Evaluating a user equipment

Abstract

An environment-specific User Equipment (UE) for a cellular network, for example an Internet-of-Things (IoT) and / or Extended Reality (XR) UE, can be evaluated. The UE communication performance is measured at each of a plurality of angles to establish at least one dip-related characteristic of the UE based on any dips in the UE communication performance over the plurality of angles. The UE is evaluated by comparing the at least one dip-related characteristic against one or more criteria.

Description

[0001] Evaluating a User Equipment

[0002] Technical Field of the Disclosure

[0003] The disclosure concerns evaluating an environment-specific User Equipment (UE) for a cellular network. This can be implemented as a method and / or a computer program, for example.

[0004] Background to the Disclosure

[0005] Standards for cellular networks, in particular those specified by the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), define minimum Radio Frequency (RF) requirements for User Equipment (UE), for example in 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 38.101-1. UEs are evaluated against these requirements in conformance tests to demonstrate that the UE will maintain appropriate communication with the cellular network in a robust and reliable way, for example to provide consistent wireless performance. The requirements are therefore desirably set to account for the way in which the UE is used in practice.

[0006] In view of the mobile nature of UEs, it has historically been expected that UEs would be used in a range of different environments. Testing for consistent wireless performance has therefore been based on Total Radiated Power (TRP) and Total Radiated Sensitivity (TRS) measurements, where power levels are averaged over various angles. 3GPP TS 38.161 V18.3.0 gives precise details on how this is measured in practice. This approach provides useful metrics for performance without the need for burdensome and inefficient measurements to be made.

[0007] New types of UE have been developed, some of which are for use in a specific environment. Examples of these include Internet of Things (loT) and Extended Reality (XR) devices. XR glasses represent a particular example where the environment may have a significant effect on the RF performance. Unlike mobile handsets that are used in varying orientations, XR glasses are typically used in a fixed orientation (that is, worn on the head a user).

[0008] In addition, 3GPP standards have relaxed antenna constraints for certain types of UE. For example, 5G standards have mandated that the UE have four receive (Rx) antennas for operation in certain frequency bands, to capture the full spatial nuances of the antenna radiation pattern. The minimum requirement in these bands for XR UEs has been reduced to two receive antennas for glasses RX for XR glasses. For example, see TS 38.101 -1 , section 3.1 , where are “Two Rx antenna port XR UE” is specified: “The UE is intended to be worn on human head. When in use, is intended to be supported only

[0009] 17508998.SK.MEWby / behind the ears and by a nose-bridge resulting in a constrained form factor with limited volume available for Rx chains.” Such changes may affect UE performance.

[0010] Whilst TRP and / or TRS measurements based on averaging provides an overall performance metric for evaluating UEs, it may not be best suited to all types of device. Evaluating performance of environment-specific UEs in an efficient and effective way, whilst providing a useful result, therefore remains a challenge.

[0011] Summary of the Disclosure

[0012] Against this background, the present disclosure provides a method for evaluating an environment-specific User Equipment (UE) for a cellular network according to claim 1 and a computer program as defined by claim 14. Other preferred features are disclosed with reference to the claims and in the description below.

[0013] The UE is desirably evaluated based on measuring the UE communication performance (examples include a radiated power measurement, for instance Effective Isotropic Radiated Power and / or a receiver sensitivity measurement, for example Effective Isotropic Sensitivity), at each of multiple angles. This is similar to (or even the same as) existing measurement approaches. However, a new metric is proposed, defined as at least one dip-related characteristic of the UE. This is advantageously based on any dips in the UE communication performance over the plurality of angles. The UE is then evaluated by comparing the at least one dip-related characteristic against one or more criteria.

[0014] For example, the at least one dip-related characteristic may comprise one or more of: a number of dips over all the measured angles; an angular extent over which each dip is identified (for instance, a range of angles over which the dip is measured); a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of a main lobe of the UE (for instance, in dB or as a percentage); a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of an adjacent (side)lobe of the UE; an absolute communication performance of each dip; and a statistic (for example, averagebased or variance-based) of the UE communication performance over one, some or all dips.

[0015] Dips may be identified by: comparison with main lobe performance; comparison with side lobe performance; and / or absolute comparison with a threshold (that is, a minimum level).

[0016] The angles over which the measurements are taken may be based on the UE type, for example, taking account of the way in which the UE is used (for instance, a glasses-based or head-mounted display UE may be used in limited range of orientations). The

[0017] 17508998.SK.MEWangles may be measured in two or three dimensions. The measurements may be taken per antenna and / or per operation frequency (one or more specific frequencies may be selected for each frequency band used, for instance). Advantageously, measurements are made for both transmission from the UE (radiation) and reception by the UE (sensitivity).

[0018] The UE may be evaluated by comparing each dip-related characteristic against at least one threshold. A pass or fail condition for the UE can be determined from the comparison. Beneficially, the threshold (or thresholds) may be set dependent on frequency and / or UE radio access technology. Optionally, there are multiple dip-related characteristics, each of which is compared against multiple thresholds. Then, the pass or fail condition may be how many of the characteristics meet each threshold.

[0019] This approach is particularly applicable to environment-specific UEs. For example, the UE may be an Internet-of-Things (loT) and / or Extended Reality (XR) UE, for instance XR glasses or XR head-mounted display. In embodiments, the UE has fewer antennas for receive and / or transmit than required by the standard for other UEs (such as handsets).

[0020] Aspects may be applied individually or in combination. Any approaches or aspect according to the disclosure may be implemented as software and / or hardware, for example in the form of a controller.

[0021] Brief Description of the Drawings

[0022] The approach of the disclosure may be put into practice in various ways, one of which will now be described by way of example only and with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:

[0023] Figure 1 shows a schematic example of measuring a XR glasses UE at different angles; and

[0024] Figure 2 depicts a flowchart of an exemplary method for evaluating a UE according to the disclosure.

[0025] Detailed Description of Preferred Embodiments

[0026] Current evaluation methods based on TRP and / or TRS involve measuring the radiated power across a range of angles (in three dimensions) and then computing an average value to determine overall performance. While this method may be sufficient for many devices, it has been found to present a significant shortcoming for environmentspecific devices. These may include Extended Reality (XR) glasses or head-mounted display and / or Internet of Things (loT) devices, which are often worn with a consistent orientation against the body of a user and / or may have a reduced number of transmit

[0027] 17508998.SK.MEWand / or receive antennas compared with the numbers required by the relevant standards for other types of UE.

[0028] In such scenarios, even if the overall TRP and / or TRS meets the required standard, a few low-power measurements (deep nulls) in certain directions may lead to inconsistent coverage. The present disclosure recognises that existing techniques for evaluating UE performance can mask localized deficiencies in the radiation pattern and specifically deep nulls that may occur in certain directions. This may be especially problematic for a XR glasses UE (which is used as a main but non-exclusive example herein), both in view of the specific way in which the UE is used and the ability to reduce the number of Rx antennas compared with other UEs. For XR glasses, performance uniformity may be desirable for maintaining seamless connectivity in an immersive experience. Deep nulls can lead to user dissatisfaction and degraded performance and coverage.

[0029] There are several implications of the way in which such devices are used and their antenna configuration. First, the reduction in antennas may lead to reduced spatial resolution. With fewer Rx antennas, the likelihood for creation of deep nulls in downlink radiation pattern is increased. The more antennas are spatially distributed, the smoother the radiation pattern and thus the lower the likelihood for deep nulls.

[0030] Second, there may be potential coverage gaps. Even if the averaged TRP and TRS appear acceptable, localized regions of poor performance may exist. In a fixed-use scenario against the body of a user, for example XR glasses, these gaps can lead to significant degradation in user experience, particularly in areas where consistent connectivity may be a key performance measure.

[0031] Third, these changes can lead to design and calibration challenges. Manufacturers desirably optimize antenna designs and calibration procedures with the knowledge that fewer Rx antennas might cause insufficient performance, for instance low throughput and coverage. Any evaluation procedure is desirably sufficiently robust to identify such deficiencies without becoming overly onerous (and therefore inefficient).

[0032] Based on these issues, a more granular analysis approach for UE evaluation is considered, that does not allow the averaging process to obscure significant performance deficiencies, but without losing the benefit of a clear performance measurement and without making the process more onerous and / or complex overall.

[0033] Referring first to Figure 1 , there is shown a schematic example of measuring a XR glasses UE 1 at different angles. The angles can be defined in a first (horizontal) plane 10 and / or in a second (vertical) plane 20. Composite three dimensional angles between the first plane 10 and the second plane 20 may also be defined. Typically, measurements are

[0034] 17508998.SK.MEWtaken at a plurality of angles in one or both of the first plane 10 and the second plane 20 and / or at selected composite three dimensional angles. The angles may be determined from the main beam of the antenna arrangement in the XR glasses LIE 1.

[0035] Referring now to Figure 2, there is depicted a flowchart of an exemplary method for evaluating a UE for a cellular network according to the disclosure. The UE is particularly an environment-specific UE, for example an loT and / or XR UE. In embodiments, the UE has fewer antennas for receive and / or transmit than required by the cellular network (according to the standardisation applied by the network) for a non-environment specific UE. It should be noted that this method may be computer-implemented, for example embodied as a computer program (stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium, for instance) comprising instructions that are configured, when operated by a processor, to perform the method.

[0036] An approach proposed in this disclosure is to introduce at least one new metric as an additional minimum requirement, related to any dips in the UE performance over multiple measured angles. The proposed approach could be implemented without altering the existing measurement procedure or requiring additional equipment, ensuring seamless integration into existing testing frameworks, whilst providing significantly improved evaluation of real-world performance.

[0037] In a first, measurement step 100, the UE communication performance is measured at each of a plurality of angles. The UE communication performance at each of the plurality of angles may be measured in terms of transmission from the UE (that is, outgoing signals) and / or reception by the UE (that is, incoming signals). In this respect, the measured UE communication performance can be one or more of: a radiated power measurement (for instance, Effective Isotropic Radiated Power, EIRP); and a receiver sensitivity measurement (for example, Effective Isotropic Sensitivity, EIS). The UE communication performance can be measured in absolute terms (for example, in dBm units) or relative terms (in dB units, for instance), for example relative to the main lobe measurement.

[0038] The plurality of angles may be set based on a type of the UE. For example, a XR glasses UE may have a different set of angles from a watch-based UE. In particular, the number and location of angles could also be set to account for the fixed orientation of XR glasses or similar type of device. The plurality of angles may be in two dimensions or in three dimensions.

[0039] In some embodiments, the UE communication performance may be measured at each of the plurality of angles at a single frequency and / or for all antennas together.

[0040] 17508998.SK.MEWAlternatively, the UE communication performance may be measured at each of the plurality of angles and for each of a plurality of different frequencies and / or for each of a plurality of different antennas of the UE. In other words, the measurements may be taken for multiple angles at a first frequency and for multiple angles at a second, different frequency and / or measurements may be taken for multiple angles with a first antenna and for multiple angles at a second, different antenna. The set of angles across which measurements are taken may be different between frequencies and / or different antennas.

[0041] In practice, a standard existing method for TRP measurement may be used without change. In this way, radiation patterns may be sampled at the multiple selected angles in a controlled laboratory environment. This continuity may allow existing protocols and equipment to be utilized without modification. However, EIRP and EIS are advantageously measured and saved for each angle or position. For each device, the EIRP and EIS can be measured per antenna.

[0042] In a second, characterising step 110, at least one dip-related characteristic of the UE is established, based on any dips in the UE communication performance over the plurality of angles.

[0043] As part of this step, any dips (if there are any) are optionally identified. A range of approaches may be taken for doing this. In one option, a main lobe communication performance may be determined from the measured UE communication performance over the plurality of angles (for example, as the maximum communication performance over all angles). Then, the UE communication performance over each of the (other) plurality of angles may be compared with the determined main lobe communication performance. This comparison, for instance, noting that the UE communication performance is lower than the main lobe communication performance by at least a threshold amount, may result in one or more dips being identified.

[0044] Another, similar approach may involve initially determining a plurality of lobe communication performances from the measured UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles (which may involve a main lobe and one or more side lobes). Then, the UE communication performance over each of the (other) plurality of angles may be compared with the one of the plurality of lobe communication performances, for instance one of the side lobes. For instance, a dip may be identified where the UE communication performance is lower than an adjacent side lobe communication performance by at least a threshold amount.

[0045] 17508998.SK.MEWA third approach may be on an absolute basis. For example, a dip may be identified based on a comparison of the UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles with a threshold communication performance.

[0046] The at least one dip-related characteristic can represent a wide range of options for characterising the UE communication performance based on the dips. For example, a dip-related characteristic may be one or more of: a number of dips over the plurality of angles; an angular extent over which each dip is identified; a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of a main lobe of the UE; a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of an adjacent lobe of the UE; an absolute communication performance of each dip; and a statistic (for example, average, variance, standard deviation or similar, where an average may be a mean, median or mode, for instance) of the UE communication performance over one, some or all dips. As noted above, identifying dips is an optional, but not essential step.

[0047] This characterising step 110 may therefore represent a post-measurement analysis. As a practical example, once the data is collected, each individual measurement point may be compared against threshold values of EIRP and EIS (EIRP Threshold and EIS_Threshold). This threshold can be expressed either as an absolute value (e.g., in dBm) or as a relative value (e.g., a percentage drop from the peak power). The exact threshold is beneficially determined to be both technically achievable and meaningful in enhancing overall device performance.

[0048] A third evaluation step 120 evaluates the UE by comparing the at least one dip-related characteristic against one or more criteria. For instance, each of the at least one dip-related characteristic may be compared against at least one threshold. Then, a pass or fail condition for the UE may be determined based on the comparison. Optionally, the at least one threshold is dependent on frequency and / or UE Radio Access Technology (RAT), which may include one or more of: modulation; coding; duplex mode; and RAT architecture. For instance, where the dip-related characteristic comprises the number of dips, this may be compared against a threshold. If the number of dips meets or exceeds the threshold, a fail condition may result. This is a fairly simplistic criterion.

[0049] It will be appreciated that more complex criteria may be used. For instance, there may be a plurality of dip-related characteristics. Then, each of the plurality of dip-related characteristics may be compared against one threshold or against a plurality of thresholds. Then, the step of determining the pass or fail condition for the UE may be based on how many of the plurality of dip-related characteristics meet each of the plurality of thresholds. For example, if a first primary threshold number of dips for one frequency is met, then a fail

[0050] 17508998.SK.MEWcondition may result if a first secondary threshold number of dips is met for another frequency, but if a second primary threshold number of dips for the one frequency is met (higher than the first primary threshold), then a fail condition may result if a second secondary threshold number of dips is met for the other frequency (lower than the first secondary threshold). Other more sophisticated tests may be considered.

[0051] Thus, rigorous decision criteria are advantageously used. One example of a criterion may be that every measurement point must meet or exceed an agreed minimum threshold (above minimum EIRP and EIS threshold values). A second criterion may be that the number of measurement points that are below the threshold for EIRP and EIS should meet minimum respective values (for instance, EIRP fail > EIRP_fail_Threshold and / or EIS_fail > EIS_fail_threshold). Again, these minimum values should be both technically achievable and meaningful in enhancing overall device performance. If EIRP fail and EIS_fail are below the agreed threshold, the device may be deemed to have an unacceptable deep null and fails the test for that specific performance criterion. This rigorous requirement may make sure that the radiation pattern is uniformly robust, thereby reducing the risk of localized coverage gaps. Optionally, EIRP_fail_Threshold and

[0052] E IS_fail_th reshold could be equal zero. The threshold values may be dependent on used frequency bands and / or technology (for instance, FDD or TDD).

[0053] For UEs with a reduced number of Rx antennas (currently fewer than 4, specifically 2, but in general may be fewer than N antennas, if N antennas are defined by a relevant standard for a normal UE) in certain frequency bands, the risk of performance deficiencies may increase. By applying a per-measurement threshold analysis, the approach according to the disclosure may compensate for the lower spatial resolution inherent in a two Rx antenna configuration (or any configuration with fewer Rx antennas than a relevant standard would normally require). This additional safeguard may make sure that even with fewer Rx antennas, every directional measurement is thoroughly evaluated, and potential deep nulls are avoided.

[0054] Another goal of a metric according to the disclosure is to help guarantee that XR glasses (and similar devices) exhibit consistent and reliable antenna performance in all directions, thus helping to show optimal real-world coverage. This is especially desirable for devices with a fixed orientation against a body of a user, where the opportunity to “average out” performance issues is minimal. By eliminating deep nulls, connectivity and overall user experience of the device may be significantly improved.

[0055] An implementation according to the disclosure may comprise hardware and / or software, for example a computer system and / or generic or bespoke hardware. This may

[0056] 17508998.SK.MEWbe implemented as a controller as part of a network element within standard cellular network architecture and / or in a network element separate from existing architecture.

[0057] Throughout the description and claims of this specification, the words “comprise” and “contain” and variations of them mean “including but not limited to”, and they are not intended to (and do not) exclude other components, integers or steps. Throughout the description and claims of this specification, the singular encompasses the plural unless the context otherwise requires. In particular, where the indefinite article is used, the specification is to be understood as contemplating plurality as well as singularity, unless the context requires otherwise.

[0058] Although specific implementations are discussed, it will be appreciated that variations are possible.

[0059] Features, integers, characteristics or groups described in conjunction with a particular aspect, embodiment or example of the disclosure are to be understood to be applicable to any other aspect, embodiment or example described herein unless incompatible therewith. All of the features disclosed in this specification (including any accompanying claims, abstract and drawings), and / or all of the steps of any method or process so disclosed, may be combined in any combination, except combinations where at least some of such features and / or steps are mutually exclusive. The disclosure is not restricted to the details of any foregoing embodiments. The disclosure extends to any novel one, or any novel combination, of the features disclosed in this specification (including any accompanying claims, abstract and drawings), or to any novel one, or any novel combination, of the steps of any method or process so disclosed. In particular, any dependent claims may be combined with any of the independent claims and any of the other dependent claims.

[0060] 17508998.SK.MEW

Claims

CLAIMS1. A method for evaluating an environment-specific User Equipment (UE) for a cellular network, the method comprising:measuring the UE communication performance at each of a plurality of angles to establish at least one dip-related characteristic of the UE based on any dips in the UE communication performance over the plurality of angles; andevaluating the UE by comparing the at least one dip-related characteristic against one or more criteria.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the at least one dip-related characteristic comprises one or more of: a number of dips over the plurality of angles; an angular extent over which each dip is identified; a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of a main lobe of the UE; a communication performance of each dip relative to a communication performance of an adjacent lobe of the UE; an absolute communication performance of each dip; and a statistic of the UE communication performance over one, some or all dips.

3. The method of claim 1 or claim 2, further comprising:identifying any dips by one of:determining a main lobe communication performance from the measured UE communication performance over the plurality of angles and comparing the UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles with the determined main lobe communication performance;determining a plurality of lobe communication performances from the measured UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles and comparing the UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles with the one of the plurality of lobe communication performances; and comparing the UE communication performance over each of the plurality of angles with a threshold communication performance.

4. The method of any preceding claim wherein the plurality of angles are set based on a type of the UE.17508998.SK.MEW5. The method of any preceding claim wherein the plurality of angles are in three dimensions.

6. The method of any preceding claim wherein the step of measuring the LIE communication performance at each of the plurality of angles is performed for each of a plurality of different frequencies and / or for each of a plurality of different antennas of the UE.

7. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the step of measuring the UE communication performance at each of the plurality of angles is performed for both transmission from the UE and reception by the UE.

8. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the measured UE communication performance comprises one or more of: a radiated power measurement; and a receiver sensitivity measurement.

9. The method of any preceding claim, wherein evaluating the UE comprises:comparing each of the at least one dip-related characteristic against at least one threshold; anddetermining a pass or fail condition for the UE based on the comparison.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein the step of comparing comprises comparing each of a plurality of dip-related characteristics against a plurality of thresholds and wherein the step of determining the pass or fail condition for the UE is based on how many of the plurality of dip-related characteristics meet each of the plurality of thresholds.

11. The method of claim 9 or claim 10, wherein the at least one threshold is dependent on frequency and / or UE radio access technology.

12. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the UE has fewer antennas for receive and / or transmit than required by the cellular network for a non-environment specific UE.

13. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the UE is an Internet-of-Things (loT) and / or Extended Reality (XR) UE.17508998.SK.MEW14. A computer program comprising instructions that are configured, when operated by a processor, to perform the method of any preceding claim.17508998. SK.MEW

Images