Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Integrated Super-resolution Sensing and Symbiotic Communication with 3D Sparse MIMO for Low-Altitude UAV Swarm

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read L-shaped sparse arrays sharpen UAV swarm sensing and rates

desk verdict The paper's central beamwidth-ordering theorem is the load-bearing claim, and right now it's supported by unproved numerical observations rather than proof; the idea is plausible and worth refereeing, but the theory needs another pass. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13570 v1 pith:TY4GWCMS submitted 2025-04-18 eess.SP

Jingran Xu , Hongqi Min , Yong Zeng This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SP
keywords symbioticradioUAVswarm3DsparseMIMOnestedarraybeampatternsuper-resolutionsensingchannelestimationintegratedandcommunication
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 studies a low-altitude UAV swarm in which one leading UAV transmits to a base station while the other UAVs backscatter the same signal to send their own data without consuming extra spectrum or power. It argues that the base station's antenna geometry is the key resource: for a fixed number of physical antennas, a 3D sparse MIMO layout, specifically an L-shaped nested array (LNA) or a planar nested array (PNA), produces a much narrower main lobe and therefore finer angular resolution for densely packed UAVs than a conventional compact uniform planar array (UPA). From the beam-pattern analysis, the main-lobe beamwidth scales as $\mathcal{O}(1/M)$ for PNA and $\mathcal{O}(1/M^2)$ for LNA versus $\mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{M})$ for UPA. The paper couples this sensing sharpness with a channel-estimation scheme that first finds all UAV directions using super-resolution sensing without pilots and then estimates the path gains with very few pilots, reaching a channel MSE of $(K+1)\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$ instead of $M\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$ for conventional training. If correct, the same hardware can serve denser swarms with less pilot overhead.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the difference co-array of a nested array: by taking differences of physical antenna positions, a small sparse array synthesizes a much larger virtual uniform array, and that virtual aperture is what provides super-resolution. For the LNA, two orthogonal one-dimensional nested arrays along the y and z axes give separable one-dimensional virtual arrays, and a pair-matching step using a permutation matrix associates the estimated elevation and azimuth angles. For the PNA, a compact uniform planar array on one side of the origin and a sparse uniform planar array on the other produce a contiguous two-dimensional difference co-array, and two-dimensional spatial smoothing restores the rank needed for MUSIC. The beam-pattern analysis in Theorems 1-4 converts this geometry into quantitative claims about main-lobe width, and the prominent side-lobe height analysis makes explicit the tradeoff between resolution and grating lobes.

What would settle it

Choose an LNA with parameters violating the stated condition, for example $M_{y,1}=3$ and $M_{y,2}=4$ so that $M_{y,2} < 3(M_{y,1}+1)=12$, compute the y-axis beam pattern $G_{\mathrm{lna}}(\Delta_y,0)$ numerically, and locate the first local minimum. If the main-lobe width is not close to $4/((M_{y,1}+1)M_{y,2})$ and the $\mathcal{O}(1/M^2)$ upper bound fails, then the tight bound of Theorem 3 is not generally valid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that integrated super-resolution sensing and symbiotic communication can be realized in a UAV swarm with a sparse 3D MIMO base station, and that sparse nested geometries outperform compact uniform arrays on both sensing and communication: they give a narrower main lobe, better separation of UAVs in angle, higher achievable backscatter-device sum rates, and lower channel-estimation error. For the L-shaped nested array, the main-lobe width on the y-axis is upper bounded by $4/((M_{y,1}+1)M_{y,2})$ under the condition $M_{y,2} \geq 3(M_{y,1}+1)$, against $4/M_{y,u}$ for the uniform planar array, which yields the $\mathcal{O}(1/M^2)$ versus $\mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{M})$ scaling. The sensing-assisted estimator builds a virtual array from the difference co-array, applies a super-resolution subspace algorithm such as MUSIC to estimate elevation and azimuth angles without dedicated pilots, pair-matches those angles, and then estimates all path gains by least squares using very few pilots. The resulting MSE is $(K+1)\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$ for the proposed scheme versus $M\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$ for conventional pilot-based training, and the simulations show LNA and PNA maintaining better estimation and rate performance as the number of UAVs grows.

Load-bearing premise

The tight beamwidth upper bounds for the L-shaped and planar nested arrays rely on parameter-size conditions, such as $M_{y,2} \geq 3(M_{y,1}+1)$ for the LNA, that the appendices verify only by numerical simulation rather than by proof; if those conditions fail, the claimed $\mathcal{O}(1/M^2)$ beamwidth advantage for the LNA is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a fixed number of physical antennas, the L-shaped nested array gives the narrowest main lobe with $\mathcal{O}(1/M^2)$ beamwidth scaling, the planar nested array is intermediate with $\mathcal{O}(1/M)$, and the conventional uniform planar array is widest with $\mathcal{O}(1/\sqrt{M})$, so dense UAV swarms are separable in angle only with the sparse geometries.
  • The proposed sensing-assisted channel estimator reaches MSE $(K+1)\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$ with only a few pilots; since conventional training gives $M\sigma^2/(\tau P_t)$, the estimator is preferable when $K+1 < M$.
  • Sparse geometries improve backscatter-device sum rate when CSI is estimated, especially when the number of UAVs is large or the antenna count is moderate, because the sharper beam pattern reduces inter-user interference.
  • The grating-lobe analysis shows a design tradeoff: more sparse elements improve resolution but raise prominent side-lobe heights, so the dense/sparse split should be chosen according to how tightly the UAVs are packed.
  • Because the super-resolution angle estimates use both pilot and data symbols, the proposed scheme removes the need for dedicated pilot training for angle acquisition, reducing overhead in the swarm scenario.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The virtual-array viewpoint suggests the same sparse geometries could support joint angle estimation and beam tracking for a moving swarm, since the direction estimates come from data symbols and can be refreshed without additional pilot overhead.
  • The parameter conditions verified numerically in the appendices are likely sufficient but not necessary; a closed-form proof of the tight beamwidth bounds would let designers choose the exact dense/sparse split that minimizes beamwidth for a fixed grating-lobe budget.
  • The MSE comparison has a natural regime boundary where $K+1$ equals $M$; operating on either side of that boundary determines whether the sensing-assisted estimator or conventional training is more efficient, and a systematic simulation sweep across that boundary would make the intended operating regime precise.
  • A testable extension is to adapt the dense/sparse split of the LNA and PNA to the instantaneous angular spread of the swarm: add more sparse elements when UAVs are tightly packed and shift toward dense elements when grating lobes would dominate.
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 paper studies a low-altitude UAV swarm symbiotic radio (SR) system in which a leading UAV acts as a primary transmitter and nearby UAVs act as passive backscatter devices. The base station is equipped with a 3D sparse MIMO array, specifically an L-shaped nested array (LNA) or a planar nested array (PNA), and the paper compares these with a conventional compact uniform planar array (UPA). The authors derive achievable rate expressions for the primary transmitter and the backscatter devices, analyze beam patterns and main-lobe beamwidths, propose an IS2AC-based channel estimation scheme that first estimates 2D angles via subspace methods and then estimates the complex path gains with few pilots, and provide simulation results showing that LNA and PNA outperform UPA in sensing and communication. The central quantitative claims are that, for a fixed number of physical antennas, LNA has O(1/M^2) and PNA has O(1/M) main-lobe beamwidth scaling, compared with O(1/sqrt(M)) for UPA, and that the proposed channel estimator achieves MSE (K+1)sigma^2/(tau Pt) versus M sigma^2/(tau Pt) for conventional training.

Significance. If the main theorems were fully proven, the paper would make a useful contribution by quantifying the sensing and communication benefits of 3D sparse MIMO in a symbiotic-radio UAV swarm setting. The system model and rate derivations in Section IV-A are standard and appear correct, and the channel estimation scheme is a sensible adaptation of the authors' prior IS2AC framework to sparse arrays. However, the central resolution-ordering claim is not established by the proof as written: the tight beamwidth bounds in Theorems 1-3 rely on unproved statements introduced as 'by numerical simulation' inside the appendices, the LNA proof contains an invalid 'without loss of generality' step, and the PNA example used in Fig. 6(b) violates the stated sufficient condition. The stress-test concern is therefore confirmed: the O(1/M^2) and O(1/M) beamwidth advantages are currently empirical conjectures rather than theorems. The MSE comparison in Section V-B also contains a reversed inequality condition.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-C, Appendices A-C] The tight upper bounds in Theorems 1-3 are not proven. In each appendix the decisive step is an unverified numerical observation: Appendix A states 'by numerical simulation, we found that when M(s)1 >= M(d)2 M(s)2/(2M(d)1+1)', Appendix B states a similar condition, and Appendix C states 'by numerical simulation, we found that when My,2 >= 3(My,1+1)'. These conditions are the only mechanism that converts the coarse bounds (23)-(26) into the claimed O(1/M^2) and O(1/M) beamwidth scalings used in Section IV-C.4. The coarse bounds alone are insufficient; for example, for PNA with M(d)1=0, Theorem 1 guarantees only 4/7 < BWy < 4, which does not establish superiority over a UPA. The phrase 'very close to' is also not a formal mathematical statement. The central resolution ordering is therefore a conjecture unless these numerical conditions are proved or replaced by explicit covering arguments.
  2. [Appendix C] The step 'Without loss of generality, assume My,1 = My,2 >= 2' is not a legitimate WLOG reduction, because My,1 and My,2 are independent design parameters. The ordering Delta_y,5 < Delta_y,4 < Delta_y,6 <= Delta_y,3 used to establish the bound (25) depends on this equality, and the paper does not prove the result for the general case. Notably, the example in Fig. 15 uses My,1=1, My,2=6, which violates the assumed equality. The theorem statement applies to all LNA parameter values, but the proof only addresses a restricted and inconsistently chosen subset.
  3. [Section VI, Fig. 6(b)] The PNA parameters used in the illustrative beam pattern comparison, M(d)1=0, M(d)2=9, M(s)1=3, M(s)2=1, do not satisfy the sufficient condition of Theorem 1. The condition reads M(s)1 >= M(d)2 M(s)2/(2M(d)1+1) = 9, but M(s)1=3, so the tight upper bound does not apply to this configuration. The only guaranteed bound is 4/7 < BWy < 4, which does not by itself show superiority over the UPA shown in the same figure. Figure 6(b) therefore cannot be cited as evidence for the O(1/M) PNA beamwidth claim.
  4. [Section V-B, Eq. (48)] The comparison sentence 'When the number of PT and BDs K+1 is larger than the number of antennas M, our proposed IS2AC-based channel estimation method can achieve better estimation performance compared with the traditional scheme' states the opposite of what the MSE expressions imply. The proposed MSE is (K+1)sigma^2/(tau Pt) and the conventional MSE is M sigma^2/(tau Pt), so the proposed method is better when K+1 < M, not when K+1 > M. Moreover, for K+1 > M the matrix A^H(Theta,Phi)A(Theta,Phi) in (47) is rank-deficient, so the LS estimate in (47) is not defined. This condition must be corrected, and the requirement M >= K+1 for the LS estimator should be stated explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section V-B] There is a typo: 'To obatin the CSI' should read 'To obtain the CSI'.
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (55)] The derivative in Eq. (55) is written as d(.)/d(Delta y), but the expression is a derivative with respect to Delta z; the notation should be corrected.
  3. [Section IV-C.4] The statement that UPA has O(1/sqrt(M)) beamwidth assumes that My,u and Mz,u both scale as sqrt(M). This scaling assumption should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Theorems 1-3] The phrase 'very close to' is not a precise mathematical claim; the authors should replace it with explicit inequalities or with a statement that the bound is a numerical conjecture.
  5. [Section V-B, Eq. (48)] The MSE result (48) is quoted from [37] with 'following a similar derivation', but since it is a load-bearing result for the paper's comparison, the derivation should be included or the exact correspondence to [37] should be stated with equation references.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the beam-pattern and channel-estimation claims derive from stated models; the "by numerical simulation" conditions are proof gaps, not circular inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—the main-lobe beamwidth ordering LNA < PNA < UPA and the sensing-assisted channel estimation MSE—do not reduce to their own inputs by construction. The beam patterns (16), (17), and (20) follow directly from the array response definitions for UPA, PNA, and LNA, and the bounding arguments in Appendices A-C start from those patterns rather than from the desired beamwidth ordering. The tight upper bounds are asserted under conditions such as My,2 ≥ 3(My,1+1) with the phrase "by numerical simulation, we found..."; this is an unproven sufficiency claim and a correctness risk, but it is not circular because those bounds are not fitted parameters, renamed outputs, or definitions of the quantities being predicted. Likewise, Eq. (48) is quoted from the authors' earlier work [37], but the paper states it follows "by a similar derivation" from the LS estimator in (47) under the stated perfect-angle assumption, and the expression (K+1)σ²/(τPt) is a standard linear-algebra consequence of estimating K+1 path gains; the self-citation is supporting rather than load-bearing. The conventional-training benchmark Mσ²/(τPt) is also a standard result. The angle-estimation and beamforming steps in Section V are explicitly constructed in this paper for the sparse arrays, and the resolution comparison is independent of the IS2AC prior work. The statement that the proposed method is better when K+1 is larger than M appears to have the inequality reversed relative to the formulas, but a typographical or logical slip in comparing the two MSE expressions is a correctness issue, not a circularity.

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

The paper leans heavily on known nested array properties (collectively cited [18], [30], [31]) and on the authors' own IS2AC channel estimation framework [14], [37]. The main novel derivations (beamwidth bounds) contain unproven numerical assertions that act as de facto axioms.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Line-of-sight channel model for all direct and backscatter links
    Section II, Eqs. (1)-(2). Every sensing and rate result assumes rank-1 LoS paths; multi-path would invalidate the MUSIC-based DoA model and the MSE expression.
  • domain assumption Information symbols s(n) and c_k(n) are i.i.d. CSCG with unit power; noise is AWGN
    Section II, Eq. (3). Needed for the rate formulas and the exponential distribution of |s(n)|^2 used in Eq. (14).
  • standard math Nested array difference co-arrays are hole-free, so virtual arrays are compact and spatial smoothing yields rank recovery
    Section III, based on [18], [30], [31]. This is a known property of nested arrays.
  • domain assumption Perfect SIC at the BS
    Section IV-A. BD rates are computed assuming earlier BDs are perfectly canceled.
  • ad hoc to paper Numerically observed parameter inequalities are sufficient for the tight main lobe width upper bounds
    Appendices A-C. The 'very close to' and factor-8 upper bounds are justified only by 'by numerical simulation, we found that...', not by derivation.
  • domain assumption Perfect angle estimation in the analytical MSE analysis
    Section V-B. Eq. (48) is derived under Θhat=Θ and Φhat=Φ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Integrated Super-resolution Sensing and Symbiotic Communication with 3D Sparse MIMO for Low-Altitude UAV Swarm." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TY4GWCMS

@misc{pith2026250413570,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Integrated Super-resolution Sensing and Symbiotic Communication with 3D Sparse MIMO for Low-Altitude UAV Swarm},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TY4GWCMS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13570}
}
read the original abstract

Low-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) swarms are expected to play important role for future intelligent aerial systems due to their great potential to cooperatively accomplish complicated missions effectively. However, there are important challenges to be addressed to enable their efficient operation: the large-scale nature of swarms usually leads to excessive spectrum consumption, and ultra-low cost requirements for individual UAVs renders it necessary to develop more cost-effective communication modules. In addition, the densely located swarm UAVs require high resolution for localization and sensing. To address the above challenges and simultaneously achieve spectrum and energy-efficient communication and accurate sensing, we investigate low-altitude UAV swarm with integrated super-resolution sensing and symbiotic communication technology. Specifically, one leading UAV may act as a primary transmitter (PT) to transmit communication signals to the base station (BS), and the remaining nearby UAVs in the swarm act as passive backscatter devices (BDs), which can modulate their information by efficiently backscattering the radio frequency (RF) signals from the PT without consuming extra spectrum or power. In addition, to achieve efficient three-dimensional (3D) super-resolution sensing for the densely located UAV swarm, 3D sparse multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technology and super-resolution signal processing algorithms are further exploited, where both L-shaped nested array (LNA) and planar nested arrays (PNA) are considered at the BS. To evaluate the communication and sensing performance for the UAV-symbiotic radio (SR) system, the achievable rates of UAV swarm are derived and the beam patterns of sparse LNA, PNA and the benchmarking compact uniform planar array (UPA) are compared.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13570 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. IS2AC-SR systems for low-altitude UAV swarm with 3D sparse MIMO. circularly symmetric complex Gaussian (CSCG) variable with mean x and variance Σ. II. SYSTEM MODEL As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. An illustration of the LNA, which consists of two 1D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. An illustration of the PNA in the y-z plane, where the compact and sparse UPAs are respectively denoted in blue and red. Denote the array response of PNA associated with the PT as a (θpt, ϕpt) =  as (θpt, ϕpt) ad (θpt, ϕpt)  ∈ CM×1 , where as (θpt, ϕpt) ∈ CM(s)×1 is the array response of sparse UPA, ad (θpt, ϕpt) ∈ C(M(d)−1)×1 is the array response of compact UPA except for the duplicate coordinate (0, 0) with spa… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of beam patterns for UPA with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The overall procedures of the proposed IS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: RBD versus the number of antennas. 5 10 15 20 transmit SNR (dB) 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 RBD (bps/Hz) PNA (perfect CSI) LNA (perfect CSI) UPA (perfect CSI) PNA (estimated CSI) LNA (estimated CSI) UPA (estimated CSI) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: RBD versus transmit SNR P¯ d. 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 the number of BDs 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 RBD (bps/Hz) PNA (perfect CSI) LNA (perfect CSI) UPA (perfect CSI) PNA (estimated CSI) LNA (estimated CSI) UPA (estimated CSI) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: RBD versus the number of BDs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Trajectory of G pna ∆z=0 (∆y) with M (d) 1 = 2, M(d) 2 = 3, M(s) 1 = 5, M(s) 2 = 3. ∆y,1 −, and g (∆y) d(g(∆y)) d(∆y) < 0 for ∆y,min → ∆y,1 +. Furthermore, since the slope of g (∆y) is steeper than that of f (∆y), we have d(Gˆpna ∆z=0(∆y)) d(∆y) > 0 for ∆y,min → ∆y,1 …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Trajectory of G pna ∆y=0 (∆z) with M (d) 1 = 1, M(d) 2 = 3, M(s) 1 = 1, M(s) 2 = 8. Since the smallest local minimum point for the positive semi-axis of z can not be solved in closed-form, we first cal￾culate the first null points of p (∆z), q (∆z) and cos (r (∆z)). F…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Trajectory of Glna ∆z=0 (∆y) with My,1 = 1, My,2 = 6, Mz,1 = 1, Mz,2 = 6. REFERENCES [1] Y. Zeng, Q. Wu, and R. Zhang, “Accessing from the sky: A tutorial on UAV communications for 5G and beyond,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 2327–2375, Dec. 2019. [2] Y. Zeng and…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Ray Antenna Array Achieves Uniform Angular Resolution Cost-Effectively for Low-Altitude UAV Swarm ISAC

    eess.SP 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    RAA achieves a direction-independent angular resolution of arcsin(2/M) for a selected sULA, while conventional ULA resolution degrades away from boresight.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Accessing from the sky: A tutorial on UA V communications for 5G and beyond,

    Y . Zeng, Q. Wu, and R. Zhang, “Accessing from the sky: A tutorial on UA V communications for 5G and beyond,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 2327–2375, Dec. 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Energy-efficient UA V communication with trajectory optimization,

    Y . Zeng and R. Zhang, “Energy-efficient UA V communication with trajectory optimization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 3747–3760, Jun. 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Survey of important issues in UA V communication networks,

    L. Gupta, R. Jain, and G. Vaszkun, “Survey of important issues in UA V communication networks,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials , vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1123–1152, 2016

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Integrated super-resolution sensing and communication with sparse MIMO for symbiotic radio,

    J. Xu, Y . Zeng, F. Yang and Y . Chen, “Integrated super-resolution sensing and communication with sparse MIMO for symbiotic radio,” in Proc. 2025 IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC) , 2025, pp. 1–6

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    A survey of research on the distributed cooperation method of the UA V swarm based on swarm intelligence,

    L. Ma, B. Lin, W. Zhang, J. Tao, X. Zhu, and H. Chen, “A survey of research on the distributed cooperation method of the UA V swarm based on swarm intelligence,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Softw. Eng. Service Sci. (ICSESS), Beijing, China, 2022, pp. 305–309

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    UA V swarm communication and control architectures: a review,

    M. Campion, P. Ranganathan, and S. Faruque, “UA V swarm communication and control architectures: a review,” J. Unmanned Veh. Syst., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 93–106, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    State-of-the-art and future research challenges in UA V swarms,

    S. Javed et al., “State-of-the-art and future research challenges in UA V swarms,” IEEE Internet Things J. , vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 19023–19045, Jun. 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Symbiotic radio: Cognitive backscattering communications for future wireless networks,

    Y .-C. Liang, Q. Zhang, E. G. Larsson and G. Y . Li, “Symbiotic radio: Cognitive backscattering communications for future wireless networks,” IEEE Trans. Cognit. Commun. Netw. , vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1242–1255, Dec. 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    Symbiotic radio: A new communication paradigm for passive Internet of Things,

    R. Long, Y . -C. Liang, H. Guo, G. Yang and R. Zhang, “Symbiotic radio: A new communication paradigm for passive Internet of Things,” IEEE Internet Things J. , vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1350–1363, Feb. 2020

    2020

  2. [10]

    Y . -C. Liang, R. Long, Q. Zhang and D. Niyato, ”Symbiotic communications: Where marconi meets darwin,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 144–150, Feb. 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    MIMO symbiotic radio with massive backscatter devices: Asymptotic analysis and precoding optimization,

    J. Xu, Z. Dai and Y . Zeng, “MIMO symbiotic radio with massive backscatter devices: Asymptotic analysis and precoding optimization,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 5487–5502, Sept. 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Rate-region characterization and channel estimation for cell-free symbiotic radio communications,

    Z. Dai, R. Li, J. Xu, Y . Zeng and S. Jin, “Rate-region characterization and channel estimation for cell-free symbiotic radio communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 674–687, Feb. 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Integrated Super-Resolution Sensing and Communication with 5G NR Waveform: Signal Processing with Uneven CPs and Experiments: (Invited Paper),

    C. Zhang, Z. Zhou, H. Wang and Y . Zeng, “Integrated Super-Resolution Sensing and Communication with 5G NR Waveform: Signal Processing with Uneven CPs and Experiments: (Invited Paper),” in Proc. Int. Symp. Model. and Opt. Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks (WiOpt), 2023, pp...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Efficient channel estimation for millimeter wave and terahertz systems enabled by integrated super-resolution sensing and communication,

    J. Xu, H. Wang, Y . Zeng, X. Xu, Q. Wu, F. Yang, Y . Chen, and A. Jamalipour, “Efficient channel estimation for millimeter wave and terahertz systems enabled by integrated super-resolution sensing and communication,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20607 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Sparse MIMO for ISAC: New opportunities and challenges,

    X. Li, H. Min, Y . Zeng, S. Jin, L. Dai, Y . Yuan, and R. Zhang, “Sparse MIMO for ISAC: New opportunities and challenges,” accepted by IEEE Wireless Commun., arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12270 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Enhancing spatial multiplexing and interference suppression for near- and far-Field communications with sparse MIMO,

    H. Wang, C. Feng, Y . Zeng, S. Jin, C. Yuen, B. Clerckx, and R. Zhang, “Enhancing spatial multiplexing and interference suppression for near- and far-Field communications with sparse MIMO,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.01956, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Minimum redundancy MIMO radars,

    C.-Y . Chen and P. P. Vaidyanathan, “Minimum redundancy MIMO radars,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Circuits. Syst. (ISCAS) , 2008, pp. 45–48

    2008

  10. [18]

    Nested arrays: A novel approach to array processing with enhanced degrees of freedom,

    P. Pal and P. P. Vaidyanathan, “Nested arrays: A novel approach to array processing with enhanced degrees of freedom,” IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 4167–4181, Aug. 2010

    2010

  11. [19]

    Multi-user modular XL-MIMO communications: Near-field beam focusing pattern and user grouping,

    X. Li, Z. Dong, Y . Zeng, S. Jin, and R. Zhang, “Multi-user modular XL-MIMO communications: Near-field beam focusing pattern and user grouping,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 13766– 13781, Oct. 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Sparse sensing with co-prime samplers and arrays,

    P. P. Vaidyanathan and P. Pal, “Sparse sensing with co-prime samplers and arrays,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 573–586, 2011

    2011

  13. [21]

    A review of sparse sensor arrays for two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation,

    I. Aboumahmoud, A. Muqaibel, M. Alhassoun and S. Alawsh, “A review of sparse sensor arrays for two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 92999–93017, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Improved two-dimensional DOA estimation algorithm for two-parallel uniform linear arrays using propagator method,

    J. Li, X. Zhang, and H. Chen, “Improved two-dimensional DOA estimation algorithm for two-parallel uniform linear arrays using propagator method,” Signal Process. , vol. 92, no. 12, pp. 3032–3038, Dec. 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    An efficient dictionary learning- based 2-D DOA estimation without pair matching for co-prime parallel arrays,

    F. Sun, P. Lan, B. Gao, and G. Zhang, “An efficient dictionary learning- based 2-D DOA estimation without pair matching for co-prime parallel arrays,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 8510–8518, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    Two-dimensional direction estimation of multiple signals using two parallel sparse linear arrays,

    Z. Zheng, Y . Yang, W.-Q. Wang, and S. Zhang, “Two-dimensional direction estimation of multiple signals using two parallel sparse linear arrays,” Signal Process., vol. 143, pp. 112–121, Feb. 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    2-D direction finding with pair-matching operation for L-shaped nested array,

    Z. Zheng and S. Mu, “2-D direction finding with pair-matching operation for L-shaped nested array,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 975– 979, Mar. 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    2-D DOA estimation via correlation matrix reconstruction for nested L-shaped array,

    Y . Yang, X. Mao, Y . Hou, and G. Jiang, “2-D DOA estimation via correlation matrix reconstruction for nested L-shaped array,” Digit. Signal Process., vol. 98, pp. 102623–102633, Mar. 2020

    2020

  19. [27]

    V-shaped sparse arrays for 2-D DOA estimation,

    A. M. Elbir, “V-shaped sparse arrays for 2-D DOA estimation,” Circuits, Syst., Signal Process. , vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 2792–2809, Jun. 2019

    2019

  20. [28]

    Single far-field or near-field source localization with sparse or uniform cross array,

    X. Wu and W.-P. Zhu, “Single far-field or near-field source localization with sparse or uniform cross array,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 9135–9139, Aug. 2020

    2020

  21. [29]

    Two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation for co-prime planar arrays: A partial spectral search approach,

    Q. Wu, F. Sun, P. Lan, G. Ding, and X. Zhang, “Two-dimensional direction-of-arrival estimation for co-prime planar arrays: A partial spectral search approach,” IEEE Sensors J. , vol. 16, no. 14, pp. 5660– 5670, Jul. 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    Nested arrays in two dimensions, Part I: Geometrical considerations,

    P. Pal and P. P. Vaidyanathan, “Nested arrays in two dimensions, Part I: Geometrical considerations,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 4694–4705, Sep. 2012

    2012

  23. [31]

    Nested arrays in two dimensions, Part II: Application in two dimensional array processing,

    P. Pal and P. P. Vaidyanathan, “Nested arrays in two dimensions, Part II: Application in two dimensional array processing,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 4706–4718, Sep. 2012

    2012

  24. [32]

    Thermos array: Two-dimensional sparse array with reduced mutual coupling,

    L. Sun, M. Yang, and B. Chen, “Thermos array: Two-dimensional sparse array with reduced mutual coupling,”Int. J. Antennas Propag., vol. 2018, pp. 1–8, Jan. 2018

    2018

  25. [33]

    Sparse active rectangular array with few closely spaced elements,

    R. Rajamki and V . Koivunen, “Sparse active rectangular array with few closely spaced elements,” IEEE Signal Process. Lett. , vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 1820–1824, Dec. 2018

    2018

  26. [34]

    Integrated sensing and communication with nested array: Beam pattern and performance analysis,

    H. Min, C. Feng, R. Li, and Y . Zeng, “Integrated sensing and communication with nested array: Beam pattern and performance analysis,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Wirel. Commun. Signal Process. (WCSP) , 2024, pp. 764–769

    2024

  27. [35]

    Symbiotic radio: A new communication paradigm for passive Internet-of-Things,

    R. Long, Y .-C. Liang, H. Guo, G. Yang, and R. Zhang, “Symbiotic radio: A new communication paradigm for passive Internet-of-Things,” IEEE Internet Things J. , vol. 7, pp. 1350–1363, Nov. 2020

    2020

  28. [36]

    Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estimation,

    R. Schmidt, “Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estimation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. AP-34, no. 3, pp. 276–280, Mar. 1986

    1986

  29. [37]

    Little pilot is needed for channel estimation with integrated super-resolution sensing and communication,

    J. Xu, H. Wang, Y . Zeng and X. Xu, “Little pilot is needed for channel estimation with integrated super-resolution sensing and communication,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. and Networking Conf.(WCNC) , 2024, pp. 1–6

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.