MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117140241 · doi:10.1109/tccn.2025.3647822

Deep Learning Optimization of Two-State Pinching Antennas Systems

2025· article· W7117140241 on OpenAlexaff
Odysseas G. Karagiannidis, Victoria E. Galanopoulou, Panagiotis D. Diamantoulakis, Zhiguo Ding, Octavia A. Dobre

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)WirelessDeep learningPipeline (software)Quadratic programmingArtificial neural networkQuadratic equationSoftware deploymentBinary numberOptimization problem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of wireless communication systems requires flexible, energy-efficient, and cost-effective antenna technologies. Pinching antennas (PAs), which can dynamically control electromagnetic wave propagation through binary activation states, have recently emerged as a promising candidate. In this work, we investigate the problem of optimally selecting a subset of fixed-position PAs to activate in a waveguide, when the aim is to maximize the communication rate at a user terminal. Due to the complex interplay between antenna activation, waveguide-induced phase shifts, and power division, this problem is formulated as a combinatorial fractional 0-1 quadratic program. To efficiently solve this challenging problem, we use neural network architectures of varying complexity to learn activation policies directly from data, leveraging spatial features and signal structure. Furthermore, we incorporate user location uncertainty into our training and evaluation pipeline to simulate realistic deployment conditions. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and NetworkingSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207