Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 2 cited by

Latency Minimization for Movable Antennas-Enabled Relay-aided D2D Mobile Edge Computing Communication Systems

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Movable antennas can cut relay-aided D2D edge-computing latency by 14–35% while using far fewer antennas.

desk verdict New MA-D2D-MEC latency application, but a dropped load-bearing constraint and mis-indexed interference make the reported gains unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11351 v1 pith:OO7RFQYW submitted 2024-12-16 eess.SP

Yue Xiu , Yang Zhao , Ran Yang , Huimin Tang , Long Qu , Maurice Khabbaz , Chadi Assi , Ning Wei This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords movableantennasmobileedgecomputingdevice-to-devicecommunicationrelay-assistednetworkslatencyminimizationpenaltydualdecompositionsuccessiveconvexapproximationbeamforming
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 replacing fixed antenna arrays with movable antennas (MAs) in a relay-aided device-to-device mobile edge computing system can substantially reduce worst-case task latency, even when the relay and base station use far fewer antennas. It formulates a joint optimization of antenna positions, beamforming vectors, task offloading ratio, and resource allocation, all aimed at minimizing the system's maximum latency under power, region, and minimum-separation constraints. Because that problem is non-convex and highly coupled, the paper develops a parallel penalty dual decomposition (PDD) algorithm combined with successive convex approximation (SCA). Numerical experiments show the proposed scheme lowers latency by about 14–35% versus existing counterparts, and that an 8-antenna MA base station matches a 22-antenna fixed-position array while a 4-antenna MA relay matches a 20-antenna fixed relay.

What carries the argument

The machine that carries the argument is the joint latency objective with auxiliary timing variables: T_total = $T_u^{1}$ + max{$T_e^{1}$, $T_d^{2}$}. The reformulation introduces auxiliary variables tu, td, tc, tu,k, td,k, and tc,k to convert the makespan into a linear sum tu + td with constraints T_u,k <= tu,k, $T_e^{1}$ <= td, T_d,k <= td,k, T_u,k >= tc,k, and equalities tu = sum_k tu,k, td = sum_k td,k, tc = sum_k tc,k. These constraints, together with the MA field-response channel model that makes each channel matrix a function of antenna coordinates, are what the PDD/SCA loop iteratively convexifies and penalizes. The PDD outer loop drives equality-constraint violations toward zero, and the SCA inner loop locally linearizes fractional SINR constraints; closed-form Lagrange-multiplier updates give the antenna-position projections.

What would settle it

Run the proposed algorithm with the offloading-to-local timing constraint explicitly enforced, for example by adding tc >= (1-rho)*L_a/F_La, and compare the resulting T_total against the paper's reported values. If the latency rises when this constraint is restored, then the reported 14–35% gains and the 8-versus-22 antenna equivalences are partly artifacts of solving a relaxed problem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that optimizing where each antenna sits, together with beamforming and task offloading decisions, turns a relay-assisted D2D MEC system into a latency-minimal pipeline under tight resources. The paper models the end-to-end latency as T_total = $T_u^{1}$ + max{$T_e^{1}$, $T_d^{2}$}, where $T_u^{1}$ is the time to offload tasks from UEs through the relay to the BS, $T_e^{1}$ is MEC-server computation, and $T_d^{2}$ is the D2D transmission of local results; it assumes offloading takes at least as long as local computation ($T_u^{1}$ >= $T_c^{2}$). The algorithm then splits this problem using PDD and SCA into a sequence of tractable subproblems, with closed-form updates for antenna positions, beamformers, and offloading ratios. If correct, the paper establishes that in this setting small movable arrays can match the latency of much larger fixed arrays.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the reformulated optimization still enforces the timing chain $T_u^{1}$ >= tc >= $T_c^{2}$, i.e., that offloading through the relay takes at least as long as local computation; if that constraint is lost in the written reformulation, the reported latency can understate the true makespan.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claimed 14–35% latency reduction holds, MA-equipped relays and base stations become a cheaper replacement for large fixed arrays in relay-aided D2D MEC deployments.
  • A base station with 8 movable antennas would match the latency of a 22-antenna fixed array, and a relay with 4 movable antennas would match a 20-antenna fixed relay, implying a sharp drop in hardware count and cost.
  • The reported convergence behavior, with latency flattening after about 28 outer iterations and constraint violation falling below 1e-5, suggests the PDD/SCA loop is practical for near-real-time resource allocation at moderate problem sizes.
  • Jointly optimizing transmit and receive MA positions gives extra latency gains over receive-only or maximum-power-position baselines, especially when the movable region is small.
  • When MEC computational capability is abundant, latency becomes limited by radio resources and antenna spatial degrees of freedom, so further MEC investment yields little additional benefit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A careful reader will notice that the written reformulation of problem (12) may not actually carry the constraint T_u^1 >= T_c^2 into problems (13)-(14): the auxiliary chain requires rho*L_a/C_k >= tc,k and tc = sum_k tc,k, but no constraint ties tc to T_c^2 = (1-rho)*L_a/F_La. If that omission stands, the algorithm solves a relaxed problem and the reported T_total can be smaller than the true mak
  • The 8-versus-22 and 4-versus-20 antenna equivalences suggest a testable scaling law: if MA gains come from spatial diversity rather than from the relaxed timing constraint, the same latency matching should hold when the problem is solved with (12b) strictly enforced, for example by adding tc >= (1-rho)*L_a/F_La to the auxiliary set.
  • If the missing constraint is the only gap, the PDD/SCA derivation should survive unchanged after adding that single inequality, making the fix a small but necessary correction before the numerical gains can be taken at face value.
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 / 7 minor

Summary. The paper studies a relay-aided D2D mobile edge computing system in which the UEs, relay, and base station are equipped with movable antennas. It formulates a joint optimization of MA positions, transmit/receive beamforming, offloading ratio, and resource allocation to minimize the maximum system latency, and proposes a PDD/SCA-based algorithm with closed-form subproblems. Numerical results report 14–35% latency improvements over several baselines and show an 8-antenna MA BS matching a 22-antenna FPA BS and a 4-antenna MA relay matching a 20-antenna FPA relay.

Significance. The intended contribution is potentially valuable: if the claims are correct, small movable-antenna arrays could replace much larger fixed arrays in relay and BS deployments while improving latency. The paper uses standard SCA/PDD machinery and compares against external baselines with a cited MA channel model, so the performance claim is not circular. However, the two technical errors identified below change the solved problem and undermine the numerical support for the central claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Eqs. (13)–(14), constraint (12b)] The reformulation from (12) to (13)/(14) does not enforce the original constraint (12b), T_u^1 >= T_c^2. The text states that the auxiliary variable tc is introduced to enforce T_u^1 >= tc >= T_c^2, but in (13)–(14) tc appears only through tc = sum_k tc,k and rho*L_a/C_k >= tc,k, which give tc <= T_u^1; there is no constraint tying tc to T_c^2 = (1 - rho)*L_a/F_La. Since tc is absent from the objective, it is free slack, so the feasible set is larger than that of (12). A returned point with T_u^1 < T_c^2 violates the timing assumption underlying (11): the local results cannot be transmitted before T_c^2, so the true makespan is at least max(T_u^1 + T_e^1, T_c^2 + T_d^2), not T_u^1 + max(T_e^1, T_d^2). All reported latency comparisons, including the 14–35% gains and the MA-vs-FPA antenna reductions in Figs. 5–8, are therefore not supported by the solved problem as written.
  2. [Eq. (7) and Section II-B] The D2D rate expression is inconsistent with the received-signal model. In (6), the desired signal at the UE2 of pair k uses channel H(bar_t_k, tilde_t_k), so the interference from the transmitter of pair k' should arrive through H(bar_t_k', tilde_t_k). Equation (7), however, places H(bar_t_k, tilde_t_k') w_k' in the interference sum. This is the channel from pair k's own transmitter to pair k''s receiver, not the interference channel into pair k's receiver. Thus even the communication rate constraint solved by the algorithm does not correspond to the D2D system described in Section II and Fig. 1. This error affects every D2D-related constraint and all numerical results involving D2D transmission.
  3. [Section IV-A and Algorithm 1] The convergence claim is not supported by the cited result. The paper states that 'the convergence analysis in [31] confirms that the PDD-based algorithm ... converges to a set of stationary solutions for problem (15)', but [31] is a general PDD convergence paper and problem (15) is not the optimization problem solved; the augmented Lagrangian problem is (19), with SCA linearizations. No problem-specific convergence proof is given, and the algorithm description (Algorithm 1) refers to 'problem (15)' and 'update (21)' rather than to the AL problem and the dual updates. This is less central than the feasibility error, but it means the paper does not substantiate its convergence guarantee.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Section II-D] In the discussion before (11), the text refers to T_e^2 and T_d^2, but these variables are not defined; the intended quantities are presumably T_e^1 and T_d^2.
  2. [Section II-E] The sentence 'The constraints (12b) and (12c) denote the transmit power constraints of D2D UEs' is incorrect: (12b) is the timing constraint T_u^1 >= T_c^2, not a power constraint.
  3. [Section III, before (13)] The text says 'td = max{T_e^1, sum_k T_d^2,k}, which implies td <= T_e^1 and td <= sum_k T_d^2,k'; the inequalities are reversed and the definition of td as a maximum is inconsistent with the stated implications.
  4. [Eq. (16)] Equation (16) uses the noise variance sigma_u^2, while the uplink model in (8)–(9) defines the relay noise as sigma_r^2; the notation should be made consistent.
  5. [Algorithm 1] Algorithm 1 initializes with '1 < c < 1', which is impossible; the text elsewhere uses c = 0.6, so the intended range is 0 < c < 1. The algorithm also says 'U^(t) is computed based on problem (15)' and 'Updating lambda^(t+1) based on (21)', but (15) is not an optimization problem and (21) is a constraint linearization, not a dual update.
  6. [Fig. 5 and Section V] The simulation parameters list 'Nt = 2, Nr = 4, Nt = 4, Nb = 8' reuses Nt twice; one of these should presumably be Nu, the number of UE antennas.
  7. [Section V, first paragraph] The text says 'After 30 iterations, the penalty term decreases to below 10', but Fig. 4(b) shows values around 10^-3 to 10^-6; the sentence likely should say 'below 10^-3' or similar.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the latency and MA-versus-FPA claims rest on external baselines and cited channel models, not on fitting or self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper's main claims (joint MA positioning, beamforming, and resource allocation reducing latency, and 8 MAs matching 22 FPAs) are assessed against external baselines such as CM, TDMA, local computing, RMA, MCP, and FPA, and the MA channel model is taken from cited prior work [13,15,20] rather than from the authors' own previous results. The PDD/SCA machinery is standard, with convergence attributed to the external PDD analysis in [31]; the SCA references [28]-[30] include an author of the present paper, but they are used only as standard convexification references and are not load-bearing for the reported performance gains. No fitted constant or equivalent-by-construction reformulation produces the reported 14%-35% improvements. The principal weaknesses are correctness issues rather than circularity: the written reformulation from (12) to (13)-(14) drops original constraint (12b) (T_u^1 >= T_c^2) because tc is introduced as a free slack variable and is never tied to (1-rho)L_a/F_La, so the algorithm as written optimizes a relaxation of the stated problem; and the D2D interference term in (7) appears to use the wrong channel indices. These issues may make the numerical results optimistic, but they do not make the derivation circular, because the reported latency outcome is not equal by construction to an input, a fitted parameter, or a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the field-response channel model and the PDD convergence theorem, both imported from prior work, and on the timing assumption T_u^1 >= T_c^2 that is used to compute T_total but not enforced in the reformulated problem. Algorithm hyperparameters are hand-set without sensitivity analysis. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Penalty update factor c = 0.6
    Set in Section V; controls PDD penalty decrease and convergence speed; no sensitivity study.
  • Initial penalty parameter kappa0 = 2
    Set in Section V; affects constraint-violation handling in PDD.
  • Tolerance epsilon1 and epsilon2 update factor = epsilon1=1e-3, epsilon2^(m+1)=0.7*epsilon2^m
    Termination thresholds chosen by hand; influence reported latency at convergence.
  • Simulation scenario parameters = L_a=1e7 bits, F_E=1e8 bit/s, F_La=0.4e7 bit/s, P_k=15 dBm, P_r=30 dBm, sigma^2=1e-8 W, alpha and path counts per…
    Set in Section V; the claimed performance gains are demonstrated only under these settings.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Field-response channel model with known path angles and gains (A(t_k), A(u_r), etc.) from [13]-[20]
    Used throughout Section II.A; assumes perfect CSI and geometric channel representation, no estimation errors.
  • standard math PDD convergence theorem of Shi and Hong [31] applies to the reformulated AL problem (19) with SCA inner loop and BCD updates
    Invoked in Section IV to claim convergence to stationary solutions; conditions are not verified for this problem.
  • domain assumption Local computation time T_c^2=(1-rho)*L_a/F_La and system latency T_total = T_u^1 + max(T_e^1,T_d^2) require T_u^1 >= T_c^2
    Introduced in Section II.D, Eq. (11) and constraint (12b); if violated, the latency formula undercounts the actual makespan.
  • domain assumption Task offloading ratio rho is a continuous scalar and tasks are perfectly divisible
    Used in the computation model (Section II.D) and constraint (12f).
  • standard math SCA first-order Taylor approximations and AM-GM inequalities preserve the feasible region of constraints (18b)-(18d), (18g)-(18h), (24)
    Used in Section IV.A; standard, but validity at non-differentiable points is not discussed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Latency Minimization for Movable Antennas-Enabled Relay-aided D2D Mobile Edge Computing Communication Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OO7RFQYW

@misc{pith2026241211351,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Latency Minimization for Movable Antennas-Enabled Relay-aided D2D Mobile Edge Computing Communication Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OO7RFQYW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11351}
}
read the original abstract

Device-to-device (D2D)-assisted mobile edge computing (MEC) is one of the critical technologies of future sixth generation (6G) networks. The core of D2D-assisted MEC is to reduce system latency for network edge UEs by supporting cloud computing services, thereby achieving high-speed transmission. Due to the sensitivity of communication signals to obstacles, relaying is adopted to enhance the D2D-assisted MEC system's performance and its coverage area. However, relay nodes and the base station (BS) are typically equipped with large-scale antenna arrays. This increases the cost of relay-assisted D2D MEC systems and limits their deployment. Movable antenna (MA) technology is used to work around this limitation without compromising performance. Specifically, the core of MA technology lies in optimizing the antenna positions to increase system capacity. Therefore, this paper proposes a novel resource allocation scheme for MA-enhanced relay-assisted D2D MEC systems. Specifically, the MA positions and beamforming of user equipments (UEs), relay, and BS as well as the allocation of resources and the computation task offloading rate at the MEC server, all are optimized herein with the objective of minimizing the maximum latency while satisfying computation and communication rate constraints. Since this is a multivariable non-convex problem, a parallel and distributed penalty dual decomposition (PDD) based algorithm is developed and combined with successive convex approximation (SCA) to solve this non-convex problem. The results of extensive numerical analyses show that the proposed algorithm significantly improves the performance of the MA-enhanced relay-assisted D2D communication system compared to a counterpart where relays and the BS are equiped with traditional fixed-position antenna (FPA).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11351 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the relay-aided D2D MEC-based MAs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Timeline of different offloading schemes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The flow chart of the proposed algorithm. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Maximum latency is plotted against the number of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Maximum latency as a function of the number of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Maximum latency as a function of the MA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Maximum latency in relation to the computational [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) Maximum latency about the BS FPA. (b) Maximum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Movable Antenna-Aided Cooperative ISAC Network with Time Synchronization error and Imperfect CSI

    eess.SP 2025-01 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A movable-antenna cooperative ISAC design is claimed to cut transmit power by 30-40% under CSI and time-synchronization errors, but the proof of its worst-case rate constraint has a central gap.

  2. Advancing Fluid Antenna-Assisted Non-Terrestrial Networks in 6G and Beyond: Fundamentals, State of the Art, and Future Directions

    cs.NI 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 1.0 of 10

    A literature survey of fluid-antenna-assisted non-terrestrial networks; it organizes existing results and identifies future directions but proves no new result.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [31]

    Penalty dual decomposition method f or non- smooth nonconvex optimization—part I: Algorithms and conv ergence analysis,

    Q. Shi and M. Hong, “Penalty dual decomposition method f or non- smooth nonconvex optimization—part I: Algorithms and conv ergence analysis,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 68, pp. 4108–4 122, Jun. 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    AI driven heterogeneous MEC system with UA V assistance for dyn amic 12 environment: Challenges and solutions,

    F. Jiang, K. Wang, L. Dong, C. Pan, W. Xu, and K. Y ang, “AI driven heterogeneous MEC system with UA V assistance for dyn amic 12 environment: Challenges and solutions,” IEEE Network, vol . 35, no. 1, pp. 400–408, Dec. 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [2]

    Aerial reconfigurable in telligent sur- faces meet mobile edge computing,

    B. Shang, H. V . Poor, and L. Liu, “Aerial reconfigurable in telligent sur- faces meet mobile edge computing,” IEEE Wireless Commun., v ol. 29, no. 6, pp. 104–111, May. 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [3]

    Multi-objective parallel task offloading and content cach ing in D2D- aided MEC networks,

    Z. Xiao, J. Shu, H. Jiang, J. C. Lui, G. Min, J. Liu, and S. Du stdar, “Multi-objective parallel task offloading and content cach ing in D2D- aided MEC networks,” IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput., vol. 22, no. 1 1, pp. 6599–6615, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    D2D communications meet m obile edge computing for enhanced computation capacity in cellul ar net- works,

    Y . He, J. Ren, G. Y u, and Y . Cai, “D2D communications meet m obile edge computing for enhanced computation capacity in cellul ar net- works,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 175 0–1763, 2019

    work page 2019

  6. [5]

    D2D-assisted m ulti-user cooperative partial offloading, transmission scheduling a nd computation allocating for MEC,

    J. Peng, H. Qiu, J. Cai, W. Xu, and J. Wang, “D2D-assisted m ulti-user cooperative partial offloading, transmission scheduling a nd computation allocating for MEC,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 4858–4873, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    UA V swarm-enabled collaborative secure relay communicat ions with time-domain colluding eavesdropper,

    C. Zhang, G. Sun, Q. Wu, J. Li, S. Liang, D. Niyato, and V . C. Leung, “UA V swarm-enabled collaborative secure relay communicat ions with time-domain colluding eavesdropper,” IEEE Trans. Mob. Com put., pp. 1–18, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [7]

    Secu re beam- forming for full-duplex MIMO two-way untrusted relay syste ms,

    S. Zhao, J. Liu, Y . Shen, X. Jiang, and N. Shiratori, “Secu re beam- forming for full-duplex MIMO two-way untrusted relay syste ms,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur., vol. 15, pp. 3775–3790, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 33 references
  1. [8]

    Energy effic ient relay selection and resource allocation in d2d-enabled mob ile edge computing,

    Y . Li, G. Xu, K. Y ang, J. Ge, P . Liu, and Z. Jin, “Energy effic ient relay selection and resource allocation in d2d-enabled mob ile edge computing,” IEEE Trans. V eh. Technol., vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 1 5 800– 15 814, 2020

    2020

  2. [9]

    Task co-offloading for d2d-assisted mobile edge computing in industrial internet of things,

    X. Dai, Z. Xiao, H. Jiang, M. Alazab, J. C. Lui, S. Dustdar, and J. Liu, “Task co-offloading for d2d-assisted mobile edge computing in industrial internet of things,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf., vol. 19, no. 1, pp . 480–490, 2022

    2022

  3. [10]

    Task offloading in multi-hop relay-aided multi-access edge computing,

    Y . Deng, Z. Chen, X. Chen, and Y . Fang, “Task offloading in multi-hop relay-aided multi-access edge computing,” IEEE Trans. V eh . Technol., vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 1372–1376, 2022

    2022

  4. [11]

    Multi- hop task offloading and relay selection for IoT devices in mob ile edge computing,

    T. Li, Y . Liu, T. Ouyang, H. Zhang, K. Y ang, and X. Zhang, “ Multi- hop task offloading and relay selection for IoT devices in mob ile edge computing,” IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput., 2024

    2024

  5. [12]

    UA V - assisted MEC networks with aerial and ground cooperation,

    Y . Xu, T. Zhang, Y . Liu, D. Y ang, L. Xiao, and M. Tao, “UA V - assisted MEC networks with aerial and ground cooperation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 7712–7727, 202 1

  6. [13]

    Movable antennas for wirele ss communi- cation: Opportunities and challenges,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable antennas for wirele ss communi- cation: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Communicatio ns Magazine, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 114–120, Oct. 2024

    2024

  7. [14]

    Mimo capacity characteriza tion for mov- able antenna systems,

    W. Ma, L. Zhu, and R. Zhang, “Mimo capacity characteriza tion for mov- able antenna systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Commu nications, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 3392–3407, Sep. 2024

    2024

  8. [15]

    Movable-antenna array enha nced beamforming: Achieving full array gain with null steering,

    L. Zhu, W. Ma, and R. Zhang, “Movable-antenna array enha nced beamforming: Achieving full array gain with null steering, ” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 3340–3344, Oct . 2023

    2023

  9. [16]

    Flexible precoding for multi-user movable antenna communications,

    S. Y ang, W. Lyu, B. Ning, Z. Zhang, and C. Y uen, “Flexible precoding for multi-user movable antenna communications,” IEEE Wire less Com- munications Letters, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1404–1408, Mar. 202 4

  10. [17]

    Weighted sum-rat e maximiza- tion for movable antenna-enhanced wireless networks,

    B. Feng, Y . Wu, X.-G. Xia, and C. Xiao, “Weighted sum-rat e maximiza- tion for movable antenna-enhanced wireless networks,” IEE E Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1770–1774, Apr. 2024

    2024

  11. [18]

    Joint beamf orming and antenna position optimization for movable antenna-ass isted spec- trum sharing,

    X. Wei, W. Mei, D. Wang, B. Ning, and Z. Chen, “Joint beamf orming and antenna position optimization for movable antenna-ass isted spec- trum sharing,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, pp. 1 -1, Jul. 2024

    2024

  12. [19]

    Channel estimation for movable antenna communication sys tems: A framework based on compressed sensing,

    Z. Xiao, S. Cao, L. Zhu, Y . Liu, B. Ning, X.-G. Xia, and R. Z hang, “Channel estimation for movable antenna communication sys tems: A framework based on compressed sensing,” IEEE Transactions on Wire- less Communications, pp. 1–1, Apr. 2024

    2024

  13. [20]

    Movable antenna-enabled ris- aided inte- grated sensing and communication,

    H. Wu, H. Ren, and C. Pan, “Movable antenna-enabled ris- aided inte- grated sensing and communication,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2 407.03228, 2024

    2024

  14. [21]

    D elay-aware computation offloading in NOMA MEC under differentiated upl oading delay,

    M. Sheng, Y . Dai, J. Liu, N. Cheng, X. Shen, and Q. Y ang, “D elay-aware computation offloading in NOMA MEC under differentiated upl oading delay,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 281 3–2826, 2020

    2020

  15. [22]

    IRS-aided wireless relaying for high-speed train c ommuni- cation: Beamforming design and channel estimation,

    J. Feng, B. Zheng, C. Y ou, X. Xiong, J. Tang, F. Chen, and R . Zhang, “IRS-aided wireless relaying for high-speed train c ommuni- cation: Beamforming design and channel estimation,” IEEE T rans. Wireless Commun., pp. 1–1, 2024

    2024

  16. [23]

    Decodi ng binary linear codes using penalty dual decomposition method,

    M.-M. Zhao, Q. Shi, Y . Cai, M.-J. Zhao, and Q. Y u, “Decodi ng binary linear codes using penalty dual decomposition method,” IEE E Commun. Lett., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 958–962, May. 2019

    2019

  17. [24]

    A unified converg ence analysis of block successive minimization methods for nons mooth optimization,

    M. Razaviyayn, M. Hong, and Z.-Q. Luo, “A unified converg ence analysis of block successive minimization methods for nons mooth optimization,” SIAM J. Optim., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 1126–1153 , Feb. 2013

    2013

  18. [25]

    Joint optimization of sourc e power allocation and distributed relay beamforming in multiuser peer-to-peer relay networks,

    Y . Cheng and M. Pesavento, “Joint optimization of sourc e power allocation and distributed relay beamforming in multiuser peer-to-peer relay networks,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 6 , pp. 2962– 2973, Jan. 2012

    2012

  19. [26]

    Mobile edg e computing meets mmwave communications: Joint beamforming and re- source allocation for system delay minimization,

    C. Zhao, Y . Cai, A. Liu, M. Zhao, and L. Hanzo, “Mobile edg e computing meets mmwave communications: Joint beamforming and re- source allocation for system delay minimization,” IEEE Tra ns. Wireless Commun., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 2382–2396, Jun. 2020

    2020

  20. [27]

    Robust joint hybrid transceiver design for millimeter wave full-duplex mimo relay systems,

    Y . Cai, Y . Xu, Q. Shi, B. Champagne, and L. Hanzo, “Robust joint hybrid transceiver design for millimeter wave full-duplex mimo relay systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1 199– 1215, Jan. 2019

    2019

  21. [28]

    Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces aided mmWave NOMA: Jo int power allocation, phase shifts, and hybrid beamforming optimiza tion,

    Y . Xiu, J. Zhao, W. Sun, M. D. Renzo, G. Gui, Z. Zhang, and N . Wei, “Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces aided mmWave NOMA: Jo int power allocation, phase shifts, and hybrid beamforming optimiza tion,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 8393–8409, Jul . 2021

    2021

  22. [29]

    Secrecy rate maxim ization for reconfigurable intelligent surface aided millimeter wa ve system with low-resolution DACs,

    Y . Xiu, J. Zhao, W. Sun, and Z. Zhang, “Secrecy rate maxim ization for reconfigurable intelligent surface aided millimeter wa ve system with low-resolution DACs,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 25, no. 7, pp . 2166– 2170, Feb. 2021

    2021

  23. [30]

    Energy-ef ficient cell- free network assisted by hybrid RISs,

    W. Lyu, Y . Xiu, S. Y ang, C. Y uen, and Z. Zhang, “Energy-ef ficient cell- free network assisted by hybrid RISs,” IEEE Wireless Commun . Lett., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 718–722, Feb. 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Boyd and L

    S. Boyd and L. V andenberghe, Convex optimization. Camb ridge univer- sity press, 2004

    2004

  25. [33]

    Deep reinforcement learning based joint beam allo cation and relay selection in mmWave vehicular networks,

    Y . Ju, H. Wang, Y . Chen, T.-X. Zheng, Q. Pei, J. Y uan, and N . Al- Dhahir, “Deep reinforcement learning based joint beam allo cation and relay selection in mmWave vehicular networks,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 1997–2012, 2023

    1997

Pith tools

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