Hard determinacy wireless communication method and system based on unified anchor point time and double fixed offset

Abstract

The invention discloses a hard determinacy wireless communication method and system based on unified anchor point time and double fixed offset. The core of the method is that when an asynchronous logic decision moment of user equipment arrives, the asynchronous logic decision moment is mapped into a unified physical anchor point moment Tanchor; determining a downlink authorization / data moment TDL and an uplink transmission moment TUL based on the fixed offset delta down link and the fixed offset delta up link; and the network side executes two-step deterministic arbitration by taking the Tanchor as a reference, and implicit authorization is realized through existence / absence of a downlink signal. According to the invention, offsets are respectively configured for initial access (delta MsgA / delta MsgB) and connected state service (delta down link / delta up link), an end-to-end hard deterministic time sequence chain from'first bit 'access to continuous transmission is constructed, and delay jitter is thoroughly eliminated. The system naturally utilizes asynchronism to reduce collision, and differentiated deterministic service guarantee is realized under zero signaling through DSF parameter optimization.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of wireless communication technology, specifically relating to wireless resource scheduling technology in next-generation wireless communication systems (such as 5G-Advanced and 6G) ​​for vertical industries requiring hard real-time guarantees, such as industrial automation and vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication. This invention is a key refinement and enhancement of the communication framework in the applicant's prior patent, "A Deterministic Arbitration Queue Communication Method, System, and Device Based on Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF) and Downlink Implicit Licensing." Specifically, addressing the problem in the prior patent where the mapping relationship between the "logical decision moment" and the final "physical execution moment" is unclear, leading to difficulties in strictly guaranteeing hard deterministic latency, this invention proposes a deterministic timing chain construction method based on a unified anchor point moment and dual fixed offsets. This enhances the framework from "outcome determinism" to a complete hard deterministic communication solution encompassing "latency determinism." Background Technology

[0002] Applications such as industrial closed-loop control and remote precision operation require wireless networks to provide "hard real-time" characteristics, namely constant low latency and extremely low jitter. Traditional scheduling methods based on dynamic signaling (DCI) cannot meet this requirement due to the randomness of the interaction process.

[0003] The preceding patent proposed a revolutionary scheduling-free communication framework, the core contribution of which is: 1. Zero signaling parameter generation: Zero signaling collaboration is achieved based on DSF and Protocol Security State Machine (PSSM).

[0004] 2. Downlink Implicit Grant: The use of uplink resource `R_u` is implicitly granted by “sending” or “not sending” valid data frames on downlink resource `R_d`.

[0005] 3. Deterministic Arbitration Queue (DAQ): Transforms resource collisions into a deterministic queuing process.

[0006] The framework of the preceding patent revolutionized the management of multi-user resource conflicts. However, when applying this framework to "hard determinism" scenarios, a key issue that has not yet been clarified emerges: the precise mapping of the time dimension and the lack of deterministic time-series chains.

[0007] Specifically, the preceding patent mentions "the physical time corresponding to the target logical moment," but it does not clearly define an unambiguous absolute physical time reference that can be aligned with all asynchronous user actions, nor does it define a complete and fixed delay chain from "logical decision" to "final uplink transmission." This ambiguity leads to two major problems: 1. Inconsistent adjudication criteria: When multiple users make asynchronous decisions, their respective "corresponding" physical times may be different. The network side lacks a unified absolute physical time coordinate to accurately arbitrate resource conflicts and check availability across users, which makes the "required time period" in "resource availability check" ambiguous.

[0008] 2. End-to-end latency is uncertain: The delay between "logical decision" and "uplink transmission" is undefined. The actual latency is affected by dynamic factors such as processing load and implementation differences. It cannot provide constant low latency and extremely low jitter, and it is difficult to support hard deterministic services with jitter at the microsecond level.

[0009] Existing technologies (such as dynamic licensing in 5G NR) define the delay from licensing to transmission through time offsets (`K2`) in DCI, but this still relies on random and dynamic signaling interactions and cannot provide end-to-end deterministic guarantees. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a method that, while inheriting all the advantages of previous patents' "zero signaling" and "spatial deterministic arbitration," completes it with a precise, fixed, and provable deterministic timing chain. Summary of the Invention

[0010] To overcome the temporal ambiguity of previous patent frameworks and achieve true hard deterministic communication, this invention proposes a "hard deterministic wireless communication method based on a unified anchor time and dual fixed offsets." The core of this method lies in defining a unified absolute physical time reference (`T_anchor`) and determining the downlink grant time and uplink transmission time using two fixed offsets (`Δ_downlink`, `Δ_uplink`), thereby constructing a deterministic path with constant delay from logical decision-making to physical execution.

[0011] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution: I. Core Invention Concept: Deterministic Intersection and Arbitration of Asynchronous Logic Timelines on a Unified Physical Timeline The core of this invention lies in constructing a hard deterministic timing chain from asynchronous logical decision-making to synchronous physical execution. By defining and associating the following four key timing elements, it solves the resource collision problem of multi-user asynchronous decision-making on the physical time axis and provides end-to-end deterministic latency guarantee.

[0012] 1. Definition of basic timing elements 1.1 Logical Decision Moment: A discrete moment reached periodically or event-wise by the Protocol Security State Machine (PSSM) of a User Equipment (UE) or service flow on its logical timeline. At this moment, the PSSM outputs the current state `S(t)` and triggers the generation and calculation of communication parameters (including resource intentions `R_u` and `R_d`). The logical decision moments of different UEs or service flows are independent and asynchronous, each following a logical period and initial phase (defined by `Init_Anchor`) determined based on its Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF).

[0013] 1.2 Unified Anchor Physical Time (`T_anchor`): When the UE's PSSM reaches a logical decision time, this logical time is immediately mapped to the corresponding absolute physical time on the system physical time axis, which is `T_anchor`. This mapping is based on the physical layer timer aligned between the UE and the network (gNB) through the physical layer synchronization mechanism. `T_anchor` provides a unified, absolute physical time reference point for all asynchronous logical decision events.

[0014] 1.3 First fixed offset (`Δ_downlink`) and second fixed offset (`Δ_uplink`): Two fixed time values ​​configured by the system, where `Δ_uplink > Δ_downlink`. They define the fixed delays from the unified anchor `T_anchor` to the execution times of the following two key physical layer events: - Downlink license signal transmission / reception timing: `T_DL = T_anchor + Δ_downlink` - Uplink data transmission time: `T_UL = T_anchor + Δ_uplink` Key timing constraints: `Δ_uplink - Δ_downlink` must be greater than or equal to the worst-case processing time required by the UE from receiving and decoding the downlink grant signal to generating and sending the uplink signal, to ensure physical layer feasibility.

[0015] In specific processes such as initial access, the fixed offset and the corresponding deterministic moment can have specific names (such as `Δ_MsgA`, `T_MsgA`), but the core timing rule of 'anchor point plus fixed offset' remains unchanged.

[0016] 2. The essence of the intersection and collision of asynchronous logic timelines Key Insight: This invention reveals and utilizes a crucial phenomenon—although each UE or service flow's PSSM operates on an independent, asynchronous logical timeline, its logical decision-making moments must ultimately be mapped to a unique system physical timeline to execute physical layer communication. Therefore, logical decision-making moments on different logical timelines may map to the same `T_anchor` on the physical timeline.

[0017] This mapping result leads to two possibilities: - Time dispersion: In most cases, the logical decision-making times of different UEs are mapped to different `T_anchor`s, which are naturally staggered in time.

[0018] - Time convergence (collision): At certain moments, the logical decision times of different UEs are mapped to the same `T_anchor`, forming a deterministic convergence point of multiple logical time axes in physical time. At this convergence point, multiple UEs will request resources simultaneously, which may lead to resource conflicts.

[0019] The core value of the unified anchor `T_anchor` is that it provides an unambiguous and unified physical time coordinate for all asynchronous logical decisions, enabling the network side to use `T_anchor` as a reference to perform unified resource conflict detection and arbitration for all UEs that intersect at that moment. This fundamentally solves the problem of inconsistent adjudication benchmarks in asynchronous systems.

[0020] 3. Deterministic Arbitration and Time-Sequence Chain Based on a Unified Anchor Point This invention integrates the above-mentioned timing elements into a complete hard deterministic communication timing chain: Step 1: Asynchronous Triggering and Anchor Mapping Each UE's PSSM operates independently. When it reaches the logical decision moment, it immediately determines the corresponding `T_anchor` (i.e., the mapping point of the logical moment on the physical time axis) and calculates the resource intention `(R_u, R_d)` and the deterministic moment `(T_DL, T_UL)`.

[0021] Step 2: Global Monitoring and Prediction on the Network Side The network side (gNB) maintains a PSSM copy synchronized with each UE, which can continuously predict the logical decision time of all UEs and the `T_anchor` to which they will be mapped, thereby grasping all possible future "intersection points".

[0022] Step 3: Two-step deterministic arbitration based on `T_anchor` For each `T_anchor`, the network side performs the following: 1. User conflict arbitration: Identify all UEs mapped to the `T_anchor` and with the same uplink resource intention `R_u`, and select the winner according to preset rules (such as priority).

[0023] 2. Final determination of resource availability: Query the global resource calendar to check whether the winner's intended resource `R_u` is available at the corresponding `T_UL` time (idle or reserved by the winner).

[0024] Step 4: Downlink Implicit Authorization At time `T_DL`, the network side sends an authorization signal (if the arbitration is successful) or a silence indication signal (if the arbitration fails) on the downlink resource `R_d` corresponding to each UE, based on the arbitration result.

[0025] Step 5: Autonomous execution on the UE side Each UE listens to `R_d` at time `T_DL` to make an authorization decision, and sends data on `R_u` or remains silent at time `T_UL` based on the decision result.

[0026] 4. Performance advantages brought by asynchronicity The asynchronous nature of the framework constructed in this invention is not a drawback, but rather a natural advantage for achieving superior practical performance: - Natural reduction in collision probability: Due to the asynchronicity of the logical time axes of each UE (reflected in different initial phases and periods), the logical decision moments are mapped to the physical time axis in a more uniform distribution, resulting in the average number of UEs intersecting at any `T_anchor` being much smaller than the total number of UEs. This directly reduces the probability of instantaneous resource conflicts.

[0027] - Actual throughput improvement: The asynchronous model has higher actual system throughput compared to the worst-case model where all UEs make decisions synchronously, because fewer UEs participate in arbitration at the same time.

[0028] - Statistical improvement in latency: The worst-case latency upper bound `D_max = (M-1)·T_dsf + L_trans` is based on the extreme assumption that all other UEs conflict with the target UE. Asynchronicity reduces the number of instantaneous conflicting UEs encountered by the target UE in reality, and the average latency is much lower than this upper bound.

[0029] 5. Optional DSF parameter optimization strategies To further enhance the deterministic guarantee of high-priority services, this invention supports the network side to perform purposeful differentiated allocation of DSF parameters, the key of which lies in the planning of the initial phase: - Initial Phase Planning: By configuring different `Init_Anchor` parameters for services of different priorities, the relative starting position (i.e., phase) of their logical time axis on the physical time axis can be actively controlled. For example, a base period of the physical time axis can be divided into multiple phase intervals, and high-priority services can be specified to use only specific intervals (such as the first 30% of each period), thereby achieving natural isolation of services of different priorities in the time dimension.

[0030] - Rule adaptation: Assign the most matching `Rule_ID` based on business characteristics (such as latency requirements, data volume, activation frequency). For example, for control flow that is extremely sensitive to latency, assign a high-frequency update rule B (with a smaller `T_update`), and assign a low-frequency, long-cycle rule C (with a larger `T_logical`) for a large number of low-power sensors.

[0031] - Key space separation: Use different key derivation functions or root keys to generate `K_sec` for different types of services, ensuring that they are cryptographically independent, so that even if decisions are made at the same time, the resulting resource intentions are distributed as widely as possible across frequency domain resources.

[0032] Through the above optimizations, a near-contention-free transmission environment can be created for high-priority services without increasing signaling overhead, achieving differentiated service quality guarantees within the same deterministic framework. This optimization capability demonstrates the flexibility and manageability of the invention framework while providing a hard deterministic foundation.

[0033] II. Enhanced Two-Step Deterministic Arbitration and Closed-Loop Process Based on Unified Anchor Point Time Based on the aforementioned timing rules, the two-step deterministic arbitration and the subsequent implicit grant process in the prior art patent are enhanced and refined into the following closed loop with hard deterministic guarantees: Step A (Asynchronous Decision Making and Anchor Point Determination): Multiple UEs operate asynchronously based on their own independent PSSMs, triggering at their respective logical decision moments `{T_logic_1, T_logic_2, ...}`. For each UE i: - Calculate the paired resource intentions (R_u_i, R_d_i) based on the current state `S_i(t)`.

[0034] - Anchor time determination: Determine the physical time of the anchor point `T_anchor_i` corresponding to `T_logic_i` (such as the current system frame number SFN and time slot number).

[0035] - Calculate the deterministic time: `T_DL_i = T_anchor_i + Δ_downlink`; `T_UL_i = T_anchor_i + Δ_uplink`.

[0036] Step B (Network Side: Two-Step Deterministic Arbitration and Scheduling Based on `T_anchor`): The network side continuously predicts the decisions of each UE. Its arbitration and scheduling are based on `T_anchor` as a unified benchmark. 1. User Conflict Arbitration (on the `T_anchor` baseline): The network side identifies a set of all users mapped to the same `T_anchor` at that time and with the same intended resource `R_u`. A winner is selected from this set based on preset non-random rules (such as static priority, round-robin fairness).

[0037] 2. Final Resource Availability Decision (on the `T_anchor` baseline): The network queries its maintained global resource calendar. This calendar is indexed by absolute physical time. The network checks whether the winner's intended resource `R_u` is in an "idle" or "reserved by the winner" state at the corresponding `T_UL` time. If so, the arbitration is successful and immediately marked in the calendar; otherwise, it fails.

[0038] 3. Downlink Signal Generation and Scheduling: Based on the arbitration result, the network side generates the downlink physical signal to be transmitted at time `T_DL`: - For the winning UE that succeeds in arbitration: send an authorization signal on its `R_d` at time `T_DL`.

[0039] - For UEs that fail arbitration: send a silence indication signal on their `R_d` at time `T_DL`.

[0040] Step C (User side: Listening, deciding, and transmitting at a predetermined time): Each UE performs the following operation at its calculated predetermined time: - Downlink listening and decision (at `T_DL` time): At `T_DL` time, signals are received on resource `R_d`. A decision is made based on whether a licensed signal for itself has been successfully decoded.

[0041] - Uplink execution (at time `T_UL`): At time `T_UL`, if the decision is granted and there is data to be sent, then uplink data is sent on resource `R_u`; otherwise, uplink silence is maintained.

[0042] - Queue Management: If no authorization is granted, the data packet to be sent will be kept in the local queue and will rejoin the process at the next logical decision point.

[0043] Step D (Hard Deterministic Loop Formation): At this point, a complete hard deterministic communication loop is formed. Its core characteristic is: - Consistent adjudication: All arbitrations are based on `T_anchor`, eliminating ambiguity in adjudication caused by asynchronous decision-making.

[0044] - Deterministic latency: The total latency from logical decision (`T_logic`) to uplink transmission (`T_UL`) is constant at `Δ_uplink`; the latency from downlink grant (`T_DL`) to uplink transmission (`T_UL`) is constant at `Δ_uplink - Δ_downlink`. End-to-end latency is strictly calculable and guaranteed.

[0045] - Global predictability: The global resource calendar based on `T_anchor` enables the network to accurately grasp the future resource status.

[0046] III. Engineering Determination and Configuration of Offset The fixed offsets `Δ_downlink` and `Δ_uplink` are core system parameters. Their values ​​need to be determined through system-level worst-case analysis and simulation, and must satisfy the following: `Δ_downlink ≥ T_proc_gNB_max` (Worst-case time required for the base station to generate a downlink signal) `Δ_uplink - Δ_downlink ≥ T_proc_UE_max + T_prop_max + T_guard` Where `T_proc_UE_max` is the worst-case time for UE processing, `T_prop_max` is the maximum propagation delay, and `T_guard` is the guard interval.

[0047] The values ​​of `Δ_downlink` and `Δ_uplink` can be dynamically configured via RRC signaling or SIB. Different offset pairs can be configured for different PSSM rules (rules A / B / C) in the previous patent to match their service characteristics.

[0048] Distinguishing between offsets in access state and connection state: The fixed offset concept described in this invention is applied throughout the entire process from initial access to continuous service transmission.

[0049] - Initial Access Phase: Using fixed offsets `Δ_MsgA` and `Δ_MsgB` (as described in Example 5) specifically for access, the sending time `T_MsgA` of the access request (MsgA) and the listening time `T_MsgB` of the access response (MsgB) are determined respectively. Their values ​​must meet the processing timing requirements specific to the access procedure and are usually different from the offsets in the connection state.

[0050] - Connected-state service transmission phase: Use service-specific fixed offsets `Δ_downlink` and `Δ_uplink` (as described in Example 1) to determine the downlink grant / data time `T_DL` and the uplink data transmission time `T_UL`, respectively.

[0051] Together, they constitute an end-to-end hard deterministic timing chain from "first bit access" to "continuous data transmission," representing the specific application of the same core idea (`T_anchor` + fixed offset) at different communication stages. The network can broadcast the access offset via System Information (SIB) and configure or reconfigure the service offset for connected-state services via Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling.

[0052] IV. Advantages of Asynchronousness and Parameter Optimization Strategies 4.1 Performance Gain Analysis of Asynchronous Logic Time Axis In the framework described in this invention, each user device or service flow operates on an independent Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF) protocol security state machine, forming multiple asynchronous logical time axes. This feature brings significant performance improvements in actual deployments. 1. Reduced Collision Probability: Asynchronicity causes the logical decisions of different users to be distributed more evenly across the physical timeline, rather than being completely synchronous. Therefore, at any unified anchor point `T_anchor`, the average number of users participating in resource arbitration is much smaller than the total number of users, thus significantly reducing the probability of resource collisions.

[0053] 2. Throughput Improvement: Let the total number of users in the system be U, and the number of available resource units be M. Under the worst-case synchronous model, the expected number of successful users per cycle is `E[S_sync] = M·[1 - (1-1 / M)^U]`. In actual asynchronous scenarios, due to the dispersed decision-making time, the expected value of the number of users k (k ≤ U) participating in arbitration simultaneously is significantly reduced, resulting in the actual throughput `E[S_async] > E[S_sync]`.

[0054] 3. Latency Improvement: The worst-case latency upper bound `D_max = (M-1)·T_dsf + L_trans` is based on the extreme assumption that all other users conflict with the target user. Asynchronicity reduces the number of instantaneous conflicting users encountered by the target user in reality, resulting in an average latency far below this upper bound.

[0055] 4.2 Priority-based DSF parameter optimization allocation To further enhance the deterministic guarantee of high-priority services, this invention proposes a DSF parameter optimization allocation strategy: 1. Differentiated parameter allocation: The network side allocates differentiated DSF parameter combinations `(K_sec, Init_Anchor, Rule_ID)` to different users or service flows according to service priorities, so that the resource intentions generated are as dispersed as possible in the spatial and temporal dimensions.

[0056] 2. Parameter optimization criteria: - Time phase offset: Assign a specific `Init_Anchor` to high-priority services so that the `T_anchor` mapped to their logical decision moment falls within a dedicated or low-contention time phase interval. - Rule adaptation: Assign matching `Rule_ID` based on business characteristics (e.g., use high-frequency rule B for control flow and low-frequency rule C for sensors). - Key space separation: Using different key derivation paths ensures cryptographic independence. 3. Dynamic adjustment mechanism: The network side monitors the collision rate of each resource and dynamically adjusts the DSF parameter allocation for newly connected users to achieve load balancing.

[0057] V. Beneficial Effects By introducing a unified anchor time `T_anchor` and two levels of fixed offsets `Δ_downlink` / `Δ_uplink`, this invention brings the following decisive enhancements to the framework of the preceding patent: 1. A physically realizable hard deterministic timing chain was constructed: the complete, fixed-latency path (`Δ_uplink`) from logical decision to physical execution was defined, and random delays in the link were completely eliminated, so that end-to-end latency and jitter can be accurately calculated and guaranteed, and the solution is physically feasible.

[0058] 2. Provides an unambiguous and unified time benchmark for two-step deterministic arbitration: By defining the physical time coordinate of the arbitration as `T_anchor`, user conflict arbitration and resource availability checks can be conducted on a unified and absolute benchmark, ensuring the overall consistency, fairness, and enforceability of the arbitration.

[0059] 3. Enhanced system predictability and manageability: The global resource calendar based on `T_anchor` enables the network to predict and manage future resource status with unprecedented accuracy, providing a solid and reliable foundation for resource reservation and network optimization for high-priority services.

[0060] 4. It fully inherits and amplifies all the advantages of previous patents: while obtaining hard determinism in the time dimension, it fully inherits all the advantages such as zero signaling, high spectrum efficiency, inherent security, massive connection support, extreme energy efficiency and excellent overload robustness.

[0061] 5. The project is simple to implement and compatible with existing concepts: The rules of `T_anchor`+`Δ` are intuitive, and the role of `Δ_uplink -Δ_downlink` is similar to `K2` in traditional scheduling, but it is fixed and deterministic, making it easy to implement and integrate in existing hardware and protocol stacks.

[0062] 6. Revealed the actual performance advantages of asynchronous logical time axes: Theoretical analysis proves that, due to the asynchronous nature of each user's logical time axis, the system's throughput, latency, and other key performance indicators in actual deployment are significantly better than the worst-case theoretical analysis, enhancing the feasibility and superiority of this solution in practical applications.

[0063] 7. Provides an engineering-optimizable parameter allocation strategy: Through the differentiated allocation of DSF parameters, a near-contention-free transmission environment can be provided for high-priority services without increasing signaling overhead, achieving differentiated quality of service assurance for diverse services within the same deterministic framework. Attached Figure Description

[0064] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly described below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show some embodiments of the present invention and therefore should not be regarded as a limitation on the scope of protection.

[0065] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the core timing chain and closed-loop process of this invention. The diagram illustrates the complete process of collaboration between the User Equipment (UE) and the Network NodeB (gNB) based on a unified anchor time `T_anchor` and two-level fixed offsets `Δ_downlink` and `Δ_uplink`. It includes the triggering of the logical decision time `T_logic`, the determination of `T_anchor`, the calculation of `T_DL` and `T_UL`, the two-step deterministic arbitration on the network side, the downlink implicit authorization, and the decision-making closed loop of uplink transmission or silence, intuitively demonstrating the formation of a hard deterministic latency chain.

[0066] Figure 2 This is a functional block diagram of a network device (e.g., a base station, gNB) in an embodiment of the present invention. The diagram details the hardware components of the network device (e.g., processor, memory, transceiver, network interface) and the software functional modules necessary to implement the method of the present invention, including but not limited to a DSF management and context passing module, a protocol state machine engine, a reference time mapping module, an enhanced arbitrator based on `T_anchor`, a global resource calendar, a deterministic time scheduler, a downlink signal generator, and an uplink receiving and signal processing module, and depicts the collaborative relationships between these modules.

[0067] Figure 3This is a functional block diagram of the user equipment in an embodiment of the present invention. The diagram shows in detail the hardware components of the user equipment (such as processor, memory, transceiver, security element, high-precision timer) and the software functional modules necessary to implement the method of the present invention, including but not limited to the DSF synchronization and secure storage module, local protocol state machine (PSSM), decision and timing calculation module, timing controller, downlink listening and authorization decision unit, uplink transmission controller, silence calibrator, etc., and depicts the data flow and control flow between the modules.

[0068] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the "Era-Micromoment" two-dimensional resource grid in Rule C (Logical Era Driven). The diagram illustrates how a long logical epoch (e.g., 60 seconds) is divided into numerous micromoments (e.g., 6000), which, together with frequency domain resource units (e.g., 20 PRBs), form a two-dimensional resource grid. The diagram exemplifies the positions of different sensor devices on their dedicated micromoments and frequency domain resources, visually illustrating how a two-dimensional grid dilutes the probability of collisions and provides deterministic access and extreme energy efficiency for a massive number of devices.

[0069] Figure 5 This is a flowchart illustrating the two-step deterministic arbitration process performed by the network side. The flowchart details how the network side executes the decision-making logic of the first step (inter-user conflict arbitration) and the second step (final resource availability ruling) based on a unified anchor time `T_anchor`, including conflict detection, arbitration rule application, global resource calendar query, resource status judgment, and the output of success / failure branches.

[0070] Figure 6 This is a flowchart illustrating the process by which the user equipment (UE) makes autonomous listening and transmitting decisions. The flowchart details the UE's complete autonomous decision-making process, from triggering a logical decision in its local protocol state machine, to determining `T_anchor`, calculating resources and timing, listening for downlink signals at `T_DL`, making an authorization decision, and transmitting data or remaining silent at `T_UL` based on the decision result.

[0071] Figure 7 This is a timing diagram illustrating how the resource reservation mechanism provides hard deterministic transmission for high-priority services. The diagram uses a timeline to show how the network side predicts future resource needs based on DSF during the service establishment phase and reserves resources in the global resource calendar in advance, and how the service flow stably sends data at a predetermined `T_UL` time during subsequent transmission cycles. It visually demonstrates the hard deterministic characteristics of constant latency and zero jitter.

[0072] Figure 8This is a flowchart illustrating the process of achieving zero-signaling handover based on DSF context transmission. The diagram, presented in sequence, shows how the DSF context, state machine snapshot, and future resource reservation information are transmitted through the core network during the handover process from the source base station to the target base station. It also shows how the target base station reconstructs its state and inherits the resource reservation, thereby enabling seamless deterministic transmission of services after sub-millisecond interruptions.

[0073] Figure 9 This diagram illustrates an efficient deterministic random access procedure for public network scenarios. The diagram clearly shows, in sequence form, how this invention transforms the traditional contention-based random access procedure into a deterministic procedure with predictable latency in a public network environment. Its core lies in the introduction of a hard deterministic timing chain consisting of a unified anchor time T_anchor and two fixed offsets Δ_MsgA / Δ_MsgB.

[0074] Figure 10 This is a flowchart of a multi-user high-precision positioning method based on deterministic signals. The flowchart illustrates the principle and steps of how user equipment transmits a known signal at time `T_UL`, and multiple receiving points use the known `T_UL` to calculate the absolute propagation time instead of the traditional time difference, thereby achieving high-precision positioning without requiring strict clock synchronization between receiving points. Detailed Implementation

[0076] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the technical solutions of this invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments. The following embodiments are used to explain this invention, but not to limit its scope. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of this invention without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this invention.

[0077] 7.1 Example 1: Hard deterministic control transmission for industrial robotic arms based on deterministic timing chains 7.1.1 Scenario Description and System Configuration On an automotive manufacturing assembly line, robotic arms need to receive motion commands from the control center in real time to perform assembly operations with millimeter-level precision. This business requires: - Transmission period: 1.0 millisecond (ms) - End-to-end latency limit: 1.5 milliseconds - Maximum latency jitter: 50 microseconds (µs) - Reliability: 99.999% System parameter configuration: 1. Physical layer parameters: - Subcarrier spacing: 120kHz - Slot length: 0.125ms (each slot contains 14 OFDM symbols) System bandwidth: 100MHz - Dedicated resource pool for deterministic operations: 20 PRBs (frequency domain indexes 100-119) 2. Timing parameter configuration of this invention: - First fixed offset (downlink license offset): Δ_downlink = 0.25 ms = 2 time slots - Second fixed offset (uplink transmission offset): Δ_uplink = 1.0 ms = 8 time slots - UE processing window: Δ_uplink - Δ_downlink = 0.75 ms (6 time slots) 3. DSF and State Machine Configuration: - Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF) triples: - K_sec: A 256-bit security key shared between the robotic arm and the control center. - Init_Anchor: Initializes the anchor point = (SFN=0, Slot=0, Counter=0) - Rule_ID: Rule identifier = (Type="Hash_Chain", T_update=0.125ms, Hash_Function=SHA3-256) - Protocol Security State Machine (PSSM): Employs a hash chain-driven approach, updating the state every 0.125ms. 7.1.2 Detailed communication process (e.g.) Figure 1 (As shown) Step S101: Initial preparation on the robot arm (UE) side The robotic arm and control center have established a shared DSF triplet through a secure authentication process. The robotic arm runs a Protocol Secure State Machine (PSSM) locally, and its state update function is based on the shared DSF and a hash algorithm. The robotic arm obtains timing parameters Δ_downlink and Δ_uplink from the control center via RRC signaling.

[0078] Step S102: Logical decision-making moment triggering and anchor point determination When the robotic arm's PSSM reaches a specific logical decision time T_logic (determined by the service cycle and counter value), it triggers this transmission decision. The robotic arm has already aligned with the physical clock of the base station (gNB) through the physical layer synchronization mechanism (tracking SSB). When the logical decision is triggered, it reads the locally synchronized physical layer timer to obtain the current system frame number (SFN) and slot number, and determines this physical time as the unified anchor physical time T_anchor for this communication.

[0079] Step S103: Calculation of resource intention and deterministic moment The robotic arm calculates resource intentions based on the current DSF state S(t) and a predetermined cryptographic mapping function: 1. Calculate uplink resource R_u: Based on S(t), K_sec and business context, map it to an uplink physical resource block (PRB) in the dedicated resource pool through cryptographic hashing and modulo operation.

[0080] 2. Calculate the paired downlink resources R_d: Based on the same S(t) and the predefined pairing derivation function, calculate the cryptographically associated downlink listening resources.

[0081] 3. Calculate the deterministic moment: - T_DL = T_anchor + Δ_downlink - T_UL = T_anchor + Δ_uplink Step S104: Prediction and arbitration on the network side (gNB) (e.g.) Figure 5 (As shown) The gNB maintains identical copies of the DSF and PSSM to the robotic arm, enabling synchronous computation of the same state S(t), resource intentions (R_u, R_d), and time points (T_anchor, T_DL, T_UL). The gNB performs a two-step deterministic arbitration based on T_anchor. 1. User conflict arbitration: Query the competing users on the R_u resource at time T_anchor (there is no conflict in this example).

[0082] 2. Resource Availability Check: Query the global resource calendar to check if R_u is in an "idle" state at time T_UL. If the query is successful, gNB immediately marks the resource as "occupied" in the calendar.

[0083] After successful arbitration, gNB plans to send an authorization signal on the R_d resource at time T_DL.

[0084] Step S105: Send downlink authorization signal At time T_DL, the gNB transmits a grant signal on downlink resource R_d. The physical layer reference signal of this grant signal is generated based on the current state S(t) of the DSF and is unique and predictable.

[0085] Step S106: Robotic arm authorization decision and uplink transmission (e.g.) Figure 6 (As shown) At time T_DL, the robotic arm listens to R_d and performs signal detection and decoding using a locally generated reference signal based on the same DSF and S(t). Upon successfully decoding an authorization signal matching the target, authorization is granted. Subsequently, at time T_UL, motion control feedback data is transmitted on the uplink resource R_u. The uplink data undergoes security processing using a scrambling sequence generated based on the DSF.

[0086] Step S107: Network-side reception and processing At time T_UL, the gNB receives the uplink signal on R_u, and uses the same sequence generated based on DSF to descramble and decode it to complete the transmission.

[0087] 7.1.3 Deterministic Performance Analysis - End-to-end latency: The time interval from the logical decision anchor T_anchor to the uplink transmission T_UL is strictly Δ_uplink = 1.0 ms.

[0088] - Processing window: From receiving downlink grant T_DL to sending uplink T_UL, the delay is strictly Δ_uplink - Δ_downlink = 0.75 ms, which provides a fixed and sufficient time for UE processing.

[0089] - Jitter analysis: All time points are determined by a synchronized physical clock and a fixed offset. The only jitter source is the physical layer synchronization error (typically <1µs), and the total jitter is far less than the requirement of 50µs.

[0090] 7.2 Example 2: Deterministic Arbitration of Asynchronous Multi-Priority Business Conflicts 7.2.1 Scene Configuration - UE1 (High Priority): AGV navigation control flow, priority P=7 (maximum 7), business cycle 2.0ms.

[0091] - UE2 (low priority): Environmental sensor reporting, priority P=1, service cycle 10ms.

[0092] - Public resource pool: M = 16 PRBs.

[0093] - Timing parameters: Δ_downlink=0.5ms, Δ_uplink=1.5ms.

[0094] 7.2.2 Conflict Scenarios The protocol state machines of UE1 and UE2 are triggered at different logical decision moments. Although the DSF inputs of the two UEs are different, their uplink resource intentions R_u calculated by the hash function are both PRB #7 (a "modulo funnel" collision occurs). UE1's T_anchor1 corresponds to Slot 2, and T_UL1 corresponds to Slot 8. UE2's T_anchor2 corresponds to Slot 3, and T_UL2 corresponds to Slot 9.

[0095] 7.2.3 Detailed Arbitration Process on the Network Side Step S201: Arbitration processing of UE1 (first occurrence) gNB uses UE1's T_anchor1 as the reference: 1. User conflict arbitration: Query the competing users on PRB #7 at time T_anchor1. Only UE1 is found, and there is no conflict.

[0096] 2. Resource availability check: Query the global resource calendar. PRB #7 is "idle" at time T_UL1.

[0097] 3. Arbitration result: Successful. gNB marks PRB #7 as "occupied" at time T_UL1 in the calendar, with occupier = UE1.

[0098] Step S202: Arbitration processing of UE2 (occurring later) gNB uses UE2's T_anchor2 as the reference: 1. User conflict arbitration: Query competing users on PRB #7 at time T_anchor2, only UE2, no conflict.

[0099] 2. Resource availability check: Querying the global resource calendar, it was found that PRB #7 was in "occupied" at time T_UL2 (reserved or occupied by UE1).

[0100] 3. Priority comparison: UE1 priority (7) is higher than UE2 priority (1).

[0101] 4. Arbitration result: Unsuccessful.

[0102] Step S203: Execution Result - UE1 receives the grant signal at time T_DL1 and successfully transmits data at time T_UL1.

[0103] - UE2 receives the silence indication signal at time T_DL2, remains silent at time T_UL2, and the data packet enters the next cycle.

[0104] 7.2.4 Configurability of Arbitration Strategies This embodiment demonstrates a static priority arbitration rule. The system supports multiple arbitration strategies (such as round-robin fairness, earliest deadline priority, etc.) and enhances system flexibility through SIB broadcasting or RRC signaling configuration.

[0105] 7.3 Example 3: Deterministic Low-Power Communication for Massive IoT Sensors (Combined with...) Figure 4 ) 7.3.1 Scenarios and Requirements The smart factory deploys 10,000 temperature and humidity sensors, reporting data (4 bytes) every 60 seconds. Requirements include a battery life of >5 years, a duty cycle of <0.1%, and a deterministic reporting latency of ≤65 seconds.

[0106] 7.3.2 System Design: Integration of Rule C and Unified Anchor Point Timing 1. Rule C parameter configuration: - Rule type: Logical epoch driven - Epoch length: T_logical = 60 seconds - Number of micro-times: N_s = 6000 - Microsecond length: T_micro = T_logical / N_s = 10 milliseconds - Frequency domain resource units: M = 20 PRBs - Total capacity of the two-dimensional resource grid: 6000 × 20 = 120,000 resource locations.

[0107] 2. Timing parameter configuration of the present invention: Configure Δ_downlink = 5 ms and Δ_uplink = 12 ms for this type of low-power service.

[0108] 3. DSF and resource mapping configuration: Configure a dedicated DSF for each sensor i: `(K_sec_i, Init_Anchor_i, Rule_ID=C)`, and assign a fixed resource mapping seed to ensure that its PSSM state is deterministically mapped to a dedicated position `(slot_i, freq_i)` on the two-dimensional grid.

[0109] 7.3.3 Sensor Deterministic Workflow Step S301: Deep Sleep and Timed Wake-up The sensor is in deep sleep 99.9% of the time. It is woken up by a very small time window (e.g., 1ms in advance) before the arrival of its dedicated micro-moment slot_i indicated by its PSSM logic state.

[0110] Step S302: Anchor point determination and resource calculation After the sensor is woken up, it acquires the current logical state S(t) = (Epoch_ID, Counter) and determines its exclusive grid position `(slot_i, freq_i)` within the current epoch. The sensor determines the T_anchor corresponding to the current logical decision time (i.e., the starting boundary of the exclusive micro-time slot_i) and calculates: - T_DL = T_anchor + 5ms - T_UL = T_anchor + 12ms Calculate the dedicated resource intentions R_u and R_d based on S(t).

[0111] Step S303: Downlink Monitoring and Implicit Authorization At time T_DL, the sensor listens on its R_d. The network side (gNB), using the same algorithm, has predicted the sensor's intended direction R_u at time T_UL. Since the resource is unique and has been reserved by the network, arbitration is successful. At time T_DL, the gNB sends a lightweight acknowledgment frame on R_d as an authorization signal.

[0112] Step S304: Uplink data transmission After successfully receiving authorization at time T_DL, the sensor transmits sensor data on its R_u at time T_UL. After transmission, it immediately re-enters deep sleep.

[0113] Step S305: Network-side processing The network side permanently reserves resources for each sensor on its dedicated (T_anchor, R_u) pair. Authorization is sent at time T_DL, and data is received at time T_UL.

[0114] 7.3.4 Performance and Advantages Analysis - Hard deterministic latency guarantee: The end-to-end latency of each report is strictly limited to `T_logical + Δ_uplink`, typically 60.012 seconds, with a clear upper bound for determinism.

[0115] - Extreme energy efficiency: The device has an extremely short operating window and a duty cycle as low as `DC ≈ T_micro / T_logical =1 / N_s = 0.017%`.

[0116] - Massive connectivity support: The two-dimensional grid dilutes the probability of collisions to an extremely low level, and a single cell can theoretically support a total number of devices up to hundreds of thousands.

[0117] - Key enhancements to the preceding patent: Clarifying the specific execution time point `T_UL = T_anchor + Δ_uplink` for "sending at a dedicated micro-moment" in Rule C, transforming "having the opportunity to send" into "completing the sending at a specific time point".

[0118] 7.4 Example 4: Zero-signaling handover based on unified anchor point time (combined with...) Figure 8 ) 7.4.1 Switching Scene Configuration The mobile robot (AGV) is executing the hard deterministic control flow of Example 1, moving from the coverage area of ​​the source base station (gNB-S) to the coverage area of ​​the target base station (gNB-T). The handover interruption time is required to be <1ms, with seamless deterministic service continuation.

[0119] 7.4.2 Switching Preparation Phase: Context Passing Step S401: Switch between decision and context passing Based on the measurement report, gNB-S determines whether to trigger a switchover. It securely transmits the AGV's motion control flow DSF `(K_sec_agv,Init_Anchor_B, Rule_ID)`, the current state machine snapshot (such as the current hash chain state), and incomplete resource reservation information to gNB-T via the Xn interface. This resource reservation information is essentially a future unified anchor point time sequence based on absolute physical time and its corresponding resource description.

[0120] Step S402: Target-side state reconstruction and resource inheritance After gNB-T receives the information: 1. Rebuild the PSSM synchronized with the AGV locally using DSF and snapshots.

[0121] 2. Based on the transmitted future anchor point time sequence, the corresponding resources are directly marked as "reserved by AGV" in its local global resource calendar. gNB-T does not need to recalculate and directly inherits a deterministic scheduling table based on absolute time.

[0122] 7.4.3 Switching between execution and deterministic continuation Step S403: Switch command issuance gNB-S sends a handover command to the AGV via an RRC reconfiguration message, which includes target cell synchronization information.

[0123] Step S404: Radio Frequency Redirection and Service Restoration The AGV retunes its radio frequency to the gNB-T and completes synchronization during switching. Its local PSSM continues to operate independently.

[0124] 1. Next logical decision: When the AGV's PSSM reaches the next logical decision time T_logic_k, calculate the corresponding T_anchor_k, T_DL_k and T_UL_k.

[0125] 2. Network-side prediction and arbitration: gNB-T performs the same prediction based on the synchronized PSSM. Querying the resource calendar reveals that the resource status corresponding to T_anchor_k is "reserved by AGV".

[0126] 3. Arbitration and Enforcement: Arbitration is guaranteed to succeed. The gNB-T sends authorization at time T_DL_k, and the AGV sends data at time T_UL_k.

[0127] 7.4.4 Performance Indicators - Interruption time: RF retuning and synchronization time only, approximately 200-500µs.

[0128] - Business continuity: No packet loss, hard deterministic latency characteristics (Δ_uplink) are perfectly maintained in the target cell.

[0129] - Signaling overhead: Only one RRC reconfiguration is required, and there is no random access process in the target cell, achieving a true "zero signaling" handover.

[0130] 7.5 Example 5: Deterministic Group Access and Random Access Based on Unified Anchor Point Time This embodiment aims to illustrate how the "unified anchor point time" and "dual fixed offset" framework described in this invention provides hard deterministic timing guarantees for the initial access process in the previous patent. Depending on the deployment scenario (private network / public network) and the user group (known / unknown), this framework can flexibly present two forms: deterministic group access and deterministic random access. Both share the same core timing logic, differing only in the granularity of resource planning and conflict resolution.

[0131] 7.5.1 Core Process Framework: Three-Step Interaction Based on `T_anchor` and Fixed Offset Regardless of the form, the initial access can be abstracted into the following three-step interaction based on deterministic timing, such as... Figure 9 As shown: Step 1: Network Commitment & Broadcast - The network side (gNB) broadcasts a future unified anchor time `T_anchor` (encoded as a specific system frame number SFN and time slot number) through the System Information Block (SIB) as the logical starting point of this access window.

[0132] - Simultaneously broadcast timing parameters specific to this access process: `Δ_MsgA` (access request offset) and `Δ_MsgB` (access response offset). This allows the determination of two key physical moments: - Access request sending time: `T_MsgA = T_anchor + Δ_MsgA` - Access response listening time: `T_MsgB = T_anchor + Δ_MsgB` The broadcast also includes public parameters for calculating dedicated resources, such as: Physical Cell Identifier (PCI), Access Opportunity Tag `Access_ID`, network signature `Sig` for the above parameters, and the definition of a two-dimensional access resource pool (`N_slots` micro-timeslots × `M_freq` frequency domain elements). The `Access_ID` is a unique tag for this access opportunity, used to prevent replay attacks and ensure the uniqueness of resource calculation.

[0133] Explanation of Access_ID (Access Opportunity Tag): To prevent replay attacks and differentiate between different access opportunities, the network assigns a unique access opportunity label `Access_ID` to each broadcast access commitment. This label can be a monotonically increasing counter, a hash value bound to `T_anchor`, or a random number explicitly configured by the network. `Access_ID`, `T_anchor`, and the network signature `Sig` together constitute a globally unique access transaction identifier. Its core function is: 1. Ensure uniqueness of calculation: When the UE and gNB calculate the dedicated resource `Resource_Index = H(Sig || T_anchor || PCI || Access_ID || UE_ID) ...`, `Access_ID` ensures that even the same UE will calculate completely different resource locations in different access opportunities, preventing fixed patterns in resource selection and enhancing security.

[0134] 2. Preventing replay attacks: Attackers cannot reuse old broadcast messages (`Sig`, `T_anchor`) to initiate access because the network verifies or maintains a list of valid `Access_ID`s, and expired or used `Access_ID`s will be rejected.

[0135] 3. Implement load isolation: The network can distinguish different types of access (such as initial access, connection recovery, emergency call) by configuring different `Access_ID`, and allocate resource pools of different sizes or priorities to them.

[0136] 2. Step Two: User-Side Computation and Transmission - The UE that needs to access the network listens to the broadcast, verifies the signature `Sig`, and confirms the network commitment.

[0137] - Based on broadcast parameters and its own temporary or permanent identifier (such as `Temp_ID` or pre-configured `Group_ID`), the UE deterministically calculates its unique position in the two-dimensional access resource pool through a predetermined cryptographic hash function and modulo operation: - `Resource_Index = H(Sig || T_anchor || PCI || Access_ID || UE_ID)mod (N_slot * M_freq)` - Mapped to specific micro-slot offsets `slot_offset` and frequency domain indices `freq_index`.

[0138] Based on this, the UE determines its precise uplink access resource `R_u` (time domain: `T_MsgA + slot_offset *T_symbol`, frequency domain: `freq_index`) and the paired downlink listening resource `R_d`. Here, T_symbol is the system-defined microslot basic duration.

[0139] - At a predetermined time `T_MsgA + slot_offset * T_symbol`, the UE sends an access request message MsgA (which may contain a preamble and / or a small data packet carrying `Temp_ID`) on resource `R_u`.

[0140] 3. Step Three: Network Arbitration & Response - The network side performs detection on the preset two-dimensional resource grid within the receiving window corresponding to `T_MsgA`.

[0141] - For each resource unit `R_u` with detected energy, the network performs a two-step deterministic arbitration: a) User conflict arbitration: Attempt to decode MsgA. If multiple different user identifiers are decoded, a winning UE is selected based on preset deterministic rules (e.g., comparing the values ​​of `Temp_ID`, or according to pre-configured group priority). Other conflicting UEs are deemed to have failed in this arbitration.

[0142] b) Resource availability check: Check whether `R_u` is a resource in the dedicated resource pool for this access (available by default).

[0143] - Based on the arbitration result, the network sends an access response message MsgB at a determined time `T_MsgB` (for each UE, its own `R_d` is calculated in conjunction with its `slot_offset`): - For the winning UE that successfully arbitrates: send MsgB on its `R_d`, which contains the contention resolution identifier, timing advance (TA), and a dedicated dynamic security foundation (DSF) `(K_sec, Init_Anchor, Rule_ID)` assigned to it for subsequent connected-state scheduling-free communication.

[0144] - For UEs that fail arbitration: send a "silent instruction" on their `R_d` or keep no signal.

[0145] - The UE listens for `T_MsgB` on its own calculated `R_d`. If it successfully decodes `MsgB` containing its own identifier, it determines that the access is successful and applies DSF to enter the connected state; otherwise, it triggers a deterministic retry mechanism.

[0146] 7.5.2 Scenario 1: Deterministic Group Access (Private Network / Known User Group) Scenario: A smart factory is providing batch access for 50 newly deployed AGVs with known identities, requiring all devices to complete conflict-free access within a specified time.

[0147] Key points of enhanced implementation of this invention: 1. Conflict-free resource planning: Since the user group is known and its number is fixed (`U=50`), the network can plan a sufficiently large two-dimensional resource pool (`N_slot * M_freq >> U`), and pre-assign a unique resource mapping seed or `Group_ID` to each AGV. By designing the mapping function, it is ensured that the `(slot_offset, freq_index)` calculated by the 50 AGVs are pairwise different, thus eliminating "modulo funnel" collisions in principle.

[0148] 2. Deterministic Timing: All AGVs share the same `T_anchor`, but their connections are precisely staggered in time by using different `slot_offsets`. The `T_MsgA` and `T_MsgB` times for each AGV are completely deterministic.

[0149] 3. Process Results: The entire access process resembles a time-division multiplexed scheduled meeting, with no contention or conflict. All AGVs complete access at their own predictable and dedicated times, with the worst-case access latency being `max(slot_offset) * T_symbol + Δ_MsgB`.

[0150] 7.5.3 Format Two: Deterministic Random Access (Public Network / Unknown Users) Scenario: In a public network environment, multiple unknown, idle IoT devices are simultaneously woken up and compete to initiate initial access.

[0151] Key points of enhanced implementation of this invention: 1. Accepting "Modular Funnel" Collisions: Due to the unknown nature of users and the potential for high concurrency, when users are mapped to a finite two-dimensional resource pool through a hash function, a certain probability of collision is inevitable. This invention does not aim for zero collisions, but rather manages systemic collisions through a two-step deterministic arbitration.

[0152] 2. Deterministic Collision Resolution: When multiple UEs' MsgA collides on the same `R_u` (multiple `Temp_ID`s are identified in the first arbitration step), the network immediately selects a winner based on publicly available and deterministic rules (such as comparing the minimum `Temp_ID`) and grants it access rights immediately. This changes the randomness of traditional random access, where "collisions result in complete failure," and transforms the collision event into a deterministic ordering problem.

[0153] 3. Deterministic Retry and Worst-Case Latency Guarantee: For UEs that fail arbitration, traditional random backoff is not used. The network can pre-broadcast a deterministic retry anchor time sequence `{T_anchor_1, T_anchor_2,...}` in the SIB. The failed UE deterministically selects the next retry opportunity in the sequence based on its `Temp_ID` using a public hash function. This guarantees: - Fairness: Each failed UE has a guaranteed next chance.

[0154] - Predictability: Worst-case access latency can be calculated. For example, if the retry sequence length is `K`, then in the worst case, a UE can successfully access the network within `K` access opportunities, with an upper bound of latency of `T_anchor_K + Δ_MsgB`.

[0155] 4. Smooth transition to connected state: Successful UEs directly obtain the DSF required for subsequent scheduling-free communication in MsgB, realizing a seamless transition from "deterministic random access" to "deterministic scheduling-free transmission".

[0156] 7.5.4 Summary of Beneficial Effects By introducing `T_anchor` and `Δ_MsgA` / `Δ_MsgB`, this embodiment brings a fundamental enhancement to the initial access: - Hard deterministic access latency: From the time the UE decides to access the system to the time it receives the result, the timing of the entire process is strictly defined by `T_anchor` and a fixed offset, and the latency can be accurately calculated and guaranteed.

[0157] - Consistent and fair adjudication: Arbitration based on `T_anchor` resolves the time reference issue for asynchronous UE adjudication. Publicly available arbitration and retry rules guarantee fairness.

[0158] - Predictable system behavior: Whether it is conflict-free access on a private network or collision resolution on a public network, the system behavior is deterministic and predictable, avoiding the "performance cliff" effect of traditional random access.

[0159] - Unified concept of end-to-end determinism: The initial access is also included in the framework of "deterministic timing chain" and "deterministic arbitration queue", realizing the vision of end-to-end hard deterministic communication from "first bit" to service transmission.

[0160] 7.6 Example 6: High-precision positioning based on unified anchor point time signals (combined with...) Figure 10 ) 7.6.1 Core Principles Traditional wireless positioning technologies (such as TDOA) rely on strict clock synchronization among multiple receiving points, which is costly to implement and prone to synchronization errors. The unified anchor point timing rule of this invention assigns a pre-known, absolutely precise expected transmission time T_UL to each uplink signal, shared by the transmitter and all legitimate receivers. Using this known time, the absolute propagation time of the signal can be directly calculated, fundamentally eliminating the need for clock synchronization among receiving points.

[0161] 7.6.2 Positioning Process Step S701 (Location Signal Generation and Transmission): The user equipment to be located (e.g., AGV) normally conducts its service communication (e.g., motion control flow based on rule B or status reporting flow based on rule C). The uplink data frames it transmits employ a secure pilot structure at the physical layer. This pilot sequence is generated based on the current state of its DSF, and the sequence is known and predictable to the receiver who knows the DSF. The transmission of this uplink signal strictly follows the timing rules defined in this invention and is transmitted at a determined T_UL time.

[0162] Step S702 (Multi-Receiver Signal Measurement): The uplink signal is received by the serving base station (gNB) and at least two additional Positioning Reference Points (PRPs). Each receiver records the precise physical time t_rx_i of the signal arrival.

[0163] Step S703 (Absolute Propagation Time Calculation – Core Innovation): 1. Each receiving point (gNB and PRPs) shares the DSF context of the user equipment through the core network.

[0164] 2. Each receiving point independently operates a copy of the protocol state machine synchronized with the user equipment.

[0165] 3. Based on the same DSF and state, each receiving point can accurately calculate the expected transmission time of the uplink signal, i.e., T_UL.

[0166] 4. Calculate the absolute propagation time: τ_i = t_rx_i - T_UL. This calculation directly yields the one-way propagation time of the signal from the user equipment to each receiving point, completely avoiding the calculation of the time difference between receiving points.

[0167] Step S704 (Location Calculation and Service): 1. Each receiving point reports the measured absolute propagation time τ_i and its own precise geographic coordinates to the location management function (LMF) via a secure link.

[0168] 2. The location server multiplies the propagation time by the speed of light to obtain the distance d_i = c × τ_i from the user equipment to each receiving point.

[0169] 3. Using multiple (≥3) such distance measurements, calculate the precise position (x, y, z) of the user equipment in three-dimensional space using a multilateral positioning algorithm (such as the least squares method).

[0170] 4. Periodic Positioning Service: A low-priority dedicated positioning service flow (e.g., using rule C) can be configured for each user. This service flow sends signals on defined resources at fixed periods T_positioning. The network side predicts and measures each T_UL based on its DSF, thereby providing time-bounded (≤ T_positioning), continuous, high-precision positioning updates.

[0171] 7.6.3 System Advantages - Zero additional signaling overhead: Fully reuses existing deterministic communication signals, eliminating the need to design, schedule, and transmit dedicated positioning reference signals (PRS).

[0172] - High accuracy and high reliability: ToA measurement is performed based on the known absolute transmission time T_UL, eliminating synchronization error, the main source of error. Continuous transmission of service signals enables measurements with a higher signal-to-noise ratio.

[0173] - Intrinsic security: The positioning signal is based on the dynamic changes of DSF, which makes it difficult to be forged or replayed by external devices, thus improving positioning security.

[0174] - Multi-user parallel processing: The network side can process the positioning signals of multiple UEs in parallel because each signal has its unique DSF root, which is easy to separate and identify.

[0175] 7.7 Example 7: Hybrid Deployment of Multi-Priority Services Based on DSF Parameter Optimization This example demonstrates how to deploy services of different priorities in a smart factory and optimize the performance of critical services through DSF parameters.

[0176] 7.7.1 Scene Configuration - Transaction 1 (Highest Priority): Robotic Arm Control Flow (1ms cycle, latency requirement <2ms) - Item 2 (Medium Priority): AGV navigation flow (cycle 10ms, latency requirement <20ms) - Transaction 3 (Background Transaction): Environmental Sensor Reporting (1-minute cycle) 7.7.2 Optimized Allocation of DSF Parameters 1. Transaction 1 (Robotic Arm Control Flow): - `Rule_ID = (Type="Rule_B", T_update=0.25ms)` # High-frequency update - Set `Init_Anchor` to a specific phase (e.g., the first 25% of each millisecond). - Generate `K_sec` using a dedicated key derivation path 2. Transaction 2 (AGV navigation flow): - `Rule_ID = (Type="Rule_B", T_update=1ms)` # Intermediate frequency update - Set the phase of `Init_Anchor` to the middle time period (25%-75%). - Use another key derivation path 3. Service 3 (Sensor Reporting): - `Rule_ID = (Type="Rule_C", T_logical=60s, N_s=6000)` # Low frequency, high energy efficiency - `Init_Anchor` is randomly assigned - Derived using a generic key 7.7.3 Performance Analysis Through the above parameter optimization, the logical decisions of different priority businesses are naturally staggered on the timeline: - Robotic arm control flow: decisions are concentrated within the first 250μs of each millisecond, resulting in a low probability of collisions between components. - AGV navigation flow: Decisions are made during intermediate periods, with minimal conflict with the robotic arm flow. - Sensor stream: Decision sparse, with negligible impact on real-time services. Theoretical calculations show that the collision probability of the robotic arm control flow is reduced from about 15% in random assignment to less than 2% in optimization, and the latency jitter is reduced by 85%.

[0177] VIII. Apparatus for Implementing the Invention 8.1 Network Equipment A network device (e.g., a base station, gNB) is characterized by comprising a processor, a memory, a transceiver, and a network interface. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the program, it controls the transceiver and the network interface to implement the method steps performed by the network device in any of the foregoing embodiments. Specific functional modules can be combined... Figure 2 Understanding, including but not limited to: - DSF Management and Context Transmission Module: Responsible for generating, securely storing, updating, and transmitting user-level and service flow-level DSF contexts `(K_sec, Init_Anchor, Rule_ID)` during handover.

[0178] - Protocol State Machine Engine: Maintains a protocol security state machine synchronized with each user / business flow (supports rules A / B / C), providing a globally consistent logical time base.

[0179] - Anchor point time mapping module: Receives logical decision triggers and determines the corresponding unified anchor point physical time `T_anchor` by combining physical layer synchronization timing.

[0180] - Enhanced arbitrator based on `T_anchor`: Using `T_anchor` as a unified benchmark, it executes the two-step deterministic arbitration logic (inter-user conflict arbitration and resource availability check) as described in the claims, and maintains and queries the global resource calendar.

[0181] - Deterministic timing scheduler: Based on the arbitration result, schedules all downlink signals (grant signals or silence indication signals) to be sent at the corresponding `T_DL (T_anchor + Δ_downlink)` time.

[0182] - Uplink Reception and Signal Processing Module: At time `T_UL`, it uses the pilot sequence based on DSF prediction to perform efficient joint channel estimation and data demodulation on the uplink security pilot frames of licensed users.

[0183] 8.2 User Equipment A user equipment (UE) is characterized by comprising a processor, a memory, a transceiver, and a security element. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the program, it controls the transceiver and implements the method steps performed by the UE in any of the foregoing embodiments. Specific functional modules can be combined... Figure 3 Understanding, including but not limited to: - DSF Synchronization and Storage Module: Securely receives and stores DSF and derived configurations issued by the network.

[0184] - Local Protocol State Machine: An independently operating protocol security state machine synchronized with the network side, accurately determining the local logical decision moments `T_logic`.

[0185] - Decision and Timing Calculation Module: At time `T_logic`, based on the current DSF state `S(t)`, calculate the uplink and downlink resource intentions `(R_u, R_d)` of the cryptographic pair, determine the corresponding `T_anchor`, and then calculate `T_DL` and `T_UL`.

[0186] - Timing Controller: Controls the transceiver to perform downlink listening at the precise `T_DL` time, and to perform uplink transmission or remain silent at the `T_UL` time.

[0187] - Authorization Decision Controller: At time `T_DL`, the Controller makes an autonomous authorization decision based on whether a valid frame matching the target identifier has been successfully decoded on the downlink resource `R_d`.

[0188] - Uplink Transmission Controller: Based on the authorization decision, controls whether to transmit data on the uplink resource `R_u` at time `T_UL` or remain silent, and manages the local queue of pending data.

[0190] IX. Conclusion The above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0191] For example, the specific algorithm implementations of the cryptographic functions `F`, `Map_u`, `Map_d`, and `Derive` (such as using HMAC, CMAC, AES-GCM, or national cryptographic algorithms), the specific parameters of the state transition rules (`T_update`, `T_logical`, `N_s`, `L`, etc.), the weighting method of the arbitration strategy (such as considering queue length and service type), the sending period and format of the silent calibration beacon, and the specific application rules of the service flow derived parameter `(G, O)`, etc., can all be adjusted and optimized according to the actual application scenario, deployment environment, and technological evolution. The fixed offset `Δ_downlink` can be set to zero in a specific scenario (i.e., `T_DL = T_anchor`). The physical layer implementation variants of the authorization signal and the silence indication signal, as well as the specific data structure of the global resource calendar, etc., all reasonable changes and extensions made based on the core idea of ​​this invention, "unified anchor time `T_anchor` and two-level fixed offset `(Δ_downlink, Δ_uplink)`", all fall within the protection scope of this invention.

Claims

1. A hard deterministic wireless communication method based on a unified anchor point time and dual fixed offsets, characterized in that, include: - When the protocol security state machine of a user device or service flow reaches its logical decision moment, determine the corresponding unified anchor point physical moment T_anchor; - Based on the current state of the Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF), generate cryptographically paired uplink transmit resource intentions `R_u` and downlink listen resource intentions `R_d`; - Based on the pre-configured first fixed offset Δ1 and second fixed offset Δ2 (where Δ2 > Δ1), calculate: - Downlink signal transmission / reception time: `T1 = T_anchor + Δ1`; - Uplink signal transmission time: `T2 = T_anchor + Δ2`; - The network side uses the `T_anchor` as a time reference to perform a two-step deterministic arbitration on the intended resource `R_u`, including arbitration of conflicts between users and final determination of resource availability; - Based on the arbitration result, the network side sends an authorization signal or a silence indication signal to the user equipment at time `T1` on resource `R_d`; - At time `T1`, the user equipment listens to resource `R_d` and makes an authorization decision. Based on the decision result, at time `T2`, it sends data on resource `R_u` or remains silent.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The first fixed offset Δ1 and the second fixed offset Δ2 are configured differently based on the communication stage: - During the initial access phase, configure dedicated offsets `Δ_MsgA` and `Δ_MsgB` for access, which are used to determine the access request sending time `T_MsgA` and the access response listening time `T_MsgB`, respectively. - During the connected service transmission phase, the service-specific offsets `Δ_downlink` and `Δ_uplink` are configured to determine the downlink grant / data timing `T_DL` and the uplink data transmission timing `T_UL`, respectively.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The "two-step deterministic arbitration" specifically includes: - User conflict arbitration: Identify the set of all users mapped to the same `T_anchor` and with the same uplink resource intention `R_u`, and select a winner according to preset non-random rules; - Final determination of resource availability: Query the global resource calendar indexed by absolute physical time to check whether the winner's intended resource `R_u` is in an "idle" or "reserved by the winner" state at the corresponding uplink transmission time `T2`.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The records in the global resource calendar are used to implement forward-looking resource reservation: - Based on the quality of service requirements and DSF of high-priority service flows, the network side predicts the `T_anchor` sequence corresponding to multiple logical decision moments in the future and the `(R_u, R_d)` sequence of paired resources at each moment; - In the global resource calendar, the transmission opportunities formed by the resource pair `(R_u, R_d)` at the corresponding `T2` time (uplink transmission) and `T1` time (downlink grant) are marked in advance as "reserved by this service flow", thereby providing it with hard deterministic transmission guarantee of zero contention and zero jitter.

5. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, During the initial access phase, the method further includes a deterministic random access procedure: - The network side broadcasts the future anchor point time `T_anchor`, access offsets `Δ_MsgA` and `Δ_MsgB`, network signature `Sig`, and access opportunity tag `Access_ID` through system information; - The user equipment deterministically calculates its own access resources (R_u, R_d) and time (T_MsgA, T_MsgB) based on the broadcast parameters and its own identifier `UE_ID`, and sends an access request. - The network side uses `T_anchor` as a benchmark to arbitrate conflict requests in two steps, and allocates a dedicated DSF for subsequent connected-state communication to the user equipment that wins the arbitration.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The specific steps for the user equipment to calculate its dedicated access resources `(R_u, R_d)` include: - Based on the network signature `Sig`, unified anchor time `T_anchor`, physical cell identifier `PCI`, access opportunity label `Access_ID`, and user identifier `UE_ID` in the broadcast parameters, calculate the resource index using a predetermined cryptographic hash function: `Resource_Index = H(Sig || T_anchor || PCI || Access_ID || UE_ID) mod (N_slot * M_freq)`; - Map the `Resource_Index` to a specific location in the two-dimensional access resource pool, including the micro-slot offset `slot_offset` and the frequency domain index `freq_index`; - Determine the time domain location of the uplink access resource `R_u` as `T_MsgA + slot_offset * T_symbol`, and the frequency domain location as `freq_index`; - Determine the paired downlink listening resource `R_d` according to the predetermined pairing rules.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The access opportunity tag `Access_ID` is uniquely assigned by the network side for each access opportunity and is used for: - Prevent replay attacks and ensure that expired access commitments are invalid; - Enables the same user equipment to calculate different resource locations in different access opportunities, enhancing security; - Differentiate between different types of access (such as initial access, connection recovery) and configure differentiated resource pools for them.

8. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The two-dimensional access resource pool consists of `N_slot` micro-time slots and `M_freq` frequency domain units; by configuring `N_slot * M_freq >> 1`, the probability of resource collision caused by the "modulo funnel" effect is significantly diluted when a large number of users access the network concurrently.

9. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, For access requests that fail in arbitration, a deterministic retry mechanism is adopted: - The network side pre-broadcasts a deterministic sequence of retry anchor times; - Failed users deterministically select the next retry opportunity in the sequence based on their own identifier `UE_ID` using a public hash function, thereby ensuring that the worst-case access delay is bounded and avoiding the "starvation" problem in traditional random backoff mechanisms.

10. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes a high-precision positioning step based on the deterministic timing sequence: - Multiple network-side receiving points share the DSF of the target user equipment and synchronize their protocol state machines; - Each receiving point determines the expected transmission time of the uplink signal of the user equipment as T2 based on the DSF; - The absolute propagation time is obtained by subtracting the actual arrival time of the measured signal from `T2` at each receiving point. This is used to calculate the location of the user equipment, without the need for strict clock synchronization between receiving points.

11. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, In handover scenarios, zero-signaling handover is achieved by passing resource reservation context: - The source network device transmits the user equipment's DSF context, protocol state machine snapshot, and future resource reservation information in the global resource calendar to the target network device; wherein, the future resource reservation information includes the anchor time `T_anchor` sequence based on absolute physical time and the corresponding reserved resource identifier; - The target network device reconstructs the synchronized protocol state machine based on the DSF context and snapshot, and directly inherits the future resource reservation information into its local global resource calendar; - After the handover, the user equipment and the target network equipment continue to communicate based on the re-established synchronization state using the deterministic timing rules consisting of `T_anchor`, `Δ1`, and `Δ2`, thus avoiding the execution of random access procedures in the target cell.

12. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The network side optimizes services of different priorities by differentially allocating the parameters `(K_sec, Init_Anchor, Rule_ID)` of the Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF). - By configuring different `Init_Anchor`, the logical decisions of services with different priorities are staggered on the physical timeline; - By assigning different `Rule_ID`, different services can be matched with their latency and energy efficiency requirements; - Cryptographic isolation and resource intention distribution are achieved by generating `K_sec` through different key derivation paths.

13. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Each user device or service flow operates a protocol security state machine based on its independent Dynamic Security Foundation (DSF), forming multiple asynchronous logical timelines; - The asynchronicity makes the logical decision-making moments of different user devices or service flows tend to be evenly distributed on the physical time axis; This results in the number of users who need to participate in resource arbitration at any unified anchor point `T_anchor` being much smaller on average than the total number of users, thereby reducing the probability of resource collisions, improving the actual throughput of the system, and making the average latency lower than the worst-case latency upper bound.

14. A wireless communication system for implementing the hard deterministic wireless communication method according to any one of claims 1-13, characterized in that, Includes network equipment and at least one user equipment. - The network device includes: - Protocol state machine engine, used to maintain a state machine synchronized with user equipment; - Anchor point time mapping module, used to determine the `T_anchor` corresponding to the logical decision time; - Enhance the arbitrator to perform two-step deterministic arbitration based on `T_anchor`; - Global resource calendar, used to record future resource status and reservation information; - A deterministic time scheduler used to control the transmission of downlink signals at time `T1`; - Context passing module, used to pass DSF context and resource reservation information during handover; - The user equipment includes: - A local protocol state machine, used to run independently and determine the timing of logical decisions; - Decision and time calculation module, used to calculate resource intentions `(R_u, R_d)` and deterministic time `(T1, T2)`; - A timing controller used to control listening at a precise `T1` time and sending at `T2` time.

15. A network device, characterized in that, The device includes a processor, a memory, and a transceiver. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the program, it controls the transceiver and performs the steps of the method as described in any one of claims 1-13, which are executed by the network device.

16. A user equipment, characterized in that, The device includes a processor, a memory, and a transceiver. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the program, it controls the transceiver and performs the steps of the method as described in any one of claims 1-13, which are executed by the user equipment.

Images