Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 29 references

Novel 1-bit Hybrid Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A 1-bit hybrid reconfigurable surface can both sense angle of arrival and steer reflected beams using two coaxial readout ports.

desk verdict A credible, incremental design study with solid full-wave beamforming evidence; the AoA accuracy claims are only validated against the same simplified model used to build the sensing matrix. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04675 v1 pith:ZWUN4E7D submitted 2025-07-07 physics.app-ph

Sajedeh Keshmiri , Suren Jayasuriya , Mohammadreza F. Imani This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.app-ph
keywords reconfigurableintelligentsurface1-bitmetasurfaceangle-of-arrivalestimationcompressivesensingparallel-platewaveguidePINdiodephaserandomizationhybridRIS
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 tries to establish that a single reconfigurable surface can do two jobs at once: detect the direction an incoming wireless signal arrives from, and reflect that signal toward a chosen direction, using only simple 1-bit (on/off) tuning elements and two output ports. The authors argue this is possible without external channel-state feedback, because a small fraction of every element's received signal is tapped through slots into a parallel-plate waveguide and read out by two coaxial connectors. They report angle-of-arrival estimates accurate to ±3° at 20 dB SNR with 16 random on/off masks, and beam patterns with suppressed quantization lobes in full-wave simulations. If these simulations carry over to hardware, the design offers a low-cost path to intelligent wireless power transfer, communication, and sensing in one device.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the unit cell: a 12 mm square patch on a Rogers 4003 substrate, loaded with a PIN diode (0.15 pF off, 0.1 Ω on), with a rectangular slot in the shared ground plane coupling a fraction of the incident wave into a parallel-plate waveguide. Two slot lengths, 2 mm and 6 mm, produce four reflection phases roughly 90° apart, which supplies the phase randomization needed to suppress quantization lobes of a 1-bit array; varying slot sizes randomly across the array decorrelates the periodic phase error that causes grating lobes. The sensing mechanism is the set of voltages induced on the two coaxial connectors; random on/off element states act as measurement masks, building the sensing matrix H whose columns are the port voltage differences for each reference angle, and both CGS and a four-mask MLP invert this mapping.

What would settle it

Assemble or simulate the full 19-element array in a full-wave solver that includes mutual coupling, edge effects, and parallel-plate waveguide propagation, illuminate it from known angles, and compare the two-port voltage differences with the simplified dipole model's predictions; if the measured sensing matrix differs substantially, the reported ±3° accuracy will not transfer to hardware.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a 1-bit hybrid RIS can estimate the angle of arrival of an incident wave and simultaneously redirect the reflected beam, with the sensing signal gathered by only two coaxial ports. The signal coupled into the parallel-plate waveguide is a superposition of contributions from all elements, and each random on/off pattern ('mask') provides a new measurement; with enough masks, the linear system $\mathbf{g} = \mathbf{H}\mathbf{f}$ is inverted by conjugate gradient squared to recover which reference angle is present, and a four-mask multilayer perceptron does the same classification directly from port voltages. Full-wave HFSS simulations show beams steered to several target angles without grating lobes when slot lengths are randomly varied, and Monte Carlo simulations put estimation accuracy at ±3° for M = 16 masks at 20 dB SNR, with accuracy degrading gracefully at lower SNR but recovering with more masks.

Load-bearing premise

The angle-of-arrival results rest on a forward model in which each element's response is taken from isolated HFSS simulations and represented as a dipole whose phase depends only on its on/off state, and the same model generates both the sensing matrix and the test signals.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single aperture can take over both sensing and reflecting tasks, removing the need for separate feedback hardware to learn the channel.
  • Beam steering with 1-bit elements and large spacing becomes practical because random slot sizes suppress quantization lobes without adding tuning bits.
  • The two-port compressive-sensing readout keeps RF chain count and cost low, which could make dense RIS deployments more economical.
  • The MLP variant shows that four masks suffice for classification once trained, cutting the measurement overhead for near-real-time angle tracking.
  • Accuracy degrades gracefully as SNR drops and improves as the number of masks grows, giving a tunable performance-versus-overhead trade-off.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same slot-length randomization trick could be transferred to other low-bit reflective metasurfaces as a cheap grating-lobe fix, since it only changes the passive slot geometry rather than the element count or control circuitry.
  • If the simplified dipole forward model were replaced by a calibration matrix measured over the air, the sensing approach could hold up against mutual coupling and fabrication tolerances; the paper itself does not run that experiment.
  • The two-port readout is inherently one-dimensional in this work, but adding a second waveguide or extra coaxial port per axis would plausibly extend the same scheme to two-dimensional angle-of-arrival estimation.
  • Because the MLP trains on synthetically noised versions of the same 25 reference angles, its reported robustness partly reflects simulator consistency; testing on out-of-distribution angles or on hardware data would verify generalization beyond the training grid.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a 1-bit hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface (HRIS) in which resonant patch elements with PIN diodes both steer reflected beams and sense the angle of arrival (AoA). A portion of the incident signal is coupled through slots in the ground plane into a parallel-plate waveguide (PPWG), and two coaxial connectors collect the combined signal. AoA estimation is performed with compressive sensing (CGS) and with an MLP classifier. Beamforming with quantization-lobe suppression is demonstrated through HFSS full-wave array simulations using a randomized slot-length distribution, and AoA accuracy of ±3° is claimed for M=16 masks at SNR=20 dB, with degradation at lower SNR and improved robustness claimed for the MLP.

Significance. If the AoA accuracy and beamforming results hold in hardware, the proposed HRIS would be a valuable simplification over previous hybrid RIS designs: it uses only two coaxial readouts, 1-bit tuning, and no feedback loop, and it combines sensing and reflection in the same aperture. The full-wave HFSS element design and beamforming simulations are substantial strengths, as is the explicit comparison between CGS and MLP sensing approaches. However, the central sensing claim is currently supported only by a closed simulation loop in which the sensing matrix, the MLP training data, and the test signals all come from the same simplified dipole forward model; no full-wave end-to-end sensing simulation or measurement is provided. The significance of the paper is therefore conditional on additional validation or on careful reframing of the claimed accuracy.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. (1) and Fig. 7] The ±3° AoA accuracy is asserted for a simulation loop in which the sensing matrix H and the test signals g are both generated from the same simplified dipole-array model introduced in Section III. Section III states that each element is modeled as a dipole with phases extracted from isolated HFSS unit-cell simulations, and Section IV builds H by collecting the difference between coaxial-port voltages without a full-wave simulation of the full 19-element array with slots and PPWG. Any systematic error in that forward model—including mutual coupling, finite-array edge effects, PPWG propagation, and slot-coupling details—cancels between H and the synthetic test data, so the reported accuracy is an in-model consistency check rather than evidence for hardware-level AoA estimation. The central sensing claim needs either a full-wave end-to-end simulation of the coaxial-port voltages or a hardware measurement before the accuracy statement can stand.
  2. [Section IV, MLP paragraph] The MLP is trained on the same 25 simulated samples (repeated 300 times with synthetic Gaussian noise) that define the dictionary used by CGS, and it is evaluated on the test portion of the same dataset with additional Gaussian noise. Because no independent physical model, measured data, or full-wave simulation is introduced at any stage, the MLP accuracy curve in Fig. 7(d) does not demonstrate robustness to model mismatch. The claim of robustness should be limited to additive noise within the assumed forward model, or the authors should provide validation on a different forward model.
  3. [Section III, phase randomization] The slot-length distribution is chosen after simulating several random distributions and selecting the one with the lowest sidelobe levels, as the text acknowledges. This post-hoc selection means the HFSS beam patterns in Fig. 5 demonstrate that one particular realization works, but they do not establish a design rule or reliability of phase randomization with two slot lengths for general arrays. The beamforming claim should be framed as an existence demonstration, not as a validated design methodology.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. (1)] The sentence 'The ith element of f is zero if the incident AoA coincides with the ith reference angle and 0 otherwise' contains a typo; the intended meaning is presumably 'one if' and 'zero otherwise'.
  2. [Introduction] The text describes the element spacing as 'large element spacing (λ/2)', but with p=24 mm at 5.6 GHz the spacing is approximately 0.45λ, which is not conventionally considered large; please rephrase or justify.
  3. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption phrase 'for the case of 1 incident angle and 5 different random masks' is unclear; please specify what is plotted in each panel and the exact quantity shown.
  4. [Section III] The 'simplified array-level simulation in MATLAB' is important for reproducibility, but the equations for the array factor and element-pattern model are not given; please include the array factor expression, the element pattern used, and how the extracted HFSS phases are combined.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The ±3° AoA accuracy and MLP results are validated only against the same simplified dipole model used to build the sensing matrix H; the test signals are generated inside the same model as H f plus synthetic noise.

  1. other [Section IV (Sensing), Fig. 7(a)-(d)]
    "The sensing matrix, HM ×N , is then constructed by collecting the difference between the voltages on the coaxial connectors caused by incident waves arriving from reference angles using M masks with random on/off distribution. ... gM ×1 = HM ×N fN ×1, ... We conducted Monte Carlo simulations ... For each SNR value, 50 independent trials with new instances of the added noise were performed."

    H is defined directly from the simplified dipole-model voltage differences at the reference angles, and the Monte Carlo test signals are generated in the same model as g = H f + synthetic noise. Thus the reported ±3° accuracy measures how well the CGS solver inverts a known synthetic matrix under added noise, not how well the physical HRIS predicts AoA. No independent HFSS or measured sensing data appear in the test loop.

  2. other [Section IV (MLP paragraph), Fig. 7(d)]
    "The MLP was trained on synthetically expanded data, generated by repeating these 25 samples 300 times and adding Gaussian noise corresponding to an SNR of 50 dB to all entries to improve generalization. ... The model was evaluated on the test portion of the same dataset, with additional Gaussian noise added to simulate varying SNR levels from 5 dB to 25 dB in 2 dB increments."

    The MLP is trained and tested on the same 25 synthetic reference-angle samples, expanded by noise; the reported classification accuracy is therefore a property of the classifier on that synthetic manifold rather than an independent prediction of the physical HRIS response. The test data do not come from a separate full-wave simulation or measurement, so the claimed robustness does not transfer to hardware without additional validation.

full rationale

The beamforming results (Fig. 5) are supported by full-wave HFSS simulations and are not circular: they show beam steering with suppressed quantization lobes for the proposed 1-bit design. The sensing results, however, form a closed simulation loop. Section III explicitly states that 'each element is modeled as a dipole whose phase will depend on the corresponding element's on/off status' and that a 'simplified array-level simulation in MATLAB' is used. Section IV builds the sensing matrix H from the voltages on the coaxial connectors computed from this model, and the Monte Carlo evaluation generates test signals from the same model (g = H f plus noise). The ±3° AoA accuracy and the MLP accuracy are therefore in-model consistency checks rather than predictions confronted with independent data. The self-citations [26] and [27] provide methodological background and prior experimental demonstration, but they are not load-bearing proofs in this paper; the limitation is the absence of an independent sensing validation. This is partial circularity because the central quantitative claim reduces by construction to a synthetic recovery experiment.

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

The central design rests primarily on engineering choices such as slot sizes, offsets, and spacings, plus simulation assumptions, rather than on a small set of fitted physical constants. The key load-bearing premise is that the isolated-element phase model and the PPWG coupling model used to build H and train the MLP faithfully represent the full 19-element array.

free parameters (4)
  • Slot lengths l = 2 mm and 6 mm
    Selected via HFSS parametric study so the four switch and slot states produce roughly 90-degree reflection phase steps at 5.6 GHz; this is a hand and simulation choice that the beamforming and sensing claims depend on.
  • Slot offset x_s = -3 mm
    Chosen off-center to reduce coupling into the parallel-plate waveguide based on a parametric study not shown; it affects the strength of the sensed signal.
  • Selected random slot distribution = not enumerated
    The array layout was chosen as the best among several random draws by lowest sidelobe level; this post hoc design choice underpins the quantization-lobe suppression claim.
  • Element spacing p = 24 mm
    Chosen by hand to reduce element-to-element coupling relative to prior HRIS designs; it changes the sensing geometry and the array factor.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Sparse linear measurement model g = H f
    The AoA inversion assumes the coaxial-port voltage differences are a linear combination of reference-angle responses and that only one angle is active; used in Section IV to set up CGS.
  • domain assumption Plane-wave incidence and 1D infinite-periodic array model
    Evaluations are performed only in the yz-plane and assume an infinite periodic extension in the perpendicular direction (Section III), so edge effects and 3D incidence are not treated.
  • domain assumption Isolated-element phase model for array-level and sensing calculations
    Each element is modeled as a dipole whose phase comes from isolated HFSS simulations (Section III), neglecting mutual coupling and finite-array effects when choosing masks and building H.
  • domain assumption Ideal two-state PIN diode model
    The diode is represented as 0.15 pF or 0.1 ohm (Section II); biasing lines, switching transients, and packaging parasitics are not simulated.
  • domain assumption Weak, linear coupling into the PPWG
    Adding slots reduces reflection by less than 0.1 dB (Section II); the sensing claims assume this coupling is linear, stable across masks, and well represented by the simulation H.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Novel 1-bit Hybrid Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZWUN4E7D

@misc{pith2026250704675,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Novel 1-bit Hybrid Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZWUN4E7D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04675}
}
read the original abstract

This paper proposes a novel 1-bit hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface (HRIS) designed to sense the incident signal's angle of arrival (AoA) and redirect it toward desired directions. This device consists of independently tunable resonant patch elements loaded with PIN diodes. To introduce sensing capabilities, a portion of the signal incident on each element is coupled to a parallel plate waveguide (PPWG) through small rectangular slots. Two coaxial connectors are then used to collect the signal coupled to the PPWG. We use compressive sensing techniques and a multi-layer perceptron to analyze this signal and detect AoA. Further, pre-coded phase randomization is implemented by varying slot sizes to suppress undesired quantization lobes. The proposed HRIS is simple, low-cost, and can pave the way for intelligent wireless communication, power transfer, and sensing without needing feedback loops.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04675 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Simulation configuration of the building block of the proposed HRIS. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Amplitude and (b) de-embedded phase of the reflection coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Beamforming results for five different desired angles (denoted by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Simulation configuration of an array of 19 elements made of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Example of on/off (respectively pink and green) distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_6.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) 3 different layouts of the 1D array where elements with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Detected versus the actual AoA for the case with (a) 16 masks and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Light propagation with phase discontinuities: generalized laws of reflection and refraction,

    N. Yu, P. Genevet, M. A. Kats, F. Aieta, J.-P. Tetienne, F. Capasso, and Z. Gaburro, “Light propagation with phase discontinuities: generalized laws of reflection and refraction,” science, vol. 334, no. 6054, pp. 333– 337, 2011

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    Shaping complex mi- crowave fields in reverberating media with binary tunable metasurfaces,

    N. Kaina, M. Dupr ´e, G. Lerosey, and M. Fink, “Shaping complex mi- crowave fields in reverberating media with binary tunable metasurfaces,” Scientific Reports, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 6693, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Smart radio environments empowered by recon- figurable ai meta-surfaces: An idea whose time has come,

    M. D. Renzo, M. Debbah, D.-T. Phan-Huy, A. Zappone, M.-S. Alouini, C. Yuen, V . Sciancalepore, G. C. Alexandropoulos, J. Hoydis, H. Gacanin, et al. , “Smart radio environments empowered by recon- figurable ai meta-surfaces: An idea whose time has come,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking , vol. 2019, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2019

    2019

  4. [4]

    Wireless communications through reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

    E. Basar, M. Di Renzo, J. De Rosny, M. Debbah, M.-S. Alouini, and R. Zhang, “Wireless communications through reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 116753–116773, 2019

    2019

  5. [5]

    Applications of absorptive reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces in interference mitigation and physical layer security,

    F. Wang and A. L. Swindlehurst, “Applications of absorptive reconfig- urable intelligent surfaces in interference mitigation and physical layer security,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , 2023

    2023

  6. [6]

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

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

    2020

  7. [7]

    Overview of ris-enabled secure transmission in 6g wireless networks,

    J. Bae, W. Khalid, A. Lee, H. Lee, S. Noh, and H. Yu, “Overview of ris-enabled secure transmission in 6g wireless networks,” Digital Communications and Networks , 2024

    2024

  8. [8]

    Secure wireless communication in active ris-assisted dfrc system,

    Y . Zhang, H. Ren, C. Pan, B. Wang, Z. Yu, R. Weng, T. Wu, and Y . He, “Secure wireless communication in active ris-assisted dfrc system,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02122 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    A reconfigurable intelligent surface with integrated sensing capability,

    I. Alamzadeh, G. C. Alexandropoulos, N. Shlezinger, and M. F. Imani, “A reconfigurable intelligent surface with integrated sensing capability,” Scientific Reports, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 20737, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    Ris-aided wireless communications: Prototyping, adaptive beamforming, and indoor/outdoor field trials,

    X. Pei, H. Yin, L. Tan, L. Cao, Z. Li, K. Wang, K. Zhang, and E. Bj¨ornson, “Ris-aided wireless communications: Prototyping, adaptive beamforming, and indoor/outdoor field trials,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 8627–8640, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Design and evaluation of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces in real- world environment,

    G. C. Trichopoulos, P. Theofanopoulos, B. Kashyap, A. Shekhawat, A. Modi, T. Osman, S. Kumar, A. Sengar, A. Chang, and A. Alkhateeb, “Design and evaluation of reconfigurable intelligent surfaces in real- world environment,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. ...

    2022

  4. [12]

    A recon- figurable intelligent surface at mmwave based on a binary phase tunable metasurface,

    J.-B. Gros, V . Popov, M. A. Odit, V . Lenets, and G. Lerosey, “A recon- figurable intelligent surface at mmwave based on a binary phase tunable metasurface,” IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 2, pp. 1055–1064, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Experimental demonstration of a mmwave passive access point extender based on a binary reconfigurable intelligent surface,

    V . Popov, M. Odit, J.-B. Gros, V . Lenets, A. Kumagai, M. Fink, K. Enomoto, and G. Lerosey, “Experimental demonstration of a mmwave passive access point extender based on a binary reconfigurable intelligent surface,” Frontiers in Communications and Networks , vol. 2, p. 733891, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    An ultra-wideband 1-bit suspended reconfigurable intelligent surface for enhancing wireless coverage,

    H. Shi, R. Liu, Z. Zhang, X. Chen, L. Wang, J. Yi, H. Liu, and A. Zhang, “An ultra-wideband 1-bit suspended reconfigurable intelligent surface for enhancing wireless coverage,” IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    From the generalized reflection law to the realization of perfect anomalous reflectors,

    A. D ´ıaz-Rubio, V . S. Asadchy, A. Elsakka, and S. A. Tretyakov, “From the generalized reflection law to the realization of perfect anomalous reflectors,” Science advances, vol. 3, no. 8, p. e1602714, 2017

    2017

  8. [16]

    Joint transmit precoding and reconfigurable intelligent surface phase adjustment: A decomposition- aided channel estimation approach,

    Z. Zhou, N. Ge, Z. Wang, and L. Hanzo, “Joint transmit precoding and reconfigurable intelligent surface phase adjustment: A decomposition- aided channel estimation approach,” IEEE Transactions on Communi- cations, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 1228–1243, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Joint channel estimation and localization in ris assisted ofdm-mimo system,

    U. Mutlu, M. Bilim, and Y . Kabalci, “Joint channel estimation and localization in ris assisted ofdm-mimo system,” in 2024 6th Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (GPECOM) , pp. 687– 692, IEEE, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Joint channel estimation and signal recovery for ris-empowered multiuser communications,

    L. Wei, C. Huang, Q. Guo, Z. Yang, Z. Zhang, G. C. Alexandropoulos, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Joint channel estimation and signal recovery for ris-empowered multiuser communications,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 4640–4655, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Channel esti- mation with reconfigurable intelligent surfaces—a general framework,

    A. L. Swindlehurst, G. Zhou, R. Liu, C. Pan, and M. Li, “Channel esti- mation with reconfigurable intelligent surfaces—a general framework,” Proceedings of the IEEE , vol. 110, no. 9, pp. 1312–1338, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Accurate direction–of–arrival estimation method based on space–time modulated metasurface,

    X. Fang, M. Li, J. Han, D. Ramaccia, A. Toscano, F. Bilotti, and D. Ding, “Accurate direction–of–arrival estimation method based on space–time modulated metasurface,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 10951–10964, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Smart sensing metasurface with self-defined functions in dual polarizations,

    Q. Ma, Q. R. Hong, X. X. Gao, H. B. Jing, C. Liu, G. D. Bai, Q. Cheng, and T. J. Cui, “Smart sensing metasurface with self-defined functions in dual polarizations,” Nanophotonics, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 3271–3278, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    Enabling large intelligent surfaces with compressive sensing and deep learning,

    A. Taha, M. Alrabeiah, and A. Alkhateeb, “Enabling large intelligent surfaces with compressive sensing and deep learning,” IEEE Access , vol. 9, pp. 44304–44321, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Hybrid reconfigurable intelligent meta- surfaces: Enabling simultaneous tunable reflections and sensing for 6g wireless communications,

    G. C. Alexandropoulos, N. Shlezinger, I. Alamzadeh, M. F. Imani, H. Zhang, and Y . C. Eldar, “Hybrid reconfigurable intelligent meta- surfaces: Enabling simultaneous tunable reflections and sensing for 6g wireless communications,” IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Joint user localization and location cali- bration of a hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface,

    R. Ghazalian, H. Chen, G. C. Alexandropoulos, G. Seco-Granados, H. Wymeersch, and R. J ¨antti, “Joint user localization and location cali- bration of a hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    Channel estimation with hybrid reconfigurable intelligent metasurfaces,

    H. Zhang, N. Shlezinger, G. C. Alexandropoulos, A. Shultzman, I. Alamzadeh, M. F. Imani, and Y . C. Eldar, “Channel estimation with hybrid reconfigurable intelligent metasurfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 2441–2456, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Sensing and reconfigurable reflection of electromagnetic waves from a metasurface with sparse sensing elements,

    I. Alamzadeh and M. F. Imani, “Sensing and reconfigurable reflection of electromagnetic waves from a metasurface with sparse sensing elements,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 105954–105965, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Experimental demonstration of sensing using hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,

    I. Alamzadeh and M. F. Imani, “Experimental demonstration of sensing using hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surfaces,” Sensors, vol. 25, no. 6, p. 1811, 2025

    2025

  20. [28]

    Mitigating quantization lobes in mmwave low-bit reconfigurable reflec- tive surfaces,

    B. G. Kashyap, P. C. Theofanopoulos, Y . Cui, and G. C. Trichopoulos, “Mitigating quantization lobes in mmwave low-bit reconfigurable reflec- tive surfaces,” IEEE Open Journal of Antennas and Propagation , vol. 1, pp. 604–614, 2020

    2020

  21. [29]

    Novel 1-bit hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface with mitigated quantization lobe,

    S. Keshmiri and M. F. Imani, “Novel 1-bit hybrid reconfigurable intelligent surface with mitigated quantization lobe,” in 2025 United States National Committee of URSI National Radio Science Meeting (USNC-URSI NRSM), pp. 385–386, IEEE, 2025

    2025

Pith tools

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