Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 58 references

Ultra-Wideband Double-Directional Channel Measurements and Statistical Modeling in Urban Microcellular Environments for the Upper-Midband/FR3

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the 6–14 GHz urban microcell channel has its own propagation character, and that vegetation-obstructed sightlines must be modeled as a separate category from clear line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight links.

desk verdict Useful first OLoS double-directional dataset for 6–14 GHz urban microcells, but the pseudo-omni PDP construction and the small location count make the fitted numbers provisional rather than definitive. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20755 v2 pith:Q5XYAKKK submitted 2024-12-30 eess.SY cs.SY

Naveed A. Abbasi , Kelvin Arana , Siddhant Singh , Atulya Bist , Vikram Vasudevan , Tathagat Pal , Jorge Gomez-Ponce , Young-Han Nam
show 2 more authors
Charlie Zhang Andreas F. Molisch
This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SYcs.SY
keywords FR3uppermidbandultra-widebandmeasurementsdouble-directionalchannelsoundingobstructedline-of-sightpathlossmodelingdelayspreadangular
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that the 6–14 GHz upper-midband channel in urban microcells behaves differently from what existing sub-6 GHz and millimeter-wave data would suggest, and that this band needs its own measurements. It reports what it describes as the first outdoor ultra-wideband double-directional measurement campaign in this frequency range, analyzing more than 25,000 directional power delay profiles across eleven locations. The measurements show that vegetation-obstructed line-of-sight links deviate strongly from free-space expectations and from clear LoS links, so the paper argues OLoS should be its own category. If the claim is right, regulators and system designers gain the first statistical basis for path loss, shadowing, delay spread, and angular spread in FR3.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the pseudo-omni power delay profile, Eq. (5), which for each delay bin sums the five Rx elevation tilts and then picks the strongest Tx–Rx azimuth pair, followed by a frequency-dependent gain correction that converts the virtual antenna pattern to omni-equivalent power. This reduces the 2340 directional transfer functions measured at each location to a single omni-directional PDP, and every fitted quantity in the paper—path loss, shadowing, RMS delay spread, and angular spread—is derived from it. The contrasting Max-Dir PDP, Eq. (4), selects the single beam pair with the highest total power and supplies the directional statistics.

What would settle it

Run the same double-directional scan at one location while recording the channel with a true omni-directional antenna; if the constructed pseudo-omni PDP's total power differs from the omni measurement by more than the calibration uncertainty, the Eq. (5) construction is biased and the fitted path-loss and delay-spread statistics would need recomputation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the 6–14 GHz urban microcell channel cannot be treated as an interpolation of lower- and higher-band behavior. Using the new campaign, it reports omni-directional path-loss exponents around 3.6–4.6 and Max-Dir exponents around 3.6–4.3, both well above free space; root-mean-square delay spread that stays roughly flat across frequency, with omni mean near −84.5 dB s and Max-Dir mean near −89.8 dB s; and angular spreads that shrink only modestly with distance and vary little with frequency. The OLoS points, where foliage blocks the direct path, show received powers 25 dB or more below Friis predictions, with reflected clusters carrying much of the energy. The paper concludes that OLoS must be separated from LoS and NLoS in upper-midband modeling.

Load-bearing premise

Every fitted statistic rests on Eq. (5)'s assumption that a delay-bin-wise maximum over azimuth directions, after elevation summing and gain correction, represents the total power a true omni-directional antenna would receive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Upper-midband system design must use measured FR3 parameters rather than interpolating a standard model built from sub-6 GHz and above-24 GHz data, since the 6–14 GHz channel has its own path-loss and dispersion behavior.
  • OLoS should enter channel models as its own category; mixing vegetation-blocked links with clear LoS and NLoS would bias path-loss exponents and shadowing variances.
  • Equalizer and scheduling designs can treat RMS delay spread as roughly flat across 6–14 GHz in this environment, since the measured means change by only about 2 dB from 6–7 GHz to 13–14 GHz.
  • Beam management can rely on a transmit angular spread that shrinks slowly with distance and a wider receive angular spread from the 360-degree scan, with weak frequency dependence.
  • Sub-band-specific path-loss fits give regulators and operators a frequency-resolved basis for deciding which parts of FR3 to allocate or aggregate.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An untested extension of the paper's logic is that vegetation, not geometry, drives most of the OLoS excess loss; a campaign that varies foliage density while holding distance fixed would separate the two.
  • It follows implicitly that the pseudo-omni max-per-delay-bin construction could overestimate omni power if two equal-strength paths arrive from different azimuths in the same delay bin; validating against a true omni antenna at one point would quantify this.
  • If the frequency-stable delay-spread result generalizes, the standard-model assumption that delay spread decreases with frequency would need revision for FR3.
  • With only one clear-LoS location, the paper's LoS-versus-OLoS contrast rests on a single point; additional LoS routes would show whether the reported exponent gap is universal.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an ultra-wideband (6-14 GHz) double-directional channel measurement campaign in an urban microcellular environment, using a VNA with radio-over-fiber haul and rotating horn antennas at both link ends. The authors analyze more than 25,000 directional power delay profiles over 11 receiver locations (1 LoS, 10 OLoS), and derive statistical models for path loss, shadowing, RMS delay spread, and angular spread, reporting 95% confidence intervals for all fitted parameters. They also provide sample PDP and APS analyses, and argue that OLoS must be treated as a separate propagation category in the upper midband. The paper claims to be the first UWB double-directional outdoor measurement campaign in this frequency range.

Significance. If the measurement and processing are sound, the dataset is a valuable contribution to FR3 channel modeling, spectrum allocation, and beamforming studies, because it fills a gap in double-directional UWB outdoor data between 6 and 14 GHz. The paper is transparent about its calibration procedure (daily OTA reference checked against Friis), reports confidence intervals throughout, and explicitly lists limitations in the conclusions. The descriptive PDP and APS results are clearly presented and illustrate the importance of vegetation-induced OLoS effects. However, two load-bearing issues need attention: the pseudo-omni PDP construction and the very small number of independent locations; both directly affect the fitted statistics that support the paper's main claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III-A, Eq. (5), Tables III and VI] The pseudo-omni PDP is constructed by taking, for each delay bin, the maximum over Tx and Rx azimuth of the elevation-summed power. In an OLoS environment with multiple comparable reflections arriving from different azimuths, this discards power that a true omni-directional antenna would collect, and the constant gain correction shown in Fig. 3 only accounts for the elevation combination, not the azimuthal selection. Because the omni path gain (Table III) and RMSDS (Table VI) are computed from this PDP, the fitted path loss exponents (approx. 3.9-4.6) and the conclusion of frequency-flat RMSDS could be systematically biased. The very fine delay resolution (0.125 ns) makes it plausible that each delay bin contains at most one specular MPC, but the paper does not justify or validate this construction for a vegetation-rich, diffuse-scattering environment, nor does it quantify the impact of the Tx azimuth mask of only ±60° on the 'omni' path gain. Please either validate Eq. (5) against a sum-over-azimuth synthesis (with appropriate beam-pattern compensation) at representative OLoS points, or provide a sensitivity analysis showing that the bias is negligible; the current evidence is insufficient.
  2. [Sec. IV-C, Tables II, III, VI, VII] The statistical models are fitted to only 10 OLoS points and 1 LoS point (Table II). The 95% confidence intervals are extremely wide (e.g., α from -5.40 to 49.91 dB at 6-7 GHz in Table III; β from -1.80 to 1.91 dB s for omni RMSDS in Table VI). The paper acknowledges the small number of locations in the conclusions, but the abstract and Section I.C present the fitted models as a central contribution without this caveat. In addition, the statement in Section IV-D that RMSDS is 'relatively stable across frequency bands' is not strongly supported by the data: the CIs for the mean μ in Tables VII and IX overlap substantially across bands, and the distance slopes β in Tables VI and VIII cross zero in most bands. Please rephrase the model claims as preliminary, add a statistical power analysis, or reduce the emphasis on specific parameter values as general models.
  3. [Abstract and Sec. I.C] The paper claims to be 'the first UWB double-directional measurement campaign in this frequency range.' This is contradicted by the authors' own companion paper [39], which reports ultra-wideband double-directionally resolved channel measurements of LoS microcellular scenarios in the upper midband. The more specific claim in Section V (first double-directional UWB campaign in outdoor OLoS scenarios) may be correct, but the broader claims in the abstract and Section I.C should be qualified to avoid overstatement. Please update the novelty statement to be consistent with the existing companion work.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV-A] The text 'Fig. 3 uses a threshold with fixed absolute level' appears to be a cross-reference error; Fig. 3 shows the antenna elevation pattern, while the threshold discussion concerns the PDP figures (Fig. 4). Please correct the reference.
  2. [Eq. (4)] The notation 'P_Max-Dir(τ) = arg max_{i,j,k} ...' is inconsistent because the left-hand side is a PDP while arg max returns indices. Please rewrite the equation to first define the selected index triple and then set P_Max-Dir to the corresponding directional PDP.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract contains a grammatical error: 'We analyze over 25,000 directional power delay profiles and providing key insights' should read 'and provide key insights'.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption contains the typo 'Elvation Pattern'; it should be 'Elevation Pattern'.
  5. [Table VII] The 'All Bands' mean RMSDS for the omni case is -84.54 dB s, whereas the band-wise means in the same table are around -82 dB s; please clarify why the all-bands mean differs from the band-wise means by about 2 dB, or correct the value.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: this is a descriptive measurement and statistical-modeling study whose fitted parameters are not used to generate the claims they are claimed to support.

full rationale

The paper is an experimental characterization, not a derivation of predictions from fitted inputs. The path-loss, shadowing, delay-spread, and angular-spread models in Section IV are descriptive least-squares and distribution fits to the measured directional PDPs and angular power spectra; none of those fitted parameters is renamed as a prediction of a separate quantity. The Friis comparison for Rx1 is an external sanity check against a theoretical benchmark, and the OLoS conclusions rest directly on the sample PDPs, APS, and the measured excess attenuation in OLoS locations, with the vegetation-loss citation [5] used only as supporting consistency, not as the load-bearing argument. Self-citations such as [48], [49], [50], [51], and [52] concern measurement methodology or threshold processing and do not supply the paper's central content. The pseudo-omni PDP construction in Eq. (5) (max over azimuth rather than sum) is a potential methodological bias in multipath-rich OLoS cases, and the Tx azimuth scan covers only ±60°, but this is a measurement-synthesis limitation, not circular reasoning: the resulting PDPs are not assumed to equal the quantity later claimed as independently predicted. No step was found where an equation reduces to its own input by construction, or where the novelty claim is forced by a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central statistical claims rest on measurement assumptions: the pseudo-omni PDP construction approximates an omni antenna, the 22 dB noise threshold gives a fair dynamic range across bands, and OTA calibration removes system and antenna responses. The fitted model parameters (alpha, beta, sigma, mu) are free parameters estimated from the 11 measured points. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (9)
  • Path loss intercept alpha (omni and Max-Dir, per band) = e.g., 21.76 dB (all bands, omni); 15.36-26.31 dB per band
    Estimated by weighted linear regression of PL vs log10(d) (Eq. 7, Tables III-IV).
  • Path loss exponent beta (omni and Max-Dir, per band) = e.g., 4.14 (all bands, omni); 3.64-4.57 per band
    Estimated slope of PL vs log10(d); values well above free-space 2, attributed to vegetation and distance-dependent loss.
  • Shadowing standard deviation sigma (per band) = 2.60-4.67 dB (omni); 4.74-6.22 dB (Max-Dir)
    Estimated from residuals of the PL fit (Table V).
  • RMSDS log-normal mean mu (per band) = e.g., -84.54 dB s (all bands, omni); -82.13 to -82.27 per band
    Estimated by Gaussian fit to log-delay-spread CDF (Table VII).
  • RMSDS log-normal std sigma (per band) = e.g., 8.59 dB s (omni); 4.61-7.90 dB s per band
    Estimated by Gaussian fit to log-delay-spread CDF (Table VII).
  • Angular spread mean mu (Tx/Rx, per band) = e.g., 0.20 (Tx, all bands); 0.20-0.23 (Rx az)
    Estimated by Gaussian fit to AS CDF (Tables XI, XIII).
  • Angular spread std sigma (Tx/Rx, per band) = e.g., 0.09 (Tx); 0.14-0.19 (Rx az)
    Estimated by Gaussian fit to AS CDF (Tables XI, XIII).
  • Noise threshold P_lambda = 22 dB below per-PDP maximum
    Fixed by hand to equal the lowest dynamic range observed across sub-bands (Sec. III-A).
  • Delay gate tau_gate = 966.67 ns (290 m excess runlength)
    Chosen to avoid wrap-around and very long delay bins (Sec. III-A).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Static or near-static channel during the multi-hour directional scan
    Measurements were done at night with pedestrian access restricted, but wind-induced foliage motion could still occur (Sec. II-A).
  • domain assumption OTA calibration at 56.45 m removes system and antenna frequency responses
    Eq. (1) divides by H_OTA; the text states this removes system response, antenna gain, and the impact of the OTA distance (Sec. III-A).
  • domain assumption Pseudo-omni PDP (max over azimuth, sum over elevation) approximates an omni-directional antenna
    Eq. (5) constructs P'_omni; a frequency-dependent gain correction is applied, but the angular combining itself is an approximation (Sec. III-A).
  • domain assumption Fixed 22 dB noise threshold gives a consistent dynamic range for fair cross-band comparison
    P_lambda is set to the lowest dynamic range observed; the paper notes the dynamic range actually varies with frequency (Sec. III-A, Sec. IV-A).
  • standard math Standard linear regression and Gaussian CDF fitting assumptions
    Used for PL, shadowing, RMSDS, and AS models (Sec. III-B).
  • domain assumption Reciprocity of the channel (BS and Tx interchangeable)
    Stated in Sec. II-A: 'BS and Tx are henceforth used interchangeable... though the channel is reciprocal.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ultra-Wideband Double-Directional Channel Measurements and Statistical Modeling in Urban Microcellular Environments for the Upper-Midband/FR3." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Q5XYAKKK

@misc{pith2026241220755,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ultra-Wideband Double-Directional Channel Measurements and Statistical Modeling in Urban Microcellular Environments for the Upper-Midband/FR3},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Q5XYAKKK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20755}
}
read the original abstract

The upper midband, designated as Frequency Range 3 (FR3), is increasingly critical for the next-generation of wireless networks. Channel propagation measurements and their statistical analysis are essential first steps towards this direction. This paper presents a comprehensive ultra-wideband (UWB) double-directional channel measurement campaign in a large portion of FR3 (6-14 GHz) for urban microcellular environments. We analyze over 25,000 directional power delay profiles and providing key insights into line-of-sight (LoS) and obstructed line-of-sight (OLoS) conditions. This is followed by statistical modeling of path loss, shadowing, delay spread and angular spread. As the first UWB double-directional measurement campaign in this frequency range, this work offers critical insights for spectrum allocation, channel modeling, and the design of advanced communication systems, paving the way for further exploration of FR3.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20755 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. RFoF-based Midband channel measurement setup. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Measurement scenario. TABLE II: Distances corresponding to each Rx Identifier. Rx Identifier Distance (m) Rx1 65.1 Rx2 62.1 Rx3 103.5 Rx4 139.1 Rx5 143.6 Rx6 162.8 Rx7 201.4 Rx8 214.9 Rx9 336.3 Rx10 404.9 Rx11 436.1 the site, representing a significant source of signal blockage in certain regions; points Rx2 - Rx11 were all classified as suffering from OLoS propagation conditions. Apart for the 0 ◦ co-elevation desc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Elevation pattern for the original horn and modified [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: PDP for two sample measurement cases. The symbols (cr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Measurement scenario for Rx5. of arrival (DoA)s and direction of departure (DoD)s. The LoS component is more than 25 dB stronger than any other component in the omnidirectional PDP, and about 35 dB stronger than any other component in the Max-Dir PDP for the 6 − 7 GHz …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: APS for two sample measurement cases. C. Path loss and shadowing The path loss modeling results for the omni-directional case are shown in Fig. 7a, while the corresponding shadowing distribution is depicted in Fig. 7b. Similarly, Fig. 8a and Fig. 8b provide the same re…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: OLoS PL modeling for Omni-directional case. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: OLoS PL modeling for Max-Dir case. dependent attenuation, even in the presence of environmental factors that are causing variability in the fitted parameters. For pure free-space propagation, theory predicts a value of β = 2 independent of frequency, and an increase of…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: RMSDS modeling for Omni-directional case. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: RMSDS modeling for Max-Dir case. TABLE VI: Linear fitting for RMDDSOmni with 95% con￾fidence intervals. Frequency αmin,95% α αmax,95% βmin,95% β βmax,95% All Bands -128.69 -77.80 -26.91 -2.60 -0.34 1.92 6 − 7 GHz -126.36 -84.61 -42.87 -1.80 0.05 1.91 7 − 8 GHz -140.92…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: AS modeling for Tx. 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 ° 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 F( ° ) Measured CDF 6-7 GHz Gaussian Fit CDF 6-7 GHz Measured CDF 9-10 GHz Gaussian Fit CDF 9-10 GHz Measured CDF 13-14 GHz Gaussian Fit CDF 13-14 GHz (a) CDF of AS. 100 150 20…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: AS modeling for Rx. decrease in AS with distance; however, some data points deviate significantly from the linear fit, resulting in wide confidence intervals, particularly at higher frequencies. For instance, Table XII shows β values ranging from −0.06 to 0.02, with s…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages

  1. [39]

    Ultra-wideband Double-Directionally Resolved Channel Measurements of Line-of-Sight Microcellular Scenarios in the Upper Mid-band

    N. A. Abbasi, K. Arana, J. Gomez-Ponce, T. Pal, V . V asude van, A. Bist, O. G. Serbetci, Y . H. Nam, C. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “Ultra-wideband double-directionally resolved channel m easurements of line-of-sight microcellular scenarios in the upper mid- band,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.12306

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Mobile data traffic outlook,

    Ericsson, “Mobile data traffic outlook,” https://www.ericsson.com/en/reports-and-papers/mobility-report/dataforecasts/mobile-traffic-forecast , 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [2]

    5G; Study on channel model for frequencies from 0. 5 to 100 GHz,

    3GPP , “5G; Study on channel model for frequencies from 0. 5 to 100 GHz,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Techn ical Specification (TS) 38.901, 05 2017, version 14.0.0. [Online ]. Available: https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/138900_138999/138901/14.00.00_60/tr_138901v140000p.pdf

    work page 2017

  4. [3]

    Ultra-wide-band propagation channels,

    A. F. Molisch, “Ultra-wide-band propagation channels, ” Proceedings of the IEEE , vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 353–371, 2009

    work page 2009

  5. [4]

    Mill imeter-wave propagation in vegetation: Experiments and theory,

    F. K. Schwering, E. J. Violette, and R. H. Espeland, “Mill imeter-wave propagation in vegetation: Experiments and theory,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing , vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 355–367, 1988

    work page 1988

  6. [5]

    An Ultra-Wideband Study of Vegetation Impact on Upper Midband / FR3 Communication

    N. A. Abbasi, T. Pal, K. Arana, V . V asudevan, J. Gomez-Pon ce, Y .-H. Nam, C. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “An ultra-wideband st udy of vegetation impact on upper midband / fr3 communication,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.17864

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  7. [6]

    Wideband penetration loss through building materials and partitions at 6.75 ghz in fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz in the fr3 upper mid-band spectrum,

    D. Shakya, M. Ying, T. S. Rappaport, H. Poddar, P . Ma, Y . Wa ng, and I. Al-Wazani, “Wideband penetration loss through building materials and partitions at 6.75 ghz in fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz in the fr3 upper mid-band spectrum,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.01362 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [7]

    Wideband ind oor channel measurements and ber analysis of frequency selective multi path channels at 2.4, 4.75, and 11.5 ghz,

    G. J. Janssen, P . A. Stigter, and R. Prasad, “Wideband ind oor channel measurements and ber analysis of frequency selective multi path channels at 2.4, 4.75, and 11.5 ghz,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 1272–1288, 1996

    work page 1996

Show all 58 references
  1. [8]

    Attenuation and diffraction effects from truck blockage of an 11-ghz line-o f-sight micro- cellular mobile radio path,

    A. Rustako, M. Gans, G. Owens, and R. Roman, “Attenuation and diffraction effects from truck blockage of an 11-ghz line-o f-sight micro- cellular mobile radio path,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 211–215, 1991

    1991

  2. [9]

    Diffraction measurements around a build ing corner at 10 ghz,

    N. Tervo, C. F. Dias, V . Hovinen, M. Sonkki, A. Roivainen, J. Meinilä, and M. Latva-aho, “Diffraction measurements around a build ing corner at 10 ghz,” in 1st International Conference on 5G for Ubiquitous Connectivity. IEEE, 2014, pp. 187–191

    2014

  3. [10]

    Mu ltiple-screen diffraction measurement at 10–18 ghz,

    G. L. Ramos, P . Kyösti, V . Hovinen, and M. Latva-aho, “Mu ltiple-screen diffraction measurement at 10–18 ghz,” IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, vol. 16, pp. 2002–2005, 2017

    2002

  4. [11]

    Path loss model for outdoor environment at 17 ghz mm-wave band,

    A. M. Al-Samman, T. A. Rahman, M. H. Azmi, N. R. Zulkefly, a nd A. M. Mataria, “Path loss model for outdoor environment at 17 ghz mm-wave band,” in 2016 IEEE 12th International Colloquium on Signal Processing & Its Applications (CSPA) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 179–182

    2016

  5. [12]

    18 ghz propagation measuremen ts and analysis in belo horizonte/brazil,

    M. H. Rezende, G. L. Ramos, P . T. Pereira, Ú. C. Resende, E . J. Silva, G. M. Ribeiro, and C. G. Rego, “18 ghz propagation measuremen ts and analysis in belo horizonte/brazil,” in 2017 IEEE-APS Topical Conference on Antennas and Propagation in Wireless Communications (AP WC)....

    2017

  6. [13]

    An empirical propagation pre diction model for urban street canyon environments at 6, 10, and 18 gh z,

    S.-S. Oh, J.-W. Choi, H.-C. Lee, Y .-C. Lee, B.-L. Cho, I. -Y . Lee, J.-H. Lim, J.-I. Lee, and S. W. Park, “An empirical propagation pre diction model for urban street canyon environments at 6, 10, and 18 gh z,” Microwave and Optical Technology Letters , vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 15...

    2019

  7. [14]

    Path loss characterizat ion of 7-ghz terrestrial propagation channel in urban environment,

    N. Y oza-Mitsuishi and R. Sun, “Path loss characterizat ion of 7-ghz terrestrial propagation channel in urban environment,” in 2019 IEEE 90th V ehicular Technology Conference (VTC2019-Fall) . IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–5

    2019

  8. [15]

    Radio channel pr opagation measurements using a multiband agile chirp sounder,

    S. Salous, A. Cheema, and X. Raimundo, “Radio channel pr opagation measurements using a multiband agile chirp sounder,” in 2014 XXXIth URSI General Assembly and Scientific Symposium (URSI GASS) . IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–4

    2014

  9. [16]

    Experimental characterization and correlation an alysis of indoor channels at 15 ghz,

    X. Zhou, Z. Zhong, B. Zhang, R. He, K. Guan, Q. Wang, and D. Ma- tolak, “Experimental characterization and correlation an alysis of indoor channels at 15 ghz,” International Journal of Antennas and Propagation , vol. 2015, no. 1, p. 601835, 2015

    2015

  10. [17]

    Wireless urban propagation measurements at 2.44, 5.8, 14. 8 & 58.68 ghz,

    J. Medbo, D. Sundman, H. Asplund, N. Jaldén, and S. Dwive di, “Wireless urban propagation measurements at 2.44, 5.8, 14. 8 & 58.68 ghz,” in 2017 XXXIInd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of the International Union of Radio Science (URSI GASS) . IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–4

    2017

  11. [18]

    Millimeter- wave outdoor-to-indoor channel measurements at 3, 10, 17 an d 60 ghz,

    C. A. Diakhate, J.-M. Conrat, J.-C. Cousin, and A. Sibil le, “Millimeter- wave outdoor-to-indoor channel measurements at 3, 10, 17 an d 60 ghz,” in 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EUCAP). IEEE, 2017, pp. 1798–1802

    2017

  12. [19]

    Propagation c haracteristics of indoor radio channel from 3.5 ghz to 28 ghz,

    F. Huang, L. Tian, Y . Zheng, and J. Zhang, “Propagation c haracteristics of indoor radio channel from 3.5 ghz to 28 ghz,” in 2016 IEEE 84th V ehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  13. [20]

    Outdoo r wideband channel measurements and modeling in the 3–18 ghz band,

    V . Kristem, C. U. Bas, R. Wang, and A. F. Molisch, “Outdoo r wideband channel measurements and modeling in the 3–18 ghz band,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 4620– 4633, 2018

    2018

  14. [21]

    Measured wideband characteristics of indoor channels at c entimetric and millimetric bands,

    W. Fan, I. Carton, J. Ø. Nielsen, K. Olesen, and G. F. Pede rsen, “Measured wideband characteristics of indoor channels at c entimetric and millimetric bands,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking , vol. 2016, pp. 1–13, 2016

    2016

  15. [22]

    Spatio-temporal channel sounding in a street canyon at 15, 28 and 60 ghz,

    R. Naderpour, J. V ehmas, S. Nguyen, J. Järveläinen, and K. Haneda, “Spatio-temporal channel sounding in a street canyon at 15, 28 and 60 ghz,” in 2016 IEEE 27th annual international symposium on personal, indoor , and mobile radio communications (PIMRC) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–6

    2016

  16. [23]

    Comparison of par ametric and nonparametric characterization of 15 ghz propagation c hannels in indoor environments,

    C. Ling, X. Yin, H. Wang, and X. Zhang, “Comparison of par ametric and nonparametric characterization of 15 ghz propagation c hannels in indoor environments,” in 2016 10th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  17. [24]

    Simultaneous multi-band chan nel 13 sounding at mm-wave frequencies,

    R. Müller, S. Häfner, D. Dupleich, R. S. Thomä, G. Steinb öck, J. Luo, E. Schulz, X. Lu, and G. Wang, “Simultaneous multi-band chan nel 13 sounding at mm-wave frequencies,” in 2016 10th European Conference on antennas and propagation (EuCAP) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  18. [25]

    Com- parison of propagation channel characteristics for multip le millimeter wave bands,

    J. Huang, R. Feng, J. Sun, C.-X. Wang, W. Zhang, and Y . Y an g, “Com- parison of propagation channel characteristics for multip le millimeter wave bands,” in 2017 IEEE 85th V ehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring). IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–5

    2017

  19. [26]

    Propagation chann el character- ization for 6–14 ghz bands based on large array measurement f or indoor scenarios,

    Q. Wang, X. Yin, J. Hong, and G. Jing, “Propagation chann el character- ization for 6–14 ghz bands based on large array measurement f or indoor scenarios,” Electronics, vol. 11, no. 22, p. 3675, 2022

    2022

  20. [27]

    Comparative evaluation of radio propagation properties a t 15 ghz and 60 ghz frequencies,

    D. Solomitckii, V . Semkin, R. Naderpour, A. Ometov, and S. Andreev, “Comparative evaluation of radio propagation properties a t 15 ghz and 60 ghz frequencies,” in 2017 9th International Congress on Ultra Mod- ern Telecommunications and Control Systems and W orkshops ( ICUMT)....

    2017

  21. [28]

    Channel measurement an d modeling for the 15-ghz radio band in an indoor corridor environment,

    X. Hui, Z. Wuxiong, and Y . Y ang, “Channel measurement an d modeling for the 15-ghz radio band in an indoor corridor environment, ” Journal of communications and information networks , vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 102–108, 2016

    2016

  22. [29]

    Spatial radio channel sounding fo r static environment at 10 ghz,

    C. F. Dias, N. Tervo, A. Roivainen, V . Hovinen, M. Sonkki , G. Fraiden- raich, and M. Latva-aho, “Spatial radio channel sounding fo r static environment at 10 ghz,” in 2016 10th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  23. [30]

    Angular spread statistics for 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 mid-band frequencies in an i ndoor hotspot environment,

    D. Shakya, M. Ying, and T. S. Rappaport, “Angular spread statistics for 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 mid-band frequencies in an i ndoor hotspot environment,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.03013 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Upper mid-band channel measurements a nd characterization at 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 in an in door factory scenario,

    M. Ying, D. Shakya, T. S. Rappaport, P . Ma, Y . Wang, I. Al- Wazani, Y . Wu, and H. Poddar, “Upper mid-band channel measurements a nd characterization at 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 in an in door factory scenario,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.03565 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  25. [32]

    V a lidation of deterministic radio channel model by 10 ghz microcell measu rements,

    A. Roivainen, P . Kyoesti, V . Hovinen, and C. F. Dias, “V a lidation of deterministic radio channel model by 10 ghz microcell measu rements,” in European Wireless 2016; 22th European Wireless Conference . VDE, 2016, pp. 1–6

    2016

  26. [33]

    11 ghz band mimo chan nel char- acteristics in a street micro-cell environment,

    K. Saito, J.-i. Takada, and M. Kim, “11 ghz band mimo chan nel char- acteristics in a street micro-cell environment,” in 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EUCAP) . IEEE, 2017, pp. 703–706

    2017

  27. [34]

    Multi-dimensional radio channel measurement, analysis and modeling for high frequency band s,

    M. Kim, J.-i. Takada, and K. Saito, “Multi-dimensional radio channel measurement, analysis and modeling for high frequency band s,” IEICE Transactions on Communications , vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 293–308, 2018

    2018

  28. [35]

    Dense multipath com ponent characteristics in 11-ghz-band indoor environments,

    K. Saito, J.-I. Takada, and M. Kim, “Dense multipath com ponent characteristics in 11-ghz-band indoor environments,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 4780–4789, 2017

    2017

  29. [36]

    5g experimental t rial achieving over 20 gbps using advanced multi-antenna solutions,

    K. Tateishi, D. Kurita, A. Harada, Y . Kishiyama, S. Itoh , H. Murai, S. Parkvall, J. Furuskog, and P . Naucler, “5g experimental t rial achieving over 20 gbps using advanced multi-antenna solutions,” in 2016 IEEE 84th V ehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall) . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    2016

  30. [37]

    15 ghz propagation properties assessed with 5g rad io access prototype,

    P . Ökvist, H. Asplund, A. Simonsson, B. Halvarsson, J. M edbo, and N. Seifi, “15 ghz propagation properties assessed with 5g rad io access prototype,” in 2015 IEEE 26th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor , and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC) . IEEE, 2015, p...

    2015

  31. [38]

    Evaluation of 30 gbps super high bit rate mobile communications using ch annel data in 11 ghz band 24 × 24 mimo experiment,

    S. Suyama, J. Shen, H. Suzuki, K. Fukawa, and Y . Okumura, “Evaluation of 30 gbps super high bit rate mobile communications using ch annel data in 11 ghz band 24 × 24 mimo experiment,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC) . IEEE, 2014, pp. 5203–5208

    2014

  32. [40]

    Urban outdoor propagation measurements and channel models at 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 upper mid-band spectrum for 5g and 6g,

    D. Shakya, M. Ying, T. S. Rappaport, P . Ma, I. Al-Wazani, Y . Wu, Y . Wang, D. Calin, H. Poddar, A. Bazzi et al. , “Urban outdoor propagation measurements and channel models at 6.75 ghz fr1 (c) and 16.95 ghz fr3 upper mid-band spectrum for 5g and 6g,” arXiv preprint arXiv:241...

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    Mimo-uwb propagation channels,

    A. F. Molisch, “Mimo-uwb propagation channels,” in Proceedings of the fourth european conference on antennas and propagation . IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–6

    2010

  34. [42]

    Measurements of mimo-uwb indoor channel,

    G. Tsao, P . Iyamu, L. Petropoulakis, R. Atkinson, I. And onovic, and I. A. Glover, “Measurements of mimo-uwb indoor channel,” in 2012 International Symposium on Signals, Systems, and Electron ics (ISSSE) . IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–6

    2012

  35. [43]

    Ultrawideband mimo channel measurements and modelin g in a warehouse environment,

    S. Sangodoyin, R. He, A. F. Molisch, V . Kristem, and F. Tu fves- son, “Ultrawideband mimo channel measurements and modelin g in a warehouse environment,” in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC) . IEEE, 2015, pp. 2277–2282

    2015

  36. [44]

    Chara cterization of massive mimo uwb channel for indoor environments,

    Y . Zahedi, R. Ngah, R. Abdolee, and D. W. Matolak, “Chara cterization of massive mimo uwb channel for indoor environments,” in 2017 IEEE 13th Malaysia International Conference on Communications (MICC). IEEE, 2017, pp. 57–62

    2017

  37. [45]

    Measurement and analysis of an outdoor mimouwb communicat ion channel,

    Y . Zahedi, R. Ngah, U. A. Okonkwo, S. Nunoo, and M. Mokaye f, “Measurement and analysis of an outdoor mimouwb communicat ion channel,” in 2014 IEEE Asia Pacific Conference on Wireless and Mobile . IEEE, 2014, pp. 168–171

    2014

  38. [46]

    Path loss model and channel capacity for uwb–mimo channel in outd oor environment,

    A. M. Al-Samman, T. A. Rahman, M. H. Azmi, and I. Shayea, “ Path loss model and channel capacity for uwb–mimo channel in outd oor environment,” Wireless Personal Communications , vol. 107, pp. 271– 281, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    A. F. Molisch, Wireless communications, 3rd ed. IEEE Press - John Wiley & Sons, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Thz band cha nnel measurements and statistical modeling for urban d2d enviro nments,

    N. A. Abbasi, J. L. Gomez, R. Kondaveti, S. M. Shaikbepar i, S. Rao, S. Abu-Surra, G. Xu, J. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “Thz band cha nnel measurements and statistical modeling for urban d2d enviro nments,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1466...

    2022

  41. [49]

    Th z band channel measurements and statistical modeling for urban mi crocellular environments,

    N. A. Abbasi, J. Gomez-Ponce, R. Kondaveti, A. Kumar, E. Bhagat, R. N. Rao, S. Abu-Surra, G. Xu, C. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “Th z band channel measurements and statistical modeling for urban mi crocellular environments,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications , 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    Directional delay spread a nd inter- ference quotient analysis in sub-7GHz Wi-Fi bands,

    J. Gomez-Ponce, D. Burghal, N. A. Abbasi, A. Hariharan, G. Jakhetia, P . Chaganlal, and A. F. Molisch, “Directional delay spread a nd inter- ference quotient analysis in sub-7GHz Wi-Fi bands,” in GLOBECOM 2020 - 2020 IEEE Global Communications Conference , 2020, pp. 1–6

    2020

  43. [51]

    Double-direction al channel measurements for urban THz communications on a linear route ,

    N. A. Abbasi, J. Gomez-Ponce, D. Burghal, R. Kondaveti, S. Abu- Surra, G. Xu, C. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “Double-direction al channel measurements for urban THz communications on a linear route ,” in ICC 2021-2021 IEEE International Conference on Communication s (ICC) . IEEE, 2021

    2021

  44. [52]

    Impact of noisy measurements with fourie r-based evaluation on condensed channel parameters,

    J. Gomez-Ponce, N. A. Abbasi, Z. Cheng, S. Abu-Surra, G. Xu, J. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “Impact of noisy measurements with fourie r-based evaluation on condensed channel parameters,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    Syn- chronous channel sounder using horn antenna and indoor meas urements on 28 GHz,

    S. Hur, Y .-J. Cho, J. Lee, N.-G. Kang, J. Park, and H. Benn , “Syn- chronous channel sounder using horn antenna and indoor meas urements on 28 GHz,” in 2014 IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom) , 2014, pp. 83–87

    2014

  46. [54]

    Distance dependence of path loss models with weighted fitti ng,

    A. Karttunen, A. F. Molisch, R. Wang, S. Hur, J. Zhang, an d J. Park, “Distance dependence of path loss models with weighted fitti ng,” in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC ), 2016, pp. 1–6

    2016

  47. [55]

    Path loss models with distance-dependent weig hted fitting and estimation of censored path loss data,

    A. Karttunen, C. Gustafson, A. F. Molisch, R. Wang, S. Hu r, J. Zhang, and J. Park, “Path loss models with distance-dependent weig hted fitting and estimation of censored path loss data,” IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation, vol. 10, no. 14, pp. 1467–1474, 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Delay spread properties in a measured massive mimo system at 2.6 GHz,

    S. Payami and F. Tufvesson, “Delay spread properties in a measured massive mimo system at 2.6 GHz,” in 2013 IEEE 24th Annual Interna- tional Symposium on Personal, Indoor , and Mobile Radio Comm unica- tions (PIMRC) . IEEE, 2013, pp. 53–57

    2013

  49. [57]

    First-and second-order characterizati on of direction dispersion and space selectivity in the radio channel,

    B. H. Fleury, “First-and second-order characterizati on of direction dispersion and space selectivity in the radio channel,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 2027–2044, 2000

    2027

  50. [58]

    THz band cha nnel measurements and statistical modeling for urban D2D enviro nments,

    N. A. Abbasi, J. G. Ponce, R. Kondaveti, , S. M. Shaikbepa ri, S. Rao, S. Abu-Surra, G. Xu, C. Zhang, and A. F. Molisch, “THz band cha nnel measurements and statistical modeling for urban D2D enviro nments,” arXiv preprint, 2021

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.