A stochastic network calculus for service performance in wireless mesh networks,

    G. Wang, M. Lai, F. Huang, and T. Li, “A stochastic network calculus for service performance in wireless mesh networks,” in 2010 5th International Conference on Computer Science & Education , 2010, pp. 1685–1688

    2010

  16. [24]

    End-to-end delay distri- bution analysis for stochastic admission control in multi-hop wireless networks,

    W. Jiao, M. Sheng, K.-S. Lui, and Y . Shi, “End-to-end delay distri- bution analysis for stochastic admission control in multi-hop wireless networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1308–1320, 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    Cheap semidefinite relaxation mimo detection using row-by-row block coordinate descent,

    H.-T. Wai, W.-K. Ma, and A. M.-C. So, “Cheap semidefinite relaxation mimo detection using row-by-row block coordinate descent,” in 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Pro- cessing (ICASSP), 2011, pp. 3256–3259

    2011

  18. [26]

    Intelligent reflecting surface enhanced wireless network via joint active and passive beamforming,

    Q. Wu and R. Zhang, “Intelligent reflecting surface enhanced wireless network via joint active and passive beamforming,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 5394–5409, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Tradeoffs between safety and efficiency from dynamic airspace geofencing for advanced air mobility,

    J. V . T. Ribeiro, M. C. R. Murc ¸a, and W. S. S. Souza, “Tradeoffs between safety and efficiency from dynamic airspace geofencing for advanced air mobility,” in 2022 IEEE/AIAA 41st Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 2022, pp. 1–8

    2022

  20. [28]

    evtol, uam, and aam: Brief development history and implementation outlook of the united states,

    K.-Y . Tsai, G.-Y . Meng, T.-L. Wu, M.-H. Zheng, W.-Y . Wang, C.-M. Kung, Y .-C. Chen, C.-F. Huang, T.-C. Hsieh, H.-S. Hsu, H.-D. Lin, and J.-X. Shi, “evtol, uam, and aam: Brief development history and implementation outlook of the united states,” in 2023 IEEE International Co...

    2023

  21. [29]

    The state of urban air mobility research: An assessment of challenges and opportunities,

    S. Shahriar Ahmed, G. Fountas, V . Lurkin, P. C. Anastasopoulos, Y . Zhang, M. Bierlaire, and F. Mannering, “The state of urban air mobility research: An assessment of challenges and opportunities,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 26, no. 2, pp. ...

    2025

  22. [30]

    On the efficient design of stacked intelligent metasurfaces for secure siso transmission,

    H. Niu, X. Lei, J. An, L. Zhang, and C. Yuen, “On the efficient design of stacked intelligent metasurfaces for secure siso transmission,” IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 20, pp. 60–70, 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    Stacked intelligent metasurfaces for multiuser beamforming in the wave domain,

    J. An, M. Di Renzo, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Stacked intelligent metasurfaces for multiuser beamforming in the wave domain,” in ICC 2023 - IEEE International Conference on Communications , 2023, pp. 2834–2839

    2023

  24. [32]

    Channel estimation for stacked intelligent metasurface-assisted wireless networks,

    X. Yao, J. An, L. Gan, M. Di Renzo, and C. Yuen, “Channel estimation for stacked intelligent metasurface-assisted wireless networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1349–1353, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Stacked intelligent metasurface enabled leo satellite communications relying on statistical csi,

    S. Lin, J. An, L. Gan, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Stacked intelligent metasurface enabled leo satellite communications relying on statistical csi,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1295– 1299, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Digital twin-based sim communication and flight control for advanced air mobility,

    K. Xiong, Z. Chen, J. Xie, S. Leng, and C. Yuen, “Digital twin-based sim communication and flight control for advanced air mobility,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.01837

    2025 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation using stacked intelligent metasurfaces,

    J. An, C. Yuen, Y . L. Guan, M. Di Renzo, M. Debbah, H. V . Poor, and L. Hanzo, “Two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation using stacked intelligent metasurfaces,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Spatial network calculus and performance guarantees in wireless networks,

    K. Feng and F. Baccelli, “Spatial network calculus and performance guarantees in wireless networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Com- munications, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 5033–5047, 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Research on real-time of hybrid scheduling for mine industrial ethernet with network calculus,

    Y . Sun, B. Zhang, and R. Li, “Research on real-time of hybrid scheduling for mine industrial ethernet with network calculus,” in 2010 8th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation , 2010, pp. 1145–1149

    2010

  30. [38]

    Ris-aided trajectory optimization in layered urban air mobility,

    K. Xiong, S. Leng, L. Chen, D. Zhang, C. Huang, and C. Yuen, “Ris-aided trajectory optimization in layered urban air mobility,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 2188–2202, 2025

    2025

  31. [39]

    Performance analysis on m2m communication network based on stochastic network calculus,

    Z. Tao, W. Quan, and W. Gao-Cai, “Performance analysis on m2m communication network based on stochastic network calculus,” in 2014 IEEE 13th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications , 2014, pp. 865–870

    2014

  32. [40]

    A note on applying stochastic network calculus,

    Y . Jiang, “A note on applying stochastic network calculus,” in Proc. SIGCOMM, vol. 10, no. 2010, 2010, pp. 16–20

    2010

  33. [41]

    Achievable rate optimization for stacked intelligent metasurface-assisted holographic mimo communications,

    A. Papazafeiropoulos, J. An, P. Kourtessis, T. Ratnarajah, and S. Chatzinotas, “Achievable rate optimization for stacked intelligent metasurface-assisted holographic mimo communications,” IEEE Trans- actions on Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 13 173–13 186, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Holographic beamform- ing for ultra massive mimo with limited radiation amplitudes: How many quantized bits do we need?

    X. Hu, R. Deng, B. Di, H. Zhang, and L. Song, “Holographic beamform- ing for ultra massive mimo with limited radiation amplitudes: How many quantized bits do we need?” IEEE Communications Letters , vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1403–1407, 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Channel modeling and channel estimation for holographic massive mimo with planar arrays,

    O. T. Demir, E. Bjornson, and L. Sanguinetti, “Channel modeling and channel estimation for holographic massive mimo with planar arrays,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters , vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 997–1001, 2022

    2022

Pith tools

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