Dynamic Beam Pair Selection for Millimeter Wave Latency Reduction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for selecting transmit-receive beam pairs in mmW wireless communication systems, such as the round-robin approach, result in long latency due to equal opportunity measurement of all beam pairs, failing to distinguish between them based on line of sight and proximity, leading to inefficient selection of serving beam pairs.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a dynamic beam pair selection method where each beam pair is assigned a priority based on both static and dynamic information, such as line of sight and recent measurement results, to quickly converge on a suitable serving beam pair, thereby reducing latency and improving connection establishment.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If round-robin measurement approach is used for all beam pairs, then each beam pair has equal opportunity to be selected, but latency in selecting serving beam pair increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebeam pair selection fairnessVSAvoidlatency in selecting serving beam pair
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the measurement opportunity parameter from equal (round-robin) to unequal based on priority values. Beam pairs are assigned different priority values where higher priority beam pairs receive more measurement opportunities. This parameter change resolves the contradiction by allowing the system to favor certain beam pairs (improving selection speed) while still maintaining a structured measurement approach (preserving fairness through priority-based allocation).

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces dynamic priority values for beam pairs that can be updated based on measurement results and channel conditions. The measurement opportunity allocation is dynamic rather than static, allowing the system to adapt to changing channel conditions and converge faster on suitable beam pairs while maintaining fairness through the priority mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Measurement precision

If all beam pairs are measured equally, then comprehensive measurement is achieved, but selection efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebeam pair measurement completenessVSAvoidbeam pair selection efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by assigning different measurement densities to different beam pairs based on their priority values. High-priority beam pairs (those with better line of sight or proximity) receive more measurement opportunities and higher measurement density, while lower-priority beam pairs receive fewer measurements. This resolves the contradiction by concentrating measurement resources where they are most needed rather than distributing them uniformly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements partial action by not measuring all beam pairs with equal depth. Instead, it focuses measurement resources on a subset of high-priority beam pairs, performing excessive measurement on those most likely to become serving beam pairs while performing minimal or no measurement on low-priority beam pairs. This improves selection efficiency while maintaining sufficient measurement completeness for the most promising candidates.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Device complexity

If round-robin approach is used, then simple measurement scheduling is maintained, but latency in convergence increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeasurement scheduling complexityVSAvoidconvergence latency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces priority values as an additional parameter to the measurement scheduling system. While this increases complexity slightly, the priority-based approach enables much faster convergence on suitable beam pairs. The system maintains relatively simple scheduling logic by using priority values to determine measurement opportunity allocation, resolving the contradiction between simplicity and convergence speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms where measurement results are used to update priority values of beam pairs. This feedback loop allows the system to learn from measurements and adjust future measurement scheduling accordingly, enabling faster convergence while maintaining manageable complexity through iterative improvement rather than complex upfront scheduling.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3725012B1Methods and apparatuses for dynamic beam pair determination
Publication Date: 2024.10.02 QUALCOMM INC
  • EP3725012B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3725012B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3725012B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The choice of a transmit (Tx)-Receive (Rx) beam pair out of many available beam pairs between a base station and a millimeter wave (mmW)-capable UE is directly related to the performance of transmission between the base station and the UE. A method, apparatus, and computer-readable medium at a transmitting user equipment (UE) capable of (mmW) communication are disclosed to determine a new serving Tx-Rx beam pair based on priorities of the plurality of Tx-Rx beam pairs. The UE may select a Transmit (Tx)-Receive (Rx) beam pair from a plurality of Tx-Rx beam pairs available at the UE for measurement, based in part on a priority of the Tx-Rx beam pair, and update the priority of the selected Tx-Rx beam pair based in part on a combination of static information and dynamic information of the selected Tx-Rx beam pair.