Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 29 references

A Multi-Scale Feature Extraction and Fusion UNet for Pathloss Prediction in UAV-Assisted mmWave Radio Networks

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A multi-scale UNet with an ASPP bottleneck predicts UAV-assisted mmWave pathloss maps more accurately than existing baselines, with RMSE of 3.15 dB on an in-house dataset and 3.97 dB on a public benchmark, while staying robust across cities

desk verdict Useful engineering paper with a new dataset and fast LOS algorithm, but the RadioUNet comparison is confounded by unequal input channels. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.09606 v1 pith:HWJ77J4F submitted 2025-09-11 eess.SP

Sajjad Hussain This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords UAVcommunicationsmmWavepropagationpathlosspredictiondeeplearningUNetASPPLOSestimationraytracing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes a deep learning architecture for predicting pathloss maps in UAV-assisted millimeter-wave networks. The model, built on UNet, combines multi-scale convolutional feature extraction with an atrous spatial pyramid pooling bottleneck to capture both local and global propagation patterns. Using three input channels—log-distance, line-of-sight mask, and building mask—the model is shown to outperform classical machine learning, empirical models, and a standard UNet baseline on both a new ray-traced dataset (28 GHz) and the public RadioMapSeer benchmark (5.9 GHz). The paper also claims strong cross-city generalization, altitude invariance, and resilience to distance noise, while introducing a vectorized LOS mask algorithm that speeds up data preprocessing.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a multi-scale feature extraction and fusion block: each encoder stage runs parallel convolutions with different kernel sizes (1x1, 3x3, 5x5, and 7x7 in the first stage), concatenates the outputs, and fuses them with a 1x1 convolution. The bottleneck uses an ASPP module with dilated convolutions (rates 1, 2, 4) plus a global average pooling branch to aggregate context across multiple receptive fields. A second component is a fully vectorized LOS mask computation algorithm that filters wall-facing geometry and performs 3D intersection tests using tensor broadcasting, enabling fast generation of training labels.

What would settle it

Retrain the strongest baseline (the 3-channel UNet) with the same three input channels as the proposed model—log-distance map, LOS mask, and building mask—on the identical train/test split. If its RMSE drops to 3.15 dB or below on the in-house dataset, or close to 3.97 dB on RadioMapSeer, then the architecture's claimed advantage is not isolated from input engineering.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that its proposed UNet variant, which uses multi-branch convolutions (1x1, 3x3, 5x5, and a 7x7 in the first stage) fused by 1x1 convolutions and an ASPP bottleneck, achieves the best pathloss prediction accuracy among all compared methods. On the in-house ray-traced dataset of five urban environments, it reports RMSE of 3.15 dB, MAE of 2.37 dB, and NMSE of 0.00049; on RadioMapSeer it reports the lowest RMSE of 3.97 dB, MAE of 2.03 dB, and NMSE of 0.0011. The model also maintains RMSE between 3.16 and 3.53 dB when trained on four cities and tested on a held-out city, and stays between 3.17 and 3.28 dB across UAV altitudes of 25, 35, and 45 m. These results are attributed to t

Load-bearing premise

The reported superiority over the UNet baseline assumes that the comparison isolates architecture quality, but the proposed model receives additional high-information inputs (log-distance map and LOS mask) that the baseline does not get; if the baseline were given the same channels, the accuracy gap might shrink or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the model's claimed accuracy holds, UAV-assisted mmWave network planning could switch from computationally heavy ray tracing to sub-second deep-learning predictions, making real-time deployment feasible.
  • Cross-city generalization of roughly 3.2 to 3.5 dB RMSE suggests a single trained model might be reused across urban environments without per-city retraining, reducing data collection costs.
  • The tight RMSE range across UAV altitudes (3.17 to 3.28 dB) implies the model could support altitude-varying missions without needing altitude-specific models.
  • The vectorized LOS mask algorithm could accelerate generation of large synthetic datasets for other radio map learning tasks, lowering the barrier to training data creation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported gains may partly stem from input information rather than architecture alone: the proposed model receives a log-distance map and a line-of-sight mask, while the primary baseline receives only transmitter/building masks or sparse measurements. Giving the baseline the same inputs could narrow the performance gap.
  • Altitude invariance may be a byproduct of using 3D distance and LOS masks as inputs, since these already encode transmitter height through geometry; the architecture may not need to learn altitude as a separate factor.
  • A testable extension is to apply the same architecture and inputs to other frequencies (e.g., sub-6 GHz) or to predict additional channel quantities like delay spread or angle of arrival, which would test whether the learned spatial features generalize beyond pathloss.
  • The vectorized LOS algorithm could be reused in other visibility or ray-tracing preprocessing pipelines, independent of the neural network, as a standalone tool.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a UNet-based architecture for UAV-to-ground millimeter-wave pathloss prediction. The model consumes three 128×128 input channels (log-distance map, binary LOS mask, building occupancy mask) and uses multi-branch encoder blocks with parallel convolutions, an ASPP bottleneck, and transposed-convolution decoding. The authors generate an in-house 28 GHz ray-tracing dataset over five urban sites at three UAV altitudes and four transmitter positions each, using a CI-pathloss fallback for NLOS receivers, and they also evaluate on the RadioMapSeer benchmark at 5.9 GHz. They report lower RMSE/MAE/NMSE than classical ML, empirical, and RadioUNet baselines, along with cross-city generalization, altitude robustness, and noise-sensitivity results. A vectorized LOS estimation algorithm and a public code release are also presented.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper would make several useful contributions to radio-map prediction for UAV communications: a public codebase, a vectorized LOS mask computation that substantially accelerates preprocessing, a large synthetic ray-tracing dataset, and a systematic evaluation across cities, altitudes, and input perturbations. The multi-scale encoder plus ASPP design is plausible, and the release of reproducible training/evaluation scripts is a clear strength. However, the headline claim of outperforming RadioUNet is not yet established because the comparison does not hold input information constant, and the altitude and noise experiments have methodological issues. The underlying framework is sound enough that targeted additional experiments could validate the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [6.1.3, Table 6] The comparison with RadioUNet is confounded by input channels. The proposed model receives a log-distance map and an LOS mask, which directly encode free-space attenuation and shadow regions; RadioUNet receives only transmitter/building masks (2-channel) or those plus 300 sparse pathloss measurements (3-channel). The RMSE gap (3.15 vs 4.59 dB on the in-house set; 3.97 vs 4.23 dB on RadioMapSeer) may therefore reflect an information advantage rather than the proposed multi-scale/ASPP architecture. To support the 'outperforms all baselines' claim, the authors should train RadioUNet with the same three input channels, or ablate the proposed model to the RadioUNet input representation, so that the comparison isolates architecture.
  2. [6.3, Table 8] The altitude-robustness experiment does not test altitude invariance. The text states that 'we train three separate instances of our model for each altitude,' so each model only ever sees one transmitter altitude. The tight RMSE range (3.17–3.28 dB) shows that altitude-specific models achieve similar accuracy, but it does not show that a single model is insensitive to altitude. Please train one model on all altitudes and evaluate per altitude, and/or perform cross-altitude transfer (e.g., train at 25 m and test at 45 m), before claiming the architecture is altitude-invariant.
  3. [6.4, Table 9] The distance-noise rows are identical across perturbation levels: Dist. Noise (Near) gives RMSE=3.18, MAE=2.39, NMSE=0.000499 for 1%, 5%, and 10%; Dist. Noise (Far) gives the same RMSE=3.17, MAE=2.38, NMSE=0.000498 for all three levels. This is implausible if the described Gaussian perturbation is actually applied, and it suggests either that the noise is not reaching the model, that the same affected receivers are reused, or that the metrics are rounded beyond meaningful precision. The authors must re-run this experiment and report the actual variation across noise levels; otherwise the noise-robustness conclusion is not supported.
  4. [5.1, Table 6] The in-house test set uses only one held-out transmitter per city (15 test scenarios). A single transmitter location per environment is a thin basis for the main accuracy claim and for the comparison with RadioUNet, since results could depend on the particular choice of that transmitter. The cross-city protocol in Table 7 is stronger, but the main benchmark should either use multiple random held-out transmitters or repeated splits to quantify variance and demonstrate that the reported gains are stable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [5.2] For RadioMapSeer, LOS masks are generated using the proposed vectorized algorithm, but the paper does not explain how wall heights for these environments are obtained. Since the algorithm requires 3D walls, this is a reproducibility gap; please specify the data source and any assumptions.
  2. [6.5, Table 10] The throughput units are inconsistent: 'one test sample' is described as one row of input features, but the computation uses 15×6×128×128 spatial samples. Please report throughput in patches/s or in pixels/s consistently, and align the MLP comparison with the CNN input format.
  3. [References] Reference [15] appears garbled: 'M. A. I. F. Takawira, F. Tariq and A. Imran' for DeepREM does not match the actual author list. Please correct.
  4. [6.3] The term 'altitude-invariant' is too strong for the presented evidence; 'consistent performance across altitude-specific models' would be more accurate. This is related to the design issue in the second major comment.
  5. [2.2] The CI fallback uses n=3.0 and σ=6.8 dB from prior literature; this is a reasonable choice, but it means the labels are partially synthetic. A brief sentence acknowledging that this fallback may increase the apparent learnability of the maps would strengthen the discussion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the pathloss predictions are learned from data, not definitionally equivalent to the input channels.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a standard supervised-learning pipeline: a CNN maps three spatial channels (log-distance, LOS mask, building mask) to a normalized pathloss map, trained with RMSE loss on ray-traced ground truth and evaluated on held-out transmitters/cities and on the external RadioMapSeer benchmark. No reported result is defined by its input: the target pathloss maps are generated by an independent ray-tracing/CI procedure, not by the network's input algebraically, and the network must learn the nonlinear mapping. The CI fallback parameters (n=3, sigma=6.8) are taken from external 3GPP-style literature ([24]), not fitted to the model's predictions. Self-citations to the author's prior ray-tracing tools ([20]-[22]) are load-bearing for dataset generation but are code-released and described mechanistically, so they constitute independent support rather than a circularity. The two notable weaknesses are experimental, not circular: (1) the RadioUNet baseline in Table 6 receives different input channels (transmitter/building masks and optional sparse measurements) than the proposed model (log-distance, LOS mask, building mask), so the performance gap may reflect information content rather than architecture; (2) Table 9's distance-noise rows are unchanged across 1%, 5%, and 10% noise, which is anomalous. Neither involves a prediction reducing to its inputs by construction. Hence score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on the accuracy of a simulated dataset and on the input features provided to the model. The free parameters listed are hand-chosen modeling and training choices; the axioms are domain assumptions about the simulator, the CI fallback, and the LOS algorithm.

free parameters (7)
  • CI pathloss exponent n = 3.0
    Used in Eq. (1) for NLOS fallback; taken from [24], not fitted here, but a hand-chosen modeling input that shapes the target labels.
  • CI shadow fading sigma = 6.8 dB
    Random component injected into NLOS targets, making the ground truth partly stochastic; chosen from [24].
  • Building entry loss = ITU-R P.2109 model
    Applied to indoor receivers to adjust pathloss; external standard, not fitted, but an arbitrary modeling choice.
  • Patch extraction strategy = 18 structured + 82 random patches per scenario
    Hand-crafted data augmentation; choices affect train/test distribution.
  • Encoder filter counts = Table 3 (e.g., ENC-1: 32/32/32/32/64)
    Architecture hyperparameters chosen by hand, not optimized.
  • ASPP dilation rates = 1, 2, 4
    Hand-selected receptive field sizes.
  • Training hyperparameters = lr=1e-4, epochs=40, batch=16, Adam
    Standard choices, not tuned systematically.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The in-house ray-tracing simulator produces physically accurate pathloss including LOS, specular/ground reflections, and diffuse scattering.
    Section 2.1; the entire dataset and all evaluations rest on this simulator.
  • domain assumption The CI model with n=3.0 and sigma=6.8 dB is a valid fallback for NLOS pathloss.
    Section 2.2, Eq. (1); used to fill in NLOS values where ray tracing fails.
  • ad hoc to paper The vectorized LOS algorithm correctly identifies all obstructing walls via the facing-wall filter and 3D intersection check.
    Section 4; no proof of correctness or validation against exact geometry; the filter assumes any occluder faces the transmitter.
  • domain assumption ITU-R P.2109 building entry loss is applicable to these urban environments.
    Section 2.2; external standard applied without local validation.
  • domain assumption RadioMapSeer IRT-4 subset provides valid LOS masks via the proposed algorithm.
    Section 5.2; LOS masks generated for benchmark data are assumed accurate.
  • standard math Standard mathematical operations in the LOS algorithm (line-segment intersection, dot-product visibility) are correctly implemented.
    Section 4; no formal proof, but standard geometry.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Multi-Scale Feature Extraction and Fusion UNet for Pathloss Prediction in UAV-Assisted mmWave Radio Networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HWJ77J4F

@misc{pith2026250909606,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Multi-Scale Feature Extraction and Fusion UNet for Pathloss Prediction in UAV-Assisted mmWave Radio Networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HWJ77J4F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.09606}
}
read the original abstract

Accurate pathloss prediction is essential for the design and optimization of UAV-assisted millimeter-wave (mmWave) networks. While deep learning approaches have shown strong potential, their generalization across diverse environments, robustness to noisy inputs, and sensitivity to UAV altitude remain underexplored. To address these challenges, we propose a UNet-based deep learning architecture that combines multi-scale feature extraction, convolution-based feature fusion, and an atrous spatial pyramid pooling (ASPP) bottleneck for efficient context aggregation. The model predicts pathloss maps from log-distance, line-of-sight (LOS) mask, and building mask inputs. In addition, we develop a fully vectorized LOS mask computation algorithm that significantly accelerates pre-processing and enables large-scale dataset generation. Extensive evaluations on both in-house ray-tracing data and the RadioMapSeer benchmark demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms several state-of-the-art baselines in accuracy and efficiency. All source code is publicly released to support reproducibility and future research.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09606 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top-down views of the urban environments used for dataset generation: (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Multi-branch feature extraction and fusion block in the encoder. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Proposed U-Net architecture with encoder–decoder stages, MaxPooling, skip [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Predicted pathloss maps for a test environment in Munich-02. (a) Ground [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    6g wireless systems: Vision, requirements, challenges, insights, and opportunities,

    H. Tataria, M. Shafi, A. F. Molisch, M. Dohler, H. Sj¨ oland, and F. Tufvesson, “6g wireless systems: Vision, requirements, challenges, insights, and opportunities,”Pro- ceedings of the IEEE, vol. 109, no. 7, pp. 1166–1199, 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Uav communications for 5g and beyond: Recent advances and future trends,

    B. Li, Z. Fei, and Y. Zhang, “Uav communications for 5g and beyond: Recent advances and future trends,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 2241–2263, 2018

    2018

  3. [3]

    A survey on channel sounding technologies and measurements for uav-assisted communications,

    K. Mao, Q. Zhu, C.-X. Wang, X. Ye, J. Gomez-Ponce, X. Cai, Y. Miao, Z. Cui, Q. Wu, and W. Fan, “A survey on channel sounding technologies and measurements for uav-assisted communications,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Mea- surement, 2024

    2024

  4. [4]

    A comprehensive survey on uav communi- cation channel modeling,

    C. Yan, L. Fu, J. Zhang, and J. Wang, “A comprehensive survey on uav communi- cation channel modeling,”IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 107 769–107 792, 2019

    2019

  5. [5]

    Impact of 3-D antenna radiation pattern in UA V Air-to-Ground path loss modeling and RSRP-Based localization in rural area,

    S. J. Maeng, H. Kwon, O. Ozdemir, and I. Guvenc, “Impact of 3-D antenna radiation pattern in UA V Air-to-Ground path loss modeling and RSRP-Based localization in rural area,”IEEE Open Journal of Antennas and Propagation, vol. 4, pp. 1029–1043, 2023

    2023

  6. [6]

    Air-to-Ground large-scale channel characterization by ray tracing,

    M. Song, Y. Huo, Z. Liang, X. Dong, and T. Lu, “Air-to-Ground large-scale channel characterization by ray tracing,”IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 125 930–125 941, 2022. 22

    2022

  7. [7]

    A 3-D geometry-based stochastic model for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle MIMO ricean fading channels,

    X. Cheng, Y. Li, C.-X. Wang, X. Yin, and D. W. Matolak, “A 3-D geometry-based stochastic model for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle MIMO ricean fading channels,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 8674–8687, 2020

    2020

  8. [8]

    Machine-learning-based pre- diction methods for path loss and delay spread in air-to-ground millimetre-wave channels,

    G. Yang, Y. Zhang, Z. He, J. Wen, Z. Ji, and Y. Li, “Machine-learning-based pre- diction methods for path loss and delay spread in air-to-ground millimetre-wave channels,”IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1113–1121, Apr. 2019

    2019

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    Air-to- ground path loss prediction using ray tracing and measurement data jointly driven DNN,

    H. Li, X. Chen, K. Mao, Q. Zhu, Y. Qiu, X. Ye, W. Zhong, and Z. Lin, “Air-to- ground path loss prediction using ray tracing and measurement data jointly driven DNN,”Computer Communications, vol. 196, pp. 268–276, 2022

    2022

  2. [10]

    An artificial intelligence ra- dio propagation model based on geographical information,

    H. Zhang, J. Dong, X. Liu, J. Liu, and X. Zhang, “An artificial intelligence ra- dio propagation model based on geographical information,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 12 049–12 060, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Interpretable AI-based large- scale 3D pathloss prediction model for enabling emerging self-driving networks,

    U. Masood, H. Farooq, A. Imran, and A. Abu-Dayya, “Interpretable AI-based large- scale 3D pathloss prediction model for enabling emerging self-driving networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 3967–3984, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Evolutionary ensemble learning pathloss prediction for 4G and 5G flying base stations with UA Vs,

    S. P. Sotiroudis, G. Athanasiadou, G. Tsoulos, P. Sarigiannidis, C. G. Christodoulou, and S. K. Goudos, “Evolutionary ensemble learning pathloss prediction for 4G and 5G flying base stations with UA Vs,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propaga- tion, vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 5994–...

    2023

  5. [13]

    Ge- ometrical features based-mmwave uav path loss prediction using machine learning for 5g and beyond,

    S. Hussain, S. F. N. Bacha, A. A. Cheema, B. Canberk, and T. Q. Duong, “Ge- ometrical features based-mmwave uav path loss prediction using machine learning for 5g and beyond,”IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 5, pp. 5667–5679, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Radiounet: Fast radio map esti- mation with convolutional neural networks,

    R. Levie, C ¸ . Yapar, G. Kutyniok, and G. Caire, “Radiounet: Fast radio map esti- mation with convolutional neural networks,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Com- munications, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 4001–4015, 2021

    2021

  7. [15]

    Deeprem: Deep-learning-based radio environment map estimation from sparse measurements,

    M. A. I. F. Takawira, F. Tariq and A. Imran, “Deeprem: Deep-learning-based radio environment map estimation from sparse measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 71, no. 10, pp. 11 096–11 110, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Pmnet: Robust pathloss map prediction via supervised learning,

    J.-H. Lee, O. G. Serbetci, D. P. Selvam, and A. F. Molisch, “Pmnet: Robust pathloss map prediction via supervised learning,” inGLOBECOM 2023 - 2023 IEEE Global Communications Conference, 2023, pp. 4601–4606

    2023

  9. [17]

    A scalable and generalizable pathloss map prediction,

    J.-H. Lee and A. F. Molisch, “A scalable and generalizable pathloss map prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 17 793–17 806, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Physics-informed neural networks for path loss estimation by solving electromagnetic integral equations,

    F. Jiang, T. Li, X. Lv, H. Rui, and D. Jin, “Physics-informed neural networks for path loss estimation by solving electromagnetic integral equations,”IEEE Transac- tions on Wireless Communications, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2024. 23

    2024

  11. [19]

    Radioformer: A multiple-granularity radio map estimation transformer with 1% spatial sampling,

    Z. Fang, K. Liu, K. Chen, Q. Liu, J. Zhang, L. Song, and Y. Wang, “Radioformer: A multiple-granularity radio map estimation transformer with 1% spatial sampling,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.19161, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Efficient preprocessed ray tracing for 5G mobile trans- mitter scenarios in urban microcellular environments,

    S. Hussain and C. Brennan, “Efficient preprocessed ray tracing for 5G mobile trans- mitter scenarios in urban microcellular environments,”IEEE Transactions on An- tennas and Propagation, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 3323–3333, 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    A dynamic visibility algorithm for ray tracing in out- door environments with moving transmitters and scatterers,

    S. Hussain. and C. Brennan, “A dynamic visibility algorithm for ray tracing in out- door environments with moving transmitters and scatterers,” in2020 14th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), 2020, pp. 1–5

    2020

  14. [22]

    A visibility matching technique for efficient millimeter- wave vehicular channel modeling,

    S. Hussain and C. Brennan, “A visibility matching technique for efficient millimeter- wave vehicular channel modeling,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propaga- tion, vol. 70, no. 10, pp. 9977–9982, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Measurement and modelling of scattering from buildings,

    V. Degli-Esposti, F. Fuschini, E. M. Vitucci, and G. Falciasecca, “Measurement and modelling of scattering from buildings,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 143–153, 2007

    2007

  16. [24]

    5g 3gpp-like channel models for outdoor urban microcellular and macrocellular environments,

    K. Haneda, J. Zhang, L. Tan, G. Liu, Y. Zheng, H. Asplund, J. Li, Y. Wang, D. Steer, C. Liet al., “5g 3gpp-like channel models for outdoor urban microcellular and macrocellular environments,” in2016 IEEE 83rd vehicular technology conference (VTC spring). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–7

    2016

  17. [25]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.2109-2: Pre- diction of building entry loss,

    ITU Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R), “Recommendation ITU-R P.2109-2: Pre- diction of building entry loss,” International Telecommunication Union, Tech. Rep. P.2109-2, Aug. 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,

    O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” inInternational Conference on Medical image com- puting and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, 2015, pp. 234–241

    2015

  19. [27]

    Study on channel model for frequency spectrum above 6 GHz (Release 15),

    3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), “Study on channel model for frequency spectrum above 6 GHz (Release 15),” Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network, Technical Report TR 38.900 V15.0.0, Jul. 2018, approved July 2018; su- perseded by TR 38.901

    2018

  20. [28]

    Study on channel model for frequencies from 0.5 to 100 GHz (Release 19),

    ——, “Study on channel model for frequencies from 0.5 to 100 GHz (Release 19),” Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network, Technical Report TR 38.901 V19.0.0, Jun. 2025, approved June 2025

    2025

  21. [29]

    2023, p Series: Radiowave Propagation

    ITU Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R), “Recommendation itu-r p.1411-12: Prop- agation data and prediction methods for the planning of short-range outdoor radio- communication systems and radio local area networks in the frequency range 300 mhz to 100 ghz,” International Teleco...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.