MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415163234 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.03918

FollowSpot: Enhancing Wireless Communications via Movable Ceiling-Mounted Metasurfaces

2025· preprint· en· W4415163234 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wenhai Lai, Kaiming Shen, Rui Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Infocomm ResearchShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityChinese University of Hong KongNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of TorontoNational University of Singapore
KeywordsMaximizationOptimization problemFocus (optics)Key (lock)WirelessVariable (mathematics)Continuous variableNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the optimal placement of ceiling-mounted metasurfaces (MTSs) to help focus the wireless signal beam onto the target receiver, as inspired by the theatre spotlight. We assume that a total of $M$ MTSs are deployed, and that there are $L$ possible positions for each MTS. The resulting signal-to-noise (SNR) maximization problem is difficult to tackle directly because of the coupling between the placement decisions of the different MTSs. Mathematically, we are faced with a nonlinear discrete optimization problem with $L^M$ possible solutions. A remarkable result shown in this paper is that the above challenging problem can be efficiently solved within $O(ML^2\log(ML))$ time. There are two key steps in developing the proposed algorithm. First, we successfully decouple the placement variables of different MTSs by introducing a continuous auxiliary variable $μ$; the discrete primal variables are now easy to optimize when $μ$ is held fixed, but the optimization problem of $μ$ is nonconvex. Second, we show that the optimization of continuous $μ$ can be recast into a discrete optimization problem with only $LM$ possible solutions, so the optimal $μ$ can now be readily obtained. Numerical results show that the proposed algorithm can not only guarantee a global optimum but also reach the optimal solution efficiently.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207