Communication device for vehicle and method for evaluating communication performance thereof

Abstract

The invention relates to a communication device for a vehicle and a method of evaluating communication performance thereof. The method of evaluating performance of a communication device for a vehicle includes: performing communication with a base station; monitoring a fault event and determining a fault event score based on a result of the monitoring; monitoring attempts of handover and determining a pinpong handover (PPHO) score based on a result of the monitoring; monitoring a dwell time within the blind spot and determining a service score based on a result of the monitoring; and determining a final score based on the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a communication device for a vehicle, and more particularly, to an apparatus for quantitatively evaluating performance of communication with a network and a method of evaluating performance of the apparatus. Background Art

[0002] "Infotainment" is a compound of "information" and "entertainment". In particular, with the popularity of smartphones, infotainment for vehicles has attracted much attention as an application service for next-generation vehicles. Infotainment as a whole refers to the environment within the vehicle that can provide passengers with both driving-related information and things to enjoy.

[0003] As the global expansion of connected car applications, online connected services such as navigation, real-time video streaming services, OTA (Over the Air) download services, safety assurance, information provision through server voice recognition, etc. are increasing, and the importance of performance evaluation for online connected services is also increasing. Specifically, it is important to provide traditional audio video navigation telematics (AVNT) OTA services and also maintain performance matching and reliability of communication with the communication network when updating the controller in the vehicle through the controller OTA.

[0004] Conventionally, network performance evaluation is performed by simply repeating data calls or voice calls, aggregating the number of successes according to the number of attempts. A lot of time is allocated to the debugging of network performance evaluation. Moreover, if the communication fails due to a simple network problem, this failure will affect the results of the network performance evaluation. Therefore, quantitative evaluation data may lead to different results depending on the environment (such as evaluation conditions, evaluators, evaluation time and evaluation location). If performance evaluation cannot be performed again even after a problem occurs, it is difficult to accurately check whether the network performance has improved. Therefore, it is not easy to immediately deal with problems occurring in the modem or to solve the problems quickly. In addition, there are difficulties in the arrangement between the performance evaluator of the delay system or modem and the developer.

[0005] Therefore, the technical field requires a technology that can stably ensure the performance of the modem by quantitatively evaluating the robustness and stability of the interlocking performance between the communication network and the modem of the AVNT terminal. Summary of the invention

[0006] The present disclosure aims to provide a communication device for a vehicle and a method for evaluating the performance of the communication device, which can quantitatively evaluate the robustness and stability of the interlocking performance between a communication network and a modem of an AVNT terminal.

[0007] The present disclosure aims to induce effective and proactive correspondence of system developers by reducing manpower and time for communication network interlocking performance evaluation in online services and objectively evaluating communication network interlocking performance.

[0008] The present disclosure aims to provide a method to quantitatively evaluate the performance of a modem, which can be interpreted as a definite numerical value.

[0009] The present disclosure aims to provide a reasonable and objective performance evaluation method that can be agreed upon by the performance evaluator and the system developer.

[0010] Technical objectives to be achieved in the present disclosure are not limited to the above-mentioned objectives, and other objectives not mentioned will be clearly understood from the following description by those skilled in the art to which the present disclosure pertains.

[0011] A method for evaluating the performance of a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may include: performing communication with a base station, monitoring fault events and determining a fault event score based on the monitoring results, monitoring handover attempts, and determining a pingpong handover (PPHO) score based on the monitoring results, monitoring the stay time in a blind spot, and determining a service score based on the monitoring results, and determining a final score based on the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0012] In this case, the determination of the fault event score may include generating a communication measurement log based on the results of the monitoring of the fault event and determining the fault event score based on the communication measurement log.

[0013] In this case, determining the fault event score may include dividing the vehicle's driving route generated based on the communication measurement log into multiple bin distances with preset arbitrary intervals, and determining the fault event score by treating multiple identical fault events that overlap and occur within one divided bin distance as one fault event.

[0014] In this case, the failure event score may be determined by subtracting a preset value from an initial value arbitrarily set based on the failure event parameter included in the communication measurement log.

[0015] In this case, the failure event parameter may include at least one of the following: "RLF", "continuous weak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE rejection", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

[0016] In this case, the PPHO score may be determined by subtracting a value that has been preset in the PPHO or Mode PPHO from an initial value arbitrarily set when the PPHO or Mode PPHO occurs.

[0017] In this case, when handover is performed, when at least one source physical cell identifier (PCI) before handover is performed (i.e., the PCI of the source cell) and the target PCI after the handover is finally performed (i.e., the PCI of the target cell) are identical to each other and the interval between handover attempts is less than a first threshold time, it can be determined that PPHO has occurred.

[0018] In this case, when handover is performed, when the source PCI and the target PCI are identical to each other and an interval between handover attempts is equal to or greater than a first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, it may be determined that the mode PPHO has occurred.

[0019] In this case, the service score can be determined based on the ratio of the stay time in the blind spot where the communication device for the vehicle enters the blind spot where communication with the base station is impossible and maintains the communication impossible state to the entire call measurement time of the communication device of the vehicle.

[0020] In this case, the final score may be obtained by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0021] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a communication device for a vehicle may include: a communication unit configured to communicate with a base station; and a processor configured to monitor a fault event; determine a fault event score based on a result of monitoring the fault event, monitor handover attempts, determine a pingpong handover (PPHO) score based on a result of monitoring the handover attempts, monitor a stay time in a blind spot, determine a service score based on a result of the monitoring of the stay time, and determine a final score, a PPHO score, and a service score based on the fault event score.

[0022] In this case, the processor may generate a communication measurement log based on the results of the monitoring of the fault event, and may determine the fault event score based on the communication measurement log.

[0023] In this case, the processor may divide the driving route of the vehicle generated based on the communication measurement log into a plurality of bin distances with preset arbitrary intervals, and may determine the fault event score by treating a plurality of identical fault events that overlap and occur within one divided bin distance as one fault event.

[0024] In this case, the failure event score may be determined by subtracting a preset value from an initial value arbitrarily set based on the failure event parameter included in the communication measurement log.

[0025] In this case, the failure event parameter may include at least one of the following: "RLF", "continuous weak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE rejection", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

[0026] In this case, the processor may determine the PPHO score by subtracting a value that has been preset in the PPHO or Mode PPHO from an initial value that has been arbitrarily set when the PPHO or Mode PPHO occurs.

[0027] In this case, when handover is performed, when at least one source physical cell identifier (PCI) before handover is performed (i.e., the PCI of the source cell) and the target PCI after the handover is finally performed (i.e., the PCI of the target cell) are identical to each other and the interval between handover attempts is less than a first threshold time, it can be determined that PPHO has occurred.

[0028] In this case, when handover is performed, when the source PCI and the target PCI are identical to each other and an interval between handover attempts is equal to or greater than a first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, it may be determined that the mode PPHO has occurred.

[0029] In this case, the service score can be determined based on the ratio of the residence time of the communication device for the vehicle entering the blind spot, where communication of the communication device with the base station is impossible and remains in a communication impossible state, compared to the entire call measurement time of the communication device for the vehicle.

[0030] In this case, the final score may be obtained by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0031] According to the above-described various embodiments of the present disclosure, the robustness and stability of the interlocking performance between the communication network and the modem of the AVNT terminal can be quantitatively evaluated.

[0032] Furthermore, by reducing the manpower and time for evaluating the communication network interlocking performance in the online service, the communication network interlocking performance can be objectively evaluated, which can trigger effective proactive responses from system developers.

[0033] Furthermore, a method of quantitatively evaluating the performance of a modem may be provided which may be interpreted as a clear numerical value.

[0034] Furthermore, a reasonable and objective performance evaluation method is provided that can be agreed upon by both the performance evaluator and the system developer.

[0035] Furthermore, reliable modem performance evaluation results are obtained by simultaneously comparing the performance of communications with the network with a comparison group, ensuring identification and fairness of network problems, and selecting factors that have direct and indirect impact on field problems when evaluating the performance of communications with the network.

[0036] In addition, scoring and quantitative results of the evaluation can be obtained by applying root cause analysis (RCA).

[0037] Furthermore, the reliability of the evaluation of the performance of the communication with the network is ensured by selecting the determination criterion according to the performance index and introducing a fractional subtraction method in the blind area.

[0038] Effects obtainable from the present disclosure are not limited to the above-mentioned effects, and other effects that are not mentioned will be clearly understood from the following description by those skilled in the art to which the present disclosure pertains. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0039] The above and other objects, features and other advantages of the present disclosure will be more clearly understood from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:

[0040] Figure 1 An embodiment of a method of analyzing a cause of a network interlocking problem with an online service of a general network system is shown.

[0041] Figure 2 It shows execution Figure 1 FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a detailed embodiment of the steps of the RCA algorithm.

[0042] Figure 3 is a block diagram schematically showing a configuration of a communication apparatus for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0043] Figure 4A An example of an entire driving route of a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown. Figure 4B Show Figure 4A An embodiment in which the entire driving path of a vehicle is divided into a plurality of bin distances.

[0044] Figure 5 An example of reducing a fault event score according to a fault event parameter according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0045] Fig. 6A and Figure 6BAn example of a field log of another terminal for determining PPHO or mode PPHO and a field log collected from a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0046] Figure 7 An example of a method for determining a stay time in a blind spot based on a communication measurement log of a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0047] Figure 8 An example of a service score according to a ratio of the dwell time within a blind spot according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0048] Fig. 9 is a flowchart illustrating a method of evaluating performance of a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0049] Hereinafter, the embodiments disclosed in this specification will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. Regardless of their reference numerals, identical or similar elements are assigned the same reference numerals, and their redundant descriptions are omitted. It should be noted that the suffixes of the components used in the following description (e.g., "module" and "unit") are assigned or interchanged with each other by simply considering the ease of writing this specification, but are not particularly given different meanings and functions themselves. In addition, when describing the embodiments disclosed in this specification, when it is determined that the detailed description of the related known technology may obscure the subject matter of the embodiments disclosed in this specification, the detailed description will be omitted. In addition, it should be understood that the drawings are only intended to easily understand the embodiments disclosed in this specification, and the technical spirit disclosed in this specification is not limited by the drawings, and includes all changes, equivalents and substitutions that fall within the spirit and technical scope of this specification.

[0050] Terms including ordinal numbers such as "first" and "second" may be used to describe various components, but these components are not limited by the terms. These terms are only used to distinguish one component from other components.

[0051] When describing that a component is "connected" or "coupled" to another component, it should be understood that a component can be directly connected or coupled to another component, but a third component may exist between the two components. Conversely, when describing that a component is "directly connected" or "directly coupled" to another component, it should be understood that there is no third component between the two components.

[0052] An expression in the singular includes an expression in the plural unless clearly defined otherwise in the context.

[0053] In this specification, it should be understood that terms such as "include" or "have" are intended to specify the existence of the characteristics, quantities, steps, operations, components, parts or combinations thereof described in the specification, and do not preclude the existence or additional possibilities of one or more other characteristics, quantities, steps, operations, components, parts or combinations thereof.

[0054] Figure 1 An embodiment of a method of analyzing a cause of a network interlocking problem with an online service of a general network system is shown.

[0055] Reference Figure 1 When a problem related to the online network interlock occurs at S110 , the cause of the problem is analyzed by executing a root cause analysis (RCA) algorithm at S130 , and the analysis result is obtained at S150 .

[0056] Figure 2 It shows execution Figure 1 FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a detailed embodiment of the steps of the RCA algorithm.

[0057] refer to Figure 2 , the steps of executing the RCA algorithm include step S210 of determining whether a problem related to a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) has occurred, and step S220 of executing a SIP analysis engine if the SIP problem has occurred.

[0058] In addition, the steps of executing the RCA algorithm include: step S230, if no problem occurs in SIP as a result of the determination in step S210, determining whether a problem related to L3 (i.e., network layer) has occurred; and step S240, if a problem has occurred in L3, executing the L3 analysis engine.

[0059] In this case, the L3 analysis engine may include a radio resource control (RRC) analysis engine and a non-access stratum (NAS) analysis engine.

[0060] In addition, the steps of executing the RCA algorithm include: step S250, if no problem occurs in L3 as a result of the determination in step S230, determining whether a problem related to L1 (i.e., physical layer) has occurred; and step S260, if a problem occurs in L1, executing the L1 analysis engine.

[0061] Figure 3 is a block diagram schematically showing a configuration of a communication device 300 for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0062] Reference Figure 3, a communication device 300 for a vehicle according to the present disclosure includes a processor 310 , a communication unit 330 , and a memory 350 .

[0063] In this case, the communication device 300 for a vehicle may be an audio video navigation telematics (AVNT) terminal installed in the vehicle.

[0064] The processor 310 may include an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), another chipset, a logic circuit, and / or a data processing device. The processor 310 implements the method for evaluating the performance of a communication device for a vehicle proposed in this specification. Specifically, in the embodiment disclosed in this specification, the processor 310 quantitatively evaluates the performance of online network interlocking services such as navigation, voice recognition, and real-time video streaming measured when a vehicle in which the communication device 300 for a vehicle has been installed is traveling.

[0065] In this case, the processor 310 may receive a score obtained by quantitatively evaluating the performance of the online network interlocking service for another terminal quantitatively from the communication unit 330, and may compare the received score with a score obtained by evaluating the performance of the communication device 300 for the vehicle.

[0066] In this case, the other terminal may be an AVNT terminal installed in another vehicle that has a driving route that is closest to the vehicle in which the communication device 300 for the vehicle has been installed or has a high ratio of a driving route that overlaps with the driving route of the vehicle in which the communication device 300 for the vehicle has been installed, or the other terminal may be an AVNT terminal installed in another vehicle that is closest to the position in which the communication device 300 for the vehicle has been installed.

[0067] The processor 310 includes a failure event score determination unit 311 , a pingpong handover (PPHO) score determination unit 313 , a service score determination unit 315 , and a final score determination unit 317 .

[0068] The failure event score determination unit 311 performs communication with the base station through the communication unit 330 and monitors a failure event.

[0069] In this case, when the failure event score determination unit 311 receives the HKDM L3 message, a failure event may occur.

[0070] In this case, the failure event score determination unit 311 may generate a communication measurement log based on the result of monitoring of the failure event.

[0071] In this case, the fault event score determination unit 311 can divide the driving path generated based on the communication measurement log into multiple binning distances based on a preset arbitrary standard, and reduce the fault event score by treating multiple identical fault events that overlap and occur within one divided binning distance as one fault event.

[0072] For example, the fault event score determination unit 311 may be as follows: Figure 4B As shown, the Figure 4A The entire driving path represented by the thick line in FIG is divided into a plurality of bin distances, and the failure event score can be reduced by treating a plurality of identical failure events that overlap and occur within one divided bin distance as one failure event.

[0073] In this case, an arbitrary value may be set as the initial value of the fault event score. For example, the initial value may be set to 100.

[0074] In this case, the fault event score may be determined based on a fault event occurrence history that is detected based on fault event parameters within the communication measurement log.

[0075] In this case, the failure event score determination unit 311 may classify the event occurrence conditions in order to ensure fairness between the other terminal and the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle.

[0076] In this case, for example, the failure event parameter may include at least one of "RLF", "ContinuousWeak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE Reject", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

[0077] In this case, the failure event score determination unit 311 may subtract a different value from the failure event score for each failure event parameter. For example, in the case of "RLF", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "continuous weak SINR", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.1. In the case of "310_Expiry", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "RRE rejection", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "RACH_PROBLEM", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "MAX_RETRX", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "rlc_MaxNumRetx", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "randomAccessProblem", the failure event score may be subtracted by 0.5. In the case of "SIB_READ_FAILURE", the failure event score may be subtracted by 5.

[0078] Figure 5 An example of reducing a fault event score according to a fault event parameter according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0079] exist Figure 5 , the reference terminal failure event log 510 indicates a failure event occurrence history of another terminal. The comparison terminal failure event log 530 indicates a score obtained by evaluating the performance of the online network interlocking service by the communication device 300 for the vehicle based on the failure event parameters detected from the communication measurement log for measuring the communication performance.

[0080] refer to Figure 5 As can be seen, the failure event score determining unit 311 may compare the failure event score according to the failure event parameter of the communication device 300 for the vehicle with the failure event score of another terminal that is performing communication at a location close to the communication device 300 for the vehicle.

[0081] Return to reference Figure 3 , the PPHO score determination unit 313 monitors the number of times the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle performs PPHO at a predetermined time, and reduces the PPHO score based on the number of times.

[0082] In this case, PPHO is a phenomenon in which networks are frequently switched in a short time, and may mean that handover is repeatedly performed between a source cell providing a service to a terminal and a target cell that will provide a service to the terminal.

[0083] Frequent PPHO affects network interlocking performance and may reduce the performance of online services. In order to determine whether frequent PPHO is caused by a problem with the communication network or a problem with the terminal, the PPHO score of another terminal can be compared and quantified with the PPHO score of the communication device 300 for the vehicle.

[0084] In this case, when the interval between handover attempts is less than a first threshold time, the handover may be determined as PPHO.When the interval between handover attempts is equal to or greater than a first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, the handover may be determined as mode PPHO.

[0085] In this case, each of the first threshold time and the second threshold time may be a time that has been arbitrarily set. For example, the first threshold time may be set to 1 second, and the second threshold time may be set to 5 seconds.

[0086] In this case, the PPHO score determination unit 313 may determine whether PPHO or mode PPHO occurs based on a field log collected as a result of the communication of the communication unit 330 with the base station.

[0087] At this time, if the source physical cell identifier (PCI) before the handover is executed (ie, the PCI of the source cell) and the target PCI after the handover is finally executed (ie, the PCI of the target cell) are the same as each other, it can be determined that the handover is PPHO or mode PPHO.

[0088] Furthermore, if an evolved absolute radio frequency channel number (EARFCN) of the source cell and an EARFCN of the target cell are different from each other, it may be determined that the handover is not PPHO or mode PPHO.

[0089] In this case, EARFCN indicates uplink and downlink channels for the base station and the terminal to communicate with each other. In order to prevent crosstalk due to neighboring cells transmitting signals through similar channels, the base station provides services by using different ARFCNs for each sector.

[0090] Thus, if the sectors of the source cell and the target cell are different from each other, the handover may be determined as not PPHO or Mode PPHO.

[0091] In this case, an arbitrary value may be set as the initial value of the PPHO score. For example, the initial value may be set to 100.

[0092] The PPHO score determination unit 313 may reduce the PPHO score by the same score or a different score for PPHO or mode PPHO. For example, the PPHO score determination unit 313 may reduce the PPHO score for PPHO or mode PPHO based on the criteria defined in Table 1.

[0093] Table 1

[0094] Handover Type Deduction of points PPHO -0.3 Mode PPHO -0.3.

[0095] Fig. 6A and Figure 6B An example of a field log of another terminal for determining PPHO or mode PPHO and a field log collected from a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown. Fig. 6A The reference terminal field log 610 shown in FIG. 6 represents a field log of another terminal. Figure 6B The comparison terminal field log 630 shown in ⊥ represents the field log of the communication device 300 for the vehicle.

[0096] refer to Fig. 6A and Figure 6B , it can be seen that the PPHO score determination unit 313 may determine whether PPHO or mode PPHO occurs based on the reference terminal field log 610 and the field log 630 of the communication device 300 for the vehicle.

[0097] Return to reference Figure 3 The service score determination unit 315 determines the service score by calculating the ratio of the residence time of the communication device 300 for the vehicle entering the blind spot compared to the entire call measurement time of the communication device 300 of the vehicle, in which the communication device 300 and the network (i.e., base station) are impossible to communicate and maintain the communication.

[0098] In this case, the ratio of the dwell time in the blind zone can be calculated by Equation 1:

[0099] NoServiceRatio(%)=(stay time in blind area / call measurement time)*100

[0100] In Equation 1, the no-service ratio indicates the ratio of the stay time within the blind area.

[0101] For example, refer to Figure 7 , in the communication measurement log of the communication device 300 for the vehicle, the stay time in the blind spot can be calculated as a time period from the timing when a value indicating that the communication service is impossible is written to the parameter indicating the communication state to the timing when a value indicating that the communication service is possible is written to the parameter.

[0102] For example, the parameter indicating the communication status may be a CM status information service status parameter. A value indicating that a communication service is not possible may be "no service". A value indicating that a communication service is possible may be "service available".

[0103] Figure 8An example of a service score according to a ratio of the dwell time within a blind spot according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0104] exist Figure 8 , the reference terminal blind spot data 810 indicates a service score for another terminal according to the stay time in the blind spot. The comparison terminal blind spot data 830 indicates a service score for the communication device 300 of the vehicle according to the stay time in the blind spot. Figure 8 , it can be seen that when both the other terminal and the communication device 300 for vehicle are placed in the serviceable area during the entire time, the service scores of the other terminal and the communication device 300 for vehicle may both have a value of 100.

[0105] Return to reference Figure 3 The final score determination unit 317 determines a final score related to the network interlocking performance of the communication device 300 for the vehicle based on the fault event score determined by the fault event score determination unit 311, the PPHO score determined by the PPHO score determination unit 313, and the service score determined by the service score determination unit 315.

[0106] In this case, the final score determination unit 317 may determine the final score by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0107] For example, the final score determination unit 317 may determine the final score based on Table 2.

[0108] Table 2

[0109] Scoring Items Consolidated Ratio Remark Failure event score 50％ Reliability of modem performance assessments combined with field issues PPHO score 20％ The impact of merging on performance that is not recognized as time Service score 30％ Incorporating performance estimation errors due to blind spots (no service)

[0110] Referring to Table 2, it can be seen that the final score determination unit 317 can determine the final score by combining the fault event score, PPHO score, and service score by 50%, 20%, and 30%, respectively. However, the ratio is only an embodiment and can be set to various ratios according to the user's selection.

[0111] The final score determined by the final score determination unit 317 may be used in various places.

[0112] For example, when the final score is lower than a threshold score, the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle may provide the final score to a manager of the base station so that the manager may monitor the communication quality by transmitting the final score to the base station.

[0113] In addition, when the final score of the communication device 300 for the vehicle is lower than the final score of another nearby terminal by more than a threshold, the communication device 300 for the vehicle can transmit the final score to the server or terminal of the vehicle manufacturer or service manager, so that the vehicle manufacturer or service manager can update the software of the vehicle's modem or controller or check the modem or controller.

[0114] The communication unit 330 is connected to the processor 310 and transmits and / or receives all types of information for implementing the method of evaluating the performance of the communication device for the vehicle. For example, the communication unit 330 may receive a score obtained by quantitatively evaluating the performance of the online network interlocking service for another terminal.

[0115] In addition, the communication unit 330 may receive a message for communication performance measurement for generating a communication measurement log from the base station.

[0116] In this case, the communication measurement log may include the failure event message used to determine the failure event score.

[0117] In this case, the message used for communication performance measurement may be a HKDM L3 message.

[0118] In addition, the communication unit 330 may collect a field log for generating a PPHO score through communication with a base station.

[0119] In addition, the communication unit 330 may collect communication measurement logs for generating a service score by communicating with a base station.

[0120] The memory 350 may include a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a flash memory, a memory card, a storage medium, and / or another storage device. The memory 350 stores information for implementing a communication device for a vehicle and a method for evaluating performance of the communication device. For example, the memory 350 stores at least one of a fault event score, a PPHO score, and a service score, or a final score, or a combination thereof.

[0121] Fig. 9 is a flowchart illustrating a method of evaluating performance of a communication device for a vehicle according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0122] Can be based on Figure 3 The communication device 300 for a vehicle of the embodiment performs the method of evaluating the performance of the communication device for a vehicle according to the present disclosure.

[0123] refer to Fig. 9 , at S910 , the communication device 300 for the vehicle communicates with a base station.

[0124] Furthermore, in S920 , the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle monitors a failure event.

[0125] Furthermore, at S930 , the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle determines a failure event score based on the result of the monitoring of the failure event.

[0126] In this case, the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle may generate a communication measurement log based on a result of monitoring of the failure event, and may determine a failure event score based on the communication measurement log.

[0127] In this case, the communication device 300 for the vehicle can divide the driving route of the vehicle generated based on the communication measurement log into multiple bin distances with preset arbitrary intervals, and can determine the fault event score by treating multiple identical fault events that overlap and occur within one divided bin distance as one fault event.

[0128] In this case, the failure event score may be determined by subtracting a preset value from an arbitrarily set initial value based on the failure event parameter included in the communication measurement log.

[0129] In this case, the failure event parameter may include at least one of the following: "RLF", "continuous weak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE rejection", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

[0130] Furthermore, at S940 , the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle monitors an attempt of handover.

[0131] Furthermore, the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle determines a PPHO score based on a result of the attempt to monitor the handover at S950 .

[0132] In this case, the PPHO score may be determined by subtracting a preset value of the PPHO or Mode PPHO from an initial value arbitrarily set when the PPHO or Mode PPHO occurs.

[0133] In this case, when handover is performed, when at least one source physical cell identifier (PCI) before handover is performed (i.e., the PCI of the source cell) and the target PCI after the handover is finally performed (i.e., the PCI of the target cell) are identical to each other and the interval between handover attempts is less than a first threshold time, it can be determined that PPHO has occurred.

[0134] In this case, when handover is performed, when the source PCI and the target PCI are identical to each other and an interval between attempts of handover is equal to or greater than a first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, it may be determined that the mode PPHO has occurred.

[0135] Furthermore, at S960 , the communication device 300 for a vehicle monitors the stay time in the blind spot.

[0136] Furthermore, at S970 , the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle determines a service score based on a result of monitoring the stay time within the blind spot.

[0137] In this case, the service score can be determined based on the ratio of the residence time of the communication device for the vehicle entering the blind spot compared to the entire call measurement time of the communication device of the vehicle, in which the communication device cannot communicate with the base station and maintains the communication impossible state.

[0138] Furthermore, at S980 , the communication apparatus 300 for a vehicle determines a final score based on the failure event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0139] In this case, the final score may be obtained by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

[0140] According to the above-described embodiments of the present invention, the robustness and stability of the interlocking performance between the communication network and the modem of the AVNT terminal can be quantitatively evaluated.

[0141] Furthermore, by reducing the manpower and time used for communication network interlocking performance evaluation in online business, the communication network interlocking performance can be objectively evaluated, which can trigger effective proactive response from system developers.

[0142] Furthermore, methods can be provided to quantitatively assess modem performance, which can be interpreted as unambiguous numerical values.

[0143] Furthermore, a reasonably objective method of evaluating the performance of communication network interlocks that can be agreed upon by performance evaluators and system developers is provided.

[0144] Furthermore, reliable modem performance evaluation results are obtained by simultaneously comparing the performance of communications with the network with a comparison group, ensuring identification and fairness of network problems, and selecting factors that have direct and indirect impact on field problems when evaluating the performance of communications with the network.

[0145] In addition, scoring and quantitative results of the evaluation can be obtained by applying root cause analysis (RCA).

[0146] Furthermore, the reliability of the evaluation of the performance of the communication with the network is ensured by selecting the determination criterion according to the performance index and introducing a fractional subtraction method in the blind area.

[0147] While the present disclosure has been described in conjunction with what are presently considered to be practical exemplary embodiments, it should be understood that the present disclosure is not limited to the disclosed embodiments, but is intended to cover various modifications and equivalent arrangements included within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating performance of a communication device for a vehicle, the method being performed by the communication device and comprising: performing communications with a base station; monitoring fault events and determining a fault event score based on the results of the monitoring; monitoring handover attempts, and determining a pingpong handover PPHO score based on results of the monitoring; monitoring the dwell time in the blind area and determining a service score based on the results of the monitoring; as well as A final score is determined based on the failure event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein: Determining the fault event score includes: generating a communication measurement log based on the results of monitoring the fault event; and The failure event score is determined based on the communication measurement log.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein: Determining the fault event score includes: Dividing the driving path of the vehicle generated based on the communication measurement log into a plurality of compartment distances with preset arbitrary intervals; and The fault event score is determined by considering a plurality of identical fault events that overlap and occur within a divided bin distance as one fault event.

4. The method according to claim 2, wherein: The failure event score is determined by subtracting a preset value from an initial value arbitrarily set based on a failure event parameter included in the communication measurement log.

5. The method according to claim 4, wherein: The failure event parameter includes at least one of "RLF", "continuous weak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE rejection", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein: The PPHO score is determined by subtracting a value that has been preset in the PPHO or the mode PPHO from an initial value that has been arbitrarily set when the PPHO or the mode PPHO occurs.

7. The method according to claim 6, wherein: When performing a handover, when at least one source physical cell identifier before the handover is performed is identical to a target physical cell identifier after the handover is finally performed, and an interval between handover attempts is less than a first threshold time, it is determined that the PPHO has occurred.

8. The method according to claim 7, wherein: When performing the handover, when the source physical cell identifier and the target physical cell identifier are identical to each other and an interval between the handover attempts is equal to or greater than the first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, it is determined that the mode PPHO has occurred.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein: The service score is determined based on a ratio of the stay time of the communication device for a vehicle entering the blind area where communication with the base station is impossible and remains in a communication impossible state compared to a whole call measurement time of the communication device for a vehicle.

10. The method according to claim 1, wherein: The final score is obtained by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

11. A communication device for a vehicle, comprising: a communication unit configured to communicate with a base station; as well as A processor is configured to monitor a fault event, determine a fault event score based on a result of monitoring the fault event, monitor a handover attempt, determine a pingpong handover PPHO score based on a result of monitoring the handover attempt, monitor a stay time in a blind area, determine a service score based on a result of monitoring the stay time, and determine a final score based on the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

12. The communication device according to claim 11, wherein: The processor generates a communication measurement log based on results of monitoring the fault event and determines the fault event score based on the communication measurement log.

13. The communication device according to claim 12, wherein: The processor divides the driving path of the vehicle generated based on the communication measurement log into a plurality of bin distances with preset arbitrary intervals, and determines the fault event score by regarding a plurality of identical fault events that overlap and occur within one divided bin distance as one fault event.

14. The communication device according to claim 12, wherein: The failure event score is determined by subtracting a preset value from an initial value arbitrarily set based on a failure event parameter included in the communication measurement log.

15. The communication device according to claim 14, wherein: The failure event parameter includes at least one of "RLF", "continuous weak SINR", "310_Expiry", "RRE rejection", "RACH_PROBLEM", "MAX_RETRX", "rlc_MaxNumRetx", "randomAccessProblem", and "SIB_READ_FAILURE".

16. The communication device according to claim 11, wherein: The processor determines the PPHO score by subtracting a value that has been preset in the PPHO or the mode PPHO from an initial value that has been arbitrarily set when the PPHO or the mode PPHO occurs.

17. The communication device according to claim 16, wherein: When performing a handover, when at least one source physical cell identifier before the handover is performed is identical to a target physical cell identifier after the handover is finally performed, and an interval between attempted handovers is less than a first threshold time, it is determined that the PPHO has occurred.

18. The communication device according to claim 17, wherein: When performing the handover, when the source physical cell identifier and the target physical cell identifier are identical to each other and an interval between attempts of the handover is equal to or greater than the first threshold time and less than a second threshold time, it is determined that the mode PPHO has occurred.

19. The communication device according to claim 11, wherein: The service score is determined based on a ratio of the stay time of the communication device for a vehicle entering the blind area where communication with the base station is impossible and remains in a communication impossible state compared to a whole call measurement time of the communication device for a vehicle.

20. The communication device according to claim 11, wherein: The final score is obtained by combining each of the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score at an arbitrary ratio and summing the fault event score, the PPHO score, and the service score.

Images