Radio Link Failure Report Analysis for Coverage Holes
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for coverage hole analysis in mobile radio communications lack detailed information about the root cause of coverage holes, particularly those with unbalanced uplink and downlink conditions, leading to inefficient countermeasures.
Innovation Solution
The proposed solution involves enhancing failure reports, such as RLF and CEF reports, by including additional information about downlink availability during the time period between a radio link failure and successful re-establishment, and adding a field to indicate the number of unreported connection establishment failures.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Loss of information
If existing RLF and CEF reporting methods are used, then the reporting overhead is reduced, but the coverage hole analysis information is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The terminal performs preliminary actions by storing downlink availability information and connection establishment failure counts locally before network analysis is required. This allows the information to be ready for immediate reporting when needed, eliminating the need for continuous real-time monitoring and reducing overall reporting overhead while ensuring complete coverage hole analysis data is available
Solution Approach 2:
The invention extracts specific critical information (downlink availability during failure periods and unreported connection establishment failure counts) from the complex radio communication environment and isolates it into dedicated report fields. This extraction approach focuses reporting on only the most relevant coverage hole analysis data, reducing unnecessary overhead while providing sufficient information for network optimization
2Measurement precision
If detailed downlink availability monitoring is implemented during failure periods, then coverage hole detection accuracy is improved, but the terminal processing burden increases
Solution Approach 1:
Instead of continuously monitoring all radio parameters, the terminal applies partial action by monitoring downlink availability only during specific failure periods (between RLF and re-establishment, or during connection establishment failures). This targeted monitoring approach achieves sufficient coverage hole detection accuracy while significantly reducing terminal processing burden compared to continuous full-spectrum monitoring
Solution Approach 2:
The terminal performs preliminary monitoring and stores downlink availability information locally during failure events before network analysis is required. This preliminary action captures the essential coverage hole indicators at the moment they occur, achieving high measurement precision without requiring continuous heavy processing, as the critical data is captured when failures actually occur
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
There are provided measures for improvement of coverage hole analysis. Such measures exemplarily comprise detecting a radio link failure, producing a failure report including information indicative of a radio condition during a time period between said radio link failure and a successful establishment of a radio link, detecting said successful establishment of said radio link, and transmitting, after detection of said successful establishment of said radio link, said failure report.