Uplink and Downlink Preemption Rules for Priority Resource Reallocation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing wireless communication systems face challenges in efficiently balancing resource allocation between different traffic types with varying reliability and latency thresholds, leading to inefficient utilization and potential unnecessary preemption of uplink and downlink communications.
Innovation Solution
Implementing uplink and downlink preemption indicators (ULPI and DLPI) to dynamically reallocate resources based on priority, allowing UEs to adjust their transmissions or receptions according to predefined rules, ensuring efficient redistribution of resources based on traffic type and priority.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If resources are statically allocated to UEs, then resource allocation simplicity is maintained, but resource utilization efficiency deteriorates when traffic priorities change
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic resource allocation by introducing preemption indicators that allow the network to reallocate uplink and downlink resources based on changing traffic priorities. The ULPI and DLPI enable flexible reassignment of resources from lower-priority traffic (e.g., eMBB) to higher-priority traffic (e.g., URLLC) without requiring complete static reconfiguration, thus improving resource utilization while maintaining manageable system complexity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If preemption indicators are implemented for all UEs, then resource reallocation flexibility is improved, but system complexity and signaling overhead increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preemption indicators selectively rather than universally to all UEs. The network can configure specific UEs or UE groups to monitor ULPI or DLPI based on their traffic characteristics and priority requirements. This localized application of preemption mechanisms provides the necessary flexibility for high-priority traffic while avoiding unnecessary complexity for UEs that do not require dynamic resource reallocation.
3Speed
If cancellation indications are sent frequently, then resource allocation responsiveness is improved, but signaling overhead and network load increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements periodic monitoring of preemption indicators at configured intervals rather than continuous monitoring. UEs are configured with specific monitoring occasions and periodicities for checking ULPI or DLPI, allowing the network to send cancellation indications only when necessary while maintaining responsive resource reallocation. This periodic approach balances responsiveness with reduced signaling overhead compared to continuous monitoring schemes.
Data Source
AI summary
A base station may allocate uplink and/or downlink resources (e.g., in the time domain, frequency domain, spatial domain) to user equipment (UEs), or groups of UEs, that are subsequently reallocated. A base station may determine a reallocation of uplink resources and/or downlink resources, and may issue a cancellation indication or preemption indicator that may correspond to at least a portion of the previously allocated resources. UEs may be configured to monitor for cancellation or preemption indicators, and based on received cancellation or preemption indicators, UEs may determine whether or not to proceed with an uplink transmission or downlink reception using their previously allocated resources. Rules for application of cancellation or preemption indicators may be identified by a UE and/or base station based on traffic prioritization and cancelation indication prioritization, based on types of scheduled reference signals to be transmitted by the UE, etc.