Generative AI for Data Augmentation in Wireless Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Case Study

Biplab Sikdar; Dusit Niyato; Jiacheng Wang; Jiawen Kang; Jinbo Wen; Ping Zhang; Yang Zhang

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Generative AI for Data Augmentation in Wireless Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Case Study

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Transformer-based diffusion models generate synthetic Wi-Fi CSI that improves gesture recognition accuracy.

desk verdict A competent tutorial-survey with a thin case study; the accuracy gains are plausible but within single-seed noise, so the paper deserves review with hard questions about experimental rigor. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08341 v2 pith:XAINCPWI submitted 2024-11-13 cs.NI cs.AI

Jinbo Wen , Jiawen Kang , Dusit Niyato , Yang Zhang , Jiacheng Wang , Biplab Sikdar , Ping Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.NIcs.AI

keywords dataaugmentationgenerativeAIWi-Figesturerecognitionchannelstateinformationtransformer-baseddiffusionmodelswirelessnetworks

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that classical data augmentation, designed for images and text, fails on wireless data because it ignores the time-frequency structure of signals like channel state information (CSI). It proposes generative data augmentation instead: a pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model synthesizes new CSI samples, which are converted into Doppler frequency shift spectrograms and added to the real training set. In a case study on the Widar 3.0 dataset with a ResNet-18 classifier, the augmented set improves gesture recognition accuracy over the real-data-only baseline, while conventional cropping hurts accuracy. The broader claim is that GenAI can serve as a general-purpose data augmentation layer across the physical, network, and application layers of wireless systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing component is the transformer-based diffusion model, a time-frequency diffusion architecture that adds time-series noise in a forward process and learns to reverse it with an attention-based, complex-valued denoising network. The attention mechanism captures global time-frequency structure in CSI, and the likelihood-based objective avoids the mode collapse that plagues GANs. Raw CSI is pre-processed into features plus conditional information (gesture, orientation, location), the model generates synthetic CSI, and a short-time Fourier transform turns both real and generated samples into DFS spectrogram images that are fed to a ResNet-18 classifier. The same machinery is positioned as the state-of-the-art generator for RF data augmentation, with FID, SSIM, and 1-Wasserstein distance reported as evidence of distributional fidelity.

What would settle it

One could take the same pre-processing and ResNet-18 pipeline but replace the transformer-based diffusion model with a GAN trained directly on the same Widar 3.0 subset; if the GAN-augmented model matches or beats the diffusion-augmented accuracy, the paper's specific attribution to transformer-based diffusion and its distributional-fidelity argument would be undercut. A second check: train the identical pipeline with synthetic samples generated by an untrained or random-seeded diffusion model and observe whether accuracy still rises, which would show the gain does not require learned distribution matching.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that synthetic CSI data produced by a transformer-based diffusion model—the RF-diffusion model, used as-is without fine-tuning on the target dataset—is realistic enough to improve downstream Wi-Fi gesture recognition. On Widar 3.0, replacing part of the training data with generated samples yields an accuracy that generally increases with the proportion of generated data, reaching 0.9127 at the fully augmented setting for ResNet-18 compared with 0.8974 for real data only; MobileNetV2 improves similarly, and the gains hold in both a hall and an office environment. The same augmentation outperforms traditional cropping, which degrades accuracy, because cropping disrupts the frequency content of DFS spectrograms. The paper presents this as evidence that generative data augmentation is a viable answer to wireless data scarcity.

Load-bearing premise

The entire case-study result rests on the assumption that the pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model, unmodified and not fine-tuned on Widar 3.0, produces synthetic CSI whose distribution is close enough to the real target data that mixing it in improves a downstream classifier rather than adding noise.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the case study generalizes, Wi-Fi gesture recognition systems can be trained on far smaller real datasets, cutting the cost of collecting labeled CSI across users, locations, and orientations.
The same transformer-based diffusion model can be applied to other RF sensing modalities, such as RFID or radar, by substituting the appropriate signal representation.
Privacy-sensitive wireless sensing applications can release synthetic CSI rather than raw measurements, since the augmented data retains task-relevant features.
The cross-layer architecture suggests one generative model can produce data jointly for physical, network, and application layers, simplifying the data pipeline.
Traditional augmentation methods such as cropping should be avoided for frequency-domain wireless representations, since they destroy the information needed for recognition.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural extension the paper leaves implicit is measuring how the augmentation benefit scales with the size of the real dataset: the improvement may be large when real data is scarce and vanish when real data is abundant, which would make the framework especially valuable in cold-start deployments.
Because the diffusion model is used as-is, fine-tuning it on a small slice of the target dataset could push generated samples closer to the target domain; the paper does not test this, so the reported gain is a lower bound on what a fine-tuned generator might achieve.
The comparison against 'traditional augmentation' uses cropping only; testing mixup, noise injection, or time-warping would clarify whether the advantage comes from generative modeling or simply from adding informative new samples.
A testable hypothesis from the privacy argument: if generated CSI retains task-relevant features but not user-identifiable details, then a classifier trained on synthetic data alone should still transfer across environments; the paper does not report single-source synthetic training.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know about this paper. First, it's mostly a survey of generative data augmentation for wireless networks, organized by physical/network/application layer, with an architecture diagram per application. That part is competently written and will be useful to people entering the area. Second, the only new empirical content is a case study: use a pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model (from RF-diffusion) to generate CSI spectrograms from Widar 3.0, add them to the training set, and measure gesture recognition accuracy. That case study is plausible but not solid.

What's genuinely good: the survey gives a clear structure and pulls together relevant recent work—RFBoost, Netdiffusion, RF-diffusion, GAN-based channel augmentation. The case study uses a public dataset, reports code in the repo, and uses a sensible pipeline (CSI -> STFT -> DFS spectrograms -> ResNet/MobileNet). It's more reproducible than most of what lands on my desk.

Where it's soft, in proportion: the reported gain is small. ResNet-18 goes from 0.8974 (0% augmented) to 0.9064/0.9127 (40%/100%), about +0.9 to +1.5 points. MobileNetV2 actually gets worse at 20% and 40% (0.8602/0.8618 vs 0.8642 baseline). The paper fixes one random seed, reports no error bars, no repeated runs, no significance test. For a six-class, single-user task, that magnitude of shift is well within seed-to-seed variation. The claim in Section V-C2 that the method "effectively enhances the performance of both models" is an overread of the table.

Other soft spots: they compare against "cropping" as a traditional augmentation baseline, but they cite RFBoost [5] as related work and never compare to it. They don't report the train/test split, the number of generated samples per class, or whether the generated samples are near-duplicates of training examples—if the diffusion model memorizes, the gain could be data duplication. Also, the diffusion model is pre-trained on other data and used as-is; fine, but that makes results sensitive to transfer quality, and they don't test that.

The central argument—generative augmentation can help Wi-Fi sensing—is not contradicted by the data. It's just not strongly established. If this is aimed at a magazine/tutorial venue, it's acceptable with a more careful experimental section. If it's a research paper, it needs more seeds, error bars, a real baseline comparison, and an analysis of generated sample diversity.

Who should read it: people wanting a quick map of GenAI augmentation for wireless and a concrete recipe for gesture recognition. Don't take the accuracy numbers at face value.

My recommendation: send it to peer review, but the reviewers should push hard on the experimental rigor.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a survey-plus-case-study on generative data augmentation for wireless networks. It reviews non-AI and GenAI augmentation methods, proposes per-layer application architectures for the physical, network, and application layers, and then contributes a case study in which a pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model (RF-diffusion) generates CSI-derived DFS spectrograms to augment Widar 3.0 data for Wi-Fi gesture recognition. The authors report that ResNet-18 and MobileNetV2 trained with augmented data achieve higher accuracy than training on real data alone, and they provide code for the framework.

Significance. If the reported gains are real, the case study would be a useful public demonstration of generative augmentation for RF sensing, with a concrete framework and released code. The survey sections are competent but largely secondary; the case study is the distinctive contribution. The evaluation is a standard train/test comparison on real held-out data, so there is no circularity concern. However, the empirical evidence is currently suggestive rather than conclusive: the improvements are small, the experimental protocol is under-specified, and the comparison set is incomplete. The paper would be strengthened substantially by additional experiments and reporting.

major comments (4)

[§V-C2, Table II] The central empirical claim rests on accuracy differences of +0.9 to +1.5 percentage points for ResNet-18, while MobileNetV2 actually degrades relative to the 0% baseline at 20% and 40% augmentation (0.8602 and 0.8618 vs. 0.8642). The experiments use a single random seed (fixed at 42 in §V-C1) with no error bars, repeated runs, or statistical test. For a 6-class, single-user task, these differences are within typical seed-to-seed variation. I cannot conclude from the reported numbers that generative augmentation reliably enhances performance; please provide multiple seeds with confidence intervals and a significance test, and discuss the MobileNetV2 decreases.
[§V-C2, Fig. 3 C1] The comparison with 'traditional data augmentation' uses cropping, but the implementation is not described (what is cropped, window sizes, overlap), and the paper does not compare against RFBoost [5], the physical data augmentation method it cites as relevant prior work. Without a fair and detailed baseline, the claim that generative augmentation outperforms traditional augmentation is not established. Please add the RFBoost baseline or justify its omission, and specify the cropping protocol.
[§V-B Step 2 and §V-C1] The generation protocol is under-specified: the paper uses a pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model as-is, without stating whether it was fine-tuned on Widar 3.0, how many samples per class were generated, how augmentation proportions (20% to 100%) translate into actual sample counts, or how the train/test split was defined. If the generated samples overlap with or are near-duplicates of the training split, the observed gains could reflect data duplication rather than useful augmentation. Please report these details and add a sensitivity check, e.g., varying the number of generated samples or fine-tuning the diffusion model.
[§V-C1 and Fig. 3 caption] The evaluation covers one user and six gestures from Widar 3.0, so the abstract's general claim that the framework 'can enhance the performance of Wi-Fi gesture recognition' is broader than the evidence. Additionally, the Fig. 3 caption states that the transformer-based diffusion model is SOTA 'compared with traditional GenAI models such as GAN and VAE models,' but no GAN/VAE comparison is presented in the text or figure. Either extend the evaluation to more users or explicitly limit the claim to the evaluated subset, and either add the GAN/VAE comparison or remove the SOTA claim.

minor comments (4)

[§V-C1] The sentence 'we select two subdatasets consisting of one user and 6 representative gestures' is ambiguous; clarify whether the two subdatasets correspond to the hall and office environments and whether the same single user appears in both.
[§V-C2] The statement 'the generative data augmentation approach effectively enhances the performance of both models' is stronger than the Table II numbers support, since MobileNetV2 does not improve at 20% and 40%; please soften and discuss.
[Fig. 2 caption] The GitHub URL ends with 'Recognization'; this appears to be a typo for 'Recognition'.
[§V-C2, Table II] In the text, the metrics are described as macro precision and macro recall, but Table II labels them simply as Precision and Recall; make the labeling consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular reasoning: the case study evaluates an external pre-trained diffusion model against real held-out Widar 3.0 data; the only self-citation is a background reference.

full rationale

The paper's central empirical claim is that adding synthetic CSI data generated by a transformer-based diffusion model to real Widar 3.0 data improves Wi-Fi gesture recognition. This is tested by training ResNet-18 and MobileNetV2 on real-plus-generated DFS spectrograms and evaluating on real Widar 3.0 data, so the target result is not used to define the input or the evaluation metric. The generative model is not fitted in this paper; it is a pre-trained model from external prior work [8], and no parameter of the downstream classifier is fitted to the test set. The only self-citation, [7], is a background reference on generative AI and is not load-bearing for the case study. Concerns about the single random seed, lack of confidence intervals, and potential data memorization are correctness risks, not circularity. No step in the derivation reduces, by construction or by self-citation, to its own input.

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

The central claim rests on the Widar 3.0 dataset, the STFT-to-spectrogram conversion, and the transferability of the RF-diffusion model. None of these are introduced ad hoc; they are inherited from prior work, but their joint validity is not independently verified here.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Widar 3.0 labels and gesture annotations are correct for the selected user and gestures.
The evaluation treats the public dataset as ground truth without checking label quality for the selected subset.
domain assumption DFS spectrograms computed via STFT preserve the information needed for gesture classification.
The pipeline converts CSI to spectrograms; if this loses task-relevant structure, the augmentation evaluation is invalid.
domain assumption The pre-trained transformer-based diffusion model from RF-diffusion can generate in-distribution CSI data for Widar 3.0 without fine-tuning.
The paper applies the model directly and provides no distributional validation on the target domain.
domain assumption Standard deep learning hyperparameters (learning rate 1e-4, 20 epochs) are sufficient to show an effect.
No hyperparameter sensitivity analysis is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generative AI for Data Augmentation in Wireless Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Case Study." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XAINCPWI

@misc{pith2026241108341,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generative AI for Data Augmentation in Wireless Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Case Study},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XAINCPWI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08341}
}

read the original abstract

Data augmentation as a technique can mitigate data scarcity in machine learning. However, owing to fundamental differences in wireless data structures, traditional data augmentation techniques may not be suitable for wireless data. Fortunately, Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) can be an effective solution to wireless data augmentation due to its excellent data generation capability. This article systematically explores the potential and effectiveness of generative data augmentation in wireless networks. We first briefly review data augmentation techniques, discuss their limitations in wireless networks, and introduce generative data augmentation, including reviewing GenAI models and their applications in data augmentation. We then explore the application prospects of generative data augmentation in wireless networks from the physical, network, and application layers, providing a generative data augmentation architecture for each application. Subsequently, we propose a general generative data augmentation framework for Wi-Fi gesture recognition. Specifically, we leverage transformer-based diffusion models to generate high-quality channel state information data. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed framework, we conduct a case study using the Widar 3.0 dataset, which employs a residual network model for Wi-Fi gesture recognition. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed framework can enhance the performance of Wi-Fi gesture recognition. Finally, we discuss research directions for generative data augmentation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.08341 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Overview of generative data augmentation for wireless applications. We show how GenAI techniques can improve data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** A generative data augmentation framework for Wi-Fi gesture recognition. The framework consists of three parts: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** A case study on evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed generative data augmentation framework for Wi-Fi gesture [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Censored Sampling for Topology Design: Guiding Diffusion with Human Preferences
cs.LG 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

Guiding a pretrained topology-diffusion generator with human-preference reward classifiers is claimed to suppress floating-material and boundary-violation failure modes without retraining the generator.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[5]

RFBoost: Understanding and boosting deep WiFi sensing via physical data augmentation,

W. Hou and C. Wu, “RFBoost: Understanding and boosting deep WiFi sensing via physical data augmentation,”Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., vol. 8, no. 2, May 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3659620

work page doi:10.1145/3659620 2024
[1]

Deep learning in mobile and wireless networking: A survey,

C. Zhang, P. Patras, and H. Haddadi, “Deep learning in mobile and wireless networking: A survey,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 2224–2287, 2019

work page 2019
[2]

AIGC for RF sensing: The case of RFID- based human activity recognition,

Z. Wang and S. Mao, “AIGC for RF sensing: The case of RFID- based human activity recognition,” in2024 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC). IEEE, 2024, pp. 1092–1097

work page 2024
[3]

A denoising diffusion probabilistic model based data augmentation method for wireless chan- nel,

M. Xu, Y . Li, M. Li, H. Cui, J. Jiang, and Y . Du, “A denoising diffusion probabilistic model based data augmentation method for wireless chan- nel,” in2023 International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing (WCSP), 2023, pp. 195–200

work page 2023
[4]

Wireless channel data aug- mentation for Artificial Intelligence of Things in industrial environment using generative adversarial networks,

X. Liang, Z. Liu, H. Chang, and L. Zhang, “Wireless channel data aug- mentation for Artificial Intelligence of Things in industrial environment using generative adversarial networks,” in2020 IEEE 18th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), vol. 1. IEEE, 2020, pp. 502–507

work page 2020
[6]

At the dawn of generative AI era: A tutorial-cum-survey on new frontiers in 6G wireless intelligence,

A. Celik and A. M. Eltawil, “At the dawn of generative AI era: A tutorial-cum-survey on new frontiers in 6G wireless intelligence,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 5, pp. 2433–2489, 2024

work page 2024
[7]

From generative AI to generative Internet of Things: Fundamentals, framework, and outlooks,

J. Wen, J. Nie, J. Kang, D. Niyato, H. Du, Y . Zhang, and M. Guizani, “From generative AI to generative Internet of Things: Fundamentals, framework, and outlooks,”IEEE Internet of Things Magazine, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 30–37, 2024

2024
[8]

RF-diffusion: Radio signal generation via time-frequency diffusion,

G. Chi, Z. Yang, C. Wu, J. Xu, Y . Gao, Y . Liu, and T. X. Han, “RF-diffusion: Radio signal generation via time-frequency diffusion,” inProceedings of the 30th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, 2024, pp. 77–92

work page 2024

Show all 15 references

[9]

Generative adversarial networks for data augmentation in machine fault diagnosis,

S. Shao, P. Wang, and R. Yan, “Generative adversarial networks for data augmentation in machine fault diagnosis,”Computers in Industry, vol. 106, pp. 85–93, 2019

2019
[10]

Intrusion detection system after data augmentation schemes based on the V AE and CV AE,

C. Liu, R. Antypenko, I. Sushko, and O. Zakharchenko, “Intrusion detection system after data augmentation schemes based on the V AE and CV AE,”IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1000– 1010, 2022

2022
[11]

Netdiffusion: Network data augmentation through protocol-constrained traffic generation,

X. Jiang, S. Liu, A. Gember-Jacobson, A. N. Bhagoji, P. Schmitt, F. Bronzino, and N. Feamster, “Netdiffusion: Network data augmentation through protocol-constrained traffic generation,”Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. ...

2024
[12]

TAnoGAN: Time series anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks,

M. A. Bashar and R. Nayak, “TAnoGAN: Time series anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks,” in2020 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI). IEEE, 2020, pp. 1778–1785

2020
[13]

Data augmentation for object detection via controllable diffusion models,

H. Fang, B. Han, S. Zhang, S. Zhou, C. Hu, and W.-M. Ye, “Data augmentation for object detection via controllable diffusion models,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2024, pp. 1257–1266

2024
[14]

Wireless network digital twin for 6G: Generative AI as a key enabler,

Z. Tao, W. Xu, Y . Huang, X. Wang, and X. You, “Wireless network digital twin for 6G: Generative AI as a key enabler,”IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 24–31, 2024

2024
[15]

Zero-effort cross-domain gesture recognition with Wi-Fi,

Y . Zheng, Y . Zhang, K. Qian, G. Zhang, Y . Liu, C. Wu, and Z. Yang, “Zero-effort cross-domain gesture recognition with Wi-Fi,” in Proceedings of the 17th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, ser. MobiSys ’19. New York, NY , USA: Asso...

2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [5]

RFBoost: Understanding and boosting deep WiFi sensing via physical data augmentation,

W. Hou and C. Wu, “RFBoost: Understanding and boosting deep WiFi sensing via physical data augmentation,”Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., vol. 8, no. 2, May 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3659620

work page doi:10.1145/3659620 2024

[2] [1]

Deep learning in mobile and wireless networking: A survey,

C. Zhang, P. Patras, and H. Haddadi, “Deep learning in mobile and wireless networking: A survey,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 2224–2287, 2019

work page 2019

[3] [2]

AIGC for RF sensing: The case of RFID- based human activity recognition,

Z. Wang and S. Mao, “AIGC for RF sensing: The case of RFID- based human activity recognition,” in2024 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC). IEEE, 2024, pp. 1092–1097

work page 2024

[4] [3]

A denoising diffusion probabilistic model based data augmentation method for wireless chan- nel,

M. Xu, Y . Li, M. Li, H. Cui, J. Jiang, and Y . Du, “A denoising diffusion probabilistic model based data augmentation method for wireless chan- nel,” in2023 International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing (WCSP), 2023, pp. 195–200

work page 2023

[5] [4]

Wireless channel data aug- mentation for Artificial Intelligence of Things in industrial environment using generative adversarial networks,

X. Liang, Z. Liu, H. Chang, and L. Zhang, “Wireless channel data aug- mentation for Artificial Intelligence of Things in industrial environment using generative adversarial networks,” in2020 IEEE 18th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), vol. 1. IEEE, 2020, pp. 502–507

work page 2020

[6] [6]

At the dawn of generative AI era: A tutorial-cum-survey on new frontiers in 6G wireless intelligence,

A. Celik and A. M. Eltawil, “At the dawn of generative AI era: A tutorial-cum-survey on new frontiers in 6G wireless intelligence,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 5, pp. 2433–2489, 2024

work page 2024

[7] [7]

From generative AI to generative Internet of Things: Fundamentals, framework, and outlooks,

J. Wen, J. Nie, J. Kang, D. Niyato, H. Du, Y . Zhang, and M. Guizani, “From generative AI to generative Internet of Things: Fundamentals, framework, and outlooks,”IEEE Internet of Things Magazine, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 30–37, 2024

2024

[8] [8]

RF-diffusion: Radio signal generation via time-frequency diffusion,

G. Chi, Z. Yang, C. Wu, J. Xu, Y . Gao, Y . Liu, and T. X. Han, “RF-diffusion: Radio signal generation via time-frequency diffusion,” inProceedings of the 30th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, 2024, pp. 77–92

work page 2024