Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

BlueME: Robust Underwater Robot-to-Robot Communication Using Compact Magnetoelectric Antennas

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 BlueME, a 15-element magnetoelectric antenna array, reports reliable underwater robot-to-robot communication beyond 700 meters in ocean trials at under 10 watts, with robustness to turbidity, obstacles, and multipath.

desk verdict A real first open-water ME antenna array deployment with a 730 m detection, but the 'reliable communication' headline outruns the sweeps-only evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09241 v5 pith:3TVU5KAI submitted 2024-11-14 cs.RO eess.SP

Mehron Talebi , Sultan Mahmud , Adam Khalifa , Md Jahidul Islam This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.ROeess.SP
keywords magnetoelectricantennasunderwaterrobotcommunicationverylowfrequencyVLF/LFantennaarraymarineroboticsfieldtrialsRFpropagation
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

BlueME is a 15-element array of magnetoelectric antennas that the authors build, simulate, and test in open water to see whether very-low-frequency electromagnetic links can serve as a practical underwater robot-to-robot communication channel. The central claim is that the system sustains a detectable link beyond 700 meters in salt water at a power footprint of 1–10 watts, and beyond 200 meters in fresh water, while remaining unaffected by turbidity, obstacles, and multipath that degrade acoustics and optics. If this range and robustness hold, BlueME would fill a gap no single existing modality covers well: standard RF dies within meters in seawater, acoustics struggle with Doppler and multipath at low rates, and optics need line-of-sight and clear water. The paper positions the system as the first ME antenna deployment outside a laboratory tank and the largest VLF/LF ME array reported to date.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the magnetoelectric (ME) antenna: a thin three-layer composite of magnetostrictive Metglas and piezoelectric PZT in which a magnetic field strains the Metglas, the strain transfers mechanically to the PZT, and a voltage appears across the PZT; the reverse path converts an applied voltage into a radiating magnetic field. Operating 15 such elements at their mechanical resonance frequency (simulated eigenfrequency 40.85 kHz, measured response across 31–41 kHz) turns a physically small radiator into an efficient VLF/LF source, where seawater attenuation is relatively low. The array is the second half of the machinery: transmitter elements wired in parallel and receiver elements in series produce a theoretical link-budget improvement of roughly 119 dB over a single antenna in air, with radiated power scaling as $N_t^2$ for $N_t$ transmitter elements. Pressure-compensated oil-filled enclosures keep the array operational while fully submerged, and the authors use these arrays on an ASV and ROV in the field trials.

What would settle it

Run the saltwater range test again with the receiver's LNA powered by a regulated supply or a freshly charged battery, logging the LNA supply voltage and noise floor continuously; if the SNR at 730 m disappears or falls sharply once the noise floor is held constant, the headline range is an artifact of the receiver. A complementary check is to inject a calibrated tone at the LNA input before and after each distance run to normalize receiver gain and noise, so link loss is separated from receiver drift.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central result is that a 3×5 array of Metglas–PZT–Metglas ME antennas, resonated near 35–41 kHz and sealed in pressure-compensated oil-filled enclosures, can send and receive very-low-frequency signals between a drifting surface vehicle and an underwater ROV at separations up to 730 meters in the Gulf of Mexico. The authors explain the unexpected reach through two compounding effects: the electromagnetic wavelength in water is far shorter than in air (roughly 170 m at 36 kHz in fresh water and about 7.6 m in sea water), which raises each antenna's radiation resistance by about a factor of 267 relative to air, and array operation scales radiated power quadratically with the number of transmitter elements while receiver sensitivity scales linearly with receiver elements. Measured signal decay was slower than near-field coupling alone would predict, which the authors attribute to propagation guided by the water-air or water-seabed interface at large ranges. They further report that complete submersion, turbidity, and obstacles do not break the link, and they derive BFSK bit-error-rate estimates from the measured SNR-versus-distance data to show the channel can support low-rate digital modulation.

Load-bearing premise

The 730-meter ocean result depends on the assumption that the signal recorded at that distance is genuine and that the receiver's simultaneously reported drop in noise floor—caused by its battery nearing full discharge—did not inflate the measured SNR; the paper discloses the effect in Sec. 6.1 but does not quantify or correct it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Multi-robot underwater missions could carry a BlueME-style array instead of an acoustic modem when the job is coordination, localization, or status exchange over hundreds of meters at low data rates.
  • Because transmitter radiated power scales as the square of the number of elements, adding antennas is a direct route to longer range or higher link margin within the same 1–10 W power class.
  • The system's tolerance for turbidity, obstacles, and multipath makes it a candidate for near-shore, cave, or under-ice operations where acoustic reflections and optical blockage break other links.
  • BFSK or constant-envelope frequency modulation is the paper's recommended modulation path, with measured SNR-distance data giving a way to pick tone spacing and achievable bit rate for a target error rate.
  • Freshwater operation at 200 m and saltwater operation beyond 700 m both use the same array hardware, so one platform design can serve between the two environments with only amplifier and gain changes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The 730 m saltwater point should be treated as an unverified upper bound until the disclosed drop in the receiver noise floor (from the LNA battery approaching full discharge, noted in Sec. 6.1) is quantified; a repeat under regulated supply voltage with continuous noise-floor logging would settle whether the SNR at that distance is real.
  • The slow 1/r decay the paper attributes to interface-guided propagation suggests a testable extension: moving both antennas away from the surface and seabed should sharply shorten range if that boundary mode is doing the work, and hugging the boundary should extend it.
  • The Shannon-Hartley capacity figures assume Gaussian noise and no co-channel interference; in a fleet of robots transmitting simultaneously the practical rates would likely be lower, so those numbers are ceilings, not deployment expectations.
  • With tighter fabrication tolerances, so individual antennas resonate at the same frequency, the ideal 119 dB array gain becomes more nearly attainable, which would put kilometer-scale links in fresh water within reach at similar power.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper describes BlueME, a 15-element magnetoelectric (ME) antenna array designed for low-frequency electromagnetic underwater communication. It covers the antenna design, COMSOL simulation, fabrication, pressure-compensated packaging, and integration of a transmitter array on an ASV and a receiver array on an ROV. Field trials in a freshwater lake and in the Gulf of Mexico measure received signal amplitude versus distance for unmodulated frequency sweeps; the freshwater tests reach 200 m and the saltwater tests reach 730 m. From the measured SNR the paper computes theoretical channel capacity and noncoherent BFSK bit-error-rate curves. The headline claim is that BlueME supports reliable signal transmission beyond 700 m at under 10 W.

Significance. If the headline result were fully established, this would be a valuable contribution to underwater robotics communication: it would be the first outdoor deployment of ME antennas, with range and power consumption that are attractive relative to conventional RF and comparable to some acoustic/optical systems, while avoiding multipath and line-of-sight constraints. The paper is strong on hardware detail and provides openly described field procedures. However, the current evidence supports only detection of a swept carrier, not reliable data communication, and the 730 m figure is clouded by a disclosed but unquantified change in the receiver noise floor. These gaps are load-bearing for the central claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Secs. 4.2, 6, and Eq. (20)] The abstract and conclusion state that BlueME maintains reliable signal transmission and achieved reliable communication beyond 700 m, but the experiments never transmit or demodulate a data-bearing waveform. Section 4.2 describes frequency sweeps from 31 to 41 kHz with peak-hold FFT recording, and Section 6 repeats this with autonomous sweeps from 30 to 40 kHz. The bit-error-rate analysis of Section 6.4, including Fig. 15, is computed from the measured SNR via Eq. (20), not from demodulated bits. The data therefore demonstrate detection of an unmodulated tone, not a communication link. The claims should be restricted to detectable signal, or a demodulated-link experiment with measured BER should be added.
  2. [Sec. 6.1 and Fig. 13] The 730 m range estimate is not robust because the SNR at that distance is computed with a noise floor that the authors disclose changed. Section 6.1 states that a reduction in the measured noise floor was observed during the 730 m test, caused by a drop in the LNA supply voltage as its battery approached full discharge. Since the reported SNR is a peak-to-noise ratio, a lower noise floor directly inflates the SNR and therefore the apparent maximum range. The authors should quantify the noise-floor shift, recompute the 730 m SNR with a noise floor equal to that of the other distances, or rerun the test with a stable LNA supply.
  3. [Sec. 6.1] The claimed underwater communication range may be dominated by interface-guided propagation rather than bulk-water propagation. The text reports that beyond about 15 m the attenuation approached a 1/r dependence and suggests propagation along water-air or water-seabed interfaces; with antennas at about 3 m depth and a seawater wavelength of about 7.6 m, this is plausible. The paper should compare the measured distance dependence with bulk-medium and interface-mode models; otherwise the comparison with acoustic/optical links and the general statement that BlueME works underwater is not established.
  4. [Sec. 5.4 and Abstract] The claim that BlueME is unaffected by turbidity, line-of-sight obstacles, and shallow-water interference is not supported by controlled measurements. Section 5.4 asserts that performance was not significantly affected by obstacles, turbidity, or multipath, but the field trials only vary distance and drive power; there is no experiment in which turbidity, obstacle presence, or multipath conditions are deliberately changed. These robustness claims should be presented as expected properties of ME antennas or supported by targeted tests.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 6.4, Eq. (20)] The relationship Eb/N0 = SNR x Rb/Delta-f requires SNR as a linear power ratio, but Figs. 13-15 present SNR in dB; please state explicitly how the conversion is made, since the BER curves depend on it.
  2. [Figs. 8, 11, 13, 14] Received amplitudes and noise floors should be labeled as antenna-terminal values or post-LNA values, and the LNA gain (60 dB in freshwater, 40 dB in saltwater) should be stated in each caption.
  3. [Secs. 5.2 and 6.1] Each distance appears to have been tested only once, or at least no repetitions or error bars are reported; adding repeated measurements would make the distance dependence and the anomalies at 80 m and 150 m in Fig. 13 more interpretable.
  4. [Sec. 3.1 and Fig. 3] Equation (1) uses L = 45.7 mm while Fig. 3 describes the fabricated antenna as 40 x 20 mm; please reconcile these dimensions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the range, power, capacity, and BER results are measured-input calculations or direct field measurements, not self-referential derivations.

full rationale

The paper's central empirical claims are direct measurements from field trials, not outputs of a model that was fitted to those same measurements. The 700+ m ocean-range result rests on received CW sweep amplitudes logged with FFT peak-hold recording; its main limitations—the absence of a demodulated data link and the disclosed LNA noise-floor reduction during the 730 m test—are evidential and correctness concerns, not circularity. The theoretical channel capacity of Sec. 5.5 is explicitly presented as a derivation from the measured signal and noise spectra: 'we can derive theoretical channel limits from our measurements using the Shannon-Hartley theorem.' Computing a Shannon capacity from a measured SNR is a direct transformation of the input into a standard bound; the paper does not claim this bound as an independent prediction or use it to validate the measurements. Likewise, the BFSK BER curves in Sec. 6.4 and Fig. 15 are labeled 'theoretical BER' and are 'based on received signal data collected during the ocean trial.' Using the standard noncoherent BFSK formula Pb = 0.5*exp(-SNR/2 * Rb/delta_f) with the measured SNR is an arithmetic mapping, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The center frequency used in Fig. 15 is an average of measured peak frequencies, which makes the illustration data-dependent but not circular, since no subsequent claim treats the resulting curve as independent confirmation of the model. The array-gain and radiation-resistance analyses rely on external references such as Dong et al. [11] and standard textbook formulas; these are not self-citations, and the cited results are not used to define the measured outcomes. No self-definitional relation, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz-smuggling-by-citation appears in the derivation chain. The disclosed weakness about the LNA noise floor is an honest limitation that affects the strength of the range claim, but it does not make the paper's reasoning circular. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the empirical claims are independent of any fitted model, so the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on standard EM and antenna formulas and on external environmental data, plus several idealizing assumptions about array coherence, medium homogeneity, and the integrity of the 730 m measurement. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Detection threshold for link establishment = not specified
    The reported maximum ranges depend on an implicit criterion for recognizing the received tone above the noise floor. Without a defined SNR threshold or matched-filter criterion, the range numbers are not independently reproducible.
  • Center frequency for BFSK analysis = 34,629.26 Hz
    Chosen as the average of measured peak-frequency values across test distances (Sec. 6.4). The resulting BER curves are in-sample transformations of the same SNR data, not out-of-sample predictions.
  • Assumed constant LNA noise floor = -91 dBV (freshwater); lower during 730 m test
    Used as a fixed noise level for the Shannon capacity calculation (Sec. 5.5). The 730 m test deviated from this because of battery voltage droop, and the effect is unquantified.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Shannon-Hartley theorem and AWGN assumption
    Used to derive channel capacity and BFSK BER (Secs. 5.5 and 6.4).
  • domain assumption Homogeneous conductive-medium propagation with displacement current neglected
    Used for wavelength and field-region estimates (Eqs. 3-6); ignores stratification, surface, and seabed effects that the paper later invokes to explain the slower decay.
  • ad hoc to paper Coherent array scaling: radiated power scales as N_t^2 and receiver sensitivity as N_r
    Used to compute the 119 dB link budget improvement (Eqs. 10-11). Assumes negligible mutual coupling and perfect phase coherence, which the authors acknowledge is not achieved in practice.
  • domain assumption Small-dipole radiation resistance formula applies to ME antennas in water
    Used for R_rad scaling (Eqs. 7-9, 15-17) without experimental verification of the absolute radiation resistance.
  • ad hoc to paper The 730 m SNR measurement is valid despite the LNA noise-floor drop
    The paper's headline range depends on this measurement, but the disclosed battery-induced noise-floor reduction is not quantified or corrected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of BlueME: Robust Underwater Robot-to-Robot Communication Using Compact Magnetoelectric Antennas." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3TVU5KAI

@misc{pith2026241109241,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: BlueME: Robust Underwater Robot-to-Robot Communication Using Compact Magnetoelectric Antennas},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3TVU5KAI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09241}
}
read the original abstract

We present the design, development, and experimental validation of BlueME, a compact magnetoelectric (ME) antenna array system for underwater robot-to-robot communication. BlueME employs ME antennas operating at their natural mechanical resonance frequency to efficiently transmit and receive very-low-frequency (VLF) electromagnetic signals underwater. We outline the design, simulation, fabrication, and integration of the proposed system on low-power embedded platforms, focusing on portable and scalable applications. For performance evaluation, we deployed BlueME on an autonomous surface vehicle (ASV) and a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) in open-water field trials. Ocean trials demonstrate that BlueME maintains reliable signal transmission at distances beyond 700 meters while consuming only 10 watts of power. Field trials show that the system operates effectively in challenging underwater conditions such as turbidity, obstacles, and multipath interference -- conditions that generally affect acoustics and optics. Our analysis also examines the impact of complete submersion on system performance and identifies key deployment considerations. This work represents the first practical underwater deployment of ME antennas outside the laboratory and implements the largest VLF ME array system to date. BlueME demonstrates significant potential for marine robotics and automation in multi-robot cooperative systems and remote sensor networks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09241 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The proposed BlueME system includes a novel ME an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Magnetoelectric (ME) effect illustrating the cou [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Top) Illustrations for (a) Cross-sectional schematic showing the three-layer structure: two 25 µm Metglas layers with a 150 µm PZT layer, dimensions 40×20 mm2 ; (b) COMSOL sim￾ulation showing displacement at the predicted fundamental reso￾nance frequency of 40.85 kHz. (Bottom) Magnetic flux density across a single fabricated ME antenna (dashed outline) under ap￾plied bias. Measurements are taken at a uniform height… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A fabricated ME antenna and its components (top); the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Data communication and signal processing flow between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Our field experimental setup includes a BlueME trans [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Results of impedance analyses for the BlueME system’s Tx-Rx communication in freshwater: (a–d) Rx impedance, reactance, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: BlueME signal strength over distance for varied Tx amplifier inputs: (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The deployment locations and relevant information from our field tests. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Measured real (in-phase) power consumption versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Channel capacity analysis derived from the BlueME signal strength measurements (on data from freshwater experiments): (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The measured transmitter power consumption versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Measured received signals from the saltwater field trials with transmitter output power [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The received spectral responses at varying transmitter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The measured transmitter power consumption versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png]

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

  1. Demonstrating CavePI: Autonomous Exploration of Underwater Caves by Semantic Guidance

    cs.RO 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A low-cost AUV tracks a cave guide line using lightweight semantic segmentation and a PID controller, with credible tank and open-water results but only limited, partially unsuccessful cave tests.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    A Survey of Un- derwater Multi-Robot Systems,

    Z. Zhou, J. Liu, and J. Yu, “A Survey of Un- derwater Multi-Robot Systems,”IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2022. DOI:10.1109/JAS.2021.1004269

    arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Robot-to-Robot Relative Pose Estimation using Humans as Markers

    M. J. Islam, J. Mo, and J. Sattar, “Robot-to-robot Rel- ative Pose Estimation Using Humans as Markers,”Au- tonomous Robots, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 579–593, 2021. DOI:10.48550/arXiv.1903.00820

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.00820 2021

  3. [3]

    Secure Com- munication in Multi-robot Systems,

    I. Jawhar, N. Mohamed, and J. Al-Jaroodi, “Secure Com- munication in Multi-robot Systems,” in2020 IEEE Sys- tems Security Symposium (SSS), pp. 1–8, IEEE, 2020. DOI:10.1109/SSS47320.2020.9174264

    arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Cooperative Multi-robot Localization Under Communi- cation Constraints,

    N. Trawny, S. I. Roumeliotis, and G. B. Giannakis, “Cooperative Multi-robot Localization Under Communi- cation Constraints,” in2009 IEEE International Confer- ence on Robotics and Automation, pp. 4394–4400, 2009. DOI:10.1109/ROBOT.2009.5152606

    arXiv 2009

  5. [5]

    A Neural Network- based Hybrid System for Detection, Characterization, and Classification of Short-duration Oceanic Signals,

    J. Ghosh, L. Deuser, and S. D. Beck, “A Neural Network- based Hybrid System for Detection, Characterization, and Classification of Short-duration Oceanic Signals,”IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 351– 363, 1992. DOI:10.1109/48.180304

    work page doi:10.1109/48.180304 1992

  6. [6]

    Robot Lo- cal Network Using TQS Protocol for Land-to-Underwater Communications,

    A. Irawan, M. F. Abas, and N. Hasan, “Robot Lo- cal Network Using TQS Protocol for Land-to-Underwater Communications,”Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology, no. 1, pp. 23–30, 2019. DOI:10.26636/jtit.2019.125818

    arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    Ego-to-exo: Interfacing Third Person Visuals from Egocentric Views in Real-Time for Improved ROV Teleoperation,

    A. Abdullah, R. Chen, I. Rekleitis, and M. J. Is- lam, “Ego-to-exo: Interfacing Third Person Visuals from Egocentric Views in Real-Time for Improved ROV Teleoperation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00848, 2024. DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2407.00848

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.00848 2024

  8. [8]

    Communication and Cooperation for Spheri- cal Underwater Robots by Using Acoustic Transmission,

    S. Gu, L. Zhang, S. Guo, L. Zheng, R. An, T. Jiang, and A. Xiong, “Communication and Cooperation for Spheri- cal Underwater Robots by Using Acoustic Transmission,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 292–301, 2022. DOI:10.1109/TMECH.2022.3199598

    arXiv 2022

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

    CaveSeg: Deep Semantic Segmentation and Scene Parsing for Autonomous Underwater Cave Ex- ploration,

    A. Abdullah, T. Barua, R. Tibbetts, Z. Chen, M. J. Islam, and I. Rekleitis, “CaveSeg: Deep Semantic Segmentation and Scene Parsing for Autonomous Underwater Cave Ex- ploration,” inIEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, 2024. 15

    2024

  2. [10]

    Overview of Underwater Communication Technology,

    A. Jaafar, H. Ja’afar, I. Pasya, R. Abdullah, and Y . Yamada, “Overview of Underwater Communication Technology,” in Proceedings of the 12th National Technical Seminar on Un- manned System Technology 2020: NUSYS’20, pp. 93–104, Springer, 2022. DOI:10.1007/978-981-16-2406-3 8

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    VLF Mechanical Antenna Arrays for Underwater Wireless Communications,

    C. Dong, Y . He, X. Liu, and N. X. Sun, “VLF Mechanical Antenna Arrays for Underwater Wireless Communications,” in16th International Conference on Underwater Networks & Systems, pp. 1–5, 2022. DOI:10.1145/3567600.3568150

    2022

  4. [12]

    Broadband Electrically Small VLF/LF Transmitter Via Time-Varying Antenna Properties,

    E. Slevin, M. B. Cohen, N. Opalinski, L. Thompson, and M. Golkowski, “Broadband Electrically Small VLF/LF Transmitter Via Time-Varying Antenna Properties,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 97–110, 2021. DOI:10.1109/TAP.2021.3096950

    2021

  5. [13]

    Underwater Communication: A Detailed Review,

    S. Kumara and C. Vatsb, “Underwater Communication: A Detailed Review,” inCEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Radio Communication in the Sea,

    R. K. Moore, “Radio Communication in the Sea,” IEEE spectrum, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 42–51, 1967. DOI:10.1109/MSPEC.1967.5217169

    1967

  7. [15]

    Re-evaluation of RF electro- magnetic communication in underwater sensor networks,

    Che, Xianhui and Wells, Ian and Dickers, Gordon and Kear, Paul and Gong, Xiaochun, “Re-evaluation of RF electro- magnetic communication in underwater sensor networks,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 143– 151, 2010. DOI:10.1109/MCOM.2010.5673085

    2010

  8. [16]

    Development of Underwater Acoustic Communication Technology,

    Z. Min and W. Yanbo, “Development of Underwater Acoustic Communication Technology,”Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 289–296, 2019. DOI:10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.2019.03.006

    2019

  9. [17]

    A Ro- bust OFDM Modem for Underwater Acoustic Communica- tions,

    A. Bourr ´e, S. Lmai, C. Laot, and S. Houcke, “A Ro- bust OFDM Modem for Underwater Acoustic Communica- tions,” in2013 MTS/IEEE OCEANS, pp. 1–5, IEEE, 2013. DOI:10.1109/OCEANS-Bergen.2013.6608003

    2013

  10. [18]

    Basin-scale Acous- tic Communication: A Feasibility Study Using To- mography m-sequences,

    L. Freitag and M. Stojanovic, “Basin-scale Acous- tic Communication: A Feasibility Study Using To- mography m-sequences,” inMTS/IEEE OCEANS 2001. An Ocean Odyssey. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37295), vol. 4, pp. 2256–2261 vol.4. DOI:10.1109/oceans.2001.968349

    2001

  11. [19]

    A Design of Tiny Basin Test-bed for AUV Multi Agent,

    K. Watanabe and A. Nakamura, “A Design of Tiny Basin Test-bed for AUV Multi Agent,” inOCEANS, pp. 1002–1008, MTS/IEEE, 2005. DOI:10.1109/OCEANS.2005.1639885

    2005

  12. [20]

    Evolv- ing Homogeneous Neurocontrollers for a Group of Hetero- geneous Robots: Coordinated Motion, Cooperation, and Acoustic Communication,

    E. Tuci, C. Ampatzis, F. Vicentini, and M. Dorigo, “Evolv- ing Homogeneous Neurocontrollers for a Group of Hetero- geneous Robots: Coordinated Motion, Cooperation, and Acoustic Communication,”Artificial Life, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 157–178, 2008. DOI:10.1162/artl.2008.14.2.157

    2008 doi

  13. [21]

    The State of the Art in Underwater Acoustic Telemetry,

    D. B. Kilfoyle and A. B. Baggeroer, “The State of the Art in Underwater Acoustic Telemetry,”IEEE Journal of oceanic engineering, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 4–27, 2000. DOI:10.1109/48.820733

    doi

  14. [22]

    Underwater Wire- less Sensor Networks: How do Acoustic Propagation Models Impact the Performance of Higher-level Proto- cols?,

    J. Llor and M. P. Malumbres, “Underwater Wire- less Sensor Networks: How do Acoustic Propagation Models Impact the Performance of Higher-level Proto- cols?,”Sensors, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 1312–1335, 2012. DOI:10.1109/W AINA.2014.149

    2012 doi

  15. [24]

    Un- derwater Optical Communications: Overview,

    G. Schirripa Spagnolo, L. Cozzella, and F. Leccese, “Un- derwater Optical Communications: Overview,”Sensors, vol. 20, no. 8, p. 2261, 2020. DOI:10.3390/s20082261

    2020 doi

  16. [25]

    Underwater Wireless Optical Communication; Recent Advances and Remaining Chal- lenges,

    M.-A. Khalighi, C. Gabriel, T. Hamza, S. Bourennane, P. Leon, and V . Rigaud, “Underwater Wireless Optical Communication; Recent Advances and Remaining Chal- lenges,” in2014 16th international conference on trans- parent optical networks (ICTON), pp. 1–4, IEEE, 2014. DOI:10.11...

    2014

  17. [26]

    A Long Distance Un- derwater Visible Light Communication System with Single Photon Avalanche Diode,

    C. Wang, H.-Y . Yu, and Y .-J. Zhu, “A Long Distance Un- derwater Visible Light Communication System with Single Photon Avalanche Diode,”IEEE Photonics Journal, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1–11, 2016. DOI:10.1109/JPHOT.2016.2602330

    2016

  18. [27]

    Demonstration of Biofouling Mitigation Methods for Long-term Deployments of Opti- cal Cameras,

    J. Joslin and B. Polagye, “Demonstration of Biofouling Mitigation Methods for Long-term Deployments of Opti- cal Cameras,”Marine Technology Society Journal, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 88–96, 2015. DOI:10.4031/MTSJ.49.1.12

    2015 doi

  19. [28]

    A Review on Practical Considerations and Solutions in Underwater Wireless Optical Communication,

    X. Sun, C. H. Kang, M. Kong, O. Alkhazragi, Y . Guo, M. Ouhssain, Y . Weng, B. H. Jones, T. K. Ng, and B. S. Ooi, “A Review on Practical Considerations and Solutions in Underwater Wireless Optical Communication,”Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 421–431, 202...

    2020

  20. [29]

    VLF Magnetoelectric Antennas for Portable Un- derwater Communication: Theory and Experiment,

    Y . Du, Y . Xu, J. Wu, J. Qiao, Z. Wang, Z. Hu, Z. Jiang, and M. Liu, “VLF Magnetoelectric Antennas for Portable Un- derwater Communication: Theory and Experiment,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 2167–2181, 2023. DOI:10.1109/TAP.2022.3233665

    2023

  21. [30]

    Acousti- cally Actuated Compact Magnetoelectric Antenna for Low- Frequency Underwater Communication,

    X. L ¨u, X. Chen, W. Zhang, L. Gu, and W. Bao, “Acousti- cally Actuated Compact Magnetoelectric Antenna for Low- Frequency Underwater Communication,”IEEE Transac- tions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 71, no. 11, pp. 8493–8503, 2023. DOI:10.1109/tap.2023.3307711

    2023

  22. [31]

    Mag- netoelectric Microelectromechanical and Nanoelectrome- chanical Systems for the IoT,

    B. Luo, A. Will-Cole, C. Dong, Y . He, X. Liu, H. Lin, R. Huang, X. Shi, M. McConney, M. Page,et al., “Mag- netoelectric Microelectromechanical and Nanoelectrome- chanical Systems for the IoT,”Nature Reviews Electrical Engineering, pp. 1–18, 2024. DOI:10.1038/s44287-024- 00044-7

    2024 doi

  23. [32]

    Investigation of Un- derwater Wireless Optical Communications Links with Sur- face Currents and Tides for Oceanic Signal Transmission,

    Z. Lv, G. He, C. Qiu, and Z. Liu, “Investigation of Un- derwater Wireless Optical Communications Links with Sur- face Currents and Tides for Oceanic Signal Transmission,” IEEE Photonics Journal, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2021. DOI:10.1109/JPHOT.2021.3076895

    2021

  24. [33]

    Future Antenna Miniaturization Mecha- nism: Magnetoelectric Antennas,

    H. Lin, M. Zaeimbashi, N. Sun, X. Liang, H. Chen, C. Dong, A. Matyushov, X. Wang, Y . Guo, Y . Gao, 16 and N.-X. Sun, “Future Antenna Miniaturization Mecha- nism: Magnetoelectric Antennas,” in2018 IEEE/MTT-S International Microwave Symposium - IMS, pp. 220–223. DOI:10.1109/MWS...

  25. [34]

    A Low Frequency Mechani- cal Transmitter Based on Magnetoelectric Heterostructures Operated at their Resonance Frequency,

    J. Xu, C. M. Leung, X. Zhuang, J. Li, S. Bhardwaj, J. V olakis, and D. Viehland, “A Low Frequency Mechani- cal Transmitter Based on Magnetoelectric Heterostructures Operated at their Resonance Frequency,”Sensors, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 853, 2019. DOI:10.3390/s19040853

    2019 doi

  26. [35]

    Subsea Cable Tracking by Autonomous Underwater Vehicle with Mag- netic Sensing Guidance,

    X. Xiang, C. Yu, Z. Niu, and Q. Zhang, “Subsea Cable Tracking by Autonomous Underwater Vehicle with Mag- netic Sensing Guidance,”Sensors, vol. 16, no. 8, p. 1335,

  27. [36]

    Performance Assessment of Underwater-to-air Optical Wireless Communication System with the Effect of Solar Noise and Sea Surface Conditions,

    B. R. Angara, P. Shanmugam, H. Ramachandran, and C. G. Sandhani, “Performance Assessment of Underwater-to-air Optical Wireless Communication System with the Effect of Solar Noise and Sea Surface Conditions,”IEEE Access,

  28. [37]

    Phase- coherent Digital Communications for Underwater Acoustic Channels,

    M. Stojanovic, J. A. Catipovic, and J. G. Proakis, “Phase- coherent Digital Communications for Underwater Acoustic Channels,”IEEE journal of oceanic engineering, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 100–111, 1994. DOI:10.1109/48.289455

    1994 doi

  29. [38]

    Survery on Underwa- ter Wireless Communication Technology,

    L. Hao, J. Ao, and C. Ma, “Survery on Underwa- ter Wireless Communication Technology,” in2023 Cross Strait Radio Science and Wireless Tech- nology Conference (CSRSWTC), pp. 1–3, 2023. DOI:10.1109/CSRSWTC60855.2023.10426965

    2023

  30. [39]

    Growth of Underwater Com- munication Technology in the US Navy,

    R. Headrick and L. Freitag, “Growth of Underwater Com- munication Technology in the US Navy,”IEEE Commu- nications Magazine, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 80–82, 2009. DOI:10.1109/MCOM.2009.4752681

    2009

  31. [40]

    De- ployment Analysis in Underwater Acoustic Wireless Sensor Networks,

    D. Pompili, T. Melodia, and I. F. Akyildiz, “De- ployment Analysis in Underwater Acoustic Wireless Sensor Networks,” in1st ACM International Work- shop on Underwater Networks, pp. 48–55, 2006. DOI:10.1145/1161039.1161050

    2006

  32. [41]

    Editorial Un- derwater Acoustic Communications: Where we Stand and What is Next?,

    A. Song, M. Stojanovic, and M. Chitre, “Editorial Un- derwater Acoustic Communications: Where we Stand and What is Next?,”IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 44, no. 1, 2019. DOI:10.1109/JOE.2018.2883872

    2019

  33. [42]

    Recent Advances in High-speed Un- derwater Acoustic Communications,

    M. Stojanovic, “Recent Advances in High-speed Un- derwater Acoustic Communications,”IEEE Journal of Oceanic engineering, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 125–136, 1996. DOI:10.1109/48.486787

    1996 doi

  34. [43]

    BlueComm 200

    Sonadyne, “BlueComm 200.”https : / / www . sonardyne . com / products / bluecomm - 200 - wireless- underwater- link/, 2016. Accessed: 22-2-2024

    2016

  35. [44]

    Luma™ Modems

    Hydromea, “Luma™ Modems.”https : / / www . hydromea . com / underwater - wireless - communication, 2020. Accessed: 22-2-2024

    2020

  36. [45]

    Underwater Ex- periments on the Polarization, Coherence, and Scatter- ing Properties of a Pulsed Blue-Green Laser,

    G. Gilbert, T. Stoner, and J. Jernigan, “Underwater Ex- periments on the Polarization, Coherence, and Scatter- ing Properties of a Pulsed Blue-Green Laser,” inUn- derwater Photo Optics I, vol. 7, pp. 8–14, Spie, 1966. DOI:10.1117/12.971001

    1966 doi

  37. [46]

    Multi-laser Transmis- someter for Ocean Optical Classification and Biofoul- ing Detection,

    B. Neuner, A. Wang, S. Zlatanovic, D. Jennings, N. Tran, and B. Wiedemeier, “Multi-laser Transmis- someter for Ocean Optical Classification and Biofoul- ing Detection,” inOCEANS, pp. 1–5, IEEE, 2019. DOI:10.1109/OCEANSE.2019.8867257

    2019

  38. [47]

    Seawater Short-Range Elec- tromagnetic Wave Communication Method Based on OFDM Subcarrier Allocation,

    J. Wang and S. Wang, “Seawater Short-Range Elec- tromagnetic Wave Communication Method Based on OFDM Subcarrier Allocation,” vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 63–71. DOI:10.4236/jcc.2019.710006

    2019

  39. [48]

    A portable very low frequency (VLF) communication system based on acoustically actuated magnetoelectric antennas ,

    C. Dong, Y . He, M. Li, C. Tu, Z. Chu, X. Liang, H. Chen, Y . Wei, M. Zaeimbashi, X. Wang,et al., “ A portable very low frequency (VLF) communication system based on acoustically actuated magnetoelectric antennas ,”IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, vol. 19, no. 3...

    2020

  40. [49]

    Minitype Arrays of Acoustically Actuated Magnetoelectric Antennas for Mag- netic Induction Communication,

    S. Wang, G. Dou, and G. Song, “Minitype Arrays of Acoustically Actuated Magnetoelectric Antennas for Mag- netic Induction Communication,”Actuators, vol. 13, no. 8, p. 276, 2024. DOI:10.3390/act13080276

    2024 doi

  41. [50]

    Bias- Free Very Low Frequency Magnetoelectric Antenna,

    S. Fu, J. Cheng, T. Jiang, H. Wu, Z. Fang, J. Jiao, O. Sokolov, S. Ivanov, M. Bichurin, and Y . Wang, “Bias- Free Very Low Frequency Magnetoelectric Antenna,”Ap- plied Physics Letters, vol. 122, no. 26, p. 262901, 2023. DOI:10.1063/5.0158020

    2023 doi

  42. [51]

    A Miniaturized, Low-Frequency Magnetoelectric Wire- less Power Transfer System for Powering Biomedical Im- plants,

    D. Mukherjee, S. K. Rainu, N. Singh, and D. Mallick, “A Miniaturized, Low-Frequency Magnetoelectric Wire- less Power Transfer System for Powering Biomedical Im- plants,”IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Sys- tems, 2023. DOI:10.1109/TBCAS.2023.3336598

    2023

  43. [52]

    Local Charge Density Wave and Metal-insulator Transition in Ba (K) Bi (Pb) O3,

    D. N. Manh, D. Mayou, and F. Cyrot-Lackmann, “Local Charge Density Wave and Metal-insulator Transition in Ba (K) Bi (Pb) O3,”Physica C: Superconductivity, vol. 185, pp. 1611–1612, 1991. DOI:10.1016/0921-4534(91)90932- O

    1991 doi

  44. [53]

    Progress on Very/Ultra Low Frequency Mechanical An- tennas,

    S. Yang, J. Xu, M. Guo, B. Zhang, C. Lan, H. Li, and K. Bi, “Progress on Very/Ultra Low Frequency Mechanical An- tennas,”ES Materials & Manufacturing, vol. 16, pp. 1–12,

  45. [54]

    Crafting Very Low Fequency Magnetoelectric Antenna via Piezoelectric and Electromechanical Synergic Opti- mization Strategy,

    Z. Fang, J. Jiao, H. Wu, T. Jiang, S. Fu, J. Cheng, S. Oleg, I. Sergey, , B. Mirza, F. Li, and Y . Wang, “Crafting Very Low Fequency Magnetoelectric Antenna via Piezoelectric and Electromechanical Synergic Opti- mization Strategy,”Journal of Materiomics, vol. V ol- ume Number,...

    2024 doi

  46. [55]

    Self-Biased Magneto-Electric Antenna for Very-Low-Frequency Communications: Exploiting Mag- netization Grading and Asymmetric Structure-Induced Resonance,

    C. M. Leung, H. Zheng, J. Yang, T. Wang, and F. Wang, “Self-Biased Magneto-Electric Antenna for Very-Low-Frequency Communications: Exploiting Mag- netization Grading and Asymmetric Structure-Induced Resonance,”Sensors, vol. 24, no. 2, p. 694, 2024. DOI:10.3390/s24020694

    2024 doi

  47. [56]

    Direct and Converse Magnetoelectric Effect at Resonant Frequency in Lam- inar Piezoelectric-Magnetostrictive Composite,

    C. Popov, H. Chang, P. M. Record, E. Abraham, R. W. Whatmore, and Z. Huang, “Direct and Converse Magnetoelectric Effect at Resonant Frequency in Lam- inar Piezoelectric-Magnetostrictive Composite,”Journal 17 of Electroceramics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 53–58, 2008. DOI:10.1007/s108...

    2008 doi

  48. [57]

    METGLAS® 2605SA1 and 2605HB1M Al- loy General Properties and Characteristics

    I. Metglas, “METGLAS® 2605SA1 and 2605HB1M Al- loy General Properties and Characteristics.”https:// metglas.com/magnetic-materials/. Accessed: 2024-10-30

    2024

  49. [58]

    Piezo Material Properties

    M. Technology, “Piezo Material Properties.”https:// support.piezo.com/article/62- material- properties. Accessed: 2024-10-30

    2024

  50. [59]

    A Comprehensive Study on Magneto- electric Transducers for Wireless Power Transfer Using Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields,

    S. Hosur, R. Sriramdas, S. Karan, N. Liu, S. Priya, and M. Kiani, “A Comprehensive Study on Magneto- electric Transducers for Wireless Power Transfer Using Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields,”IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 1079– 1092, 2021...

    2021

  51. [60]

    Magnetic Field and Ultrasound Induced Simultaneous Wireless Energy Harvesting,

    S. K. Karan, S. Hosur, Z. Kashani, H. Leng, A. Vijay, R. Sriramdas, K. Wang, B. Poudel, A. Patterson, M. Kiani, and S. Priya, “Magnetic Field and Ultrasound Induced Simultaneous Wireless Energy Harvesting,”Energy and Environmental Science, vol. 17, pp. 2129–2144, 2024. DOI:10....

    2024 doi

  52. [61]

    COMSOL - Software for Multiphysics Sim- ulation

    I. COMSOL, “COMSOL - Software for Multiphysics Sim- ulation.”https : / / www . comsol . com, 2016. Ac- cessed: 22-8-2024

    2016

  53. [62]

    Analysis of Near Field Mutual Coupling in Wideband Magnetoelectric Antennas Array,

    B. Dong, Z. Yan, Y . Zhang, T. Han, H. Zhou, and Y . Wang, “Analysis of Near Field Mutual Coupling in Wideband Magnetoelectric Antennas Array,”Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 134, no. 11, p. 114103, 2023. DOI:10.1063/5.0166407

    2023 doi

  54. [63]

    Surface Electromagnetic Waves at Gradual Interfaces Between Lossy Media,

    I. I. Smolyaninov, “Surface Electromagnetic Waves at Gradual Interfaces Between Lossy Media,” vol. 170, pp. 177–186. DOI:10.2528/PIER21043006

    doi

  55. [64]

    Development of Broadband Underwater Radio Communication for Ap- plication in Unmanned Underwater Vehicles,

    I. Smolyaninov, Q. Balzano, and D. Young, “Development of Broadband Underwater Radio Communication for Ap- plication in Unmanned Underwater Vehicles,” vol. 8, no. 5, p. 370. DOI:10.3390/jmse8050370

    doi

  56. [65]

    Alachua LAKEW ATCH Report 2023

    U. of Florida, “Alachua LAKEW ATCH Report 2023.” https : / / lakewatch . ifas . ufl . edu / media / lakewatchifasufledu / reports / lake - reports / Lake - Report - 2023 - Alachua . pdf. 2022-12-09

    2023

  57. [66]

    An Axial Mode Magnetoelectric Antenna: Radiation Predic- tions via Multiphysics Modeling with Experimental Valida- tions,

    E. A. Burnside, S. Tiwari, S. R. Burnside, R. N. Can- dler, R. Henderson, S. Grimm, and G. P. Carman, “An Axial Mode Magnetoelectric Antenna: Radiation Predic- tions via Multiphysics Modeling with Experimental Valida- tions,”Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 134, no. 14, 2023. ...

    2023 doi

  58. [67]

    A Multilayered Magnetoelectric Transmitter with Suppressed Nonlinearity for Portable VLF Communication,

    Z. Chu, Z. Mao, K. Song, S. Jiang, S. Min, W. Dan, C. Yu, M. Wu, Y . Ren, Z. Lu, J. Jiao, T. Nan, and S. Dong, “A Multilayered Magnetoelectric Transmitter with Suppressed Nonlinearity for Portable VLF Communication,” vol. 6, p. 0208. DOI: 10.34133/research.0208

    doi

  59. [68]

    Shannon–Hartley Channel Capac- ity for Underwater Wireless Optical Communications,

    J. M. De Freitas, “Shannon–Hartley Channel Capac- ity for Underwater Wireless Optical Communications,” ACS Photonics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 866–873, 2024. DOI:10.1021/acsphotonics.3c00843

    2024 doi

  60. [69]

    FSUCML real-time and continuous seawater monitoring system: An- nual report 2024 - 2025

    B. Mejia-Mercado, J. Trexler, and C. Morris, “FSUCML real-time and continuous seawater monitoring system: An- nual report 2024 - 2025.”

    2024

  61. [71]

    V oltage-Driven Nonlinear- ity in Magnetoelectric Heterostructures,

    Z. Chu, C. Dong, C. Tu, Y . He, X. Liang, J. Wang, Y . Wei, H. Chen, X. Gao, C. Lu, Z. Zhu, Y . Lin, S. Dong, J. McCord, and N.-X. Sun, “V oltage-Driven Nonlinear- ity in Magnetoelectric Heterostructures,” vol. 12, no. 4, p. 044001. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.12.044001

    doi

  62. [72]

    The Duffing Equation: Nonlinear Oscillators and their Be- haviour

    “The Duffing Equation: Nonlinear Oscillators and their Be- haviour.” DOI:10.1002/9780470977859

    doi

  63. [73]

    Modeling of Magnetoelectric Microresonator Using Numerical Method and Simulated Annealing Algorithm,

    M. Sadeghi, M. M. Bazrafkan, M. Rutner, and F. Fau- pel, “Modeling of Magnetoelectric Microresonator Using Numerical Method and Simulated Annealing Algorithm,” vol. 14, no. 10, p. 1878. DOI:10.3390/mi14101878

    doi

  64. [74]

    Nonlinear Resonant Magnetoelectric Coupling Model for Dual-Peak Phenomenon in Magnetoelectric Laminates,

    H.-M. Zhou, M.-H. Li, Y . Zhou, and Q. Chen, “Nonlinear Resonant Magnetoelectric Coupling Model for Dual-Peak Phenomenon in Magnetoelectric Laminates,” vol. 672, pp. 292–297. DOI:10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.02.150

    2016 doi

  65. [75]

    Nonlinear Harmonic Distortion Effect in Magnetoelectric Laminate Compos- ites,

    H. Xu, Y . Pei, D. Fang, and P. Wang, “Nonlinear Harmonic Distortion Effect in Magnetoelectric Laminate Compos- ites,” vol. 105, no. 1, p. 012904. DOI:10.1063/1.4887373

    doi

  66. [76]

    Theoretical Study on Nonlin- ear Magnetoelectric Effect and Harmonic Distortion Be- havior in Laminated Composite,

    Y . Shi and Y .-W. Gao, “Theoretical Study on Nonlin- ear Magnetoelectric Effect and Harmonic Distortion Be- havior in Laminated Composite,” vol. 646, pp. 351–359. DOI:10.1016/j.jallcom.2015.05.229

    2015 doi

  67. [77]

    A Portable VLF Magnetoelectric Antenna with High Communication Rate Based on Direct Antenna Amplitude Modulation,

    J. Qiao, J. Wu, Y . Du, Y . Xu, Z. Hu, and M. Liu, “A Portable VLF Magnetoelectric Antenna with High Communication Rate Based on Direct Antenna Amplitude Modulation,” in 2022 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Workshop Se- ries on Advanced Materials and Processes for RF and TH...

    2022

  68. [78]

    Acoustically Actuated Magnetoelectric An- tennas for VLF Communication and Magnetic Sensing

    C. Dong, “Acoustically Actuated Magnetoelectric An- tennas for VLF Communication and Magnetic Sensing.” DOI:10.17760/D20670383

    doi

  69. [79]

    Engineering Resonance Modes for Enhanced Magnetoelectric Coupling in Bilayer Laminate Compos- ites for Energy Harvesting Applications,

    A. B. Swain, S. Dinesh Kumar, V . Subramanian, and P. Mu- rugavel, “Engineering Resonance Modes for Enhanced Magnetoelectric Coupling in Bilayer Laminate Compos- ites for Energy Harvesting Applications,” vol. 13, no. 2, p. 024026. DOI:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.13.024026

    doi

  70. [80]

    Theoretical Analysis on Radiation Perfor- mance of Magnetoelectric Antennas Considering Eddy- Current Loss and Quasistatic Hysteresis Effect,

    B. Lei, Y . Li, G. Xu, C. Gao, K. Pang, D. Ye, Y . Shi, and S. Xiao, “Theoretical Analysis on Radiation Perfor- mance of Magnetoelectric Antennas Considering Eddy- Current Loss and Quasistatic Hysteresis Effect,” vol. 138, no. 4, p. 044101. DOI:10.1063/5.0282234

    doi

  71. [81]

    J. G. Proakis and M. Salehi,Digital Communications. McGraw-Hill, 5. ed ed. 18

  72. [82]

    John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 5 ed

    Simon Haykin and Michael Moher,Communication Sys- tems, 5th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 5 ed

  73. [83]

    J. R. Barry, E. A. Lee, and D. G. Messerschmitt,Digital Communication. Springer US, 3 ed. DOI:10.1007/978-1- 4615-0227-2

    doi

  74. [84]

    State-of-the-Art Underwater Acoustic Communication Modems: Classifi- cations, Analyses and Design Challenges,

    M. Y . I. Zia, J. Poncela, and P. Otero, “State-of-the-Art Underwater Acoustic Communication Modems: Classifi- cations, Analyses and Design Challenges,” vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 1325–1360. DOI:10.1007/s11277-020-07431-x

    doi

  75. [85]

    Effects of Biofouling on Performance of Moored Data Logging Acoustic Receivers,

    M. R. Heupel, K. L. Reiss, B. G. Yeiser, and C. A. Simpfendorfer, “Effects of Biofouling on Performance of Moored Data Logging Acoustic Receivers,” vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 327–335. DOI:10.4319/lom.2008.6.327

    2008 doi

  76. [86]

    An Integrated, Underwater Optical/Acoustic Communications System,

    N. Farr, A. Bowen, J. Ware, C. Pontbriand, and M. Tivey, “An Integrated, Underwater Optical/Acoustic Communications System,” inOCEANS, pp. 1–6, 2010. DOI:10.1109/OCEANSSYD.2010.5603510

    2010

  77. [87]

    Chal- lenges and Opportunities of Underwater Cognitive Acous- tic Networks,

    Y . Luo, L. Pu, M. Zuba, Z. Peng, and J.-H. Cui, “Chal- lenges and Opportunities of Underwater Cognitive Acous- tic Networks,”IEEE Transactions on Emerging Top- ics in Computing, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 198–211, 2014. DOI:10.1109/TETC.2014.2310457

    2014

  78. [88]

    Recent Progress in and Perspectives of Under- water Wireless Optical Communication,

    S. Zhu, X. Chen, X. Liu, G. Zhang, and P. Tian, “Recent Progress in and Perspectives of Under- water Wireless Optical Communication,”Progress in Quantum Electronics, vol. 73, p. 100274, 2020. DOI:10.1016/j.pquantelec.2020.100274

    2020

  79. [89]

    High Bandwidth Underwater Optical Communication,

    F. Hanson and S. Radic, “High Bandwidth Underwater Optical Communication,”Applied optics, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 277–283, 2008. DOI:10.1364/ao.47.000277

    2008 doi

  80. [90]

    Luma™ Modems

    Hydromea, “Luma™ Modems.”https : / / www . hydromea . com / underwater - wireless - communication, 2020. Accessed: 22-10-2024

    2020

  81. [91]

    Gb/s Underwater Wireless Optical Communications Using Series-Connected GaN Micro-LED Arrays,

    G. N. Arvanitakis, R. Bian, J. J. D. McKendry, C. Cheng, E. Xie, X. He, G. Yang, M. S. Islim, A. A. Purwita, E. Gu, H. Haas, and M. D. Dawson, “Gb/s Underwater Wireless Optical Communications Using Series-Connected GaN Micro-LED Arrays,”IEEE Photonics Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, ...

    2020

  82. [92]

    Underwa- ter Propagation of High-Data-Rate Laser Communications Pulses,

    J. B. Snow, J. P. Flatley, D. E. Freeman, M. A. Landry, C. E. Lindstrom, J. R. Longacre, and J. A. Schwartz, “Underwa- ter Propagation of High-Data-Rate Laser Communications Pulses,” inOcean Optics XI(G. D. Gilbert, ed.), vol. 1750, pp. 419 – 427, International Society for Opt...

    1992 doi

  83. [93]

    CSignum - Underwater Communications

    CSignum, “CSignum - Underwater Communications.” https://www.csignum.com/, 2020. Accessed: 22- 2-2024

    2020

  84. [94]

    A Compact Low-Power Underwater Magneto-Inductive Modem,

    Y . Wang, A. Dobbin, and J.-F. Bousquet, “A Compact Low-Power Underwater Magneto-Inductive Modem,” inProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Underwater Networks & Systems (WUWNet’16), pp. 1–5, Association for Computing Machinery. DOI:10.1145/2999504.3001064

  85. [95]

    A Survey of Underwater Magnetic Induction Com- munications: Fundamental Issues, Recent Advances, and Challenges,

    Y . Li, S. Wang, C. Jin, Y . Zhang, and T. Jiang, “A Survey of Underwater Magnetic Induction Com- munications: Fundamental Issues, Recent Advances, and Challenges,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 2466–2487, 2019. DOI:10.1109/COMST.2019.2897610

    2019

  86. [96]

    Con- tribution of Surface Wave to Horizontal Magnetic Dipole in Three-layered Media,

    L. Zhang, J. Tang, F. Yu, and H. Chen, “Con- tribution of Surface Wave to Horizontal Magnetic Dipole in Three-layered Media,” in2017 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Signal Processing, Communica- tions and Computing (ICSPCC), pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2017. DOI:10.1109/ICSPCC.2017.8242435

    2017

  87. [97]

    Multiple Frequency Band Channel Modeling and Analysis for Magnetic Induction Communication in Practical Underwater Environments,

    H. Guo, Z. Sun, and P. Wang, “Multiple Frequency Band Channel Modeling and Analysis for Magnetic Induction Communication in Practical Underwater Environments,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 6619–6632, 2017. DOI:10.1109/TVT.2017.2664099

    2017

  88. [98]

    Anal- ysis and Implementation of Underwater Single Capaci- tive Coupled Simultaneous Wireless Power and Bidirec- tional Data Transfer System,

    C. Da, F. Li, L. Wang, C. Tao, S. Li, and M. Nie, “Anal- ysis and Implementation of Underwater Single Capaci- tive Coupled Simultaneous Wireless Power and Bidirec- tional Data Transfer System,”IEEE Transactions on Indus- trial Electronics, vol. 71, no. 12, pp. 15674–15684, 202...

    2024

  89. [99]

    A bio- inspired electrocommunication system for small underwa- ter robots,

    W. Wang, J. Liu, G. Xie, L. Wen, and J. Zhang, “A bio- inspired electrocommunication system for small underwa- ter robots,” vol. 12, no. 3, p. 036002. DOI:10.1088/1748- 3190/aa61c3

    doi

  90. [100]

    Underwater wireless communication via TENG-generated Maxwell’s displacement current,

    H. Zhao, M. Xu, M. Shu, J. An, W. Ding, X. Liu, S. Wang, C. Zhao, H. Yu, H. Wang, C. Wang, X. Fu, X. Pan, G. Xie, and Z. L. Wang, “Underwater wireless communication via TENG-generated Maxwell’s displacement current,” vol. 13, no. 1, p. 3325. DOI:10.1038/s41467-022-31042-8

    doi

  91. [101]

    Design and Verification of Underwater Electric Field Communica- tion System Based Spread Spectrum Techniques,

    T. Lu, Q. Hu, D. Xu, X. Feng, and Y . Zhang, “Design and Verification of Underwater Electric Field Communica- tion System Based Spread Spectrum Techniques,” inInter- national Conference on Autonomous Unmanned Systems, pp. 1421–1431, Springer, 2022. DOI:10.1063/1.4992839

    2022 doi

  92. [102]

    Underwater Communication by Electric Current,

    H. Momma and T. Tsuchiya, “Underwater Communication by Electric Current,” inOCEANS’76, vol. 1, pp. 631–636,

  93. [103]

    Underwater Electric Field Communication,

    T. Esemann, G. Ardelt, and H. Hellbr ¨uck, “Underwater Electric Field Communication,” inProceedings of the 9th International Conference on Underwater Networks & Sys- tems (WUWNet’14), Association for Computing Machin- ery, 2014. DOI:10.1145/2671490.2674561

    2014

  94. [104]

    Evaluation of Underwater IEEE 802.11 Networks at VHF and UHF Frequency Bands using Soft- ware Defined Radios,

    F. Teixeira, J. Santos, L. Pessoa, M. Pereira, R. Campos, and M. Ricardo, “Evaluation of Underwater IEEE 802.11 Networks at VHF and UHF Frequency Bands using Soft- ware Defined Radios,” inProceedings of the 10th Inter- national Conference on Underwater Networks & Systems (WUWN...

  95. [105]

    GNUradio and 802.11: Performance Evaluation and Limitations,

    T. Vilches and D. Dujovne, “GNUradio and 802.11: Performance Evaluation and Limitations,” IEEE Network, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 27–31, 2014. DOI:10.1109/MNET.2014.6915436. 19

    2014

  96. [106]

    An Experi- mental Study of Network Performance Impact of Increased Latency in Software Defined Radios,

    T. Schmid, O. Sekkat, and M. B. Srivastava, “An Experi- mental Study of Network Performance Impact of Increased Latency in Software Defined Radios,” inProceedings of the Second ACM International Workshop on Wireless Network Testbeds, Experimental Evaluation and Characterizatio...

    2007

  97. [107]

    Radio Communication Model for Underwater WSN,

    C. Uribe and W. Grote, “Radio Communication Model for Underwater WSN,” in2009 3rd International Conference on New Technologies, Mobility and Security, pp. 1–5, 2009. DOI:10.1109/NTMS.2009.5384789

    2009

  98. [108]

    Superlensing Enables Radio Communication and Imaging Underwater,

    I. I. Smolyaninov, Q. Balzano, M. Barry, and D. Young, “Superlensing Enables Radio Communication and Imaging Underwater,”Scientific Reports, vol. 13, p. 18333, 2023. DOI:10.1038/s41598-023-45663-6

    2023 doi

  99. [109]

    Transmission of High-Definition Video Signals and Detection of the Ob- jects Underwater Using Surface Electromagnetic Waves,

    I. I. Smolyaninov, Q. Balzano, and M. Barry, “Transmission of High-Definition Video Signals and Detection of the Ob- jects Underwater Using Surface Electromagnetic Waves,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 566–571, 2024. DOI:10.1109/JOE.2023.3335599

    2024

  100. [110]

    Reconfigurable Super-Low-Frequency Magnetoelectric Antenna for Underwater Frequency-Hopping Communica- tion,

    S.-Y . Wang, G.-Q. Dou, D. Yi, S.-M. Feng, and M.-C. Tang, “Reconfigurable Super-Low-Frequency Magnetoelectric Antenna for Underwater Frequency-Hopping Communica- tion,”IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation, vol. 18, no. 12, pp. 911–916, 2024. DOI:10.1049/mia2.12523. 20

    2024 doi

  101. [1976]

    DOI:10.1109/OCEANS.1976.1154306

    1976

  102. [2016]

    DOI:10.3390/s16081335

    doi

  103. [2021]

    DOI:10.30919/esmm5f497

    doi

  104. [2024]

    DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3409424

    2024

Pith tools

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