Abstract:
This invention is a method for time-sharing sounding resources. This invention time-shares one sounding source across plural user equipment for different sub-frames. This invention uses different sounding periods which are periodic and either non-changing in time or changing in time. Different user equipment have sounding periodicities where one is an integral multiple of the other. This invention also allocates and updates a sub-frame offset for each user equipment.

Description:
CLAIM OF PRIORITY 
     This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(1) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/944,950 filed Jun. 19, 2007. 
    
    
     TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
     The technical field of this invention is wireless communication. 
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     Sounding RS enables time and frequency domain scheduling and has been adopted as a RAN1 working assumption for EUTRA. The channel quality indicator (CQI) estimate obtained from sounding can be expired or stale because of the inevitable time delay between channel sounding and the follow-up scheduled transmission. This is more pronounced for faster user equipment (UE). Thus faster UE needs to have more frequent sounding in order to maintain the fresh CQI at the NodeB. For example a UE with a Doppler of 200 Hz requires a propagation channel for every fifth sub-frame because the sub-frame rate is 1000 Hz. In such case for channel adaptive modulation and coding (AMC) to be performed, the UE must sound nearly every sub-frame or every other sub-frame. The objective of maintaining a fresh CQI at the NodeB may be impossible for very fast UEs having a Doppler of 200 Hz or more because the channel can change substantially between sub-frames. For such fast UEs, a slow rate of infrequent sounding can be performed. Slower UEs naturally ought to sound less frequently. As the UE speed increases, the sounding period should reduce up to a point. Very fast UEs should abandon the goal of maintaining a fresh CQI and sound less frequently. 
     A simple solution is to configure each cell with a common sounding period for each UE and for each sounding resource. However, any cell may contain UEs with a spread of velocities yielding a spread of Dopplers. Allocating sounding resources to UEs corresponding to the set of UEs velocities would be efficient. This allocation enables efficient utilization of sounding resources. In another proposed allocation, very slow UEs sound only once per several sub-frames and intermediate speed UEs sound once per few sub-frames. This allocation is not straight forward and not always possible. It is mathematically impossible to share a common sounding resource between one UE sounding every 2 sub-frames and a second UE sounding every 3 sub-frames. There is a need in the art to use different sounding periods different cells while tailoring each sounding period to the velocity of a UE or subset of UEs. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     This invention proposes three options for time-sharing sounding resources. The first option defines one common sounding period for all UEs and all sounding resources. This option is the simplest, but offers no flexibility in tailoring the sounding periods to individual velocities of UEs. The second option allows for different sounding periods so long as each individual sounding resource uses only one sounding period. This second option offers more flexibility in allocation of sounding periods across UEs. Finally, the third option offers the most flexibility in sharing of the sounding resources by permitting changes in time. The first option is a special case of the second option. The second option is a special case of the third option. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       These and other aspects of this invention are illustrated in the drawings, in which: 
         FIG. 1  is a diagram of a communication system of the present invention having three cells; 
         FIG. 2  is a timing diagram of allocation of sounding resources between three UEs; 
         FIG. 3  illustrates the recursive relationship of a generalized sounding resource sharing tree (SRST); 
         FIG. 4  illustrates an example sounding resource sharing tree (SRST); and 
         FIG. 5  illustrates an under utilized allocation of the sounding resource sharing tree (SRST) illustrated in  FIG. 4 . 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
       FIG. 1  shows an exemplary wireless telecommunications network  100 . The illustrative telecommunications network includes base stations  101 ,  102  and  103 , though in operation, a telecommunications network necessarily includes many more base stations. Each of base stations  101 ,  102  and  103  are operable over corresponding coverage areas  104 ,  105  and  106 . Each base station&#39;s coverage area is further divided into cells. In the illustrated network, each base station&#39;s coverage area is divided into three cells. Handset or other user equipment (UE)  109  is shown in Cell A  108 . Cell A  108  is within coverage area  104  of base station  101 . Base station  101  transmits to and receives transmissions from UE  109 . As UE  109  moves out of Cell A  108  and into Cell B  107 , UE  109  may be handed over to base station  102 . Because UE  109  is synchronized with base station  101 , UE  109  can employ non-synchronized random access to initiate handover to base station  102 . 
     Non-synchronized UE  109  also employs non-synchronous random access to request allocation of up-link  111  time or frequency or code resources. If UE  109  has data ready for transmission, which may be traffic data, measurements report, tracking area update, UE  109  can transmit a random access signal on up-link  111 . The random access signal notifies base station  101  that UE  109  requires up-link resources to transmit data to the UE. Base station  101  responds by transmitting to UE  109  via down-link  110 , a message containing the parameters of the resources allocated for UE  109  up-link transmission along with a possible timing error correction. After receiving the resource allocation and a possible timing advance message transmitted on down-link  110  by base station  101 , UE  109  optionally adjusts its transmit timing and transmits the data on up-link  111  employing the allotted resources during the prescribed time interval. 
     Sounding involves exchange of signals between the base station and the connected user equipment. Each sounding uses a reference resource identifier selected from an available reference resource identifier map h(t, L) and a portion of the spectrum selected from an available spectrum identifier map f(t, N); where L is a group of shared parameters signaled to each UE from the group; and N is a group of shared parameters signaled to each UE from the group. Some examples utilize CAZAC sequences as the reference sequences. CAZAC sequences are complex-valued sequences with: constant amplitude (CA); and             zero cyclic autocorrelation (ZAC). Examples of CAZAC sequences include: Chu sequences, Frank-Zadoff sequences, Zadoff-Chu (ZC) sequences and generalized chirp-like (GCL) sequences. CAZAC (ZC or otherwise) sequences are presently preferred.
     Zadoff-Chu (ZC) sequences, as defined by:
 
 a   m ( k )=exp[ j 2π( m/N )[ k ( k+ 1)/2+ qk]] for N odd,  
 
 a   m ( k )=exp[ j 2π( m/N )[ k   2 /2+ qk]] for N even.  
 
An alternative convention of the ZC definition replaces j (the complex number √{square root over (−1)}) in these formulas with −j. In the formula: m is the index of the root ZC sequence; N is the length of the sequence, with m and N are relatively prime; q is any fixed integer, for example, q=0 is a good choice because it simplifies computation as qk=0; and k is the index of the sequence element from {0, 1, . . . , N−1}. Making N a prime number maximizes the set of root ZC sequences having optimal cross-correlation. When N is prime, there are N− 1  possible choices for m and each choice results in a distinct root ZC CAZAC sequence. The terms: Zadoff-Chu, ZC, and ZC CAZAC, are commonly used interchangeably.
 
     The problem of allocating sounding resources is to cover each UE with sounding fast enough to meet their requirements. The maximum sounding period is generally related the UE Doppler, a measure of how fast the UE is moving relative to the base station. We assume that the sounding requirements of the set of UEs are fixed at any point in time but may vary slowly with time. This slow time change enables computing and using repeating patterns for the sounding resource allocation. 
     A first embodiment of this invention associates only one sounding period to each sounding resource. There can be at most 12 sounding resources for a given contiguous spectrum bandwidth. These are defined for any given orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol. This sounding capacity is a fundamental limitation determined by the ratio of the OFDM symbol duration and the channel delay spread. This sounding capacity is the maximum number of sounding resources including code division multiplexing (CDM), frequency division multiplexing (FDM) or hybrid multiplexing. A sounding resource is defined by a sequence index, a specific cyclic shift and a repetition factor (RPF). These may all vary over time to enable hopping. A fixed sounding resource has one set of values sequence index, cyclic shift and RPF at one sub-frame or slot, and optionally another set of values sequence index, cyclic shift and RPF in other time-slots. This sounding resource can be time division multiplexed (TDM) across UEs. 
     One solution to the problem of tailoring the sounding period to the UE speed is to associate only one sounding period to each sounding resource. Therefore all UEs which are time sharing a common sounding resource have a common sounding period but different offsets. Different sounding resources can have different sounding periods. This permits flexibility in tailoring sounding periods to UEs Doppler spreads. UEs whose Doppler spreads are relatively close can share one sounding resource and one sounding period. Table 1 summarizes an example of this solution. 
                                           TABLE 1               Sounding Resource   Sounding Period in   UE Doppler       Index   sub-frames   in Hz                                1   20   &gt;200       2   10   0-10       3   10   0-10       4   10   0-10       5   7   10-30        6   7   10-30        7   7   10-30        8   5   30-100       9   5   30-100       10   5   30-100       11   2   100-150        12   1   150-200                     
Table 1 shows how each sounding resource can use only one sounding period, while different sounding resources can have different sounding periods. Table 1 shows merely one example of sounding resource management. Allocation of resources can be adapted depending on the percentage of fast or slow UEs for efficient utilization of sounding resources.
 
     This solution is not the most efficient because it requires only one sounding period for any sounding resource. This becomes inefficient when it is necessary to multiplex UEs with substantially different Doppler spreads on a common sounding resource. This is inefficient in a cell where all UEs except for one are relatively slow with a Doppler of 0 to 10 Hz. Suppose the fast UE had a Doppler in the range of 100 Hz. In using sounding period in this case, the faster UE should sound once per 5 sub-frames. However, the sounding period per sounding resource limitation would force the slow UEs also to sound once per 5 sub-frames. This is inefficient because slower UEs can sound at a slower rate. 
     An alternative solution involves more complex resource management. This alternative allows UEs to time-share a common sounding resource but with disparate sounding periods. This permits more efficient sharing of sounding resources. Consider the example of three UEs time-sharing a common sounding resource across consecutive sub-frames. Assume UE 1  has an intermediate speed and UE 2  and UE 3  have slow speeds. UE 1  sounds relatively frequently because its channel varies faster. This could be every other sub-frame. In this example UE 2  and UE 3  sound every fourth sub-frame.  FIG. 2  illustrates the sounding sharing pattern for these three UEs. 
     Thus UE 1  sounds during sub-frames which are either  0  mod  4  ( 211 ,  221 ) or  2  mod  4  ( 213 ,  223 ). UE 2  sounds during sub-frames which are  1  mod  4  ( 212 ,  222 ). UE 3  sounds during sub-frames which are  3  mod  4  ( 214 ,  224 ). This sounding allocation is efficient because the sounding resource is utilized every sub-frame and the allocation itself can be adapted to UE speeds. For example, if UE 1  later slows down, then system can be reconfigured, so that UE 1  uses the sounding resource only during  0  mod  4  sub-frames. The position within the repeating period is known as the offset. 
     To time share a common sounding resource, assume that sounding for each particular UE is periodic but the period is changeable. Any UE which performs sounding is configured in a periodic deterministic fashion. The sounding period of UE i  is designated s[i]. Note that it is impossible to time share a common sounding resource with periods which are not multiples of each other. It is impossible to configure two UEs where s[ 1 ] =2 and s[ 2 ] =3. Thus this design requires each distinct sounding period to a multiple of another for a particular sounding resource. 
     Let {M 1 , M 2 , . . . , M N } be any sequence of not necessarily different positive integers. Then, the set of possible sounding periods is defined as follows:
 
Λ={M 1 , M 1 M 2 , M 1 M 2 M 3 , . . . , M 1 M 2  . . . M N }  (1)
 
     If any two sounding periods are selected from the set Λ, one selected sounding period must be an integral multiple of the other or two must be identical. This property enables multiplexing of different sounding periods if they are multiples of each other. 
     A feasibility condition for time-sharing of any given sounding resource is as follows. Without loss of generality, let s[ 1 ]≦s[ 2 ]≦ . . . ≦s[K] be the set of desired sounding periods, where i-th sounding period s[i] is applies to the i-th UE time-sharing a common sounding resource. A time-sharing allocation for the sounding resource exists only if s[k] belongs to some set Λ for some values of M 1 , M 2 , . . . , M N , and for every k from (1, 2, . . . , K) and simultaneously: 
                       1     s   ⁡     [   1   ]         +     1     s   ⁡     [   2   ]         +   …   +     1     s   ⁡     [   K   ]           ≤   1           (   2   )               
Thus in this invention the set of possible sounding periods is Λ with the structure defined above. Given this particular set Λ, for any pair of distinct sounding periods one sounding period is an integral multiple of another. The collection s[ 1 ], s[ 2 ], . . . , s[K] is the collection of used sounding periods, where each s[k] belongs to the set Λ of possible sounding periods. When and only when the strict equality holds in (2), then the sounding resource is fully utilized throughout all sub-frames. Such was the case with the example of  FIG. 2 .
 
     A sounding resource sharing tree (SRST) enables design for multiplexing possibly different sounding periods. The root vertex of the SRST is labeled v[ 0 ,  1 ]. This root vertex will have M 1  children descended from the root vertex. Children of the root vertex are be labeled v[ 0 , M 1 ], v[ 1 , M 1 ], . . . , v[M 1 −1, M]. Each of these children of the root vertex have M 2  children of their own, each of which will have M 3  children of their own, until M N . 
     A SRST tree is defined recursively as follows. The root vertex v[ 0 ,  1 ] has no parent node. The root vertex v[ 0 ,  1 ] has M 1  children: v[ 0 , M 1 ], v[ 1 , M 1 ], . . . , v[M 1 −1, M 1 ]. A recursive relationship generating remaining vertices of the SRST tree is: any vertex v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M n ] will have M n+1  children v[m+qM 1 M 2  . . . M n , M 1 M 2  . . . M n M n+1 ]: where q={0, 1, 2, . . . , M n+1 −1}. 
       FIG. 3  illustrates this recursive relationship.  FIG. 3  shows root vertex v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M n ]  301  and children vertices v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M n M n+1 ]  311 , v[m+M 1 M 2  . . . M n , M 1 M 2  . . . M n M n+1 ]  312  and v[m+(M n+1 −1)M 1 M 2  . . . M n , M 1 M 2  . . . M n M n+1 ]  313 . For any vertex v[i,j], j represents the number of nodes at that level and i represents the offset of that node. For any level the set of offsets i is equal in number to the number of nodes at that level j. 
       FIG. 4  illustrates an example SRST tree.  FIG. 4  illustrates: root vertex v[ 0 ,  1 ]  401 ; children vertices v[ 0 ,  3 ]  411 , v[ 1 ,  3 ]  412  and v[ 2 ,  3 ]  413 ; grandchildren vertices v[ 0 ,  6 ]  421 , v[ 3 ,  6 ]  422 , v[ 1 ,  6 ]  423 , v[ 4 ,  6 ]  424 , v[ 2 ,  6 ]  425  and v[ 5 ,  6 ]  426 ; and great grandchildren vertices v[ 0 ,  12 ]  431 , v[ 6 ,  12 ]  432 , v[ 3 ,  12 ]  433 , v[ 9 ,  12 ]  434 , v[ 1 ,  12 ]  435 , v[ 7 ,  12 ]  436 , v[ 4 ,  12 ]  437 , v[ 10 ,  12 ]  438 , v[ 2 ,  12 ]  439 , v[ 8 ,  12 ]  440 , v[ 5 ,  12 ]  441  and v[ 11 ,  12 ]  442 . The root node v[ 0 ,  1 ] has three children. Each of these children has two children making six grandchild nodes. Each of these grandchildren have two children making 12 great grandchildren. The number of nodes at the bottom level is determined by the relation between the shortest sounding period to the longest sounding period. 
     Vertices of the SRST tree are interpreted as follows: each vertex v[m, M 1 M 2 . . .  M n ] represents a potential sounding transmission, which is defined by the sounding period M 1 M 2  . . . M n  and by the relative offset m with respect to a common reference sub-frame. Each child vertex labeled as v[m+qM 1 M 2  . . . M n , M 1 M 2  . . . M n+1 ] for some q, only occupies a subset of sounding sub-frames from its parent vertex v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M n ]. If a particular vertex v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M n ] is used in the final allocation of sounding sub-frames, then no descendants of that vertex can be re-used in the final allocation for other UEs. 
     A valid sharing configuration is any set X of vertices on the SRST in which no vertex from X descends from another vertex from X. Each vertex v[m, M 1 M 2  . . . M] from X is allocated to a distinct UE. Thus that UE sounds with a period M 1 M 2  . . . M n  and with a relative offset m. The thus determined any valid sharing configuration X solves the problem of time-multiplexing UEs with different sounding periods on a common sounding resource. Allocating each vertex from X to a different UE satisfies two desired goals. Each UE transmitter uses periodic sounding. Different UEs share the sounding resource across distinct sub-frames. 
       FIG. 5  illustrates an under-utilized example of a valid sharing configuration for M 1 =3, M 2 =2, M 3 =2. In  FIG. 5  the vertices  411 ,  423 ,  424 ,  439 ,  440  and  441  are allocated and used by the system. Allocation of vertex  411  prevents allocation of children vertices  421  and  422  and grandchildren vertices  431 ,  432 ,  433  and  434 . Allocation of vertex  423  prevents allocation of children vertices  435  and  436 . Allocation of vertex  424  prevents allocation of children vertices  437  and  438 . In the example of  FIG. 5  vertex v[ 11 , 12 ]  442  is not allocated. 
     Specifying period and offset of a particular sounding transmission for a UE specifies a vertex from the resource tree. A valid sharing configuration is a set of vertices with the above stated properties. Listing  1  is a greedy algorithm which is guaranteed to converge. This algorithm assumes s[ 1 ]≦s[ 2 ]≦ . . . ≦s[K]. This assumption can be made without loss of generality. 
                                                                                         Listing 1                                    Initialization: All vertices are available           for k = 1 to K do                find an available vertex v[m, s[k]] from the list of                available vertices                put v[m, s[k]] into X           remove v[m, s[k]] and all its descendents from the list                of available vertices                end                        
During each pass corresponding to a value of k, this greedy algorithm selects an available vertex v[m, s[k]], from the list of available vertices. The exact nature of this selection is an implementation detail. The algorithm then eliminates the selected vertex from the available list. Then the algorithm repeats for the next value of k.
 
     Other algorithms are clearly possible. Using basic combinatorial principles, the number of different available choices for a valid sharing configuration is given as follows: 
                   L   =       ∏     k   =   1     K     ⁢     [       s   ⁡     [   k   ]       +   1   -       ∑     n   =   1     k     ⁢       s   ⁡     [   k   ]         s   ⁡     [   n   ]             ]               (   3   )               
The first term in the product is s[ 1 ]. The second term is s[ 2 ]−s[ 2 ]/s[ 1 ]. The third term is s[ 3 ]−s[ 3 ]/s[ 1 ]−s[ 3 ]/s[ 2 ]. Accordingly a valid sharing configuration is not unique. A number of possible solutions exist. In the preferred embodiment the set of periods s[k] includes the most used periods of 2 ms, 5 ms, 10 ms, 20 ms, 40 ms, 80 ms, 160 ms and 320 ms.
 
     This invention proposes three options for time-sharing sounding resources. The first option defines one common sounding period for all UEs and all sounding resources. This option is the simplest, but offers no flexibility in tailoring the sounding periods to individual velocities of UEs. The second option allows for different sounding periods so long as each individual sounding resource uses only one sounding period. This second option offers more flexibility in allocation of sounding periods across UEs. Finally, the third option offers the most flexibility in sharing of the sounding resources by permitting changes in time. The first option is a special case of the second option. The second option is a special case of the third option.