WiFi AP Scheduling With In-Device Coexistence Feedback
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
In devices supporting multiple communications standards like WiFi and LTE, existing systems face inefficiencies in uplink resource allocation due to a lack of information about potential in-device coexistence conflicts, leading to interference issues and wasteful resource allocation, especially in UL OFDMA and UL MU-MIMO modes.
Innovation Solution
The method involves a WiFi Access Point requesting or receiving in-device coexistence interference information from devices, which allows it to schedule uplink resources effectively, avoiding conflicts by considering preferred and avoided resource units and channels, thereby optimizing resource allocation.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If the WiFi Access Point schedules uplink resources without IDC information, then resource allocation can proceed without additional signaling overhead, but in-device coexistence conflicts occur causing interference and wasted resources
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the STA reports IDC information (preferred and avoided RUs/channels) to the AP through uplink transmissions. The AP uses this feedback to make informed scheduling decisions, resolving the contradiction by enabling reliable IDC conflict avoidance while maintaining efficient resource allocation through targeted information exchange rather than continuous signaling overhead
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies preliminary action by having the STA proactively report its IDC preferences and constraints to the AP before resource allocation occurs. This advance information allows the AP to pre-plan resource assignments that avoid IDC conflicts, eliminating the need for reactive conflict resolution and reducing signaling overhead associated with repeated negotiations
2Adaptability or versatility
If the WiFi device makes autonomous uplink transmission decisions, then the device can avoid IDC conflicts independently, but this approach is incompatible with UL OFDMA and UL MU-MIMO where the AP must schedule resources
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces IDC information reporting as an intermediary mechanism that bridges the autonomous device intelligence and the centralized AP scheduling required for UL OFDMA/MU-MIMO. The STA provides IDC preferences to the AP, which then incorporates this information into its scheduling decisions, allowing the system to maintain both AP-controlled resource allocation and IDC-aware transmission decisions
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements dynamics by making the resource allocation process adaptive - the AP dynamically adjusts its scheduling decisions based on the IDC information received from STAs. This allows the system to transition from static, autonomous device decisions to dynamic, AP-coordinated scheduling that adapts to each device's specific IDC constraints while supporting advanced WiFi features
3Productivity
If the AP assigns uplink resources without considering device-specific IDC constraints, then resource allocation is simplified and faster, but resources may be assigned that cause interference or must remain unused
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by tailoring resource allocation to each STA's specific IDC characteristics. Instead of applying a uniform scheduling approach to all devices, the AP customizes resource assignments based on individual STA preferences and constraints, maximizing uplink utilization for each device while maintaining overall system efficiency through targeted rather than blanket complexity
Data Source
AI summary
Methods and/or apparatus for reducing or avoiding (IDC) in-device coexistence problems in devices which support multiple communications protocols, e.g., WiFi and LTE, are described. In various embodiments a WiFi AP can request or require devices, e.g., STAs to report IDC information pertinent to the individual device. This is done by sending one or more trigger frames, e.g., as part of a multicast or unicast operation. Alternatively, devices can voluntarily report IDC information. The AP, e.g., WiFi AP, takes the IDC information it receives, e.g., from multiple devices, e.g., STAs, into account when scheduling UL resources to be used by the wireless devices. By taking into consideration the IDC information provided by STAs, IDC conflicts can be avoid even though a WiFi AP is scheduling resources for WiFi communication in devices which are also using resources for another communications standard, e.g, LTE, over which the AP does not have control.