UE Processing Timeline Enhancement via Retransmission Parameter Changes

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In New Radio (NR) mobile communications, aggressive user equipment (UE) processing timelines for uplink and downlink transmissions are needed to reduce latency, but this leads to increased complexity and cost, putting pressure on UE implementation and architecture, necessitating an intermediate solution to enhance processing time without overwhelming the UE.

Innovation Solution

Defining a specific processing time for retransmissions that is shorter than the normal processing time, allowing the UE to use normal processing time for initial transmissions and more aggressive specific processing time for retransmissions, optimizing tasks such as PUSCH preparation and PDSCH decoding, and configuring this time via RRC signaling or dynamic indication.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If more aggressive N1 and N2 processing times are used, then transmission latency is reduced, but UE complexity and implementation cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransmission latencyVSAvoidUE implementation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by dynamically adjusting processing time parameters (N1, N2, N3) based on transmission type. Different processing time values are configured for initial transmissions versus retransmissions, allowing the system to optimize latency where possible while maintaining manageable complexity by not uniformly aggressive parameters across all transmissions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the transmission process into distinct phases (initial transmission and retransmission) with different processing time requirements. This segmentation allows tailored optimization - aggressive processing times can be applied selectively to retransmissions where latency is critical, while initial transmissions use more conservative timing that accommodates standard UE capabilities

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Loss of time

If more aggressive N1 and N2 processing times are used, then transmission latency is reduced, but hardware performance requirements and manufacture cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransmission latencyVSAvoidUE manufacture cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes processing time parameters dynamically based on transmission context rather than requiring hardware optimized for the most aggressive timing in all scenarios. This allows standard hardware to be used with flexible parameter adjustment, avoiding the need for expensive high-performance components while still achieving low latency when conditions permit

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Loss of time

If more aggressive N1 and N2 processing times are used, then transmission latency is reduced, but power consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransmission latencyVSAvoidUE power consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent adjusts processing time parameters based on transmission type, enabling the UE to enter lower-power states during initial transmissions with more conservative timing, while only activating high-performance processing modes for retransmissions where latency reduction is critical. This selective approach reduces overall power consumption compared to continuously operating in aggressive mode

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Loss of time

If more aggressive N1 and N2 processing times are used, then transmission latency is reduced, but computation complexity on UE increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransmission latencyVSAvoidcomputation complexity on UE
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements parameter changes by configuring different processing time values for different transmission scenarios. Computationally intensive operations are concentrated on retransmissions where aggressive timing is applied, while initial transmissions use more relaxed parameters that allow simpler processing, thereby reducing overall computation complexity while still achieving latency reduction where most needed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS11424868B2Method and apparatus for user equipment processing timeline enhancement in mobile communications
Publication Date: 2022.08.23 MEDIATEK SINGAPORE PTE LTD
  • US11424868B2 patent drawing
  • US11424868B2 patent drawing
  • US11424868B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Various solutions for processing timeline enhancement with respect to user equipment and network apparatus in mobile communications are described. An apparatus may determine a normal processing time. The apparatus may determine a specific processing time. The apparatus may use the normal processing time when performing an initial transmission. The apparatus may use the specific processing time when performing a retransmission.