Telecom Network Reconfiguration Using Historical Confidence Screening
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Reconfigurations in telecommunications networks are slow, resource-intensive, and poorly scalable due to increased complexity and flexibility, requiring manual user input and often causing unplanned network downtime and financial damage.
Innovation Solution
A computer-implemented method that assesses reconfiguration instructions by comparing them to historic instructions with similar parameters and performance outcomes, calculating a success confidence metric to predict potential detrimental effects, and automatically approving or preventing reconfigurations based on this metric.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If manual user input is required to plan and verify reconfigurations, then reconfiguration accuracy can be maintained, but reconfiguration speed and productivity deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary analysis of reconfiguration instructions by comparing them against historical reconfiguration data and simulated outcomes before actual implementation. This pre-validation process identifies potential detrimental effects in advance, maintaining accuracy while enabling automated decision-making that accelerates the reconfiguration process.
Solution Approach 2:
An automated assessment system acts as an intermediary between manual reconfiguration requests and network implementation. This intermediary analyzes instructions using historical data and simulation, providing validated recommendations that maintain precision while reducing direct manual intervention and speeding up the overall process.
2Stability of the object's composition
If reconfigurations are applied step-wise to limited portions of the network, then network stability is maintained, but reconfiguration time and resource consumption increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary simulation and assessment of reconfiguration instructions against historical data before implementation. This pre-validation enables confident broader deployment of reconfigurations while maintaining stability, as potential issues are identified and resolved before actual network changes occur.
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically adjusts reconfiguration parameters based on historical performance data and simulated outcomes. By optimizing parameters such as reconfiguration scope, timing, and implementation strategy based on learned patterns, the system can safely expand reconfiguration breadth while maintaining network stability and reducing overall time loss.
3Reliability
If comprehensive assessment of reconfiguration instructions is performed, then reliability of network operation is improved, but computational resources and processing time increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system uses historical reconfiguration data and simulated outcomes as proxies for comprehensive actual testing. By analyzing patterns from past reconfigurations and their effects, the system achieves reliable assessment without requiring exhaustive real-world testing of each new reconfiguration instruction, thereby reducing computational overhead while maintaining reliability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system employs lightweight simulation models and historical data analysis instead of expensive, resource-intensive comprehensive testing. These simplified assessment mechanisms provide sufficient reliability for decision-making while consuming significantly fewer computational resources compared to exhaustive validation approaches.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
A computer-implemented method (300) of operating a telecommunications network (110-1), said telecommunications network comprising a plurality of nodes (150), and the method comprising the steps of: storing: a set of historic reconfiguration instructions, said instructions having been used to reconfigure the telecommunications network; first status information from each of the plurality of nodes, wherein said first status information is received prior to reconfiguring the telecommunications network according to a given historic reconfiguration instruction; and second status information from each of the plurality of nodes, wherein said second status information is received after reconfiguring the telecommunications network according to the given historic reconfiguration instruction; receiving a new reconfiguration instruction (310); prior to reconfiguring the telecommunications network according to the new reconfiguration instruction, identifying from the set a similar historic reconfiguration instruction having a similarity to the new reconfiguration instruction within a tolerance threshold; comparing the first and the second status information associated with the identified similar historic reconfiguration instruction so as to determine whether the identified similar historic reconfiguration instruction resulted in a detrimental effect to performance of the telecommunications network; in dependence on whether the identified similar historic reconfiguration instruction resulted in a detrimental effect, calculating a success confidence metric for the new reconfiguration instruction, said metric representing a probability that a reconfiguration instruction does not result in a detrimental effect to performance of the telecommunications network (320); and if the success confidence metric is: greater than a predetermined threshold value, reconfiguring the telecommunications network according to the new reconfiguration instruction (350); or less than a predetermined threshold value, preventing reconfiguration of the telecommunications network according to the new reconfiguration instruction (360).