UL Control Channel Structure Adaptation for Latency and Coverage Trade-offs
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Future radio communication systems face challenges in accommodating diverse user terminal requirements for latency reduction, coverage, and throughput, as existing LTE systems use fixed UL control channel structures that do not adequately meet individual user terminal needs.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of multiple UL control channel structures with varying numbers of symbols allows user terminals to select the most suitable structure based on their specific requirements, enabling flexible transmission of uplink control information.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If a fixed UL control channel structure is used in existing LTE systems, then system simplicity and ease of operation are maintained, but the system cannot meet diverse user terminal requirements for latency reduction, coverage, and throughput
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dynamics by making the UL control channel structure adjustable rather than fixed. The number of symbols allocated to PUCCH can be dynamically changed based on user terminal requirements, allowing the system to adapt between different service types (eMBB, mMTC, URLLC) while maintaining a unified framework. This resolves the contradiction by enabling adaptability without requiring multiple completely separate systems.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the parameter of the number of symbols allocated to PUCCH to achieve different service requirements. By varying this parameter, the system can optimize for latency (fewer symbols), coverage (more symbols), or throughput (balanced allocation) as needed, while the underlying channel structure remains the same. This resolves the contradiction by providing adaptability through parameter adjustment rather than structural complexity.
2Reliability
If more symbols are allocated to UL control channel, then coverage is improved, but latency increases and throughput decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent makes the symbol allocation dynamic, allowing the system to adjust the number of PUCCH symbols based on whether coverage or latency is the priority for a given user terminal and service type. This dynamic adjustment resolves the contradiction by allowing optimal allocation in different scenarios rather than being locked into a fixed allocation that must compromise between conflicting requirements.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies local quality by allowing different user terminals to have different PUCCH symbol allocations tailored to their specific requirements. User terminals requiring coverage (e.g., mMTC) can be allocated more symbols, while those requiring low latency (e.g., URLLC) can be allocated fewer symbols. This resolves the contradiction by optimizing for the local needs of each user terminal rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.
3Loss of time
If fewer symbols are allocated to UL control channel, then latency is reduced, but coverage deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent makes symbol allocation dynamic, allowing rapid adjustment between latency-optimized and coverage-optimized configurations. This resolves the contradiction by enabling the system to switch between fewer symbols for low latency applications and more symbols for coverage-critical applications, rather than being constrained by a fixed allocation.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies local quality by tailoring the PUCCH symbol allocation to the specific requirements of each user terminal and service type. User terminals prioritizing latency (e.g., URLLC) receive fewer symbols, while those prioritizing coverage (e.g., mMTC) receive more symbols. This resolves the contradiction by optimizing for the local priorities of each user terminal.
4Adaptability or versatility
If multiple UL control channel structures with different symbol numbers are supported, then adaptability to individual user terminal needs is improved, but device complexity and resource allocation complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies universality by designing a unified PUCCH framework that can serve multiple service types (eMBB, mMTC, URLLC) with different requirements. Instead of creating separate control channel structures for each service, the system uses a single flexible structure that can be configured with different numbers of symbols to meet diverse needs. This resolves the contradiction by providing adaptability through multi-functionality rather than through multiple separate systems.
5Productivity
If flexible allocation of UL control channel resources is implemented, then throughput and latency are optimized for individual services, but resource management complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent optimizes throughput by allowing flexible parameter adjustment of the number of PUCCH symbols. This enables the system to allocate more symbols when control information needs to be transmitted reliably (improving throughput for control channels) and fewer symbols when data transmission is prioritized. The parameter-based approach resolves the contradiction by providing simple, direct control over resource allocation without complex management mechanisms.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2A~2B
Figure 3A~3B
AI summary
The present invention is designed to transmit uplink control information (UCI) by using UL control channels that are suitable for the requirements of user terminals in future radio communication systems. A user terminal, according to the present invention, has a transmission section that transmits uplink control information (UCI) by using an uplink (UL) control channel, and a control section that controls transmission of the UCI, and the structure of the UL control channel is selected from a plurality of structures that contain different numbers of symbols.