1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to communications spectrum allocation and reuse on a non-interference basis in bands which have pre-existing spectrum users (both transmit/receive type and receive-only type).
2. Description of Prior Art
Communication systems commonly use methods to optimize the use of the spectrum. There are several approaches involving radio networks where channels are selected to optimize system capacity.
Cellular phone and other types of systems use low power transmissions and a cellular architecture that enables spectrum to be reused many times in a metropolitan area. These systems assume that within the allocated frequency band, the system is the primary user and that there is a control or signaling channel between all nodes. The goal of these systems is to maximize the number of calls system wide given a fixed amount of bandwidth. This problem is complex because of the nearly innumerable choices of frequency/channel combinations possible, the time varying nature of the calls, and the unpredictable propagation loses between all of the nodes. While global optimization schemes would give the highest capacities, limited communications capacity between the nodes, finite channel measuring capabilities in some of the nodes, and short decisions times require that distributed non-optimal methods be used. Examples are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,672,657 (1987), 4,736,453 (1988), 4,783,780 (1988), 4,878,238 (1989), 4,881,271 (1989), 4,977,612 (1990), 5,093,927 (1992), 5,203,012 (1993), 5,179,722 (1993), 5,239,676 (1993), 5,276,908 (1994), 5,375,123 (1994), 5,497,505 (1996), 5,608,727 (1997), 5,822,686 (1998), 5,828,948 (1998), 5,850,605 (1998), 5,943,622 (1999), 6,044090 (2000), and 6,049,717 (2000).
The above patents describe methods where current channel measurements (noise level, carrier-to-interference ratio (C/I)), previous channel measurement statistics, and traffic loading are used in different ways to optimize capacity while minimizing latency in channel assignment, equipment requirements, and dropped calls. All of these methods assume that the system is the primary spectrum user. This would allow the primary system to select channels where it was jammed, but it would create significant interference to another system.
Several methods to enable a system to operate as the secondary spectrum user with minimal impact to the primary user have been disclosed. The first type assume that there are predetermined spatial “exclusions zones” where if the secondary user avoids transmission while located in these areas, then there will be no interference to the primary user. U.S. Pat. No. 5,422,930 (1995) uses a telephone circuit based keying method where the telephone's location is known and when the secondary user is connected to the specific phone line, authorization is given for operation using a set of frequencies. U.S. Pat. No. 5,511,233 (1996) is similar method where an undefined position location system is used. U.S. Pat. No. 5,794,1511 (1998) uses a GPS (global positioning system) to locate the secondary user.
This geolocation exclusion method has significant shortfalls. To determine the exclusion zones, propagation estimates or propagation methods would have to be made. There would be large uncertainties in the antenna type, antenna orientation, antenna height, and power level used by the secondary user. There would be uncertainties in the local propagation conditions between the secondary user and the primary user, and these propagation conditions might change because of ducting or other temporary atmospheric conditions. To mitigate these problems, the exclusion zones would have to have very large margins, which would greatly reduce system capacity, or some unintended interference would be created. These schemes do not address how the interference caused by one specific secondary user would be quickly and economically identified and eliminated.
A second type of secondary spectrum allocation method uses detailed propagation modeling of the primary and secondary communication systems and channel occupancy measurements made by the secondary system (U.S. Pat. No. 5,410,737 (1995) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,752,164 (1998)). The channel measurements are use to validate and improve the propagation modeling estimates. Using this information, the spectrum is allocated so that the primary user is not impacted.
Because of the large uncertainties in propagation estimates, the above method must use large margins to insure minimal interference. Using measurements of the propagation losses between the primary and secondary user can be directly used to reduce these margins only if the primary system transmits and receives using the same antenna, at the same frequency and at a known power level. In this case the secondary radio directly estimates it's impact on the primary system and can select its frequency and power level to avoid interference. However, most communication systems use different transmit and receive frequencies and often use different transmit and receive antennas. Hence, the measurements of the primary signal received by the secondary don't provide direct information on the impact the secondary transmitter has on the primary receiver. This method also doesn't describe how unintentional interference would be identified and mitigated.
A third approach insurers that the measurements of the primary signals made by the secondary user can be used to determine the available spectrum is to add a narrow bandwidth “marker” signal to every primary receiver antenna system (U.S. Pat. No. 5,412,658 (1995)). This approach has significant cost impact to the primary user and because the CW marker transmitter is collocated to the primary receiver, it will cause significant interference to the primary user.
A fourth method has the primary and secondary users sharing a spectrum band between the primary and secondary users to reserve bandwidth (U.S. Pat. No. 5,428,819 (1995)). An “etiquette” is observed between the users and each user makes measurements of the open channels to determine priority usage. This method has the disadvantage that the primary system must be modified to communicate with the secondary system, which is cost prohibitive if the primary user is already established. Also, the method will fail in many cases because of the well known “hidden node problem”. This occurs when the secondary nodes are unable to receive transmissions from a primary node because of the particular propagation conditions. Thus, the secondary user incorrectly believes the channel is available and his transmissions cause interference.
A fifth method assumes that the primary and secondary systems are controlled by a central controller (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,040,238 (1991), 5,093,927 (1992), 5,142,691 (1992), and 5,247,701 (1993)). When interference occurs, the secondary system's power level and/or frequency list is adjusted. Some of the methods use channel measurements at the secondary system to detect changes in the frequency usage that would require a re-prioritization of channels. This method has obvious problems because the primary system would have to be highly modified to interact with the secondary system and to be able to make the required spectrum measurements. The spectrum is now fully allocated and there are primary users in every band. What is needed is a method that enables secondary operation without any modification to the existing primary user.
A sixth method uses field monitors the measure the secondary signal strength at specific locations. One sub-method is intended to enable secondary usage inside buildings (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,548,809 (1996) and 5,655,217 (1997)). Field monitors are located surrounding the secondary system nodes which determine what channels are not used by nearby primary systems or if the channels are in use, if the coupling between the primary to them where the coupling to detected. The second sub-method is intended to enable adjacent cellular based mobile communication systems (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,862,487 (1999)).
Accordingly, several objects or advantages of my invention are:
Further objects and advantages of my invention will become apparent from a consideration of the drawings and ensuing description.
This invention allows a secondary user to efficiently use the spectrum on a non-interference basis with an existing primary user.
Determining the secondary transceiver's maximum power level is very difficult since it depends on antennas, cable losses, locations, radio frequency (RF) propagation, and other factors which can't economically be reliably predicted. In the preferred embodiment, a combination of primary signal strength measurements, measurements of signals from nearby primary receivers, and secondary-to-secondary node coupling measurements are made to determine this power level.
The new secondary node 21 then measures the primary signal strength in each of the proposed channels. As will be described later, this measurement is coordinated with the secondary signals in the secondary service area 24. During the measurement interval the secondary signals are switched off to prevent the secondary signals from affecting the primary signal measurement. If the primary signal is below a certain value, then the new secondary node 21 is assumed to be located in a region where the channel is potentially available for spectrum reuse. If the primary signal is above another certain value, then the new secondary node 21 is assumed to be located in the primary service region B 28, the channel is not available for spectrum reuse by this node, and this node can be used to received signal probes.
However, there are a variety of factors which may reduce the propagation losses and create interference: (1) The primary or secondary users may have elevated antennas (100 m or more), (2) incorrect information on the secondary user's location, and (3) unusual propagation due to atmospheric conditions. These conditions are rare but exist often enough that the secondary system must mitigate them in order to operate on a non-interference basis. The conditions also vary with time so they must be mitigated on a regular basis.
Unfortunately, the signal level from each secondary transceiver 20 at each primary receiver 10 can't be measured directly because of the expense in deploying the measurement equipment and the location of the primary receivers 10 may be unknown. Simulations and analysis could be used to estimate these effects, they would require extensive detailed knowledge of all primary users, terrain features and atmospheric data, which is impractical to obtain.
Instead, the secondary signal level at the primary receivers 10 is estimated by the use of propagation models and measuring the secondary signal level at secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base stations 22 surrounding the primary receivers 10. In the example shown in
The secondary central controller 30 then tasks the new secondary transceiver 21 to transmit a probe signal for a brief period (several milliseconds). The secondary central controller 30 previously coordinates with the secondary transceivers 20 and secondary base stations 22 in service area B 28 so that they measure the probe signal amplitude. The central controller identifies which nodes are within service area B 28 by comparing the primary signal level measurements to a threshold value as previously described. These amplitude values are sent to the secondary central controller 30. If any of the probe signal amplitudes exceed a threshold value, then the maximum transmit power level that the new secondary transceiver 21 can use on channel B is reduced by the amount the maximum measurement exceeded the threshold. The value of the maximum transmission power level is thus equal to the following formula: P_transmission (dBm)=P_probe (dBm)−P_received (dBm)+“constant”, with “P_probe” the probe transmission power level, “P_received” the maximum received probe power level, and the value of the “constant” depending on the maximum interference level allowed in the “primary region” plus a safety margin.
These measurements are repeated at a regular interval (10's of minutes to a few hours) and the probe signal amplitudes are compared to previous values. If there is a significant change due to changes in the secondary equipment (new location, antenna rotations, changes to the system cabling . . .) or due to unusual propagation conditions, the maximum transmit power level that the new secondary transceiver 21 can use on channel B is changed so that the maximum measurement value equals the threshold value.
If the secondary equipment is mobile, than the measurements are made more frequently and the threshold value is set higher to account for lags in transmitting the data to the secondary central controller 30 and other system delays. The probe duration is adjusted to balance the probe measurement time versus probe waveform detection probability and depends on the number of secondary nodes and the node dynamics. In a secondary service area 26 or 28 with 10,000 users, 10% of the capacity allocated to probing, and probing done every hour, the probe duration is approximately 2 ms.
To decrease the amount of time spent probing, groups of secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base stations 22 can transmit the probe signals simultaneously. If the secondary transceivers 20 and secondary base stations 22 in service area B 28 measure a probe signal amplitude greater than the threshold value, then each of the secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base stations 22 can individually re-transmit the probe signal to determine which link will cause interference.
To minimize the interference to the primary system, the probe waveform is not the same as used to transmit data. The waveform is designed to have minimal effect on the primary waveform, to be easily and quickly acquired by the secondary system, and to have sufficient bandwidth across the channel of interest so that frequency selective fading doesn't introduce large errors. In the preferred embodiment of this invention, one of the following waveforms is used depending of the primary signal modulation.
The value of this waveform is that it has approximately the same level of impact to the TV signal as a broadband waveform used to send data, but this waveform can be received with a narrow bandwidth (˜10 Hz) receiver compared to a wide bandwidth (several MHz) broadband receiver, thus it can be transmitted at much lower (˜50 dB) amplitude and will have minimal impact to the primary signal.
The relative amplitudes of the CW tones in each zone are shown in
To receive this waveform, standard FFT processing techniques are used to measure the amplitude of each CW tone and the amplitudes are normalized by the 30 dB and 10 dB amounts described above. Selective fading will cause the relative amplitude of each tone to vary just as would occur with a data waveform and must be accounted for to estimate the interference caused by a data waveform. To account for fading, the largest of the four CW tone amplitudes is used to estimate the worse case channel conditions. The probability that all four tones are faded causing the propagation losses to be over estimated is very low.
If the primary signal is other than NTSC TV video signals, the probe signal is a conventional BPSK waveform with bandwidth approximately equal to the channel bandwidth. This sets the chip rate at approximately the inverse of the bandwidth (a 10 MHz bandwidth would have a chip rate of 10 Mcps). The waveform transmits a pseudo random sequence with the maximum length that can be coherently integrated when limited by channel conditions or receiver hardware complexity. In non-line-of-sight (LOS) propagation conditions, the maximum channel coherence time is approximately 100 ms. Current low cost receiver hardware is limited to sampling and processing approximately 10,000 samples. Assuming 2 samples per chip, the maximum sequence is approximately 5,000 samples. Thus, the sequence length is set to the minimum of the chip rate (symbols per second) times 100 ms (the maximum sequence duration) and 5,000.
To receive the BPSK probe signal, the secondary receiver samples the signal for a period equal to the transmit period and using a non-linear technique to measure the amplitude of probe signal. Each sample value is squared and the resulting series analyzed using an FFT. At the frequency corresponding to twice the chip rate, a narrow bandwidth spectral line will exist with amplitude that is related to the received probe signal amplitude. It is well known to those familiar in the art that this technique is able identify BPSK signals with amplitude well below the noise level and provides nearly optimal signal detection performance. Thus, the probe signal can be transmitted at a much lower power level than a regular data signal (which reduces interference to the primary signal) and can still be detected.
Once the probe signal amplitudes are measured at the secondary transceivers 20 and secondary base stations 22 in service area B 28, the values are sent to the secondary central controller 30 who then decides what the maximum power level each secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base station 22 can use with this channel as is described above.
In addition to measuring the primary background signal, each secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base station 22 will send data, receive probe signals and transmit probe signals. This information is sent to the central controller 30 via the high capacity network connecting the base stations 22. The notional time line for a transceiver is shown in
An additional innovation is a technique where the secondary transceivers 20 and base stations 22 modify their behavior when there are nearby primary receivers 10 or transmitters 12. Closely spaced (10's of meters) radios are susceptible to significant interference caused by non-linear mixing interference and interference caused by unintended out-of-band transmitted signals (phase noise, harmonics, and spurs). In the preferred approach, the secondary transceiver and base station (20 and 22) measure the spectrum and identify strong signals that indicate proximate primary transceivers. Each secondary node (20 and 22) will then avoid transmitting on frequencies likely to cause interference to that specific radio. The frequencies to avoid can be determined using a simple model that includes harmonically related signals and cross products of the primary signal with the secondary signal. For example, if a strong cell phone transmission is detected at 890 MHz, it can be inferred that a receiver is nearby tuned to 935 MHz (cell phone channels are paired). The secondary system may have a significant harmonic at 935 MHz when it transmits at 233.75 MHz (4th harmonic is 935 MHz) and at 467.5 MHz (2nd harmonic is 935 MHz). To avoid causing interference, this specific secondary node would restrict its transmitted power at these frequencies to low values or change to another frequency.
In broadcast bands (i.e. TV), the primary receiver's 10 local oscillator leakage will be detected to determine if there is a nearby receiver as shown in
To measure the LO signal amplitude, fast Fourier transform (FFT) methods are used to create a narrow (˜10 Hz) bandwidth receiver. The LO signals are detected by searching for stable, narrow bandwidth, continuous wave (CW) signals.
In the preferred embodiment of this invention, the secondary signal waveform is selected based on the interference measurements made by the secondary transceivers 20 and secondary base stations 22. If the interference measurements indicate that the primary signal is below the threshold value used to declare the channel open for use and the primary signal level is well above the noise level, then the secondary signal spectrum is reduced to fit into gaps of the primary spectrum (from 1.5 MHz above the channel start frequency to 5.5 MHz above the channel start frequency) as shown in
There are many types of waveforms that could be used to optimize performance in a high multipath link or in high quality (line-of-sight) link.
The primary user reports his location, the channel with interference and the time of the interference. The central controller identifies all secondary transceivers 20 and secondary base stations 22 within a distance X of the primary user active within the time period in question, and identifies what additional channels may have caused the interference due to adjacent channel or image rejection problems. Using propagation and interference models, the maximum power each secondary transceiver 20 and secondary base station 22 is allowed to transmit, the probability of each secondary node is calculated. The secondary nodes are sorted by this probability. If the interference is still present, a secondary central controller 30 tasks the most probable secondary node to temporarily cease transmitting and then asks the primary user if the problem has cleared. If not, the secondary central controller 30 goes to the next probable node and repeats this process (expanding the distance X as required) until the offending secondary node is identified.
If the primary user had reported the interference as intermittent (due to variations in the secondary traffic loading), the secondary central controller 30 commands the secondary nodes to transmit for each of the above tests instead of ceasing to transmit.
Once the secondary node causing the interference is identified, the maximum transmit power level that node can transmit in that channel is reduced until there is no interference. This is accomplished by the secondary central controller 30 iteratively tasking the secondary node to transmit signal at varying power levels until the primary user reports no interference.
Secondary transceivers 20 and base stations 22 that are highly elevated compared to the surrounding terrain have line-of-sight to a large area and will have much lower propagation losses to the surround primary nodes compared to secondary nodes that are at low altitude. Because they are more likely to cause interference, they are assigned frequencies that are the least likely to cause interference as determined by the probe measurements described above. To determine if a secondary node is elevated, the node measures the strength of several primary signals (at different frequencies) in the area as shown in
In some system applications, the frequency range of the secondary system will not include the standard broadcast bands. The elevation of a secondary node can still be inferred using signals from primary cellular, PCS, or other systems (that are not constant amplitude). These systems use frequency re-use schemes where channels are assigned to different cell towers. If the node is elevated, it will receive strong amplitude signals at many frequencies within the frequency re-use scheme. If the node is not elevated, it will receive strong amplitude signals at only one or two frequencies within the frequency re-use scheme.
As mentioned above, the system will use a slightly different scheme to allocate frequencies for mobile nodes. To determine if a node is stationary or mobile, the system will periodically (approximately once per second) measure the amplitude of background primary signals. As shown in
Accordingly, the reader will see that the method described above allows efficient secondary use of spectrum while causing minimum interference to the primary user. The method has minimal impact to the choices of the secondary system could be added as an applique to existing or planned communication systems. It requires no modification to the existing primary user. The technology can be economically built with existing component technology.
The invention will provide 100's of megahertz of spectrum to be used which before was unavailable to new uses and will provide this spectrum below 2 GHz which is the most useful portion for mobile and non-line-of-sight applications. Because the method has minimal effect on the present primary users, it allows a gradual transition from the present fixed frequency based, broadcast use of the spectrum set-up in the 1930's to the computer controlled, fully digital, packet based, frequency agile systems coming in the near future. With the advent of the Internet and the need for high-speed connectivity to rural and mobile users, the present spectrum use methods are inadequate and will not be able to meet this need. This invention will provide spectrum for the new Internet driven demand while not significantly impacting the present spectrum users.
The invention described here has many advantages. The technique used by each secondary node uses multiple effective ways (propagation models, measuring the primary signal level and probing) to identify what channels are available. The technique of amplitude modulating the secondary signals allows accurate measurement of the primary signal levels while the secondary system is operating. Using the special probe waveforms allows these measurements to me made with minimal impact to the primary system. Varying the secondary waveform greatly reduces the impact to the primary system while increasing the capacity of the secondary system. The methods to detect node elevation and node motion allow for rapid checking and adjustment of spectrum allocations making this technique applicable to mobile applications.
Although the description above contains many specifications, these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention but as merely providing illustrations of some of the presently preferred embodiments of this invention. For example, the primary system could be the present broadcast TV system. However, the methods described here would be equally effective with sharing between commercial and military systems, with sharing between radar and communications systems and others.
Thus the scope of the invention should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.
This applicationThe present application is a Divisional Reissue Application of Reissue application Ser. No. 12/326,755, which is a reissue of U.S. Pat. No. 7,146,176, which claims priority under 35 USC 119(e) based on of U.S. Provisional Patent Applications Ser. No. 60/211,215 dated Jun. 13, 2000 and Ser. No. 60/264,265 dated Jan. 29, 2001. Both applicationsPriority Applications are incorporated by reference in entirety. More than one reissue application has been filed for the reissue of U.S. Pat. No. 7,146,176. The reissue applications are application Ser. Nos. 12/326,755, 12/944,796 (the present application), and Ser. No. 13/089,492 all of which are divisional reissues of U.S. Pat. No. 7,146,176.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3893064 | Nishihara et al. | Jul 1975 | A |
3935572 | Broniwitz et al. | Jan 1976 | A |
4107613 | Queen et al. | Aug 1978 | A |
4119964 | Fletcher et al. | Oct 1978 | A |
4227255 | Carrick et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4305150 | Richmond et al. | Dec 1981 | A |
4398220 | Satoh | Aug 1983 | A |
4501020 | Wakeman | Feb 1985 | A |
4672657 | Dershowitz | Jun 1987 | A |
4736453 | Schloemer | Apr 1988 | A |
4783780 | Alexis | Nov 1988 | A |
4803703 | DeLuca et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4878238 | Rash et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4881271 | Yamauchi | Nov 1989 | A |
4918730 | Schulze | Apr 1990 | A |
4977612 | Wilson | Dec 1990 | A |
5040238 | Comroe et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5093924 | Toshiyuki et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5093927 | Shanley | Mar 1992 | A |
5142690 | McMullan et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5142691 | Freeburg et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5151747 | Nourrcier et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5155590 | Beyers et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5162937 | Heidemann et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5177604 | Martinez | Jan 1993 | A |
5177767 | Kato | Jan 1993 | A |
5179722 | Gunmar et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5203012 | Patsiokas et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5225902 | McMullan, Jr. | Jul 1993 | A |
5239676 | Strawczynski et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5247701 | Comroe et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5260974 | Johnson et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5271036 | Lobert et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5276908 | Koohgoli et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5325088 | Willard et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5375123 | Andersson et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5402523 | Berg | Mar 1995 | A |
5410737 | Jones | Apr 1995 | A |
5412658 | Arnold et al. | May 1995 | A |
5422912 | Asser et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5422930 | McDonald et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5428819 | Wang et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5448753 | Ahl et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5475868 | Duque-Anton et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5497505 | Koohgoli et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5502688 | Recchione et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5511233 | Otten | Apr 1996 | A |
5548809 | Lemson | Aug 1996 | A |
5553081 | Downey et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5585850 | Schwaller | Dec 1996 | A |
5608727 | Perreault et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5655217 | Lemson | Aug 1997 | A |
5668747 | Ohashi | Sep 1997 | A |
5748678 | Valentine et al. | May 1998 | A |
5752164 | Jones | May 1998 | A |
5794151 | McDonald et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5822686 | Lundberg et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828948 | Almgren et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5850605 | Souissi et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5862487 | Fujii et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5884181 | Arnold et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889821 | Arnstein et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5939887 | Schmidt et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5943622 | Yamashita | Aug 1999 | A |
5960351 | Przelomiec | Sep 1999 | A |
5999561 | Naden et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6011970 | McCarthy | Jan 2000 | A |
6044090 | Grau et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047175 | Trompower | Apr 2000 | A |
6049707 | Buer et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6049717 | Dufour et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6141557 | Dipiazza | Oct 2000 | A |
6147553 | Kolanek | Nov 2000 | A |
6154501 | Friedman | Nov 2000 | A |
6157811 | Dent | Dec 2000 | A |
6178328 | Tang et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6188873 | Wickman et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6208858 | Antonio et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6240274 | Izadpanah | May 2001 | B1 |
6269331 | Alanara et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6295289 | Ionescu et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6304140 | Thron et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6356555 | Rakib et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6380879 | Kober et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6522885 | Tang et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526264 | Sugar et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6529715 | Kitko et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6570444 | Wright | May 2003 | B2 |
6597301 | Cerra | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6606593 | Jarvinen et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6615040 | Benveniste | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6625111 | Sudo | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6671503 | Niwamoto | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6675012 | Gray | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6687492 | Sugar et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6690746 | Sills et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6697436 | Wright et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6700450 | Rogers | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6714605 | Sugar et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6714780 | Antonio et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6728517 | Sugar et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6771957 | Chitrapu | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6785520 | Sugar et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6792268 | Benveniste et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6799020 | Heidmann et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6816832 | Alanara et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6847678 | Berezdivin et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6850735 | Sugar et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6850764 | Patel | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6862456 | Sugar et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6904269 | Deshpande et al. | Jun 2005 | B1 |
6941110 | Kloper et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6952563 | Brown et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6959178 | Macedo et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6965762 | Sugar et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6990087 | Rao et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
6993440 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7013345 | Brown et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7035593 | Miller et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7054625 | Kawasaki et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7058383 | Sugar et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7089014 | Brown et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7227974 | Kamijo et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7260156 | Krupezevic et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7269151 | Diener et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7313393 | Chitrapu | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7342876 | Bellur et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7424268 | Diener et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7428270 | Dubuc et al. | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7457295 | Saunders et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7463952 | Bidou et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7483700 | Buchwald et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7532857 | Simon | May 2009 | B2 |
7564816 | McHenry et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7610036 | Teo et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7613148 | Hong et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7742764 | Gillig et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7826839 | Nicholas | Nov 2010 | B1 |
20010013834 | Yamazaki | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010046843 | Alanara et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020002052 | McHenry | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020196842 | Onggosanusi et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030027577 | Brown et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030081628 | Sugar et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030099218 | Tillotson | May 2003 | A1 |
20030165187 | Tesfai et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030181173 | Sugar et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030181211 | Razavilar et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030181213 | Sugar et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030198200 | Diener et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030203743 | Sugar et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040017268 | Rogers | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040023674 | Miller et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040047324 | Diener | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040072546 | Sugar et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040121753 | Sugar et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040136466 | Tesfai et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040142696 | Saunders et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040203474 | Miller et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050070294 | Lyle et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050119006 | Cave et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050192011 | Hong et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050213580 | Mayer et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050213763 | Owen et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050270218 | Chiodini | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060075467 | Sanda et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060211395 | Waltho | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060220944 | Ikeda | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060234716 | Vesterinen et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060246836 | Simon | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070008875 | Gerhardt et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019603 | Gerhardt et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070046467 | Chakraborty et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070053410 | Mahonen et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070076745 | Manjeshwar et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070091998 | Woo et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070100922 | Ashish | May 2007 | A1 |
20070165664 | Gerhardt et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070165695 | Gerhardt et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070183338 | Singh et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070253394 | Horiguchi et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080010040 | McGehee | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080014880 | Hyon et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080031143 | Ostrosky | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080069079 | Jacobs | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080228446 | Baraniuk et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080261537 | Chen | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080267259 | Budampati et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080284648 | Takada et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090074033 | Kattwinkel | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090161610 | Kang et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090190508 | Kattwinkel | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090252178 | Huttunen et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100008312 | Viswanath | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100220618 | Kwon et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100296078 | Forrer et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110051645 | Hong et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1220499 | Jul 2002 | EP |
2260879 | Apr 1993 | GB |
WO 2004054280 | Jun 2004 | WO |
WO 2006-101489 | Sep 2006 | WO |
WO 2007-034461 | Mar 2007 | WO |
WO 2007058490 | May 2007 | WO |
WO 2007094604 | Aug 2007 | WO |
WO 2007096819 | Aug 2007 | WO |
WO 2007108963 | Sep 2007 | WO |
WO 2007108966 | Sep 2007 | WO |
WO 2007109169 | Sep 2007 | WO |
WO 2007109170 | Sep 2007 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Ditri “Dynamic spectrum access moves to the forefront” (2008). |
McHenry “XG DSA Radio System” 2008, pp. 1-10. |
Perich “Experimental Field Test Results on Feasibility of Declarative Spectrum Management” 3rd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2008). |
Tenhula “Update on XG and Follow-on Programs: Cognitive Radio for Tactical and Public Safety Communications” (2008). |
Tenhula “Spectrum Access Control for Public Safety Cognitive Radio Systems” (2008). |
Erpek “Location-based Propagation Modeling for Opportunistic Spectrum Access in Wireless Networks” (2007). |
Perich “Policy-Based Network Management for NeXt Generation Spectrum Access Control” 2nd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2007). |
Seelig “A Description of the Aug. 2006 XG Demonstrations at Fort A.P. Hill 2nd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks” (2007). |
SSC Products 2009. |
SSC Press Release “Shared Spectrum Company to Demonstrate XG Radio Technology at IEEE Dyspan Conference” (2007). |
SSC “Shared Spectrum Company to Introduce Dynamic Spectrum Access Technology at Wimax Conference” (2007). |
SSC “Thales Communications and Shared Spectrum Company Team to Add Dynamic Spectrum Access Technology to Military Radios” (2007). |
Steadman “Dynamic Spectrum Sharing Detectors” 2nd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2007). |
Zeng “Maximum-Minimum Eigenvalue Detection for Cognitive Radio” Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications EEE 18th International Symposium on pp. 1-5, 2007. |
Adaptive Spectrum Technology: Findings From the DARPA XG Project (2007). |
McHenry “XG dynamic spectrum access field test results [Topics in Radio Communications” Communications Magazine IEEE. vol. 45: 6 (2007). |
McHenry “Creation of a Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test-Bed and The President's Spectrum Policy Initiative Spectrum Sharing Innovation Test-Bed” (2006). |
SSC “Shared Spectrum Company Successfully Demonstrates neXt Generation (XG) Wireless Communications System” (2006). |
Tenhula “Shared Spectrum Company Successfully Demonstrates Next Generation (XG) Wireless System” (2006). |
Anticipated XG VIP Demo Invitees (2006). |
Tenhula, Dynamic Spectrum Sharing Bid Lease & MVNO/MVNE: Spectrum Options For Operators (2006). |
Tenhula, Secondary Markets & Spectrum Leasing UTC Telecom 2006 Tampa FL, May 23, 2006. |
XG Dynamic Spectrum Experiments Findings and Plans Panel (2006). |
Zheng “Device-centric spectrum management New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks” (2005) “DySPAN 2005” 2005 First IEEE International Symposium on pp. 56-65, (2005). |
Ackland “High Performance Cognitive Radio Platform with Integrated Physical and Network Layer Capabilities” Network Centric Cognitive Radio (2005). |
Leu “Ultra sensitive TV detector measurements” New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2005). |
McHenry “The probe spectrum access method” New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2005). “DySPAN 2005” First IEEE International Symposium on 2005, pp. 346-351 (2005). |
Next Generation (XG) Architecture and Protocol Development (XAP) (2005). |
Steenstrup “Channel Selection among Frequency-Agile Nodes in Multihop Wireless Networks” (2005). |
Zhao “Distributed coordination in dynamic spectrum allocation networks” New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (2005). “DySPAN 2005” First IEEE International Symposium, pp. 259-268 (2005). |
Dynamic Spectrum Sharing Presentation 2005. |
Supplementary European Search Report in the European Application No. 01 94 5944 dated Apr. 24, 2009. |
PCT Office Communication in the PCT application No. PCT/US2008/073193 dated Jun. 2, 2009. |
Cabric et al. “Implementation issues in spectrum sensing for cognitive radios” Signals Systems and Computers, 2004. Conference record of the 38th Asilomar Conference on Pacific Grove, CA, USA, Nov. 7-10, 2004, NJ, USA, vol. 1, pp. 772-776, sections I-IV, Nov. 7, 2004. |
Ning Han et al., “Spectral correlation based on signal detection method for spectrum sensing in IEEE 802.22 WRAN systems” Advanced Communication Technology, 2006. ICACT 2006. The 8th International Conference, vol. 3, Feb. 20-22, 2006, NJ, USA, pp. 1765-1770. |
Falconer, D. et al., “Frequency Domain Equalization for Single-Carrier Broadband Wireless Systems”, IEEE Communications Magazine (Apr. 2002). |
Rohde, U. L. et al., “RF/Microwave Circuit Design for Wireless Applications”, published by Wiley-Interscience (Mar. 2000). |
The International Search Report, mailed Mar. 25, 2005, in related International Application No. PCT/US04/17883, filed Jun. 9, 2004. |
The International Search Report mailed Oct. 6, 2008, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US07/22356, filed Oct. 19, 2007. |
The International Search Report mailed Feb. 8, 2002, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US01/14853. |
The International Search Report mailed Mar. 18, 2008, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US07/11414. |
The International Search Report mailed Sep. 28, 2009, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US08/073194. |
The International Search Report mailed Feb. 14, 2008, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US07/21940. |
Zhou et al., “Detection timing and channel selection for periodic spectrum sensing in cognitive radio”, 2008 IEEE, p. 1-5. |
Mahbubani et al., “Dynamic channel allocation in wireless ad-hoc networks” pp. 1-12. |
Project: IEEE P802.15 working group for wireless personal area networks (WPANs), pp. 1-25. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60211215 | Jun 2000 | US | |
60264265 | Jan 2001 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09877087 | Jun 2001 | US |
Child | 12944796 | US |