Beam Failure Recovery Resource Selection for Reliable Reconnection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Wireless communications are prone to disruptions due to interference, leading to disconnections that can hinder reconnections, and existing solutions often increase signaling overhead or decrease spectral efficiency.

Innovation Solution

A wireless device detects beam failure and performs beam failure recovery on a subset of serving beams that have not failed, using a new beam within a threshold distance and time from the previous request, thereby optimizing beam failure recovery requests.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If beam failure recovery requests are repeated using the same beam, then reconnection reliability is improved, but interference from the initial disruption prevents successful reconnection

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereconnection reliabilityVSAvoidinterference
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of repeatedly transmitting recovery requests on the same failed beam (conventional approach), the patent inverts the approach by selecting a different beam for each recovery request. The wireless device identifies alternative beams from a set of candidate beams and uses these different beams to transmit recovery requests, thereby avoiding the interference that plagues the original beam and enabling successful reconnection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

2Reliability

If beam failure recovery is performed on all serving beams, then comprehensive recovery is achieved, but signaling overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverecovery completenessVSAvoidsignaling overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the beam failure recovery process by dividing serving beams into two categories: those that have failed and those that have not failed. Recovery operations are selectively applied only to the failed beams, while non-failed beams continue normal operation. This segmentation avoids the unnecessary signaling overhead that would result from performing recovery on all beams, while still achieving comprehensive recovery of the failed portions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by performing beam failure recovery only on the subset of beams that actually failed, rather than on all serving beams. The wireless device identifies which specific beams have failed and limits recovery operations to those beams only, thereby reducing signaling overhead while maintaining effective recovery of the affected communication links.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Reliability

If beam failure recovery is performed on all serving beams, then comprehensive recovery is achieved, but spectral efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverecovery completenessVSAvoidspectral efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the beam failure recovery process by dividing serving beams into two categories: those that have failed and those that have not failed. Recovery operations are selectively applied only to the failed beams, while non-failed beams continue normal operation. This segmentation avoids the unnecessary signaling overhead that would result from performing recovery on all beams, while still achieving comprehensive recovery of the failed portions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by performing beam failure recovery only on the subset of beams that actually failed, rather than on all serving beams. The wireless device identifies which specific beams have failed and limits recovery operations to those beams only, thereby reducing signaling overhead while maintaining effective recovery of the affected communication links.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Object-affected harmful factors

If a new beam is selected far from the previous request beam, then interference avoidance is improved, but beam selection complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinterference avoidanceVSAvoidbeam selection complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by selecting beams that differ by a minimum threshold in angular separation from previously used beams. This quantitative parameter (angular threshold) provides a clear, objective criterion for beam selection that balances interference avoidance with selection simplicity. The wireless device uses this angular threshold parameter to automatically select appropriate beams without requiring complex decision logic.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20250280463A1Resource Selection in Beam Failure Recovery Transmissions
Publication Date: 2025.09.04 COMCAST CABLE COMM LLC
  • US20250280463A1 patent drawing
  • US20250280463A1 patent drawing
  • US20250280463A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems, apparatuses, and methods are described for beam failure recovery in wireless communications. A plurality of candidate beams may be selected for beam failure recovery. After sending a first signal associated with a first candidate beam for beam failure recovery, the wireless device may send a second signal associated with a second candidate beam for beam failure recovery.