Learning-Aided Iterative Receiver for Superimposed Pilots: Design and Experimental Evaluation

Chao-Kai Wen; Jing Zhang; Shi Jin; Xiao Li; Xingyu Zhou; Xinjie Li; Yixiao Cao

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 33 references

Learning-Aided Iterative Receiver for Superimposed Pilots: Design and Experimental Evaluation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 An iterative receiver makes superimposed pilots beat orthogonal pilots in MIMO-OFDM throughput, with gains up to about 40 percent in fast-fading simulation and a working over-the-air prototype.

desk verdict Solid engineering contribution with real OTA validation, but the quantitative high-mobility claims rest on simulations alone and the closest prior SIP baseline is missing. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10074 v1 pith:PARSKY5B submitted 2025-07-14 cs.IT eess.SPmath.IT

Xinjie Li , Xingyu Zhou , Yixiao Cao , Jing Zhang , Chao-Kai Wen , Xiao Li , Shi Jin This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.ITeess.SPmath.IT MSC 94A1294A40

keywords superimposedpilotsiterativereceiverjointchannelestimationanddecodingvariationalmessagepassingdeeplearningMIMO-OFDMhighmobilityover-the-airprototype

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 superimposed pilots—where reference symbols are added onto every data resource element—can outperform dedicated orthogonal pilots in both throughput and reliability, provided the receiver couples channel estimation, detection, and decoding into a few iterative rounds. The payoff would be higher spectral efficiency in MIMO-OFDM uplinks, especially at high user speeds and with many spatial streams, where orthogonal pilot patterns either fail to track the channel or consume too many resources. The paper reports that two iterations of its joint receiver recover the pilot overhead: a 19.7% throughput gain over a two-symbol orthogonal pilot pattern and a 39.8% gain over a four-symbol pattern in a 2x2 high-mobility simulation, with similar gains in a 64x4 setting. It also claims three refined channel estimators—two variational message-passing variants and one convolutional-neural-network estimator—that keep the receiver robust when the channel statistics used in training do not match the test channel.

What carries the argument

The engine is the iterative IC-based JCDD receiver: estimate the channel, subtract pilot contamination and soft-data interference, detect with LMMSE, decode, and feed extrinsic LLRs back as soft symbol estimates for the next estimation round. The initial estimate uses separable time-frequency LMMSE interpolation, whose dependence on time-domain correlation is the weak point that VMP, VMP-L, and the DL estimator are designed to remove. VMP builds a factor graph of the equivalent MIMO system and updates a Gaussian posterior over the channel without time-domain correlation; VMP-L decouples variable nodes per transmit antenna, cutting complexity from O(T(NrNtK)^3) to O(T Nt (Nr+1)$K^{3}$); the DL estimator applies a despreading operation, a residual CNN denoiser, an attention block that ingests soft-symbol confidence scores, and a DNN interpolator to produce full-grid channel estimates.

What would settle it

Run the proposed receiver at a user speed of 324 km/h over an outdoor measurement or ray-traced channel whose Doppler spread and delay profile differ from CDL-C, and check whether the >2 dB mismatched-statistics gain and the roughly 20-40% throughput advantage over the 2P and 4P orthogonal-pilot baselines survive; if they vanish or invert, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a joint channel-estimation, detection, and decoding (JCDD) receiver operating on superimposed pilots can exploit soft-decoded data feedback to cancel mutual pilot-data interference so effectively that the full-grid pilot occupation becomes a net win rather than a loss. The paper builds on a prior interference-cancellation JCDD design, replacing its least-squares estimator with LMMSE, and then adds two families of refined estimators: variational message passing (VMP) and its low-complexity variant VMP-L, which perform inference without time-domain correlation statistics, and a deep-learning (DL) estimator that combines despreading, a residual CNN denoiser, an attention mechanism fed by soft-decision confidence, and a neural interpolator. Under matched statistics, the receiver with I=2 iterations approaches the ideal SIP-CSI performance upper bound; under mismatched time-varying statistics, the DL estimator maintains more than 2 dB gain over LMMSE in the 2x2 case and about 1.5 dB over VMP-L in the 64x4 case. An over-the-air static line-of-sight experiment with a 2x2 software-defined-radio prototype confirms the receiver's practical viability, showing a 7.7% throughput gain over an orthogonal-pilot baseline despite a roughly 1 dB BLER penalty.

Load-bearing premise

The high-mobility throughput gains are demonstrated only in simulated CDL-C channels with matched statistics, while the over-the-air validation is static, line-of-sight, and uses matched training data, so the fast-fading benefit rests on the assumption that the simulated channel captures the relevant real-world dynamics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Two JCDD iterations are enough to approach the SIP-CSI bound, so the iterative overhead is modest and the configuration is practical.
SIP with this receiver removes the dependence of pilot density on the number of transmit antennas, which is the reason the 64x4 massive-MIMO case improves over orthogonal pilots by roughly 19-40% in high mobility.
Under mismatched channel statistics, VMP and VMP-L avoid the degradation of LMMSE by ignoring time-domain correlation, while the DL estimator stays robust with over 2 dB gain over LMMSE.
The over-the-air prototype shows the receiver works outside simulation, achieving a 7.7% throughput gain over an orthogonal-pilot baseline even though the experiment is static.
The complexity analysis indicates the DL estimator scales linearly with resource blocks, making it the most deployable option among the three refined estimators.

Reading between the lines

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

The same iterative data-aided cancellation could transfer to OTFS or wideband systems where orthogonal pilots are even costlier; the despreading-plus-attention recipe is generic across time-frequency lattices.
A fair comparison at constant overhead—for instance SIP with reduced pilot power versus orthogonal pilots with fewer pilot symbols—would isolate whether the gain comes from the receiver iterations or from the extra data resource elements.
The attention block's use of soft-decision confidence suggests a testable extension: use the confidence map to early-exit the iterations, cutting latency when the feedback is already reliable.
Because the over-the-air test is static and line-of-sight, the high-mobility claims hinge on simulation realism; a ray-traced or measured high-mobility channel test would be the natural next validation.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is a well-executed engineering paper that delivers what it promises. The new content is the specific combination: an IC-based JCDD loop starting from LMMSE channel estimates, two VMP-based estimators that avoid time-domain correlation, an attention-augmented CNN with despreading, and a real over-the-air prototype. The OTA experiment, even at v=0 over a short LOS link, is more than most papers in this subfield bother to do. The Section III derivations look internally consistent, and the complexity table is honest, including the admission that full VMP becomes intractable in the 64x4 case and that VMP-L's gain is marginal there.

The weaknesses are real but not fatal. First, there is no comparison against the closest prior SIP receiver, Qian et al. [24]. Without that baseline, the reported gains over OP receivers could partly be generic iterative-receiver processing gain rather than something specific to SIP and these estimators. That is a concrete missing experiment, and the paper would be much cleaner with it. Second, there are no error bars anywhere; the Sionna curves are deterministic-looking, but one would like to know the spread across channel realizations or training runs. Third, the high-mobility headline numbers (19.7% and 39.8% in 2x2; 19.4% and 40.5% in 64x4) come only from simulated CDL-C. The mismatch study shifts training speed from 72 to 324 km/h, but keeps the same delay profile, so it is a narrow distribution shift. The OTA test is static, matched, and LOS, so it does not exercise the fast-fading claim at all. These limitations matter because the design is explicitly motivated by high mobility.

I do not think the paper is overclaiming in a deceptive way. It states the OTA conditions clearly and acknowledges VMP-L's limited benefit. The main issue is that the quantitative gains are less firmly established than the narrative suggests. A revision that adds the [24] comparison, error bars, and ideally a channel-emulator test at high speed would substantially raise confidence.

This deserves a serious referee. It is an incremental but useful contribution with genuine experimental effort. I would send it to review, and I would ask the authors to address the missing baseline and the experimental scope before publication.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an iterative joint channel estimation, detection, and decoding (JCDD) receiver for superimposed-pilot (SIP) MIMO-OFDM, augmenting a prior interference-cancellation design with LMMSE-based refinement and two adaptive estimators: a variational message-passing (VMP) method with a low-complexity variant (VMP-L), and a CNN-plus-attention deep learning estimator. Simulations under CDL-C channels in 2x2 and 64x4 MIMO at 15 and 324 km/h compare the receiver against orthogonal-pilot (OP) baselines, reporting throughput gains up to 19.7% over OP 2P and 39.8% over OP 4P in the 2x2 high-mobility case, and more than 2 dB robustness gains under mismatched channel statistics. A 2x2 MIMO over-the-air (OTA) prototype at 2 GHz demonstrates a 7.7% throughput gain over an OP 1P baseline in a static line-of-sight environment. The paper includes complexity analysis and releases simulation details via the Sionna package.

Significance. If the claims are fully supported, the paper would make a useful contribution by showing that SIP with an iterative receiver and adaptive estimation can recover pilot overhead while maintaining high-mobility and multi-stream performance, which matters for spectral-efficiency-oriented 6G designs. The inclusion of an OTA prototype and explicit complexity comparisons is a strength, as is the use of standard channel models and the Sionna simulator. However, the current evidence does not yet establish the headline high-mobility and generalization claims: the OTA test is static and matched, the mismatch study covers only one type of Doppler mismatch, and no comparison is made with the prior SIP receiver [24] that the paper directly extends. These gaps are central to the claimed contributions rather than cosmetic.

major comments (4)

[Section IV-B, Figs. 6-7] The throughput gains of 19.7% and 39.8% are computed against OP receivers that use LMMSE-based estimation and detection without the iterative JCDD feedback loop described in Section II-B. Because the proposed receiver changes both the pilot scheme and the receiver architecture, these percentages do not isolate the SIP-specific benefit of recovering pilot overhead. Please add an OP baseline that is run with the same I=2 JCDD iterations, and also compare against the prior SIP IC-based JCDD receiver in [24], which is the design this paper modifies. The exact SNR operating point at which the percentage gains are evaluated should also be stated explicitly.
[Sections V-C and IV-C] The OTA experiment is static (v=0 km/h), line-of-sight, and uses channel statistics and DL training data collected from the same OTA environment, so it validates only the matched, low-mobility regime. The high-mobility gains in Section IV-B rest entirely on Sionna simulations with the CDL-C delay profile. The mismatch study in Section IV-C varies only the training speed from 72 to 324 km/h while keeping the same delay profile and the same frequency/spatial statistics. This is a narrow distribution shift and does not substantiate the abstract's broad claim of robustness under mismatched channel conditions. Please either provide high-mobility emulator or OTA validation, or substantially temper the generalization claims in the abstract and conclusion.
[Section IV-C, Fig. 8] The quantitative robustness claims, such as 'a performance gain of more than 2 dB' for the DL estimator, are presented without confidence intervals, standard errors, or the number of Monte Carlo frames used for each BLER point. In Fig. 8(b), the authors themselves describe the VMP-L gain over LMMSE as marginal, and the DL and VMP-L curves may overlap within statistical uncertainty. Please provide error bars or confidence intervals and state the number of independent trials per point, so that the relative merits of VMP-L and DL can be assessed.
[Section III-C, Eq. (25)] The despreading operation in the DL estimator assumes that the residual interference terms in (25) are zero-mean, but after only I=2 JCDD iterations the soft-symbol and channel-estimation errors can be biased, especially under high mobility. The averaging over L1=6 and L2=2 neighboring REs may therefore introduce systematic bias rather than simply suppressing noise. Please provide a justification for the zero-mean assumption or quantify the bias it introduces, for example by comparing despreading with and without an unbiasedness correction.

minor comments (4)

[Eq. (31) and Section IV-B] Please define Omega explicitly for each OP pilot pattern (1P, 2P, 4P) and state the SNR at which the throughput gains in Section IV-B are computed, since the throughput curves cross at different SNR values.
[Fig. 5] The 1P pilot pattern is described only by a diagram; please clarify whether it uses one OFDM symbol with all subcarriers or a frequency-domain comb, as this directly affects the reported overhead and the comparison with SIP.
[Table II and Section III-C] In the DL complexity expression, the constant factor '10' in '10 F^2 C^2' is unexplained. A brief derivation or a reference to the network layer count would help the reader reproduce the complexity comparison.
[Section III-A] After Eq. (12), the superscript (t) is dropped for notational convenience; please remind the reader that all variables in Section III-A still depend on the time index, as this omission initially makes the equations ambiguous.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the receiver and estimators are derived from the system model and trained/evaluated against external baselines, not from their own conclusions.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The JCDD receiver follows from the stated system model (Eqs. 1-4) and standard LMMSE detection/decoding equations (5)-(11), with no target quantity appearing as an input. The VMP estimator is obtained by minimizing KL divergence on the factorized probabilistic model (13)-(22); its 'no time-correlation' property follows from the chosen prior and factor graph, not from the performance claim. VMP-L is a complexity-reduced variant of the same update, derived by decoupling variable nodes. The DL estimator is trained in a supervised manner on labeled channel samples (Eq. 30) and tested under matched and mismatched conditions; this is external validation rather than a fitted-input-called-prediction. The only self-citation, [1], is used for architectural inspiration of a residual CNN and as the prior conference version of this work; it does not supply a load-bearing theorem or forbid alternatives. Throughput is defined conventionally (Eq. 31), and the reported gains over orthogonal-pilot baselines are empirical simulation/OTA results, not consequences of the definition. The OTA experiment is static and uses matched statistics, which limits external validity of the high-mobility claims, but that is an evidence-strength concern, not circularity.

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

The central claim relies on standard signal models plus hand-chosen design parameters (rho, despreading lengths, DL hyperparameters, iteration count) and on the representativeness of simulated channel statistics. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)

Power allocation factor rho = 0.3
Chosen from prior work [21], [24] rather than optimized; controls the pilot and data power split and affects all receivers.
Despreading lengths L1, L2 = L1=6 (frequency), L2=2 (time)
Hand-selected averaging windows in the DL despreading module (Section III-C); no sensitivity study is provided.
DL hyperparameters (C, F, Nh1, Nh2, learning rate, epochs) = C=8, F=3, Nh1=16, Nh2=128, Adam lr=0.001, 100 epochs, batch 128
Chosen by hand for the network in Section III-C; the paper reports no ablation or sensitivity analysis.
Number of JCDD iterations I = I=2
Selected as a performance and complexity trade-off in Section IV-B; the receiver behavior depends on this choice.

assumptions (5)

standard math Gaussian AWGN and linear MIMO observation model in eqs. (2)-(4)
The received signal is modeled as a linear superposition of pilot and data contributions plus i.i.d. Gaussian noise, which is the standard base for LMMSE, VMP, and the DL training target.
domain assumption Zero-mean Gaussian channel prior with covariance Sigma_p = R_spat (x) R_freq in VMP
Invoked in Section III-A, eq. (15); no time-domain correlation is used, which is the design point but also a modeling assumption about spatial and frequency structure.
domain assumption CDL-C statistics from 10^5 Sionna samples are representative, and a single speed mismatch (72 to 324 km/h) captures generalization failure
Section IV-A computes correlation matrices from 10^5 samples; the mismatch study only shifts the speed under the same delay profile, so the generalization claim is tested for only one kind of distribution shift.
ad hoc to paper Residual interference in (25) is zero-mean, so despreading by averaging over L1=6 and L2=2 neighbors is effective
Section III-C decomposes the effective noise and averages over neighboring REs to suppress it; this requires the residual to be mean-zero and the channel to be locally smooth.
domain assumption The channel is constant within each OFDM symbol
The per-symbol equations (3) and (12) treat the channel as fixed over one OFDM symbol, which is an approximation that becomes more fragile at 324 km/h.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Learning-Aided Iterative Receiver for Superimposed Pilots: Design and Experimental Evaluation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PARSKY5B

@misc{pith2026250710074,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Learning-Aided Iterative Receiver for Superimposed Pilots: Design and Experimental Evaluation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PARSKY5B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10074}
}

read the original abstract

The superimposed pilot transmission scheme offers substantial potential for improving spectral efficiency in MIMO-OFDM systems, but it presents significant challenges for receiver design due to pilot contamination and data interference. To address these issues, we propose an advanced iterative receiver based on joint channel estimation, detection, and decoding, which refines the receiver outputs through iterative feedback. The proposed receiver incorporates two adaptive channel estimation strategies to enhance robustness under time-varying and mismatched channel conditions. First, a variational message passing (VMP) method and its low-complexity variant (VMP-L) are introduced to perform inference without relying on time-domain correlation. Second, a deep learning (DL) based estimator is developed, featuring a convolutional neural network with a despreading module and an attention mechanism to extract and fuse relevant channel features. Extensive simulations under multi-stream and high-mobility scenarios demonstrate that the proposed receiver consistently outperforms conventional orthogonal pilot baselines in both throughput and block error rate. Moreover, over-the-air experiments validate the practical effectiveness of the proposed design. Among the methods, the DL based estimator achieves a favorable trade-off between performance and complexity, highlighting its suitability for real-world deployment in dynamic wireless environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.10074 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** The channel vector factor graph representation corresponding to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The channel vector factor graph representation for VMP-L, where [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (9 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Architecture of the proposed DL-based refined channel estimator. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Illustration of the pilot pattern used in the OP transmission scheme. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Performance comparisons between the OP receiver and our proposed iterative receiver in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Performance comparisons between the OP receiver and our proposed iterative receiver in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Performance comparisons of the proposed JCDD designs under both [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Hardware components of the prototype platform. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Diagram of the system flow chart. B. Software Design The software implementation of the prototype system is realized using two primary programming environments: Python for the Jetson processors and LabVIEW for the USRP hardware, enabling physical-layer signal proces…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Frame structure used in the prototype system. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Performance comparisons between the OP receiver and our proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

[24]

Enhancing wideband mul- tiuser MIMO uplink using superimposed pilots: Joint receiver design,

C. Qian, R. Gu, W. Xu, J. Xu, and X. You, “Enhancing wideband mul- tiuser MIMO uplink using superimposed pilots: Joint receiver design,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1138–1142, Apr. 2024

work page 2024
[1]

AI-driven iterative receiver for superimposed pilot schemes in MIMO-OFDM systems,

X. Li, X. Zhou, J. Zhang, C.-K. Wen, and S. Jin, “AI-driven iterative receiver for superimposed pilot schemes in MIMO-OFDM systems,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC) , Milan, Italy, Mar. 2025, pp. 1–6

work page 2025
[2]

Channel estimation techniques based on pilot arrangement in OFDM systems,

S. Coleri, M. Ergen, A. Puri, and A. Bahai, “Channel estimation techniques based on pilot arrangement in OFDM systems,” IEEE Trans. Broadcast., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 223–229, Sept. 2002

work page 2002
[3]

Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited num- bers of base station antennas,

T. L. Marzetta, “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited num- bers of base station antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 3590–3600, Nov. 2010

2010
[4]

How much training is required for multiuser MIMO?

——, “How much training is required for multiuser MIMO?” in Proc. 40th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput. (ACSSC), Pacific Grove, CA, USA, Oct. 2006, pp. 359–363

work page 2006
[5]

Superim- posed pilots for cell-free massive MIMO over spatial-correlated Rician fading channels,

M. Xie, X. Yu, K. Wang, J. Zhang, X. Dang, and C. Yuen, “Superim- posed pilots for cell-free massive MIMO over spatial-correlated Rician fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 19 537–19 552, Dec. 2024

work page 2024
[6]

Optimized payload length and power allocation for generalized superimposed pilot in URLLC transmissions,

X. Zhou, Y . Zhu, W. Xia, J. Zhang, and K.-K. Wong, “Optimized payload length and power allocation for generalized superimposed pilot in URLLC transmissions,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 72, no. 10, pp. 6073–6086, Oct. 2024

work page 2024
[7]

Message passing- based joint channel estimation and signal detection for OTFS with superimposed pilots,

F. Huang, Q. Guo, Y . Zhang, and Y . V . Zakharov, “Message passing- based joint channel estimation and signal detection for OTFS with superimposed pilots,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. , vol. 73, no. 8, pp. 11 531–11 542, Aug. 2024

work page 2024

Show all 33 references

[8]

Bayesian learning-aided channel estimators for superimposed-pilot-based OTFS systems,

M. A. Sheikh, A. Rajoriya, P. Singh, and R. Budhiraja, “Bayesian learning-aided channel estimators for superimposed-pilot-based OTFS systems,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 950–967, Feb. 2025

2025
[9]

RIS-empowered integrated location sensing and communica- tion with superimposed pilots,

W. Xia, B. Zhao, W. Tang, Y . Zhu, K.-K. Wong, S. Lambotharan, and H. Shin, “RIS-empowered integrated location sensing and communica- tion with superimposed pilots,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , pp. 1–1, Apr. 2025

2025
[10]

An affine precoded superimposed pilot-based mmWave MIMO-OFDM ISAC system,

A. Gupta, M. Jafri, S. Srivastava, A. K. Jagannatham, and L. Hanzo, “An affine precoded superimposed pilot-based mmWave MIMO-OFDM ISAC system,” IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc. , vol. 5, pp. 1504–1524, Feb. 2024

2024
[11]

End-to-end learning for OFDM: From neural receivers to pilotless communication,

F. Ait Aoudia and J. Hoydis, “End-to-end learning for OFDM: From neural receivers to pilotless communication,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1049–1063, Feb. 2022

2022
[12]

Deep receiver for multi-layer data transmission with superimposed pilots,

J. Zou, J. Xiao, Q. Mao, S. Liu, B. Xiao, and Y . Liang, “Deep receiver for multi-layer data transmission with superimposed pilots,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech Signal Process. (ICASSP) , Hyderabad, India, Apr. 2025, pp. 1–5

2025
[13]

Superimposed DMRS for spectrally ef- ficient 6G uplink multi-user OFDM: classical vs AI/ML receivers,

S. Rezaie, M. Honkala, D. Korpi, D. C. Melgarejo, T. Izydorczyk, D. Gold, and O.-E. Barbu, “Superimposed DMRS for spectrally ef- ficient 6G uplink multi-user OFDM: classical vs AI/ML receivers,” arXiv:2506.20248, 2025

2025 arXiv
[14]

Interference cancellation based neural receiver for superimposed pilot in multi-layer transmission,

H. Xiao, W. Tian, S. Jin, W. Liu, J. Shen, Z. Shi, and Z. Zhang, “Interference cancellation based neural receiver for superimposed pilot in multi-layer transmission,” China Commun., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 75–88, Jan. 2025

2025
[15]

A comparative study of deep learning and iterative algorithms for joint channel estimation and signal detection in OFDM systems,

H. Ju, H. Zhang, L. Li, X. Li, and B. Dong, “A comparative study of deep learning and iterative algorithms for joint channel estimation and signal detection in OFDM systems,” Signal Process., vol. 223, p. 109554, Oct. 2024

2024
[16]

Variational message-passing for joint channel estimation and decoding in MIMO-OFDM,

G. E. Kirkelund, C. N. Manchón, L. P. B. Christensen, E. Riegler, and B. H. Fleury, “Variational message-passing for joint channel estimation and decoding in MIMO-OFDM,” in Proc. IEEE Global Telecomm. Conf. (GLOBECOM), Miami, FL, USA, Dec. 2010, pp. 1–6

2010
[17]

Trainable joint channel estimation, detection, and decoding for MIMO URLLC systems,

Y . Sun, H. Shen, B. Li, W. Xu, P. Zhu, N. Hu, and C. Zhao, “Trainable joint channel estimation, detection, and decoding for MIMO URLLC systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 12 172– 12 188, Sept. 2024

2024
[18]

Bilinear expectation propagation for distributed semi-blind joint channel estimation and data detection in cell-free massive MIMO,

A. Karataev, C. Forsch, and L. Cottatellucci, “Bilinear expectation propagation for distributed semi-blind joint channel estimation and data detection in cell-free massive MIMO,” IEEE Open J. Signal Process. , vol. 5, pp. 284–293, Jan. 2024

2024
[19]

On orthogonal and superimposed pilot schemes in massive MIMO NOMA systems,

J. Ma, C. Liang, C. Xu, and L. Ping, “On orthogonal and superimposed pilot schemes in massive MIMO NOMA systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 2696–2707, Dec. 2017

2017
[20]

Massive-MIMO iterative channel estimation and decoding (MICED) in the uplink,

D. Verenzuela, E. Björnson, X. Wang, M. Arnold, and S. ten Brink, “Massive-MIMO iterative channel estimation and decoding (MICED) in the uplink,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 854–870, Feb. 2020

2020
[21]

Superimposed pilot optimization design and channel estimation for multiuser massive MIMO systems,

X. Jing, M. Li, H. Liu, S. Li, and G. Pan, “Superimposed pilot optimization design and channel estimation for multiuser massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 67, no. 12, pp. 11 818–11 832, Dec. 2018

2018
[22]

Bayesian learning-based ISAC in RIS-aided mmWave systems with superimposed symbols,

X. Gan, Z. Yang, C. Huang, C. Zhong, and Z. Zhang, “Bayesian learning-based ISAC in RIS-aided mmWave systems with superimposed symbols,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Work- shops), Rome, Italy, May 2023, pp. 1463–1468

2023
[23]

Bayesian learning for double-RIS aided ISAC systems with superimposed pilots and data,

X. Gan, C. Huang, Z. Yang, C. Zhong, X. Chen, Z. Zhang, Q. Guo, C. Yuen, and M. Debbah, “Bayesian learning for double-RIS aided ISAC systems with superimposed pilots and data,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 766–781, Jul. 2024

2024
[25]

NR; Physical channels and modulation,

3GPP, “NR; Physical channels and modulation,” 3GPP TS 38.211, Tech. Rep., 2023

2023
[26]

ASIC implementation of soft- input soft-output MIMO detection using MMSE parallel interference cancellation,

C. Studer, S. Fateh, and D. Seethaler, “ASIC implementation of soft- input soft-output MIMO detection using MMSE parallel interference cancellation,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits , vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 1754– 1765, Jul. 2011

2011
[27]

Deep residual learning meets OFDM channel estimation,

L. Li, H. Chen, H.-H. Chang, and L. Liu, “Deep residual learning meets OFDM channel estimation,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 615–618, May 2020

2020
[28]

Deep learning based OFDM channel estimation using frequency-time division and attention mechanism,

A. Yang, P. Sun, T. Rakesh, B. Sun, and F. Qin, “Deep learning based OFDM channel estimation using frequency-time division and attention mechanism,” in Proc. IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC Wkshps), Madrid, Spain, Dec. 2021, pp. 1–6

2021
[29]

Deep residual learning with attention mechanism for OFDM channel estimation,

W. Gao, W. Zhang, L. Liu, and M. Yang, “Deep residual learning with attention mechanism for OFDM channel estimation,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 250–254, Feb. 2025

2025
[30]

An attention-aided deep learning framework for massive MIMO channel estimation,

J. Gao, M. Hu, C. Zhong, G. Y . Li, and Z. Zhang, “An attention-aided deep learning framework for massive MIMO channel estimation,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1823–1835, Mar. 2022

2022
[31]

Symbol-level online channel tracking for deep receivers,

R. A. Finish, Y . Cohen, T. Raviv, and N. Shlezinger, “Symbol-level online channel tracking for deep receivers,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech Signal Process. (ICASSP) , Singapore, May 2022, pp. 8897–8901

2022
[32]

Study on channel model for frequencies from 0.5 to 100 GHz,

3GPP, “Study on channel model for frequencies from 0.5 to 100 GHz,” 3GPP TR 38.901, Tech. Rep., 2022

2022
[33]

Sionna: An open-source library for next-generation physical layer research,

J. Hoydis, S. Cammerer, F. A. Aoudia, A. Vem, N. Binder, G. Marcus, and A. Keller, “Sionna: An open-source library for next-generation physical layer research,” arXiv:2203.11854, 2022

2022 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [24]

Enhancing wideband mul- tiuser MIMO uplink using superimposed pilots: Joint receiver design,

C. Qian, R. Gu, W. Xu, J. Xu, and X. You, “Enhancing wideband mul- tiuser MIMO uplink using superimposed pilots: Joint receiver design,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1138–1142, Apr. 2024

work page 2024

[2] [1]

AI-driven iterative receiver for superimposed pilot schemes in MIMO-OFDM systems,

X. Li, X. Zhou, J. Zhang, C.-K. Wen, and S. Jin, “AI-driven iterative receiver for superimposed pilot schemes in MIMO-OFDM systems,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. Netw. Conf. (WCNC) , Milan, Italy, Mar. 2025, pp. 1–6

work page 2025

[3] [2]

Channel estimation techniques based on pilot arrangement in OFDM systems,

S. Coleri, M. Ergen, A. Puri, and A. Bahai, “Channel estimation techniques based on pilot arrangement in OFDM systems,” IEEE Trans. Broadcast., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 223–229, Sept. 2002

work page 2002

[4] [3]

Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited num- bers of base station antennas,

T. L. Marzetta, “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited num- bers of base station antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 3590–3600, Nov. 2010

2010

[5] [4]

How much training is required for multiuser MIMO?

——, “How much training is required for multiuser MIMO?” in Proc. 40th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput. (ACSSC), Pacific Grove, CA, USA, Oct. 2006, pp. 359–363

work page 2006

[6] [5]

Superim- posed pilots for cell-free massive MIMO over spatial-correlated Rician fading channels,

M. Xie, X. Yu, K. Wang, J. Zhang, X. Dang, and C. Yuen, “Superim- posed pilots for cell-free massive MIMO over spatial-correlated Rician fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 19 537–19 552, Dec. 2024

work page 2024

[7] [6]

Optimized payload length and power allocation for generalized superimposed pilot in URLLC transmissions,

X. Zhou, Y . Zhu, W. Xia, J. Zhang, and K.-K. Wong, “Optimized payload length and power allocation for generalized superimposed pilot in URLLC transmissions,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 72, no. 10, pp. 6073–6086, Oct. 2024

work page 2024

[8] [7]

Message passing- based joint channel estimation and signal detection for OTFS with superimposed pilots,

F. Huang, Q. Guo, Y . Zhang, and Y . V . Zakharov, “Message passing- based joint channel estimation and signal detection for OTFS with superimposed pilots,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. , vol. 73, no. 8, pp. 11 531–11 542, Aug. 2024

work page 2024