5G Full-Duplex Slot Scheduling for QoS and Interference Balance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for mitigating interference in full-duplex wireless networks are sub-optimal, leading to reduced quality of service, particularly for services requiring guaranteed bit rate or low-latency, due to excessive signaling and inefficient spectrum usage.

Innovation Solution

Scheduling full-duplex transmissions by identifying flexible symbols in air interface resources, separating delay-sensitive transmissions to dedicated uplink/downlink portions, and scheduling non-delay-sensitive transmissions in flexible portions to minimize interference.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If full-duplex transmissions are scheduled in flexible symbols to improve spectrum utilization, then network efficiency is improved, but interference from neighboring sectors increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvenetwork efficiencyVSAvoidinterference

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The time slot is segmented into three distinct portions: uplink portion, downlink portion, and flexible portion. This segmentation allows different transmission types to be scheduled in appropriate portions, isolating delay-sensitive transmissions from interference-prone flexible symbols while maintaining spectrum utilization benefits

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different portions of the air interface resource are assigned different qualities/functions: uplink and downlink portions provide protected, interference-free transmission for sensitive services, while flexible portions provide full-duplex capability for non-sensitive services. Each portion has tailored characteristics suitable for its intended use

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If interference mitigation techniques are applied to protect delay-sensitive transmissions, then quality of service is improved, but spectrum usage efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvequality of serviceVSAvoidspectrum usage efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The air interface resource is divided into protected portions (uplink/downlink) and flexible portions, allowing QoS-critical transmissions to be isolated in protected portions while non-critical transmissions utilize flexible portions, achieving both reliability and efficiency

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of applying interference mitigation to all transmissions (which would reduce spectrum efficiency), only delay-sensitive and control transmissions receive protected scheduling in specific portions, while non-sensitive transmissions use flexible portions without additional protection overhead

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Productivity

If flexible symbols are used for full-duplex transmissions to increase throughput, then data transmission capacity is improved, but latency for control signaling increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata transmission capacityVSAvoidlatency

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The time slot is segmented to separate control signaling from data transmissions, with control transmissions scheduled in protected uplink/downlink portions that guarantee timing requirements, while data transmissions utilize flexible portions for increased capacity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different portions are assigned different quality levels: uplink/downlink portions provide low-latency, high-reliability transmission for control signaling, while flexible portions provide high-capacity transmission for data, matching transmission requirements to appropriate resources

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

4Object-affected harmful factors

If muting subframes is used to prevent interference in flexible symbols, then interference is reduced, but overall network throughput decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveinterferenceVSAvoidnetwork throughput

Core Design Contradiction:

Object-affected harmful factorsVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of muting flexible symbols to prevent interference (which reduces throughput), the patent inverts the approach by scheduling non-delay-sensitive transmissions in flexible symbols and protecting delay-sensitive transmissions in dedicated portions, thereby utilizing flexible symbols productively while maintaining QoS

Inventive Principle:

Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The air interface is segmented into protected and flexible portions, allowing interference management through selective scheduling rather than blanket muting, thus maintaining throughput while managing interference impact

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS12506585B2Scheduling full-duplex transmissions in 5G networks

Publication Date: 2025.12.23 SPRINT SPECTRUM LP

AI summary

Scheduling full-duplex transmissions includes configuring adjacent time slots of an air interface resource with different ratios of uplink portions, downlink portions, and flexible portions, scheduling transmissions in each adjacent time slot based on whether or not the transmissions are latency-sensitive or delay-sensitive or control transmissions. The uplink portions, downlink portions, and flexible portions comprise symbols within time slots of a subframe, and can vary based on a numerology. The flexible portions are symbols configured to simultaneously transmit uplink data and downlink data.