Traffic Pattern Model Comparison for Complex Communication Systems

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Legacy telecommunications networks are inadequate to meet current demands due to their complexity and inability to effectively manage the combination of voice and data traffic, requiring improved methods for modeling and optimizing traffic patterns.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for comparing traffic pattern models in complex communication systems by computing normalized transmission parameters and model parameters, allowing for the comparison of anticipated and actual traffic flow, which helps in identifying optimal capacity requirements and service levels.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If legacy telecommunications networks are used to manage traffic, then network architecture is simple, but the network is inadequate to meet current demands for voice and data combination

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to meet current demandsVSAvoidnetwork complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the complex communication system into multiple subsystems, each with its own traffic pattern model. By dividing the network into manageable components (different traffic types, time periods, and patterns), the system can handle complex voice and data combinations while maintaining model simplicity through modular analysis of each segment separately.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Measurement precision

If multiple traffic pattern models are used to represent complex traffic flows, then traffic modeling accuracy is improved, but model complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraffic flow representation accuracyVSAvoidmodel complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms complex traffic pattern models into comparable forms by computing normalized transmission parameters and model parameters. This parameter transformation allows different complex models (representing various traffic flows, times, and patterns) to be systematically compared and evaluated, maintaining modeling accuracy while enabling simplified comparison through standardized parameter metrics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If traditional network capacity planning is used, then capital expenditures are high, but service quality cannot be compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveservice qualityVSAvoidtrunk and switch capacity requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism by comparing model parameters representing anticipated traffic patterns with actual traffic flow data. This comparison allows the system to validate traffic models against real-world performance, ensuring that capacity planning decisions are based on accurate predictions that maintain service quality while optimizing resource allocation and reducing unnecessary capacity requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS8990056B2Method, computer program product, and apparatus for comparing traffic pattern models of a complex communication system
Publication Date: 2015.03.24 AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I L P
  • US8990056B2 patent drawing
  • US8990056B2 patent drawing
  • US8990056B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Traffic pattern models of a complex communication system are compared. A normalized transmission parameter is computed for each traffic pattern model. Model parameters are also computed for each traffic pattern model. The model parameters for each traffic pattern model represent anticipated traffic flow through the complex communication system over a predetermined time period. Data representing an actual traffic flow pattern through the complex communication system over the predetermined time period is compared to the model parameters representing anticipated traffic patterns for each model. The normalized transmission parameters for each of the traffic pattern models are also compared.