Modeling and Analysis of Near-Field ISAC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the technical trends for the next-generation wireless network significantly extend the near-field region, a performance reevaluation of integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) with an appropriate channel model to account for the effects introduced by the near field becomes essential. In this paper, a near-field ISAC framework is proposed for both downlink and uplink scenarios based on an accurate channel model. A uniform planar array is equipped at a base station, where the impacts of the effective aperture and polarization of antennas are considered. For the downlink case, three distinct designs are studied: a communications-centric (C-C) design, a sensing-centric (S-C) design, and a Pareto optimal design. Regarding the uplink case, the C-C design, the S-C design and a time-sharing strategy are considered. Within each design, sensing rates (SRs) and communication rates (CRs) are derived. To gain further insights, high signal-to-noise ratio slopes and rate scaling laws concerning the number of antennas are examined. The attainable near-field SR-CR regions of ISAC and the baseline frequency-division S&C are also characterized. Numerical results reveal that, as the number of antennas in the array grows, the SRs and CRs under our accurate model converge to finite values, while those under conventional far- and near-field models exhibit unbounded growth, highlighting the importance of precisely modeling the channels for near-field ISAC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".