The invention relates to femtocells, and in particular relates to performing access control to a femtocell base station, such as a femtocell base station operating in a hybrid access mode.
Femtocell base stations in a Long Term Evolution (LTE) communication network (otherwise known as Home evolved Node Bs—HeNBs- or Enterprise evolved Node Bs-EeNBs) are small, low-power, indoor cellular base stations for residential or business use. They provide better network coverage and capacity than that available in such environments from the overlying macrocellular LTE network. In addition, femtocell base stations use a broadband connection to receive data from and send data back to the operator's network (known as “backhaul”).
Femtocell base stations can operate in one of three access modes known as “closed”, “open” or “hybrid”. For femtocell base stations operating in a “closed” access mode, only a limited set of mobile devices (otherwise known as User Equipments—UEs) belonging to the network operator and associated or registered with the femtocell base station are allowed to access the femtocell base station. This set of UEs is called the Closed Subscriber Group (CSG), and would typically consist of family members where the femtocell base station is used in a home environment, or employees where the femtocell base station is used in an enterprise or work environment.
For femtocell base stations operating in an “open” access mode, all UEs belonging to the network operator are allowed to access the femtocell base station. This might be desirable in order to allow other UEs that would otherwise have a poor signal quality, or that would otherwise cause or suffer interference to/from the femtocell base station, to access (i.e. hand-in to) the femtocell base station.
For femtocell base stations operating in a “hybrid” access mode as defined in 3GPP release 9 (for example see 3GPP TS 36.300), all UEs belonging to the network operator are allowed to access (i.e. hand-in to) the femtocell base station as in the “open” mode. However once the UEs access the femtocell base station, priority is given to UEs that are in the CSG set in order to avoid significant degradations in quality of service that might result from the UEs that are not in the CSG set consuming too many resources of the femtocell base station (these resources might include femtocell base station power, bandwidth (in LTE networks) or code resource (in WCDMA networks), and backhaul bandwidth). These non-CSG UEs are referred to as “visiting UEs” herein as they are temporarily making use of the resources of the femtocell base station. The UEs that are making use of the macrocell base station rather than the femtocell base station are referred to as “macro UEs” herein, and the UEs that are part of the Closed Subscriber Group of the femtocell and that are making use of the femtocell base station are referred to as “home UEs”.
Conventionally, the decision for performing a handover of a macro UE from a macrocell base station to a femtocell base station (and vice versa, i.e. performing a handover of a home or visiting UE from the femtocell base station to the macrocell base station) is based on the occurrence of one or more of a number of “measurement events”, that are indications that a specific event has occurred. These measurement events are used to trigger the sending of measurement reports from a UE to the current serving cell (i.e. the macrocell for a macro UE and femtocell for a home or visiting UE). The measurement events specified in the 3GPP specification include:
The measurement reports sent from the UE to the current serving cell may include Received Signal Reference Power (RSRP) and Received Signal Reference Quality (RSRQ) measured on both source and target cells. RSRP is a measurement of received power made on the reference signals transmitted in a cell whereas RSRQ is a measure of quality. Both are measurements of the downlink. The decision to access a target cell is typically made based on RSRP such that a decision to handover will only be made if the
RSRP on the target cell is better by some threshold. If this threshold equals the threshold used in the measurement event then in effect the measurement event triggers the handover.
It has been noted that the use of femtocell base stations that may be useable by any UE of the network, i.e. use of femtocell base stations operating in the open access node or the hybrid access mode, has the potential to improve the overall performance of the network (over both the macrocell and femtocell layers) as follows:
However, there are problems with using the conventional handover measurement procedure to decide whether to allow a macro UE to make use of (i.e. hand-in to) a femtocell base station, especially one operating in a hybrid access mode, (and vice versa, i.e. whether a visiting UE should still be allowed to make use of the femtocell base station).
In particular, it has been found that the optimum decision point for permitting a handover to the femtocell base station may be different for the uplink and the downlink. The differences in the optimum decision point for granting or denying a macro UE access to a femtocell base station can be seen by considering the differences between the link budget between the macro UE and femtocell base station and the macro UE and the macrocell base station, in both the uplink and downlink directions.
For the uplink (i.e. from the macro UE to the femtocell or the macrocell base stations), the loss in transmissions to the femtocell base station will be lower than the loss in transmissions to the macrocell base station (where the loss is the net loss considering pathloss, shadowing and antenna gains, etc.), but the maximum UE transmission power will be the same in both cases.
However, for the downlink (i.e. from the macrocell or femtocell base stations to the macro UE), while the loss due to pathloss, shadowing and antenna gains will be the same as for the uplink, the transmit power of the femtocell base station will be significantly lower than the transmit power of the macrocell base station.
Furthermore, noise and interference levels may be different in the uplink to the femtocell base station and the uplink to the macrocell base station.
Therefore, the relative performance for a macro UE between using the femtocell base station and the macrocell base station are not balanced in the uplink and downlink, and this means the optimum decision point for admitting a macro UE to a femtocell base station is different for uplink and downlink.
Therefore, there is a need for an improved method and network node implementing the same for determining when to allow a macro UE to access a femtocell base station that considers both uplink and downlink performance.
Furthermore, another problem with granting macro UEs access to a hybrid-mode femtocell base station is how to determine the resources available for use at a femtocell base station for the visiting UEs, such that the UEs registered to the Closed Subscriber Group of the femtocell base station (i.e. the home UEs) do not suffer significant degradation to their quality of service (and preferably experience improved performance), while the performance is also improved for macro UEs.
Thus, according to a first aspect of the invention, there is provided a method for controlling access of a mobile device to a femtocell base station comprising determining whether to allow access of the mobile device to the femtocell base station based on the femtocell-mobile device path loss for transmissions between the mobile device and the femtocell base station.
The method therefore uses pathloss considerations to determine when to allow access to a femtocell base station. In one embodiment the method may allow access only if the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is below a threshold value.
In some embodiments determining whether to allow access to the femtocell basestation may further be based on a macrocell-mobile device pathloss for transmissions between the mobile device and a macrocell base station and, for example, access may be allowed only if the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is lower than the macrocell-mobile device path loss and in some instances lower by a threshold amount. The condition that the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is lower than the macrocell-mobile device pathloss may be in addition, or an alternative, to the condition that the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is below a threshold value.
The femtocell base station may operate in hybrid access mode and there may be a preferred group of mobile devices for the femtocell base station.
In a second aspect of the invention there is provided a network device for use in a communications network comprising at least one macrocell base station and at least one femtocell base station, the network device may comprise a processor configured to implement the method described above.
The network device may, for example, comprise the femtocell base station, at least part of a macrocell base station, or a gateway device which forms a gateway to the femtocell base station.
In one embodiment the method further comprising obtaining measurement data of the signal strength of the femtocell base station at the mobile device and assessing the femtocell-mobile device path loss from the measurement data. The determining whether to allow access may comprise allowing access only if the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is below a threshold value. In one variation whether to allow access is further based on a macrocell-mobile device pathloss for transmissions between the mobile device and a macrocell base station. Or, determining whether to allow access comprises allowing access only if the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is lower than the macrocell-mobile device path loss.
In one embodiment determining whether to allow access comprises allowing access only if the femtocell-mobile device pathloss is lower than the macrocell-mobile device path loss by a threshold amount. It is contemplated that the method may further comprise obtaining measurement data of the signal strength of at least one available macrocell base station at the mobile device and assessing the macrocell-mobile device path loss from the measurement data. The method may further comprise allowing access only if at least one additional condition is satisfied.
Also disclosed herein is the method wherein at least one of the one additional condition specifies that access to the femtocell base station for the mobile device is allowed only if the number of mobile devices which are not part of the preferred group of mobile devices that are accessing the femtocell base station is less than a specified limit. The specified limit may vary depending on the number of mobile devices that are part of the preferred group of mobile devices that are accessing the femtocell base station. In one embodiment the at least one of the one additional condition specifies that access to the femtocell base station is allowed only if the femtocell base station has the available capacity or resources to support the mobile device. The method may further comprise, when the mobile device is being served by a macrocell base station and access to the femtocell base station is allowed, initiating handover of the mobile device from the macrocell base station to the femtocell base station.
In one configuration, if access to the femtocell base station is allowed to the mobile device, then determining whether to allow access is repeated to determine whether continued access should be allowed to the mobile device. Likewise, determining whether to allow access is repeated may be repeated at at least one of: periodic intervals; availability of updated pathloss data; and changes in loading conditions of the femtocell base station. Determining whether to allow access may be repeated following access to the femtocell of a mobile device which is part of a preferred group of mobile devices for the femtocell base station. In on variation, if in the event that access of the mobile device to the femtocell base station is denied, then further comprising initiating handover of the mobile device from the femtocell base cell to a macrocell base station.
In one embodiment the overall transmission losses between the femtocell and the mobile device are used as an indication of the femtocell-mobile device path loss. In one embodiment, when access to the femtocell base station is allowed to a mobile device which is not part of a preferred group of mobile devices for the femtocell base station, one or more constraints are applied governing transmission with the mobile device which is not part of the preferred group. The one or more constraints may comprise a restriction on the number of frequency resource blocks that can be used in the uplink from the mobile device which is not part of the preferred group to the femtocell base station. In addition, the one constraint may comprise a power cap on the power of uplink transmission from the mobile device to the femtocell base station.
In one embodiment the power cap for a mobile device which is not part of the preferred group is higher than a power cap for mobile devices which are part of the preferred group. It is also contemplated that the one constraint may be a restriction on an amount of power of the femtocell base station transmissions available for downlink transmissions to mobile devices that are not part of the preferred group. The one constraint may also be a restriction on an amount of resource blocks of the femtocell base station available for downlink transmissions to mobile devices that are not part of the preferred group.
Also disclosed herein is a network device for use in a communications network comprising at least one macrocell base station and at least one femtocell base station, the network device comprising memory and a processor, the processor configured to control access of a mobile device to a femtocell base station by allowing access of the mobile device to the femtocell base station based on a femtocell-mobile device path loss for transmissions between the mobile device and the femtocell base station.
In one variation the network device comprises a femtocell base station and the processor is configured control access to the femtocell base station based on a comparison of the femtocell-mobile device path loss to a threshold value. In one embodiment, the femtocell base station is configured to receive data indicative of femtocell-mobile device pathloss of a mobile device from a macrocell base station which is serving the mobile device. The femtocell base station may be configured to allow a mobile device which is not part of a preferred group of mobile devices to access the femtocell base station as part of controlling access.
In addition, the network device may be part of a macrocell base station. The network device may be configured to receive resource information from a femtocell base station. The network device may comprise a gateway device which forms a gateway to the femtocell base station.
Embodiments of the invention will now be described in detail, by way of example only, with reference to the following drawings, in which:
Although the invention will be described below with reference to an LTE communication network and femtocell base stations or HeNBs, it will be appreciated that the invention is applicable to any type of second, third or subsequent generation network in which femtocell base stations (whether for home, business or public use), or their equivalents in those networks, can be deployed, such as WiMAX and WCDMA/HSPA. Moreover, although in the embodiments below the femtocell base stations and macrocell base stations use the same air interface (LTE), it will be appreciated that the invention can be used in a situation in which the macrocell and femtocell base stations use different air interface schemes (for example the macrocell base stations could use WCDMA while the femtocell base stations use LTE).
It will be noted that this application refers generally to allowing or denying a macro UE access to a femtocell or femtocell base station, but it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that in practice this means allowing or rejecting the handover (or a request for the handover) of a UE from a macrocell base station to the femtocell base station. Thus, references herein to allowing or denying access to the femtocell base station should be understood accordingly.
Moreover, the application also refers to allowing or denying a visiting UE access to a femtocell or femtocell base station, and it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that in practice this means retaining the visiting UE in the femtocell when further access is allowed and performing a handover of the visiting UE back to the macrocell base station when further access is denied.
One or more femtocell base stations 8 (Home eNBs—HeNBs) can be located within the coverage area 6 of the macrocell base station 4 (although only one femtocell base station 8 is shown in
It will be appreciated that
A number of mobile devices (UEs) 12, 14 and 16 are also located in the communication network 2 within the coverage area 6 of the macrocell base station 4.
Mobile device 12 is located within the coverage area 10 of the femtocell base station 8 and is a home UE since it is part of the Closed Subscriber Group of the femtocell base station 8. Mobile device 12 is currently associated with the femtocell base station 8, meaning that it transmits and/or receives control signalling and/or data using the femtocell base station 8.
Mobile devices 14 and 16 are each currently associated with the macrocell base station 4 (i.e. they are macro UEs), meaning that they transmit and/or receive control signalling and/or data using the macrocell base station 4. Mobile device 14 (at least) is not part of the Closed Subscriber Group of the femtocell base station 8, but it is within the coverage area 10, so it could potentially make use of the femtocell coverage 10 (i.e. it could become a visiting UE).
The femtocell base station 8 is illustrated in more detail in
A method of determining whether to allow a macro UE 14 to access a femtocell 10 in accordance with the invention is shown in
In step 301, measurements of the signal strength (RSRP) of the macro UE's serving cell (the macrocell 6) and neighbouring cell(s) (which will include the femtocell 10) are obtained.
In step 303, the pathloss from the macro UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8, denoted PUE
Then, in step 305, the estimated or determined pathloss from the macro UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8 , PUE
In a first implementation, step 305 comprises comparing the estimated or determined pathloss PUE
PUE
In a second implementation, step 305 comprises estimating or determining the pathloss from the macro UE 14 to the current serving macrocell base station 4, denoted PUE
PUE
In a third implementation, step 305 comprises a combination of the conditions in the first and second implementations described above, and access can only be permitted if the conditions in both equations (1) and (2) are satisfied.
In further implementations, additional conditions to those specified in equations (1) and (2) can be applied to determine if the macro UE 14 can access the femtocell 10, with access being allowed only if all of the conditions are satisfied.
One additional condition specifies a limit to the number of visiting UEs such that access to the femtocell 10 can only be allowed if there are currently less than N other visiting UEs in the femtocell 10, where N is an integer equal to or greater than 1.
Another additional condition specifies that access to the femtocell 10 can only be allowed if the femtocell base station 8 has the available capacity or resources to support a visiting UE.
These additional conditions can be implemented by, for example, a femtocell base station 8 having separate limits on the number of CSG and visiting UEs that can be supported. Alternatively, if a the femtocell base station 8 is already highly loaded, it is possible to allow CSG UEs to access the femtocell base station 8 (although this might result in the overall quality of service for the other home UEs 12 being reduced), but access for macro UEs 14 would be denied.
As mentioned, if a macro UE meets the pathloss conditions specified above but the femtocell base station is currently supporting the maximum number of visiting UEs and/or does not have the resources to serve an additional visiting UE then access to that macro UE may be denied. In another implementation however in such a scenario the relevant macro UE and the existing visiting UEs may all be viewed as candidate visiting UEs and a selection made as to which of the candidate UEs will be allowed access or continued access to the femtocell. The selection criteria may be such that the UEs that would be best served by the femtocell and/or have the most significant pathloss to the macrocell are selected to be visiting UEs. For example the selection could be based on admitting the candidate UEs with the lowest pathlosses to the femtocell base station. In such an embodiment therefore continuing access to a visiting UE may be denied to allow an existing macro UE, that would be better served, to access the femtocell base station.
Returning to
However, if access to the femtocell 10 is not allowed (step 307), the macro UE 14 continues its use of the macrocell 6 and the method returns to step 301 and repeats when the next measurements of the signal strength are obtained.
It will be appreciated that where a macro UE 14 is granted (allowed) access to a femtocell 10, it is necessary to periodically or regularly repeat the access control procedure to make sure that it is still beneficial for the macro UE 14 (visiting UE) to use the femtocell 10. The access control procedure can be repeated in accordance with the frequency of measurement reports or measurement events made by the macro UE 14, and/or depending on how the loading of the femtocell base station 8 (i.e. the number of CSG-UEs making use of the femtocell base station 8) changes over time.
Thus, in step 401, measurements of the signal strength of the visiting UE's serving cell (the femtocell 10) and neighbouring cell(s) (which will include the macrocell 6) are obtained.
In step 403, the pathloss from the visiting UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8, denoted PUE
Then, in step 405, the estimated or determined pathloss from the visiting UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8, PUE
If access is allowed, the visiting UE 14 can continue using the femtocell 10 (step 407) and the method returns to step 401 and repeats when the next measurements of the signal strength are obtained.
However, the access is no longer allowed (step 407), handover of the visiting UE 14 from the femtocell 10 to the macrocell 6 is initiated and the visiting UE 14 returns to being a macro UE (step 409). The method then returns to step 401 and repeats when the next measurements of the signal strength are obtained.
It will be noted that both of the methods described above make use of the pathloss from the macro UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8 in order to determine whether the macro UE 14 can access the femtocell 10. However, in a preferred implementation of the invention, the overall loss in the link can be used, with the overall loss including the shadowing and antenna gains in addition to the pathloss.
The method described above to decide whether to allow a macro UE to access a femtocell may be implemented by the femtocell, i.e. the femtocell may make the decision whether or not to allow access of a macro UE and/or maintain access of a visiting UE. Alternatively at least an initial decision may be made by the macrocell base station. In general the method may be implemented by any suitable network node, i.e. any device that forms part of, or can communicate with, the network, provided that the estimation or determination of the relevant transmission loss or losses are available. This may involve passing information related to power measurements and transmit powers to the network node making the decision. Where the femtocell itself does not make the decision it may provide information about its available resources and utilization and any constraints thereon to the network node making the decision. In some implementations however a network node other than the femtocell may decide that a macro UE should be allowed access to a femtocell but the femtocell itself may subsequently refuse such access based on resource constraints.
In the event that the pathloss indicates that the macro UE 14 should continue to be served by the macrocell, or the femtocell base station 8 is unable to accommodate any additional visiting UEs, the process may end and the macro UE 14 will continue to be served via the macrocell base station 4, in this case the femtocell may send an access denied message to the macrocell (not shown in
Once the UE is established as a visiting UE it will, in future, transmit measurement reports directly to the femtocell base station. If subsequently the pathloss conditions change the femtocell base station 8 may determine that the visiting UE should be handed back to the macrocell base station. Also, if the resource conditions for the femtocell base station 8 change, for instance due to more home UEs accessing the femtocell, it may be necessary to deny the visiting UE continued access. At this point a handover request is generated for the macrocell base station and the visiting UE establishes signalling with the macrocell base station 4 and returns to being a macro UE (shown in the lower part of
In an alternative implementation, illustrated with reference to
In the event that the pathloss considerations indicate that access to a femtocell would be beneficial a handover request to the femtocell base station 8 is generated. The femtocell base station may, if resources permit, establish signalling with the macro UE 14 and admit it as a visiting UE. If resource constraints on the femtocell base station 8 mean that it can not admit any new visiting UEs then the femtocell base station may reject the handover request. Alternatively the femtocell base station 8 may, following a handover request, establish signalling with the macro UE but then hand it back to the macrocell due to resource constraints.
The macrocell base station may also be arranged to make access decisions regarding visiting UEs, i.e. to determine whether a UE should be maintained as a visiting UE and thus may receive signal strength/transmit power or pathloss data from the femtocell base station for visiting UEs. In another embodiment however the macrocell base station makes the access decision as to when to seek to hand over a macro UE to a femtocell base station but the femtocell base station then makes the access decision whether to maintain access for a visiting UE.
Were the HeNB gateway to have determined that access should not be allowed to a macro UE then no action is necessary although the decision to deny access may be communicated to the femtocell (and/or the macrocell base station).
For a visiting UE the femtocell base station 8 may provide signal data and resource information to the HeNB gateway for a decision as to whether to continue to allow access. In the event that conditions change and further access should be denied the HeNB gateway may indicate such a decision to the femtocell (and/or the macrocell base station) which may then generate a handover request to hand the visiting UE back to the macrocell base station 4. Alternatively, the HeNB gateway may make an access decision for when a macro UE should become a visiting UE but the femtocell base station itself may make access decisions for any visiting UEs that have previously been admitted.
In accordance with a further aspect of the invention, once a macro UE 14 has been allowed to access a femtocell 10, one or more constraints are placed on the use of resources by the visiting UE in order to reduce the impact of the visiting UE on the home UE(s) 12.
A first constraint that can be applied is a restriction on the number of frequency Resource Blocks (RBs) to N. that can be used in the uplink from the visiting
UE 14 to the femtocell base station 8. A suitable range of values would be 5 to 20 for a 10 MHz LTE system.
Another constraint that can be applied relates to the “power cap” for uplink transmissions that is used to protect other macro UEs 16 in the macrocell 6 that are in the vicinity of the femtocell 10. According to this constraint, the power cap is set higher for visiting UEs 14 than for home UEs 12 by Ω dB. A suitable range of values for Ω is 10 to 20 dB. Thus, visiting UEs 14 are permitted to use a higher power for transmitting signals to the femtocell base station 8 than home UEs 12. Typically, in use, the home UEs that are accessing the femtocell may be located closer to the femtocell base station than any visiting UEs, for example were the femtocell base station located in a house the home UEs may typically be located within the house when accessing the femtocell whereas any visiting UEs may be outside. The visiting UEs may therefore require more power than the home UEs to access the femtocell and thus may be more sensitive to a power cap. Therefore allowing the visiting UEs a higher power cap than the home UEs allows the visiting UEs to access the femtocell from further away—which benefits the network as a whole.
Another constraint can be applied to the downlink transmissions from the femtocell base station 8 to the visiting UE 14 such that up to X % of the transmission power and Y % RBs are used by visiting UEs 14. Typically the transmission power per resource block is constant and hence the values of X and Y are typically the same but in some embodiments the power per resource block may vary for visiting UEs and home UEs. This constraint could be applied so that a limit applies individually to each visiting UE or the constraint could be applied so as to collectively limit the available resource blocks and transmission power shared by all the visiting UEs. In one embodiment the maximum percentage X of the transmission power used collectively by the visiting UEs is in the range of 25 to 50% and the maximum percentage Y of the RBs used collectively by the visiting UEs is also in the range of 25 to 50%.
The above embodiments have been described with reference to femtocell base stations operating in hybrid access mode. As will be described in more detail below operating a femtocell base station (that has a closed subscriber group) in hybrid access mode according to embodiments of the present invention offers benefits for the network as a whole compared with operating such a femtocell in closed mode. However the same methods may also be applied to determining when macro UEs should access an open access femtocell base station, although in such case it will not be necessary to implement resource limitations to ensure preferential access for home UEs.
Each graph in
In the downlink, simulation results are generated both with and without femtocell “power setting” (i.e. with some control of the maximum permitted transmission power of the femtocell base station). If femtocell power setting is present, then the femtocell base station is assumed to control its power based on the received power from a macrocell base station.
In the uplink, a static capping of home UE power is performed for both closed and hybrid access. This static capping is based on pathloss measurements to the macrocell base station.
The results shown in
Although the graphs in
Thus, with the appropriate strategy for deciding when to admit macro UEs to femtocells, and optionally with the appropriate control of the usage of power and RBs by visiting UEs in the femtocell, implementing hybrid access control according to the invention offers performance benefits in both the uplink and downlink for macro UEs, with similar or slightly improved performance for home UEs. The performance benefits for macro UEs are particularly pronounced in the downlink for cell edge macro UEs. With the hybrid access control according to the invention, no other downlink interference mitigation approach (e.g. power setting) is required.
There is therefore provided an improved method and network node implementing the same for determining when to allow a macro UE to access a femtocell base station operating in a hybrid access mode that considers both uplink and downlink performance.
While the invention has been illustrated and described in detail in the drawings and foregoing description, such illustration and description are to be considered illustrative or exemplary and not restrictive; the invention is not limited to the disclosed embodiments.
Variations to the disclosed embodiments can be understood and effected by those skilled in the art in practicing the claimed invention, from a study of the drawings, the disclosure and the appended claims. In the claims, the word “comprising” does not exclude other elements or steps, and the indefinite article “a” or “an” does not exclude a plurality. A single processor or other unit may fulfil the functions of several items recited in the claims. The mere fact that certain measures are recited in mutually different dependent claims does not indicate that a combination of these measures cannot be used to advantage. Any element described herein may combined with any other element described herein, in any combination. A computer program may be stored/distributed on a suitable medium, such as an optical storage medium or a solid-state medium supplied together with or as part of other hardware, but may also be distributed in other forms, such as via the Internet or other wired or wireless telecommunication systems. Any reference signs in the claims should not be construed as limiting the scope.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1013702.4 | Aug 2010 | GB | national |
This application is a continuation of and claims priority to and the benefit of PCT Application No. PCT/GB2011/051537 filed on Aug. 15, 2011 which claims priority to and the benefit of Great Britain Application No. 1013702.4 filed on Aug. 16, 2010.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4380046 | Frosch et al. | Apr 1983 | A |
4574345 | Konesky | Mar 1986 | A |
4589066 | Lam et al. | May 1986 | A |
4601031 | Walker et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4603404 | Yamauchi et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4622632 | Tanimoto et al. | Nov 1986 | A |
4698746 | Goldstein | Oct 1987 | A |
4720780 | Dolecek | Jan 1988 | A |
4736291 | Jennings et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4814970 | Barbagelata et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4825359 | Ohkami et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4858233 | Dyson et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4890279 | Lubarsky | Dec 1989 | A |
4914653 | Bishop et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4937741 | Harper et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4943912 | Aoyama et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
4967326 | May | Oct 1990 | A |
4974146 | Works et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
4974190 | Curtis | Nov 1990 | A |
4992933 | Taylor | Feb 1991 | A |
5036453 | Renner et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5038386 | Li | Aug 1991 | A |
5065308 | Evans | Nov 1991 | A |
5109329 | Strelioff | Apr 1992 | A |
5152000 | Hillis | Sep 1992 | A |
5193175 | Cutts et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5233615 | Goetz | Aug 1993 | A |
5239641 | Horst | Aug 1993 | A |
5241491 | Carlstedt | Aug 1993 | A |
5247694 | Dahl | Sep 1993 | A |
5253308 | Johnson | Oct 1993 | A |
5265207 | Zak et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5280584 | Caesar et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5384697 | Pascucci | Jan 1995 | A |
5386495 | Wong et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5408676 | Mori | Apr 1995 | A |
5410723 | Schmidt et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5410727 | Jaffe et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5473731 | Seligson | Dec 1995 | A |
5555548 | Iwai et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557751 | Banman et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5570045 | Erdal et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5600784 | Bissett et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5692139 | Slavenburg | Nov 1997 | A |
5719445 | McClure | Feb 1998 | A |
5734921 | Dapp et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5752067 | Wilkinson et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761514 | Aizikowits et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5790879 | Wu | Aug 1998 | A |
5795797 | Chester et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796937 | Kizuka | Aug 1998 | A |
5802561 | Fava et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805839 | Singahl | Sep 1998 | A |
5826033 | Hayashi et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826049 | Ogata et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826054 | Jacobs et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5845060 | Vrba et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5860008 | Bradley | Jan 1999 | A |
5861761 | Kean | Jan 1999 | A |
5864706 | Kurokawa et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5923615 | Leach et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926640 | Mason et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5946484 | Brandes | Aug 1999 | A |
5951664 | Lambrecht et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5959995 | Wicki et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5963609 | Huang | Oct 1999 | A |
6023757 | Nishimoto et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6044451 | Slavenburg | Mar 2000 | A |
6052752 | Kwon | Apr 2000 | A |
6055285 | Alston | Apr 2000 | A |
6069490 | Ochotta et al. | May 2000 | A |
6101599 | Wright et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6122677 | Porterfield | Sep 2000 | A |
6167502 | Pechanek et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6173386 | Key et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175665 | Sawada | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6199093 | Yokoya | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6317820 | Shiell et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6345046 | Tanaka | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6360259 | Bradley | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6381293 | Lee et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381461 | Besson et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6393026 | Irwin | May 2002 | B1 |
6408402 | Norman | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6424870 | Maeda et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6448910 | Lu | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6499096 | Suzuki | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6499097 | Tremblay et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6567417 | Kalkunte et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6615339 | Ito et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6631439 | Saulsbury et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6681341 | Fredenburg et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6775766 | Revilla et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6795422 | Ohsuge | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6829296 | Troulis et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6892293 | Sachs et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6928500 | Ramanujan et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6952181 | Karr et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6961782 | Denneau et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6996157 | Ohsuge | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7103008 | Greenblat et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7161978 | Lu et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7237055 | Rupp | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7302552 | Guffens et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7340017 | Banerjee | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7342414 | DeHon | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7383422 | Kageyama et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7428721 | Rohe et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7549081 | Robbins et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7672836 | Lee et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7712067 | Fung et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7801029 | Wrenn et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7804719 | Chirania et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
8032142 | Carter et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8219101 | Shin | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8243682 | Nylander et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
20020045433 | Vihiriala | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020069345 | Mohamed et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020174318 | Stuttard et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020198606 | Satou | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030154358 | Seong | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030235241 | Tamura | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040078548 | Claydon et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040083409 | Rozenblit et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040139466 | Sharma et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040150422 | Wong et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040198386 | Dupray | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050083840 | Wilson | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050114565 | Gonzalez et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050124344 | Laroia et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050163248 | Berangi et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050250502 | Laroia et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050282500 | Wang et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060087323 | Furse et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089154 | Laroia et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060251046 | Fujiwara | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060268962 | Cairns et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070036251 | Jelonnek et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070127556 | Sato | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070173255 | Tebbit et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070183427 | Nylander et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070220522 | Coene et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070220586 | Salazar | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070248191 | Pettersson | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070254620 | Lindqvist et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070263544 | Yamanaka et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070270151 | Claussen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080146154 | Claussen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080151832 | Iwasaki | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090003263 | Foster et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090042593 | Yavuz et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090042596 | Yavuz et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090046665 | Robson et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090080550 | Kushioka | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090092122 | Czaja et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090097452 | Gogic | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090098871 | Gogic | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090111503 | Pedersen et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090150420 | Towner | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090163216 | Hoang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090168907 | Mohanty et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090196253 | Semper | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090215390 | Ku et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090252200 | Dohler et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090264077 | Damnjanovic | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090296635 | Hui et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100035556 | Cai et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100046455 | Wentink et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100054237 | Han et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100067491 | Park et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100087148 | Srinivasan et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100105345 | Thampi et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100111070 | Hsu | May 2010 | A1 |
20100157906 | Yang et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100167730 | Shin | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100195525 | Eerolainen | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100203891 | Nagaraja et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100215032 | Jalloul et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100216403 | Harrang | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100216485 | Hoole | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100222068 | Gaal et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100234061 | Khandekar et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100248646 | Yamazaki et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100273481 | Meshkati et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100279689 | Tinnakornsrisuphap et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110002426 | Muirhead | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110122834 | Walker et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110130143 | Mori et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110170494 | Kim et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110182252 | Liu et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110218004 | Catovic et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110286407 | Vajapeyam et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20140080488 | Michel et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
101754351 | Jun 2010 | CN |
101873688 | Oct 2010 | CN |
0 180 212 | May 1986 | EP |
492174 | Jul 1992 | EP |
0 877 533 | Nov 1998 | EP |
0 973 099 | Jan 2000 | EP |
0 977 355 | Feb 2000 | EP |
1054523 | Nov 2000 | EP |
1 134 908 | Sep 2001 | EP |
1418776 | May 2004 | EP |
1 946 506 | Jul 2008 | EP |
1876854 | Sep 2008 | EP |
2 071 738 | Jun 2009 | EP |
2 160 062 | Mar 2010 | EP |
2 326 118 | May 2011 | EP |
2 304 495 | Mar 1997 | GB |
2 370 380 | Jun 2002 | GB |
2398651 | Aug 2004 | GB |
2 414 896 | Dec 2005 | GB |
2391083 | Mar 2006 | GB |
2 447 439 | Sep 2008 | GB |
2463074 | Mar 2010 | GB |
61123968 | Jun 1986 | JP |
A-8-297652 | Nov 1996 | JP |
11272645 | Oct 1999 | JP |
2001-034471 | Feb 2001 | JP |
2004-525439 | Aug 2004 | JP |
2006-500673 | Jan 2006 | JP |
2010-147682 | Jul 2010 | JP |
9004235 | Apr 1990 | WO |
9111770 | Aug 1991 | WO |
9726593 | Jul 1997 | WO |
9850854 | Nov 1998 | WO |
0102960 | Jan 2001 | WO |
0250624 | Jun 2002 | WO |
0250700 | Jun 2002 | WO |
03001697 | Jan 2003 | WO |
2004029796 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2004034251 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2004102989 | Nov 2004 | WO |
2005048491 | May 2005 | WO |
2006059172 | Jun 2006 | WO |
2007021139 | Feb 2007 | WO |
2007054127 | May 2007 | WO |
2007056733 | May 2007 | WO |
2007126351 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2008030934 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008090154 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2008099340 | Aug 2008 | WO |
2008155732 | Dec 2008 | WO |
2009054205 | Apr 2009 | WO |
2009061585 | May 2009 | WO |
2010031066 | Mar 2010 | WO |
2010072127 | Jul 2010 | WO |
2010121199 | Oct 2010 | WO |
2010126155 | Nov 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Details on specification aspects for UL ICIC”, Qualcomm Europe, May 5-May 9, 2008, 2 pages. |
3GPP TS 36.331 v9.2.0 3rd Generation Partnership Project: Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Acces (E-UTRA); Radio Resource Control (RRC) Protocol specification (Release 9) Mar. 2010, pp. 1-248. |
Alcatel-Lucent, et al., “Congested H(e)NB Hybrid Access Mode cell”, 2009, 3GPP Draft; R3-091053-Congested H(e)NB, 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Apr. 29, 2009, 4 pages. |
Motorola, “Text proposal for TR 36.9xx: Reducing HeNB interference by dynamically changing HeNB access mode”, 2009, 3GPP Draft: R4-094688, Apr. 29, 2009, 2 pages. |
MIPS, MIPS32 Architecture for Programmers, 2001, MIPS Technologies, vol. 2, pp. 1-253. |
Pechanek, et al. ManArray Processor Interconnection Network: An Introduction, Euro-Par'99, LNCS 1685, pp. 761-765, 1999. |
Waddington, T., Decompilation of “hello world” on Pentium and SPARC, 4 pages, [retrieved on Aug. 3, 2012]. Retrieved from the Internet:<URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20050311141936/http://boomerang.sourceforge.net/helloworld.html>. |
Balakrishnan, et al., CodeSurfer/x86 - A Platform for Analyzing x86 Executables, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelber, 2005, [retrieved on Dec. 30, 2011], retrieved from the internet:<URL:http://www.springerlink.com/content/uneu2a95u9nvb20v/>. |
Miecznikowski, J., et al., “Decompiling Java Using Stage Encapsulation”, Proceedings of the Eighth Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, Oct. 2-5, 2001. |
Panesar, G. et al., “Deterministic Parallel Processing”, Proceedings of the 1st Microgrid Workshop, Jul. 2005. |
Towner, D. et al., “Debugging and Verification of Parallel Systems—the picoChip way”, 2004. |
PicoChip, “PC7203 Development Platform Preliminary Product Brief”, Jul. 2007. |
Ennals, R. et al., “Task Partitioning for Multi-core Network Processors”, 2005. |
Rabideau, Daniel J., et al., “Simulated Annealing for Mapping DSP Algorithms on to Multiprocessors,” Signals, Systems and Computers, 1993 Conference Record of the Twenty-Seventh Asilomar Conference, Nov. 1-3, 1993, IEEE, pp. 668-672. |
Nanda, Ashwini K., et al., “Mapping Applications onto a Cache Coherent Multiprocessor,” Conference on High Performance Networking and Computing, Proceedings of the 1992 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing, 1992, IEEE, pp. 368-377. |
Lin, Lian-Yu, et al., Communication-driven Task Binding for Multiprocessor with Latency Insensitive Network-on-Chip, Design Automation Conference, 2005 Proceedings of th ASP-DAC, Jan. 18/21, 2005, IEEE, pp. 39-44. |
Holger Claussen, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent; “Performance of Macro and Co-Channel Femtocells in a Hierarchical Cell Structure”; The 18th Annual IEEE Internation Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC'07); Sep. 1, 2007; pp. 1-5, XP031168593, ISBN: 978-1-4244-1143-6; Swindon, United Kingdom. |
Shiroshita, T., et al.: “Reliable data distribution middleware for large-scale massive data replication” Parallel and Distributed Information Systems, 1993, Fourth International Conference on Miami Beach, FL, USA Dec. 18-20, 1996, Los Alamitos, CA, USA IEEE Comput. Soc, US, Dec. 18, 1996, pp. 196-205m XP010213188 ISBN: 0-8186-7475-X. |
Levine B. N. et al.: “A comparison of known classes of reliable multicast protocols” Netowrk Protocols, 1996 International Conference on Columbus, OH, USA Oct.29-Nov. 1, 1996, Los Alamitos, CA, USA IEEE Comput. Soc. US Oct. 29, 1996, pp. 112-121, XP010204425 ISBN: 0-8186-7453-9. |
Ishijima, et al., A Semi-Synchronous Circuit Design Method by Clock Tree Modification IEEE Trans. Fundamentals, vol. E85-A, no. Dec. 12, 2002. |
Greenstreet, et al., Implementing a STARI Chip, IEEE 1995. |
Hierarchical multiprocessor organizations; J. Archer Harris; David R. Smith; International Symposium on computer Architecture; Proceedings of the 4th annual symposium on Computer architecture pp. 41-48 Year of Publication 1977. |
“Hierarchical Interconnection Networks for Multicomputer systems” Sivarama P. Dandamudi, et al. IEEE Transactions on Computers archive vol. 39, Issue 6 (Jun. 1990 ) pp. 786-797 Year of Publication: 1990. |
A Cluster Structure as an Interconnection Network for Large Multimicrocomputer Systems Wu, S.B. Liu, M.T. This paper appears in: Transactions on Computers Publication Date: Apr. 1981 vol. C-30, Issue: 4 On pp. 254-264. |
Performance Analysis of Multilevel Bus Networks for Hierarchichal Multiprocessors S.M. Mahmud IEEE Transactions on Computers archive vol. 43, Issue 7 (Jul. 1994) pp. 789-805 Year of Publication: 1994. |
Performance Analysis of a Generalized Class of M-Level Hierarchical Multiprocessor Systems I.O. Mahgoub A.K. Elmagarmid Mar. 1992 (vol. 3, No. 2) pp. 129-138. |
Kober, Rudolf, “The Multiprocessor System SMS 201—Combining 128 Microprocessors to a Powerful Computer,” Sep. 1977, Compcon '77, pp. 225-230. |
Knight, Thomas and Wu, Henry, “A Method for Skew-free Distribution of Digital Signals using Matched Variable Delay Lines,” VLSI Circuits, 1993. Digest of Technicial Papers. 1993 Symposium on, May 1993, pp. 19-21. |
Popli, S.P., et al., “A Reconfigurable VLSI Array for Reliability and Yield Enhancement,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Systolic Arrays, 1988, pp. 631-642. |
John, L.K., et al., “A Dynamically Reconfigurable Interconnect for Array Processors,” IEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (lvsi) Systems, vol. 6, No. 1, Mar. 1998, pp. 150-157. |
Schmidt, U., et al., “Datawave: A Single-Chip Multiprocessor for Video Applications,” IEEE Micro, vol. 11, No. 3, Jun. 1991, pp. 22-25, 88-94. |
Chean, M., et al., “A Taxonomy of Reconfiguration Techniques for Fault-Tolerant Processor Arrays,” Computer, IEEE Computer Society, vol. 23, No. 1, Jan. 1990, pp. 55-69. |
Kamiura, N., et al., “A Repairable and Diagnosable Cellular Array on Multiple-Valued Logic,” Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic, 1993, pp. 92-97. |
LaForge, l., “Extremally Fault Tolerant Arrays,” Proceedings: International Conference on Wafer Scale Integration, 1989, pp. 365-378. |
Reiner Hartenstein, et al., On Reconfigurable Co-Processing Units, Proceedings of Reconfigurable Architectures Workshop (RAW98), Mar. 30, 1998. |
Schmidt, U., et al., “Data-Driven Array Processor for Video Signal Processing”, IEEE—1990 (USA). |
Muhammad Ali Mazidi, “The80x86 IBM PC and Compatible Computers”, 2003, Prentice Hall, 4th edition, pp. 513-515. |
Shigei, N., et al., “On Efficient Spare Arrangements and an Algorithm with Relocating Spares for Reconfiguring Processor Arrays,” IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, communications and Computer Sciences, vol. E80-A, No. 6, Jun. 1997, pp. 988-995. |
“Interference Management in Femto Cell Deployment”, Mingxi Fan, Mehmet Yavuz, Sanjiv Nanda, Yeliz Tokgoz, Farhad Meshkati, Raul Dangui, Qualcomm Incorporated, QUALCOMM 3GPP2 Femto Workshop, Boston, MA, Oct. 15, 2007. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130231118 A1 | Sep 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | PCT/GB2011/051537 | Aug 2011 | US |
Child | 13768991 | US |