MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Building 6G Radio Foundation Models with Transformer Architectures

2025· article· en· W4414539622 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Aboulfotouh, Ashkan Eshaghbeigi, Hatem Abou-Zeid

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Communications and Noise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrogramTransformerWirelessScalabilityDeep learningGeneralizationSegmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foundation deep learning (DL) models are general models, designed to learn general, robust and adaptable representations of their target modality, enabling finetuning across a range of downstream tasks. These models are pretrained on large, unlabeled datasets using self-supervised learning (SSL). Foundation models have demonstrated better generalization than traditional supervised approaches, a critical requirement for wireless communications where the dynamic environment demands model adaptability. In this work, we propose and demonstrate the effectiveness of a Vision Transformer (ViT) as a radio foundation model for spectrogram learning. We introduce a Masked Spectrogram Modeling (MSM) approach to pretrain the ViT in a selfsupervised fashion. We evaluate the ViT-based foundation model on two downstream tasks: Human Activity sensing and Spectrogram Segmentation. Experimental results demonstrate competitive performance to supervised training while generalizing across diverse domains. Notably, the pretrained ViT model outperforms a four-times larger model that is trained from scratch on the spectrogram segmentation task, while requiring significantly less training time, and achieves competitive performance on the human activity sensing task. This work demonstrates the effectiveness of ViT with MSM for pretraining as a promising technique for scalable foundation model development in future 6G networks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Line Communications and NoiseFrench-language works237,207