Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 59 references

Interference in Spectrum-Sharing Integrated Terrestrial and Satellite Networks: Modeling, Approximation, and Robust Transmit Beamforming

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Robust satellite beamforming protects terrestrial users without shared CSI.

desk verdict Useful CSI-free interference model and two sound iterative schemes, but Proposition 3 is false, so the closed-form MMSE bisection is not guaranteed to enforce the interference threshold. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.11851 v1 pith:SIX4J4XH submitted 2025-06-13 eess.SP

Wenjing Cao , Yafei Wang , Tianxiang Ji , Tianyang Cao , Wenjin Wang , Symeon Chatzinotas , Björn Ottersten This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords integratedterrestrialandsatellitenetworksspectrumsharingtransmitbeamformingstatisticalCSIinterferencemitigationMMSEweightedsumratemaximizationposition-aidedapproximation
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

Satellite links sharing sub-6 GHz spectrum with terrestrial networks can be shaped so that they respect a terrestrial interference limit using no instantaneous channel information from the terrestrial side. The paper builds this on a statistical interference model: the satellite-to-terrestrial channel covariance is written as an integral over the terrestrial user distribution and base-station geometry, so only slowly varying statistics and known locations are needed. Three beamformers are derived: an iterative weighted-sum-rate design, a lower-complexity equivalent WMMSE design, and a closed-form MMSE design whose penalty factor is tuned by bisection to meet the threshold. A position-aided approximation replaces the integral by satellite-to-base-station channels, cutting complexity while preserving the interference guarantee in simulation. If correct, this gives spectrum-sharing integrated networks a satellite-only way to keep terrestrial users protected.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the integral-form interference covariance $\Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg}$, defined elementwise in Eq. (13) by summing over terrestrial BSs an integral of the user density $f(r_n,\phi_n)$ times a rank-one steering-vector outer product weighted by free-space path loss. It turns the unknown instantaneous interference channel into a deterministic statistical quantity the beamformer can be optimized against. The optimization is carried by three mechanisms: the multidimensional complex quadratic transformation decoupling SINR ratios in the WSR problem; the WSR-WMMSE equivalence giving a closed-form iterative beamformer through KKT conditions; and the penalty-function reformulation whose scalar $\varsigma$ is found by bisection, giving the fully closed-form MMSE beamformer. The position-aided approximation replaces $\Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg}$ by $\tilde{\Upsilon}_{sg} = \bar K_G E[\tilde H_{sg}\tilde H_{sg}^H]$ built from satellite-to-BS channels, dropping the integral's dependence on real-time user distributions.

What would settle it

Run a Monte Carlo simulation of a multi-cell deployment with base stations away from the sub-satellite point and non-uniform user density, compute $\Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg}$ from the true user positions, then evaluate $\frac{1}{K_G}\mathrm{Tr}(P^H \Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg} P)$ for the beamformer produced with the position-aided $\tilde{\Upsilon}_{sg}$; if this interference exceeds $I_{\mathrm{thr}}$ by more than a small numerical tolerance in a realistic geometry, the paper's approximation guarantee fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that, given only statistical CSI of the satellite channel and the distribution of terrestrial users around base stations, the satellite can solve the interference-constrained transmit beamforming problem without any CSI-sharing protocol. The interference covariance $\Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg}$ in Eq. (13) converts the sum over many terrestrial UTs into an integral of the user density over the coverage disk of each BS, so the constraint $\frac{1}{K_G}\mathrm{Tr}\big(P^H \Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg} P\big) \le I_{\mathrm{thr}}$ has no dependence on instantaneous terrestrial channels. Proposition 2 gives the closed-form solution of the penalized MMSE problem as $P^\star = \beta^\star\big(\Upsilon_{ss} + \varsigma \Upsilon^{\mathrm{int}}_{sg} + \frac{K_S \sigma_s^2}{P_T} I\big)^{-1} \bar H_{ss}$ with $\beta^\star$ set by the power budget, and Proposition 3 shows the interference $I_{sg}(\varsigma)$ is monotone non-increasing in the penalty factor, so a bisection on $\varsigma$ meets the threshold. Proposition 4 analyzes the error of the base-station-position approximation for a single centered BS, showing the error grows with cell radius and user density and shrinks with carrier frequency. The contribution is that the satellite alone, with statistical knowledge only, can carry out interference management that previously required shared CSI.

Load-bearing premise

The weakest point is the modeling premise that the satellite knows the terrestrial user distribution $f(r,\phi)$ and that the channel obeys Rician line-of-sight with free-space path loss; if the true distribution differs, or cells are large enough that the position-aided approximation error is significant, the computed interference can fall below what terrestrial users actually suffer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, a LEO satellite sharing sub-6 GHz spectrum can guarantee a terrestrial interference threshold without any CSI exchange with the terrestrial operator, avoiding protocol overhead and delay.
  • The closed-form MMSE beamformer with bisection-tuned penalty gives a practical low-complexity implementation: the interference constraint at a given SNR is met by a one-dimensional search over $\varsigma$.
  • The position-aided approximation lowers the complexity order from $O(M_S^2 N_G N_r N_\phi)$ to $O(M_S^2 N_G)$, and the paper's simulations show the approximate schemes still satisfy the threshold at 10 dB SNR.
  • The base-station-position approximation performs nearly as well as the integral-based one in the tested settings, so the method can be deployed where user distributions are not tracked in real time.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Going beyond the paper: because Proposition 4 analyzes only one BS at the sub-satellite point under uniform density, the approximation error for off-center or multiple BSs is untested; a conservative designer could add a margin calibrated to the proven growth of $[E_{sg}]_{i,j}$ with cell radius and user density.
  • Going beyond the paper: the monotonicity of $I_{sg}$ in $\varsigma$ suggests the penalty factor could be adapted online using measured aggregate interference feedback, rather than recomputed from the statistical model.
  • Going beyond the paper: the same integral-form covariance could be reused for satellite uplink or terrestrial-BS-side beamforming, since it relies only on geometry and user density rather than instantaneous cross-system channels.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies downlink transmit beamforming from a LEO satellite to satellite user terminals in a spectrum-sharing integrated terrestrial and satellite network, using only statistical CSI and without sharing terrestrial CSI. It models the satellite-to-terrestrial interference as an integral over the terrestrial user distribution, formulates a weighted-sum-rate maximization with an interference threshold and power budget, solves it by a multidimensional complex quadratic transform and by a WMMSE-based iteration, and derives a closed-form MMSE beamformer whose penalty coefficient is tuned by bisection. It also proposes a terrestrial-base-station-position-aided approximation of the integral interference term and analyzes the approximation error for a single BS at the sub-satellite point. Numerical simulations compare the proposed schemes with conventional beamformers.

Significance. The problem is timely, and the sCSI-only interference integral formulation is a useful starting point for interference management without cross-system CSI. The paper is not circular: the penalty coefficient is chosen algorithmically, and no parameters are fitted to results. The WSR/WMMSE iterations and the position-aided approximation are potentially valuable, and the complexity tables make the computational claims concrete. However, the closed-form MMSEIA scheme currently rests on a false monotonicity proposition, so the paper's most distinctive practical claim is not established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix C / Proposition 3 / Eq. (35)] The proof that ∇ς I_sg(ς) ≤ 0 is invalid, and the statement is false. The matrices M and N defined after Eq. (51) are not Hermitian in general, so the von Neumann trace inequality cannot be applied; the subsequent inequality Tr{MN} ≤ Tr{M}Tr{N} is not valid for Hermitian matrices with indefinite eigenvalues. More importantly, the claimed monotonicity fails in a concrete instance of the model: with M_S=2, orthonormal steering vectors v1=[1,1]^T/√2 and v2=[1,-1]^T/√2, K_S=2, Rician factor κ=1, K_Sσ_s²/P_T=1, and in the {v1,v2} basis Υ_ss=diag(2,200), arΥ_ss=diag(1,100), Υ_sg=diag(1,2), the updates (33)–(34) give I_sg(0)/P_T≈1.02, I_sg(10)/P_T≈1.26, and I_sg(50)/P_T≈1.76. Thus I_sg increases with ς, opposite to Proposition 3.
  2. [Algorithm 3 / Section IV-B] Because Proposition 3 is false, the bisection method in Algorithm 3 is not guaranteed to find a penalty coefficient that satisfies I_sg(ς) ≤ I_thr. In the counterexample above, bisection would be applied to a non-monotone function and can converge to a value with interference above the threshold. The paper should either replace the bisection with a provably correct procedure, such as a constrained convex solve of the MMSE problem, or add explicit conditions on Υ_ss, arΥ_ss, and Υ_sg under which monotonicity holds and can be verified.
  3. [Appendix B / Proposition 2 / Eqs. (32)–(34)] The proof establishes only a stationary point of the Lagrangian of problem (32), not global optimality. Problem (32) is not jointly convex in (P,β) because of the 1/β² and 1/β terms, and the reduction to a scalar minimization in ζ does not show convexity of f(ζ). The statement that the given solution 'achieves the optimum' is therefore an overclaim; at most a locally optimal or heuristic closed-form solution is obtained. The authors should either prove global optimality under explicit conditions or reword the claim.
  4. [Section V / Proposition 4 / Eq. (39)] The error analysis covers only a single terrestrial BS located at the sub-satellite point under uniform user density. For the general multi-BS geometry used in the Section VI simulations, no expression or bound for the approximation error is provided, so the claim that the PA schemes nearly meet the interference threshold is supported only by simulation. Please either extend the analysis to the general geometry or clearly state this as a limitation of the theoretical guarantees.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II, Eq. (10)] The symbol 'Rbs' appears as a subscript in several places; use R_bs consistently with the equation formatting.
  2. [Algorithm 3] Step 2 should specify the initial interval for ς, the bisection tolerance, and what to do if no feasible ς exists; currently the procedure is described only in words.
  3. [Section VI, Fig. 7] The caption contains the typo 'convergernce'; it should be 'convergence'.
  4. [Table I] The rows 'Noise Figure F 9 dB' and 'Noise Temperature T 290 K' are ambiguous; clarify whether T is the system noise temperature or the reference temperature in the SNR formula, and how F and T enter the noise power calculation.
  5. [Section III-B] The sentence describing the complexity of Step 6 is grammatically ambiguous and should be split; also, define N_r and N_ϕ before first use.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the beamforming derivations are self-contained optimization arguments, and the bisection over the penalty factor is an algorithmic procedure, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

I found no load-bearing step in which a claimed result reduces by construction to its own input or to a self-citation chain. The integral-form interference model in Eq. (13) is a modeling assumption built from base-station positions and a user distribution; it is an input to the beamforming design, not a quantity predicted from the design. Propositions 1 and 2 are obtained by standard Lagrangian/KKT and normalization arguments for the stated problems, and Proposition 3 is an attempted monotonicity proof of the interference as a function of the penalty factor. Algorithm 3's bisection over ς is a numerical constraint-satisfaction procedure, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Proposition 4 compares two defined quantities, the integral-form term and its base-station-position approximation, and derives error-gradient inequalities; no target result is smuggled into the assumptions. The simulations validate the proposed algorithms using the same statistical model, which is ordinary self-consistency rather than circularity. Several cited works include authors of this paper, but they are used for standard channel modeling, WMMSE equivalence, and background; the central claims do not rest on an unverified self-citation or on an imported uniqueness theorem. Any concern that Proposition 3's proof is technically invalid or that the monotonicity claim is false would be a correctness issue, not a circularity issue.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central design rests on several domain assumptions (Rician LoS channels, known user distribution, known BS positions, negligible BS-to-satellite interference). No new physical entities are introduced. The only fitted or ad hoc parameter is the penalty coefficient ς. The proof of the key monotonicity claim is not sound, which raises the correctness risk.

free parameters (1)
  • Penalty coefficient ς = not fixed; found by bisection for each I_thr and SNR
    Introduced in the MMSE objective (Eq. 32) and tuned to satisfy the interference constraint; Proposition 3 is meant to justify the bisection, but the proof is flawed.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Rician LoS channel model for satellite links
    Assumed in Section II.A for h_ss,k and the satellite-to-terrestrial channel; all interference and rate expressions depend on it.
  • domain assumption Terrestrial interference to satellite UTs is negligible
    Section II.A: satellite switches off coverage over areas with terrestrial connectivity, so BS-to-satellite UT interference is ignored.
  • domain assumption Known terrestrial user distribution f(r,ϕ)
    Required for the integral-form interference model (Eqs. 10-13). The paper later replaces this with BS positions in the PA approximation.
  • domain assumption Known terrestrial BS positions
    Assumed prior knowledge in Section V for the PA approximation.
  • domain assumption LoS terrestrial UTs dominate satellite interference
    Section VI states the focus is on LoS UTs; non-LoS UTs are not modeled.
  • standard math Jensen's inequality lower bound for ergodic sum rate
    Used in Eq. (16) to convert the ergodic rate objective into a tractable lower bound; standard information-theoretic result.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Interference in Spectrum-Sharing Integrated Terrestrial and Satellite Networks: Modeling, Approximation, and Robust Transmit Beamforming." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SIX4J4XH

@misc{pith2026250611851,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Interference in Spectrum-Sharing Integrated Terrestrial and Satellite Networks: Modeling, Approximation, and Robust Transmit Beamforming},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SIX4J4XH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.11851}
}
read the original abstract

This paper investigates robust transmit (TX) beamforming from the satellite to user terminals (UTs), based on statistical channel state information (CSI). The proposed design specifically targets the mitigation of satellite-to-terrestrial interference in spectrum-sharing integrated terrestrial and satellite networks. By leveraging the distribution information of terrestrial UTs, we first establish an interference model from the satellite to terrestrial systems without shared CSI. Based on this, robust TX beamforming schemes are developed under both the interference threshold and the power budget. Two optimization criteria are considered: satellite weighted sum rate maximization and mean square error minimization. The former achieves a superior achievable rate performance through an iterative optimization framework, whereas the latter enables a low-complexity closed-form solution at the expense of reduced rate, with interference constraints satisfied via a bisection method. To avoid complex integral calculations and the dependence on user distribution information in inter-system interference evaluations, we propose a terrestrial base station position-aided approximation method, and the approximation errors are subsequently analyzed. Numerical simulations validate the effectiveness of our proposed schemes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.11851 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The system architecture of the ITSN. A. Channel and Signal Model We consider a satellite equipped with a large-scale uniform planar array (UPA) composed of MS = Mx × My antennas, where Mx and My denote the number of antenna elements along the x-axis and y-axis, respectively. Adopting a ray￾tracing-based channel modeling approach, the space-domain channel vector hss,k (t, f) ∈ CMS×1 for the satellite UT k at time ins… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Approximation of terrestrial UTs with terrestrial BS position. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The MSE between Υint sg and Υ˜ sg vs Rbs, ρtut = 0.0001/m2 . In addition, the simulation results presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Satellite beam patterns (red stars represent satellite UTs and green [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Average interference power, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Satellite sum rate vs SNR, Ithr = −150 dBW. indicating its effectiveness in sustaining capacity. Further￾more, both the ‘WWEIA’ and ‘WQTIA’ schemes outperform ‘MMSE’ and closely approach the performance of ‘WMMSE’. These two iterative algorithms significantly enhance t…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Satellite sum rate vs Ithr, SNR = 10 dB. 10 20 30 40 50 60 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Sum Rate of Satellite (bits/channel use) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Satellite sum rate vs KS, Ithr = −150 dBW, SNR = 10 dB. as KS grows, and when KS ≥ 40, the sum rate of ‘MMSEIA’ approaches a plateau, remaining nearly constant thereafter. Notably, the satellite sum rate performance of ‘MMSEIA’ approaches that of ‘MMSE’, and ‘WWEIA’ a…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Average interference power, Ithr = −150 dBW, SNR = 10 dB. -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 SNR (dB) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Sum Rate of Satellite (bits/channel use) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Satellite sum rate vs SNR, Ithr = −150 dBW. TABLE II COMPLEXITY COMPARISON Scheme Complexity Order WQTIA O [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Radio resource management in future terrestrial-satellite communication networks,

    L. Kuang, X. Chen, C. Jiang, H. Zhang, and S. Wu, “Radio resource management in future terrestrial-satellite communication networks,” IEEE Wirel. Commun., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 81–87, Oct. 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Signal processing for high-throughput satellites: Chal- lenges in new interference-limited scenarios,

    A. I. Perez-Neira, M. A. Vazquez, M. B. Shankar, S. Maleki, and S. Chatzinotas, “Signal processing for high-throughput satellites: Chal- lenges in new interference-limited scenarios,”IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 112–131, Jul. 2019

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    In- terference analysis of the coexistence of 5G cellular networks with satellite earth stations in 3.7-4.2GHz,

    G. Hattab, P. Moorut, E. Visotsky, M. Cudak, and A. Ghosh, “In- terference analysis of the coexistence of 5G cellular networks with satellite earth stations in 3.7-4.2GHz,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops), Jul. 2018, pp. 1–6

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Analysis of interference issues in integrated satellite and terrestrial mobile systems,

    V . Deslandes, J. Tronc, and A.-L. Beylot, “Analysis of interference issues in integrated satellite and terrestrial mobile systems,” inProc. Adv. Satell. Multimedia Syst. Conf. Signal Process. Space Commun. Workshop (ASMS/SPSC), 2010, pp. 256–261

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Broadband hybrid satellite-terrestrial communication systems based on cognitive radio toward 5G,

    M. Jia, X. Gu, Q. Guo, W. Xiang, and N. Zhang, “Broadband hybrid satellite-terrestrial communication systems based on cognitive radio toward 5G,”IEEE Wirel. Commun., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 96–106, Dec. 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    5G cellular and fixed satellite service spectrum coexistence in C-band,

    E. Lagunas, C. G. Tsinos, S. K. Sharma, and S. Chatzinotas, “5G cellular and fixed satellite service spectrum coexistence in C-band,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 72 078–72 094, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    5G embraces satellites for 6G ubiquitous IoT: Basic models for integrated satellite terrestrial networks,

    X. Fang, W. Feng, T. Wei, Y . Chen, N. Ge, and C.-X. Wang, “5G embraces satellites for 6G ubiquitous IoT: Basic models for integrated satellite terrestrial networks,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 18, pp. 14 399–14 417, Sep. 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Hybrid beamforming, user scheduling, and resource allocation for integrated terrestrial-satellite communication,

    D. Peng, A. Bandi, Y . Li, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ottersten, “Hybrid beamforming, user scheduling, and resource allocation for integrated terrestrial-satellite communication,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 8868–8882, Sep. 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Joint two-tier user association and resource management for integrated satellite-terrestrial networks,

    H. Nguyen-Kha, V . Nguyen Ha, E. Lagunas, S. Chatzinotas, and J. Grotz, “Joint two-tier user association and resource management for integrated satellite-terrestrial networks,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 16 648–16 665, Nov. 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Interference mitigation for reverse spectrum sharing in B5G/6G satellite-terrestrial networks,

    H.-W. Lee, C.-C. Chen, C.-I. S. Liao, A. Medles, D. Lin, I.-K. Fu, and H.-Y . Wei, “Interference mitigation for reverse spectrum sharing in B5G/6G satellite-terrestrial networks,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 4247–4263, Mar. 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Integrating terrestrial and satellite multibeam systems toward 6G: Techniques and challenges for interference mitigation,

    D. Peng, D. He, Y . Li, and Z. Wang, “Integrating terrestrial and satellite multibeam systems toward 6G: Techniques and challenges for interference mitigation,”IEEE Wirel. Commun., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 24– 31, Feb. 2022

    2022

  4. [12]

    Hybrid satellite-terrestrial communication networks for the maritime internet of things: Key technologies, opportunities, and challenges,

    T. Wei, W. Feng, Y . Chen, C.-X. Wang, N. Ge, and J. Lu, “Hybrid satellite-terrestrial communication networks for the maritime internet of things: Key technologies, opportunities, and challenges,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 8910–8934, Jun. 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Resource allocation for cognitive satellite communications with incum- bent terrestrial networks,

    E. Lagunas, S. K. Sharma, S. Maleki, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ottersten, “Resource allocation for cognitive satellite communications with incum- bent terrestrial networks,”IEEE Trans. Cogn. Commun. Netw., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 305–317, Sep. 2015

    2015

  6. [14]

    Power control for satellite uplink and terrestrial fixed-service co-existence in Ka-band,

    Lagunas, Eva and Sharma, Shree Krishna and Maleki, Sina and Chatzinotas, Symeon and Ottersten, Bjorn, “Power control for satellite uplink and terrestrial fixed-service co-existence in Ka-band,” inProc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC2015-Fall), Sep. 2015, pp. 1–5

    2015

  7. [15]

    SANSAhybrid terrestrialsatellite backhaul network: scenarios, use cases, KPIs, architecture, network and physical layer techniques,

    G. Ziaragkas, G. Poziopoulou, J. Nez-Martnez, J. Baranda, I. Moreno, C. Tsinos, S. Maleki, S. K. Sharma, M. Alodeh, and S. Chatzino- tas, “SANSAhybrid terrestrialsatellite backhaul network: scenarios, use cases, KPIs, architecture, network and physical layer techniques,”Int. J...

    2017

  8. [16]

    Carrier allocation for hybrid satellite-terrestrial backhaul net- works,

    E. Lagunas, S. Maleki, L. Lei, C. Tsinos, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ot- tersten, “Carrier allocation for hybrid satellite-terrestrial backhaul net- works,” inIEEE Int. Conf. Commun. Workshops (ICC Workshops), Jun. 2017, pp. 718–723

    2017

  9. [17]

    Multimedia multicast beamforming in integrated terrestrial-satellite networks,

    C. Jiang, X. Zhu, L. Kuang, Y . Qian, and J. Lu, “Multimedia multicast beamforming in integrated terrestrial-satellite networks,” inIEEE Int. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. Conf., (IWCMC), Jun. 2017, pp. 340– 345

    2017

  10. [18]

    Spectrum sharing for coexistence of fixed satellite services and frequency hopping tactical data link,

    H. Baek and J. Lim, “Spectrum sharing for coexistence of fixed satellite services and frequency hopping tactical data link,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 2642–2649, Oct. 2016

    2016

  11. [19]

    Outage perfor- mance of cognitive hybrid satellite-terrestrial networks with interference constraint,

    K. An, M. Lin, W.-P. Zhu, Y . Huang, and G. Zheng, “Outage perfor- mance of cognitive hybrid satellite-terrestrial networks with interference constraint,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 9397–9404, Nov. 2016

    2016

  12. [20]

    Massive MIMO transmission for LEO satellite communications,

    L. You, K.-X. Li, J. Wang, X. Gao, X.-G. Xia, and B. Ottersten, “Massive MIMO transmission for LEO satellite communications,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 1851–1865, Aug. 2020

    2020

  13. [21]

    Chal- lenges of using the L-band and S-band for direct-to-cellular satellite 5G-6G NTN systems,

    A. Pastukh, V . Tikhvinskiy, S. S. Dymkova, and O. V . Varlamov, “Chal- lenges of using the L-band and S-band for direct-to-cellular satellite 5G-6G NTN systems,”Technologies, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    MIMO satellite communication systems: A survey from the PHY layer perspective,

    J. Heo, S. Sung, H. Lee, I. Hwang, and D. Hong, “MIMO satellite communication systems: A survey from the PHY layer perspective,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1543–1570, 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Onboard beam generation for multibeam satellite systems,

    V . Joroughi, M. . Vzquez, A. I. Prez-Neira, and B. Devillers, “Onboard beam generation for multibeam satellite systems,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 3714–3726, Jun. 2017. 13

    2017

  16. [24]

    Precoding for high- throughput satellite communication systems: A survey,

    M. Khammassi, A. Kammoun, and M.-S. Alouini, “Precoding for high- throughput satellite communication systems: A survey,”IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 80–118, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Inte- grating terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks: 3D opportunities and challenges,

    G. Geraci, D. Lpez-Prez, M. Benzaghta, and S. Chatzinotas, “Inte- grating terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks: 3D opportunities and challenges,”IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 42–48, Apr. 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    A vision, survey, and roadmap toward space commu- nications in the 6G and beyond era,

    K. Ntontin, E. Lagunas, J. Querol, J. u. Rehman, J. Grotz, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ottersten, “A vision, survey, and roadmap toward space commu- nications in the 6G and beyond era,”Proc. IEEE, pp. 1–37, 2025

    2025

  19. [27]

    Satellite swarm-based antenna arrays for 6G direct-to-cell connectivity,

    D. Tuzi, T. Delamotte, and A. Knopp, “Satellite swarm-based antenna arrays for 6G direct-to-cell connectivity,”IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 36 907–36 928, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Optimality of zero-forcing beamforming with multiuser diversity,

    T. Yoo and A. Goldsmith, “Optimality of zero-forcing beamforming with multiuser diversity,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. (ICC), vol. 1, May 2005, pp. 542–546

    2005

  21. [29]

    A vector-perturbation technique for near-capacity multiantenna multiuser communication-part I: Channel inversion and regularization,

    C. Peel, B. Hochwald, and A. Swindlehurst, “A vector-perturbation technique for near-capacity multiantenna multiuser communication-part I: Channel inversion and regularization,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 195–202, Jan. 2005

    2005

  22. [30]

    Weighted sum-rate maximization using weighted MMSE for MIMO- BC beamforming design,

    S. S. Christensen, R. Agarwal, E. De Carvalho, and J. M. Cioffi, “Weighted sum-rate maximization using weighted MMSE for MIMO- BC beamforming design,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 4792–4799, Dec. 2008

    2008

  23. [31]

    Towards unified AI models for MU-MIMO communications: A tensor equivariance framework,

    Y . Wang, H. Hou, X. Yi, W. Wang, and S. Jin, “Towards unified AI models for MU-MIMO communications: A tensor equivariance framework,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09022, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.09022

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Energy and computational efficient precoding for LEO satellite communications,

    S. Wu, Y . Wang, G. Sun, L. You, W. Wang, and R. Ding, “Energy and computational efficient precoding for LEO satellite communications,” in Proc. IEEE Glob. Commun. Conf (GLOBECOM), Dec. 2023, pp. 1872– 1877

    2023

  25. [33]

    Optimal multiuser transmit beamforming: A difficult problem with a simple solution structure,

    E. Bjrnson, M. Bengtsson, and B. Ottersten, “Optimal multiuser transmit beamforming: A difficult problem with a simple solution structure,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 142–148, Jul. 2014

    2014

  26. [34]

    Robust downlink precoding for LEO satellite systems with per-antenna power constraints,

    Y . Liu, Y . Wang, J. Wang, L. You, W. Wang, and X. Gao, “Robust downlink precoding for LEO satellite systems with per-antenna power constraints,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 10 694– 10 711, Oct. 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    Joint beamformer design and user scheduling for integrated terrestrial-satellite networks,

    H. Dong, C. Hua, L. Liu, W. Xu, S. Guo, and R. Tafazolli, “Joint beamformer design and user scheduling for integrated terrestrial-satellite networks,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 6398– 6414, Oct. 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Downlink beam- forming scheme for hybrid satellite-terrestrial networks,

    Y . Jiang, J. Ouyang, C. Yin, Z. Xu, X. Tao, and L. Lou, “Downlink beam- forming scheme for hybrid satellite-terrestrial networks,”IET Commun., vol. 12, no. 18, p. 23422346, Oct. 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    Transmit beamforming for spectral coexistence of satellite and terrestrial networks,

    S. K. Sharma, S. Chatzinotas, and B. Ottersten, “Transmit beamforming for spectral coexistence of satellite and terrestrial networks,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Cognitive Radio Oriented Wirel. Networks Commun., (CROWNCOM), Jul. 2013, pp. 275–281

    2013

  30. [38]

    Joint beamforming for integrated mmwave satellite-terrestrial self-backhauled networks,

    Q. Wang, H. Zhang, J.-B. Wang, F. Yang, and G. Y . Li, “Joint beamforming for integrated mmwave satellite-terrestrial self-backhauled networks,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 9103–9117, Sep. 2021

    2021

  31. [39]

    Joint beamforming design and resource allocation for terrestrial-satellite cooperation system,

    Y . Zhang, L. Yin, C. Jiang, and Y . Qian, “Joint beamforming design and resource allocation for terrestrial-satellite cooperation system,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 778–791, Feb. 2020

    2020

  32. [40]

    Multicast beamforming optimization in cloud-based heterogeneous terrestrial and satellite networks,

    H. Zhang, C. Jiang, J. Wang, L. Wang, Y . Ren, and L. Hanzo, “Multicast beamforming optimization in cloud-based heterogeneous terrestrial and satellite networks,”IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 1766– 1776, Feb. 2020

    2020

  33. [41]

    Optimal beam- forming for hybrid satellite terrestrial networks with nonlinear PA and imperfect CSIT,

    C. Liu, W. Feng, Y . Chen, C.-X. Wang, and N. Ge, “Optimal beam- forming for hybrid satellite terrestrial networks with nonlinear PA and imperfect CSIT,”IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 276– 280, Mar. 2020

    2020

  34. [42]

    Hybrid analog digital transmit beamforming for spectrum sharing backhaul networks,

    M. A. Vzquez, L. Blanco, and A. I. Prez-Neira, “Hybrid analog digital transmit beamforming for spectrum sharing backhaul networks,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 2273–2285, May 2018

    2018

  35. [43]

    Cooperative multigroup multicast transmission in integrated terrestrial-satellite net- works,

    X. Zhu, C. Jiang, L. Yin, L. Kuang, N. Ge, and J. Lu, “Cooperative multigroup multicast transmission in integrated terrestrial-satellite net- works,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 981–992, May 2018

    2018

  36. [44]

    Distributed precoding for satellite-terrestrial integrated networks without sharing CSIT: A rate- splitting approach,

    D. Kim, S. Cho, W. Shin, J. Park, and D. K. Kim, “Distributed precoding for satellite-terrestrial integrated networks without sharing CSIT: A rate- splitting approach,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., 2025

    2025

  37. [45]

    Study on new radio (NR) to support non-terrestrial networks,

    3GPP, “Study on new radio (NR) to support non-terrestrial networks,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project, Tech. Rep. TR 38.811, Sep. 2020

    2020

  38. [46]

    Low- complexity user scheduling for LEO satellite communications,

    S. Wu, G. Sun, Y . Wang, L. You, W. Wang, and R. Ding, “Low- complexity user scheduling for LEO satellite communications,”IET Commun., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 1368–1383, May 2023

    2023

  39. [47]

    Channel prediction in high-mobility massive MIMO: From spatio-temporal autoregression to deep learning,

    C. Wu, X. Yi, Y . Zhu, W. Wang, L. You, and X. Gao, “Channel prediction in high-mobility massive MIMO: From spatio-temporal autoregression to deep learning,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 1915–1930, Jul. 2021

    1915

  40. [48]

    Capacity of the multiple spot beam satellite channel with rician fading,

    N. Letzepis and A. J. Grant, “Capacity of the multiple spot beam satellite channel with rician fading,”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 5210–5222, Nov. 2008

    2008

  41. [49]

    Solutions for NR to support non-terrestrial networks (NTN): Non-terrestrial networks (NTN) related RF and co-existence aspects,

    3GPP, “Solutions for NR to support non-terrestrial networks (NTN): Non-terrestrial networks (NTN) related RF and co-existence aspects,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project, Tech. Rep. TR 38.863, Mar. 2025

    2025

  42. [50]

    Satellite Space Stations: Application to Launch and Operate,

    Federal Communications Commission (FCC), “Satellite Space Stations: Application to Launch and Operate,” FCC.report. https://fcc.report/IBFS/ Filing-List/SAT-LOA (accessed: Apr. 17, 2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Near optimal timing and frequency offset estimation for 5G integrated LEO satellite communication system,

    W. Wang, Y . Tong, L. Li, A.-A. Lu, L. You, and X. Gao, “Near optimal timing and frequency offset estimation for 5G integrated LEO satellite communication system,”IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 113 298–113 310, 2019

    2019

  44. [52]

    Robust WMMSE precoder with deep learning design for massive MIMO,

    J. Shi, A.-A. Lu, W. Zhong, X. Gao, and G. Y . Li, “Robust WMMSE precoder with deep learning design for massive MIMO,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 3963–3976, Jul. 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    Fractional programming for communication systemspart I: Power control and beamforming,

    K. Shen and W. Yu, “Fractional programming for communication systemspart I: Power control and beamforming,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2616–2630, May 2018

    2018

  46. [54]

    A trust-region interior-point method for nonlinear programming,

    M. Villalobos and Y . Zhang, “A trust-region interior-point method for nonlinear programming,” inTAPIA - Richard Tapia Celebr. Diversity Comput. Conf., Oct. 2005, pp. 7–9

    2005

  47. [55]

    Massive MIMO downlink transmission for multiple LEO satellite communication,

    Z. Xiang, X. Gao, K.-X. Li, and X.-G. Xia, “Massive MIMO downlink transmission for multiple LEO satellite communication,”IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 3352–3364, Jun. 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    An iteratively weighted MMSE approach to distributed sum-utility maximization for a MIMO interfering broadcast channel,

    Q. Shi, M. Razaviyayn, Z.-Q. Luo, and C. He, “An iteratively weighted MMSE approach to distributed sum-utility maximization for a MIMO interfering broadcast channel,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 59, no. 9, pp. 4331–4340, Sep. 2011

    2011

  49. [57]

    Channel estimation for LEO satellite massive MIMO OFDM communications,

    K.-X. Li, X. Gao, and X.-G. Xia, “Channel estimation for LEO satellite massive MIMO OFDM communications,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Com- mun., vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 7537–7550, Nov. 2023

    2023

  50. [58]

    A tensor-structured approach to dynamic channel prediction for massive MIMO systems with temporal non-stationarity,

    H. Hou, Y . Wang, Y . Zhu, X. Yi, W. Wang, D. T. M. Slock, and S. Jin, “A tensor-structured approach to dynamic channel prediction for massive MIMO systems with temporal non-stationarity,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.06713, 2024. [Online]. Available: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2412.06713

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Penalty function-based precoding for down- link multiuser MIMO systems,

    K.-J. Wang and X. Zhang, “Penalty function-based precoding for down- link multiuser MIMO systems,”AEU Int. J. Electron. Commun., vol. 67, pp. 167–173, Feb. 2013

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.