Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 50 references

Multi-modal ISCC that uses maximal coding rate reduction for both feature extraction and sensing evaluation beats single-modality and equal-resource baselines under tight delay and energy limits.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-11 23:06 UTC pith:OV3ZYTPA

load-bearing objection Solid multi-modal ISCC systems paper that turns MCR^{2} into a tractable resource-allocation objective; gains look real under tight budgets, with the usual surrogate-metric caveat. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.03907 v1 pith:OV3ZYTPA submitted 2026-07-04 eess.SP

Task-Oriented Multimodal Edge Intelligence via Integrated Sensing-Communication-Computation

Weiwei Chen , Yinghui He , Zhong Ye , Dingzhu Wen , Guanding Yu This is my paper
classification eess.SP
keywords integrated sensing-communication-computationmulti-modal sensingmaximal coding rate reductiontask-oriented communicationsedge intelligencehuman activity recognitionresource allocationblock coordinate descent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Existing edge-intelligence designs that fuse sensing, communication, and computation usually rely on one sensing modality. That choice leaves the system brittle to occlusions, noise, and sensor failures. This paper argues that multi-modal sensing can restore robustness, but only if the extra data volume and the correlations among modalities are handled explicitly. The authors therefore place a feature extractor at each device that is trained with the maximal coding rate reduction (MCR^{2}) criterion: features of different activity classes are driven into large, well-separated subspaces while same-class features stay compact. The same MCR^{2} quantity, evaluated on the noisy concatenated features that arrive at the edge, is then used as a differentiable proxy for recognition accuracy. Under delay and energy budgets the resulting non-convex resource-allocation problem is rewritten into an equivalent form that a block-coordinate algorithm can solve efficiently. On a public multi-modal human-activity data set the scheme consistently records higher recognition accuracy than equal-time allocation, uniform quantization, and single-modality baselines.

Core claim

When each device extracts features with the MCR^{2} objective and the edge server treats the same MCR^{2} value computed on the recovered multi-modal features as the sensing metric, jointly optimizing quantization bits, transmit power, and TDMA slots under common delay and energy constraints yields higher human-activity recognition accuracy than device-level quantization, equal-time allocation, or any single-modality scheme that uses the same total resources.

What carries the argument

Maximal coding rate reduction (MCR^{2}): the difference between the coding rate of the whole feature matrix and the weighted sum of the coding rates of its class-conditional sub-matrices. It both trains the device-side extractors and, after substitution of the estimated multi-modal covariances plus quantization noise, becomes the objective that the BCD resource allocator maximizes.

Load-bearing premise

The coding-rate-reduction number computed from estimated multi-modal covariances stays a faithful, monotonic stand-in for actual classifier accuracy once quantization and channel noise are present.

What would settle it

On the same XRF55 activity subset, generate a family of quantization-noise matrices that cover the operating range used by the optimizer, plot true SVM/MLP accuracy against the MCR^{2} value of each matrix, and check whether the monotonic relationship claimed in Figure 6 fails for any realistic distortion level.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a task-oriented multi-modal ISCC framework in which IoT devices extract compact features under the maximal coding rate reduction (MCR²) criterion and an edge server performs joint multi-modal inference. MCR² is also used as a differentiable sensing metric (Eq. 12) built from estimated multi-modal covariances, leading to a sensing-accuracy maximization problem under delay, energy, and successful-transmission constraints. After an equivalent reformulation via an auxiliary-matrix identity (Lemma 1), the problem is solved by a BCD algorithm with an alternating inner loop for quantization-bit and communication-time allocation (Algorithms 2–3). On an eight-class subset of the public XRF55 human-activity dataset, with SVM and MLP edge classifiers, the scheme is reported to outperform device-level quantization, equal-time allocation, single-modality, and a semantic JSCC baseline under tight resource budgets.

Significance. Multi-modal ISCC is a timely and under-explored direction for 6G edge intelligence; treating heterogeneous sensing modalities under shared delay/energy budgets is practically relevant. The dual use of MCR² for device-side feature learning and as a closed-form edge-side metric is a clear methodological contribution relative to cross-entropy extractors and black-box accuracy. The optimization path is standard but carefully executed: convexity of the reformulated constraints is argued (Appendix A), monotonic improvement of the AO loop is proven (Theorem 1), and complexity is stated. Empirical evaluation is comparatively thorough—public data, two classifiers, multiple resource sweeps (delay, bandwidth, energy, feature dimension, number of classes), a semantic-communication baseline, and a cross-modal correlation check (Table III). If the reported accuracy gains hold under broader conditions, the work is a solid systems-level contribution to task-oriented multi-modal ISCC.

major comments (3)
  1. §VI-B and Fig. 6 establish that sensing accuracy rises monotonically with ΔR when N is generated by sweeping arbitrary distortion levels. The resource allocator (Algorithms 2–3), however, never sees classifier accuracy; it maximizes the closed-form ΔR(N) of Eq. (12) and produces a structured family of feature-wise, modality-coupled N under tight delay. The main claims in Figs. 9–13 therefore rest on the assumption that the same ranking holds at these optimized operating points. Please re-evaluate the ΔR–accuracy scatter (SVM and MLP) specifically on the N matrices returned by Algorithm 3 under the resource settings of the main experiments, and report whether the ranking versus the three system-level baselines is preserved. Without this check, the gap between the surrogate used for optimization and the accuracy used for evaluation remains incompletely closed.
  2. §III-D and Eq. (12): Σ and Σ_l are estimated once from clean, offline multi-modal training features and then held fixed during online allocation. The text asserts that off-diagonal blocks encode cross-modal correlation and that the optimizer therefore avoids redundant modalities, with supporting evidence only in the all-WiFi vs multi-modal comparison of Table III. Please clarify the sensitivity of the allocated (T_tran_k, N_blk_k) and of final accuracy to mismatch between these offline covariances and the online feature statistics (e.g., different environments, partial modality dropout, or distribution shift). A short sensitivity study or explicit limitation statement is needed, because the central resource-allocation claim depends on the fidelity of these fixed second-order statistics.
  3. §VI-C.2, single-modality baseline: multi-modal devices use d_k = 20 (total D = 60), while the single-modality (WiFi-only) baseline uses feature dimension 24, described as “empirically determined as the optimal value.” Under the same total communication budget this is not an apples-to-apples comparison of information content versus resource use. Please either (i) report single-modality accuracy also at d = 20 and at d = 60 (matching total multi-modal dimension), or (ii) justify why 24 is the appropriate comparator and show that the multi-modal gain is not an artifact of unequal total feature dimension.
minor comments (7)
  1. Table I and several places in the text use “Sening power” / “sening”; correct to “Sensing”.
  2. Fig. 3 rendering is corrupted (“Vo l (…”) and the geometric packing illustration is hard to read; please regenerate with clear labels for W, W′, Z1, Z2 and the white-ball interpretation of ΔR.
  3. §III-A: edge computation delay is ignored “due to abundant resources.” A one-sentence bound or reference to the MLP/SVM inference cost on the edge server would make the delay model more complete.
  4. Notation: N is used both for the full quantization-distortion matrix and (in places) in a way that can be confused with the Gaussian N(·); consider a distinct symbol for the distortion matrix.
  5. §VI-C.1 JSCC baseline: “we adjust the model size … while keeping its original framework unchanged” is underspecified. State the resulting feature/bit budget and how it was matched to the 0.03 s and 0.09 s delay points.
  6. Related work on multi-modal semantic / task-oriented communication is appropriate; a brief pointer to other MCR² / rate-reduction uses in communications (if any) would help position the metric choice.
  7. Algorithm 3 complexity O(I1(D³ + I0 Σ d_k³ + …)) is given; stating typical (I0, I1) used in the experiments would aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: MCR^{2} is an external criterion, the optimization maximizes a closed-form proxy that is only later correlated with accuracy, and self-citations of prior single-modal ISCC work are not load-bearing for the multi-modal claims.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Feature extractors are trained offline under the independent MCR^{2} objective of Yu et al. (NeurIPS 2020, ref. [24]); the edge-side sensing metric is the closed-form coding-rate reduction ΔR(N) obtained by substituting the estimated multi-modal covariances into that same objective (Eq. 12). Resource allocation then maximises this differentiable surrogate under delay/energy constraints via an equivalent reformulation (Lemma 1) and BCD (Algorithms 2–3). Classifier accuracy is measured separately on held-out XRF55 samples after the optimised quantisation and channel distortion are applied; the paper never equates ΔR with accuracy by definition, but only reports an empirical monotonic scatter (Fig. 6). Prior single-modal ISCC papers by the same group appear in Related Work merely as motivation for the multi-modal extension; none supplies a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that forces the present multi-modal formulation or the reported gains over the three baselines. Consequently the central experimental claim (higher accuracy under identical budgets) is not reduced to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard information-theoretic coding-rate formulas, a Gaussian-mixture model of features, fixed sensing powers, and the empirical claim that MCR² tracks accuracy. No new physical entities are postulated; free parameters are the usual simulation knobs plus the offline-estimated covariances.

free parameters (5)
  • feature dimension d_k = 20 (default)
    Set to 20 (or swept 8–32); chosen by training experiments rather than derived.
  • coding-rate distortion level ε = 0.1
    Fixed at 0.1; directly scales the MCR² objective.
  • quantization noise variance δ_k² = 1
    Set to 1 for all devices; controls the feasible region of the bit-allocation subproblem.
  • per-device sensing power p_s_k = 0.04, 0.02, 0.06 W
    Pre-configured (0.04/0.02/0.06 W) and never optimized; treated as given.
  • offline covariance matrices Σ, Σ_l = estimated from 3360 samples
    Estimated once from the training set and frozen; they encode all cross-modal correlations used by the optimizer.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Extracted multi-modal features follow a real Gaussian-mixture distribution whose parameters can be estimated from a finite training set (Eq. 10–11).
    Invoked to replace the sample-based MCR² with a closed-form expression that depends only on the quantization noise matrix N.
  • domain assumption Edge-server computation delay is negligible compared with sensing and communication delays.
    Stated in Section III-A; removes the edge compute time from the total-delay constraint.
  • ad hoc to paper Coding-rate reduction ΔR is a monotonic proxy for downstream classification accuracy after quantization.
    Used as the sole optimization objective; only empirically supported by Fig. 6 on the chosen dataset and classifiers.
  • domain assumption Devices can be perfectly time-synchronized for sensing and TDMA uplink without residual interference.
    Assumed in the system model (Fig. 2) so that the max-plus-sum delay expression holds.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 27811 in / 2907 out tokens · 25889 ms · 2026-07-11T23:06:14.740121+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Task-Oriented Multimodal Edge Intelligence via Integrated Sensing-Communication-Computation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OV3ZYTPA

@misc{pith2026260703907,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Task-Oriented Multimodal Edge Intelligence via Integrated Sensing-Communication-Computation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OV3ZYTPA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.03907}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Integrated sensing, communication, and computation (ISCC) has recently emerged as a unified framework for enabling edge intelligence. However, existing ISCC designs predominantly rely on single-modal sensing, which is inherently vulnerable to occlusions, environmental uncertainties, and modality-specific failures, leading to degraded robustness in real-world deployments. This motivates the need for multi-modal ISCC, yet its design remains insufficiently explored. Compared with the single-modal case, multi-modal ISCC is more challenging because heterogeneous modalities enlarge data dimensionality and tighten communication/computation/energy budgets, while inter-modal correlations further complicate performance characterization. To address these challenges, we propose a task-oriented multi-modal ISCC framework that integrates device-side feature extraction with edge-side joint multi-modal inference. A central component of our approach is the maximal coding rate reduction (MCR^2) criterion, which enables each device to learn compact and discriminative task-relevant features, offering clear advantages over conventional cross-entropy-based extractors. We further leverage MCR^2 as a principled metric for edge-side sensing evaluation. On this basis, we formulate a sensing accuracy maximization problem under delay and resource constraints and develop an efficient block coordinate descent (BCD) algorithm after transforming the problem into a more tractable equivalent form. Focusing on a human activity recognition task, we conduct extensive experiments on publicly available datasets to evaluate the performance of the proposed ISCC framework. The results demonstrate that our approach consistently outperforms three baseline schemes under limited resource conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03907 by Dingzhu Wen, Guanding Yu, Weiwei Chen, Yinghui He, Zhong Ye.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An ISCC system with multi-modal sensing. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Delay analysis for the ISCC system. them to the edge server to enable edge intelligence. Since a single sensing modality may suffer from degraded recognition accuracy under occlusions or in complex environments, multi￾modal sensing is adopted to enhance robustness and reliability in this system. Specifically, each IoT device is equipped with an individual sensing modality, such as millimeter-wave radar, RF… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An illustration of the coding rate reduction function. Specifically, ′ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Solution procedure of the proposed ISCC framework. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The workflow of the proposed system. recognition task and adopt a multi-model dataset, namely XRF55 [40], for multi-modal edge inference. The dataset consists of three modalities, i.e., Wi-Fi, RFID, and mmWave radar, and it contains 55 human activity types. Among them, we select eight representative types: waving, clapping hands, falling on the floor, jumping, sitting down, standing up, turning, and walkin… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sensing accuracy with different ∆R. 0 10 20 30 Iterations 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 10 20 30 Iterations 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0 5 10 Iterations 0 2 4 6 8 10 AO objective Iter 5 Iter 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Convergence behavior of the proposed algorithms. The left two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Performance comparison with the semantic JSCC baseline. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Sensing accuracy vs. communication bandwidth. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sensing accuracy vs. feature dimension of each model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Sensing accuracy vs. energy threshold. 4 8 12 16 20 Number of classes 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Accuracy (%) Proposed algorithm Average time Device-level quantization Single modality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Sensing accuracy vs. number of classes. the single-modality scheme degrades the fastest. When the number of classes exceeds 12, its accuracy falls below that of the average time allocation scheme, further confirming the superiority of multi-modal sensing. 3) Effect of Cross-Modal Correlation on the Resource Al￾location: We further conduct a supplementary experiment to demonstrate the effect of cross-modal… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Integrating sensing and communi- cations for ubiquitous IoT: Applications, trends, and challenges,

    Y . Cui, F. Liu, X. Jing, and J. Mu, “Integrating sensing and communi- cations for ubiquitous IoT: Applications, trends, and challenges,”IEEE Netw., vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 158–167, Sep. 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Toward integrated sensing and com- munications for 6G: Key enabling technologies, standardization, and challenges,

    A. Kaushik, R. Singhet al., “Toward integrated sensing and com- munications for 6G: Key enabling technologies, standardization, and challenges,”IEEE Commun. Stand. Mag., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 52–59, Jun. 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Distributed foundation models for multi-modal learning in 6G wireless networks,

    J. Du, T. Lin, C. Jiang, Q. Yang, C. F. Bader, and Z. Han, “Distributed foundation models for multi-modal learning in 6G wireless networks,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 20–30, Jun. 2024

    2024

  4. [4]

    Pushing AI to wireless network edge: An overview on integrated sensing, communication, and computation towards 6G,

    G. Zhu, Z. Lyu, X. Jiao, P. Liu, M. Chen, J. Xu, S. Cui, and P. Zhang, “Pushing AI to wireless network edge: An overview on integrated sensing, communication, and computation towards 6G,”Sci. China Inf. Sci., vol. 66, no. 3, Feb. 2023

    2023

  5. [5]

    A survey on integrated sensing, communication, and computation,

    D. Wen, Y . Zhou, X. Li, Y . Shi, K. Huang, and K. B. Letaief, “A survey on integrated sensing, communication, and computation,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut., vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 3058–3098, Oct. 2025

    2025

  6. [6]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,

    F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Buzzi, “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, Jun. 2022

    2022

  7. [7]

    Enabling intelligent connectivity: A survey of secure ISAC in 6G networks,

    X. Zhu, J. Liu, L. Lu, T. Zhang, T. Qiu, C. Wang, and Y . Liu, “Enabling intelligent connectivity: A survey of secure ISAC in 6G networks,”IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 748–781, Apr. 2025

    2025

  8. [8]

    Integrated sensing and communication signals toward 5G-A and 6G: A survey,

    Z. Wei, H. Qu, Y . Wang, X. Yuan, H. Wu, Y . Du, K. Han, N. Zhang, and Z. Feng, “Integrated sensing and communication signals toward 5G-A and 6G: A survey,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 10, no. 13, pp. 11 068– 11 092, Jul. 2023

    2023

  9. [9]

    Task-oriented integrated sensing and semantic communications for multi-device video analytics,

    Y . He, X. Li, and J. Luo, “Task-oriented integrated sensing and semantic communications for multi-device video analytics,”IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 7323–7337, May 2026

    2026

  10. [10]

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

    Z. Xiao, J. Shu, H. Jiang, J. C. Lui, G. Min, J. Liu, and S. Dustdar, “Multi-objective parallel task offloading and content caching in D2D- aided MEC networks,”IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput., vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 6599–6615, Nov. 2023

    2023

  11. [11]

    Mobile-edge computing architecture: The role of MEC in the Internet of Things,

    D. Sabella, A. Vaillant, P. Kuure, U. Rauschenbach, and F. Giust, “Mobile-edge computing architecture: The role of MEC in the Internet of Things,”IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 84–91, Oct. 2016

    2016

  12. [12]

    Task offloading optimization in digital twin assisted MEC-enabled air-ground IIoT 6G networks,

    M. Hevesli, A. M. Seid, A. Erbad, and M. Abdallah, “Task offloading optimization in digital twin assisted MEC-enabled air-ground IIoT 6G networks,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 73, no. 11, pp. 17 527–17 542, Nov. 2024

    2024

  13. [13]

    Task-oriented over-the-air computation for multi-device edge AI,

    D. Wen, X. Jiao, P. Liu, G. Zhu, Y . Shi, and K. Huang, “Task-oriented over-the-air computation for multi-device edge AI,”IEEE Trans. Wire- less Commun., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 2039–2053, Mar. 2024

    2039

  14. [14]

    Device scheduling for privacy- aware integrated sensing, computation, and communication systems,

    D. Wang, D. Wen, Y . He, and G. Yu, “Device scheduling for privacy- aware integrated sensing, computation, and communication systems,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. Workshops, Dec. 2023, pp. 957–962

    2023

  15. [15]

    Sensing framework design and performance optimization with action detection for ISCC,

    W. Chen, Y . He, G. Yu, J. Wang, and H. Luo, “Sensing framework design and performance optimization with action detection for ISCC,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 8361–8375, Oct. 2025

    2025

  16. [16]

    Joint MIMO precoding and computation resource allocation for dual-function radar and communication systems with mobile edge computing,

    C. Ding, J.-B. Wang, H. Zhang, M. Lin, and G. Y . Li, “Joint MIMO precoding and computation resource allocation for dual-function radar and communication systems with mobile edge computing,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 2085–2102, Jul. 2022

    2085

  17. [17]

    Joint beam- forming and offloading design for integrated sensing, communication, and computation system,

    P. Liu, Z. Fei, X. Wang, Y . Zhou, Y . Zhang, and F. Liu, “Joint beam- forming and offloading design for integrated sensing, communication, and computation system,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 74, no. 9, pp. 14 933–14 937, Sep. 2025

    2025

  18. [18]

    Multi-functional beamforming design for integrated sensing, communication, and computation,

    Y . Zhao, Q. Wu, W. Chen, Y . Zeng, R. Liu, W. Mei, F. Hou, and S. Ma, “Multi-functional beamforming design for integrated sensing, communication, and computation,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 73, no. 8, pp. 6322–6336, Aug. 2025

    2025

  19. [19]

    Task- oriented sensing, computation, and communication integration for multi- device edge AI,

    D. Wen, P. Liu, G. Zhu, Y . Shi, J. Xu, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Cui, “Task- oriented sensing, computation, and communication integration for multi- device edge AI,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 2486–2502, Mar. 2024

    2024

  20. [20]

    Joint device scheduling and resource allocation for ISCC-based multi-view-multi- task inference,

    D. Wang, D. Wen, Y . He, Q. Chen, G. Zhu, and G. Yu, “Joint device scheduling and resource allocation for ISCC-based multi-view-multi- task inference,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 11, no. 24, pp. 40 814– 40 830, Dec. 2024

    2024

  21. [21]

    Integrated sensing, computation, and communication: System framework and performance optimization,

    Y . He, G. Yu, Y . Cai, and H. Luo, “Integrated sensing, computation, and communication: System framework and performance optimization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 1114–1128, Feb. 2024

    2024

  22. [22]

    Multi- modal fusion sensing: A comprehensive review of millimeter-wave radar and its integration with other modalities,

    S. Wang, L. Mei, R. Liu, W. Jiang, Z. Yin, X. Deng, and T. He, “Multi- modal fusion sensing: A comprehensive review of millimeter-wave radar and its integration with other modalities,”IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 322–352, Feb. 2025

    2025

  23. [23]

    MM-Fi: Multi-modal non-intrusive 4D human dataset for versatile wireless sensing,

    J. Yang, H. Huang, Y . Zhou, X. Chen, Y . Xu, S. Yuan, H. Zou, C. X. Lu, and L. Xie, “MM-Fi: Multi-modal non-intrusive 4D human dataset for versatile wireless sensing,”Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (NeurIPS), vol. 36, pp. 18 756–18 768, Jan. 2023

    2023

  24. [24]

    Learning diverse and discriminative representations via the principle of maximal coding rate reduction,

    Y . Yu, K. H. R. Chan, C. You, C. Song, and Y . Ma, “Learning diverse and discriminative representations via the principle of maximal coding rate reduction,” inProc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (NeurIPS), Jan. 2020, pp. 9422–9434

    2020

  25. [25]

    A wireless signal correlation learning framework for accurate and robust multi-modal sensing,

    X. Liu, B. Zhang, S. Chen, X. Xie, X. Tong, T. Gu, and K. Li, “A wireless signal correlation learning framework for accurate and robust multi-modal sensing,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 2424–2439, Sep. 2024

    2024

  26. [26]

    Integrated sensing and communications toward proactive beamforming in mmWave V2I via multi-modal feature fusion (MMFF),

    H. Zhang, S. Gao, X. Cheng, and L. Yang, “Integrated sensing and communications toward proactive beamforming in mmWave V2I via multi-modal feature fusion (MMFF),”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 15 721–15 735, Nov. 2024

    2024

  27. [27]

    Intelligent multi-modal sensing-communication integration: Synesthesia of machines,

    X. Cheng, H. Zhang, J. Zhang, S. Gao, S. Li, Z. Huang, L. Bai, Z. Yang, X. Zheng, and L. Yang, “Intelligent multi-modal sensing-communication integration: Synesthesia of machines,”IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 258–301, 1st Quart., 2024

    2024

  28. [28]

    Radar-LiDAR fusion-aided RF beams prediction for vehicular communications,

    Z. Ye, Y . He, G. Yu, and P. Loskot, “Radar-LiDAR fusion-aided RF beams prediction for vehicular communications,”IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc., vol. 6, pp. 5121–5134, Jun. 2025

    2025

  29. [29]

    Task-oriented multi-user semantic communications,

    H. Xie, Z. Qin, X. Tao, and K. B. Letaief, “Task-oriented multi-user semantic communications,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 2584–2597, Sep. 2022

    2022

  30. [30]

    A unified multi- task semantic communication system for multimodal data,

    G. Zhang, Q. Hu, Z. Qin, Y . Cai, G. Yu, and X. Tao, “A unified multi- task semantic communication system for multimodal data,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 72, no. 7, pp. 4101–4116, Jul. 2024

    2024

  31. [31]

    Cooperative task- oriented communication for multi-modal data with transmission control,

    S. Wan, Q. Yang, Z. Shi, Z. Yang, and Z. Zhang, “Cooperative task- oriented communication for multi-modal data with transmission control,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops), May 2023, pp. 1635–1640

    2023

  32. [32]

    Robust multi-modal task-oriented communications with redundancy-aware representations,

    J. Fu, M. Xiao, Z. Lyu, M. Skoglund, and C. Wu, “Robust multi-modal task-oriented communications with redundancy-aware representations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.08642, 2025

    arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Forward-compatible integrated sensing and communication for WiFi,

    Y . He, J. Liu, M. Li, G. Yu, and J. Han, “Forward-compatible integrated sensing and communication for WiFi,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 2440–2456, Sep. 2024

    2024

  34. [34]

    Integrated human activity sensing and communications,

    X. Li, Y . Cui, J. A. Zhang, F. Liu, D. Zhang, and L. Hanzo, “Integrated human activity sensing and communications,”IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 90–96, May 2023

    2023

  35. [35]

    Redunet: A white-box deep network from the principle of maximizing rate reduction,

    K. H. R. Chan, Y . Yu, C. You, H. Qi, J. Wright, and Y . Ma, “Redunet: A white-box deep network from the principle of maximizing rate reduction,”J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 4907–5009, 2022. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, VOL. XX, NO. XX, XX 2026 15

    2022

  36. [36]

    Adversarial training with maximal coding rate reduction,

    H.-Y . Chu, H. Zhao, and M. Flierl, “Adversarial training with maximal coding rate reduction,” inProc. 58th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst., Comput. (ACSSC), Oct. 2024, pp. 1866–1870

    2024

  37. [37]

    Deep task-based quantization,

    N. Shlezinger and Y . C. Eldar, “Deep task-based quantization,”Entropy, vol. 23, no. 1, p. 104, Jan. 2021

    2021

  38. [38]

    Convergence of a block coordinate descent method for nondifferentiable minimization,

    P. Tseng, “Convergence of a block coordinate descent method for nondifferentiable minimization,”J. Optim. Theory Appl., vol. 109, no. 3, pp. 475–494, Jun. 2001

    2001

  39. [39]

    Federated learning over wireless networks: Optimization model design and analysis,

    N. H. Tran, W. Bao, A. Zomaya, M. N. Nguyen, and C. S. Hong, “Federated learning over wireless networks: Optimization model design and analysis,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Commun. (INFOCOM), Apr. 2019, pp. 1387–1395

    2019

  40. [40]

    XRF55: A radio fre- quency dataset for human indoor action analysis,

    F. Wang, Y . Lv, M. Zhu, H. Ding, and J. Han, “XRF55: A radio fre- quency dataset for human indoor action analysis,”Proc. ACM Interact., Mobile, Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.,, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–34, Mar. 2024

    2024

  41. [41]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” inProc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Jun. 2016, pp. 770–778

    2016

  42. [42]

    3GPP TR 38.901 channel model,

    Q. Zhu, C.-X. Wang, B. Hua, K. Mao, S. Jiang, and M. Yao, “3GPP TR 38.901 channel model,” inthe Wiley 5G Ref: the Essential 5G Reference Online, 2021, pp. 1–35

    2021

  43. [43]

    IoV-oriented integrated sensing, computation, and communication: System design and resource allocation,

    J. Zhao, R. Ren, D. Zou, Q. Zhang, and W. Xu, “IoV-oriented integrated sensing, computation, and communication: System design and resource allocation,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 73, no. 11, pp. 16 283– 16 294, Nov. 2024

    2024

  44. [44]

    Optimal resource allocation for integrated sensing and communications in internet of vehicles: A deep reinforcement learning approach,

    C. Liu, M. Xia, J. Zhao, H. Li, and Y . Gong, “Optimal resource allocation for integrated sensing and communications in internet of vehicles: A deep reinforcement learning approach,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 3028–3038, Feb. 2025

    2025

  45. [45]

    Latency minimization oriented radio and computation resource allocations for 6G V2X networks with ISCC,

    P. Liu, X. Wang, Z. Fei, Y . Wu, J. Xu, and A. Nallanathan, “Latency minimization oriented radio and computation resource allocations for 6G V2X networks with ISCC,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 73, no. 12, pp. 15 851–15 865, Dec. 2025

    2025

  46. [46]

    Deep joint source- channel coding for wireless image transmission,

    E. Bourtsoulatze, D. B. Kurka, and D. G ¨und¨uz, “Deep joint source- channel coding for wireless image transmission,”IEEE Trans. Cogn. Commun. Netw., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 567–579, Sep. 2019

    2019

  47. [47]

    Reshaping WiFi ISAC with high-coherence hardware capabilities,

    R. Li, Y . Duan, R. Du, F. Xu, H. Zhao, Y . Sun, Y . Zhang, D. Zhang, Y . Liu, Z. Jianget al., “Reshaping WiFi ISAC with high-coherence hardware capabilities,”IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 114– 120, Sep. 2024

    2024

  48. [48]

    SenCom: Integrated sensing and communication with practical WiFi,

    Y . He, J. Liu, M. Li, G. Yu, J. Han, and K. Ren, “SenCom: Integrated sensing and communication with practical WiFi,” inProc. ACM Annu. Int. Conf. Mob. Comput. Netw. (MobiCom), Oct. 2023, pp. 1–16

    2023

  49. [49]

    Vision transformers for human activity recognition using WiFi channel state information,

    F. Luo, S. Khan, B. Jiang, and K. Wu, “Vision transformers for human activity recognition using WiFi channel state information,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 11, no. 17, pp. 28 111–28 122, Sep. 2024. Weiwei Chenreceived the B.E. degree in Communi- cation Engineering from Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China, in 2023. She is c...

    2024

  50. [50]

    His research interests include brain-computer communication, edge AI, task-oriented communi- cations, and integrated sensing-communication-computation. He has served as a co-organizer for workshops at flagship IEEE conferences including ICC, GlobeCom, WCNC, PIMRC, and VTC, and as a tutorial co-organizer at GlobeCom, WCNC, ICCC, and PIMRC. He has also chai...

    2022