IncMon for UTRA and EUTRA – ‘k’ vs scale factor trade-off

2. May 19th - May 23rd, 2014 – Seoul, S. Korea IncMon for UTRA and EUTRA – ‘k’ vs scale factor trade-off

3. Agreements Key Agreements So Far • Performance requirements for increased carrier monitoring are divided into two performance groups, i.e. Option 4 or (Option 4 + Option 5) • Normal performance group and Low performance group. • Different performance requirements are to be defined by RAN4 for the normal performance group carriers and the low performance group carriers • UTRA Idle / Cell PCH/ URA PCH/E-UTRA idle state • Evaluate Option 4, and, (Option 4 + Option 5) combined • UTRA Cell FACH State • Evaluate Option 4, and, (Option 4 + Option 5) combined • UTRA Cell DCH State/E-UTRA RRC connected • Option 4 chosen

4. Options considered for evaluation (For LTE, DCH can be replaced with RRC connected,k=3) • Option A: • Configurable number of carriers ‘k’ in the normal performance group i.e. UTRAN signals ‘k’ • Performance in normal performance group and low performance group will be determined by a fixed ratio i.e. fixand • Option B: • Configurable performance ratio between normal and low performance groups • i.e. UTRAN signalsand • Max number of carriers ‘k’ in the normal performance group is the legacy max carriers i.e. Fix k=2 • Option C • Max number of carriers ‘k’ in the normal performance group is the legacy max carriers i.e. Fix k=2 • Performance in normal performance group and low performance group will be determined by a fixed ratio i.e. fixand • Option D • Configurable number of carriers ‘k’ in the normal performance group i.e. UTRAN signals ‘k’ • Configurable performance ratio between normal and low performance groups • i.e. UTRAN signalsand

5. Analysis

6. Idle Mode Inter-Freq Measurements • If Ninter_freq_carriers≤ k, keep existing inter-freq requirements as is • If Ninter_freq_carriers> k, • Normal Performance Group: Existing requirements shall be a function of ‘k’ for first ‘k’ inter-frequencies, and, • Low Performance Group: Scale reqt for additional (Ninter_freq_carrier-k) inter-frequencies by 6.25%increase in UE current consumption with s=8 10%increase in UE current consumption with s=5 k

7. Idle Mode Inter-Freq Measurements • Cell Identification delay of low performance carriers increases as increases • Cell Identification delay of normal performance carriers is unaffected by Cell Identification Delay of low perf group (seconds)

8. Idle Mode Inter-Freq Measurements • UE current consumption decreases as increases • Higher results in larger reselection delay for low performance carriers • Choose sidle>=5 to ensure at most 10% increase in current consumption

9. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-Freq Measurements • IfNinter_freq_carriers≤ k, keep existing inter-freq requirements as is • If Ninter_freq_carriers> k, • Normal Performance Group: Existing requirements shall be a function of ‘k’ and reqtsfor first ‘k’ inter-frequencies shall be scaled by • Low Performance Group: Reqts for additional (Ninter_freq_carrier- k) inter-frequencies scaled by

10. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-Freq Measurements Cell Identification Delay vs ‘k’ for various sDCH • For normal performance group, delay increases with ‘k’ • k=2 is legacy UE setting; • Rel-12 UE will perform worse than legacy UE for k=3,4,5 on normal performance group Normal Performance Group Cell Identification Delay (ms) Low Performance Group 'k' (Number of freq in normal group)

11. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-Freq Measurements Cell Identification Delay vs ‘k’ for various sDCH • For normal performance group, for a fixed ‘k’, delay increases as sDCH decreases (inversely proportional) • For low performance group, for a fixed ‘k’, delay decreases as sDCH decreases (directly proportional) Normal Performance Group Cell Identification Delay (ms) Low Performance Group 'k' (Numberof freq in normal group)

12. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-Freq Measurements Cell Identification Delay vs sDCHfor k=2 • For k=2, sDCH>=1.7 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perf group Cell Identification Delay (ms)

13. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-FreqMeasurements Cell Identification Delay vs sDCHfor k=3 • For k=3, sDCH>=3 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perfgroup Cell Identification Delay (ms)

14. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-Freq Measurements Cell Identification Delay vs sDCHfor k=4 • For k=4, sDCH>=5 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perfgroup Cell Identification Delay (ms)

15. Cell_DCH/Cell_FACHInter-FreqMeasurements Cell Identification Delay vs sDCHfor k=5 • For k=5, no need for sDCHsince there are no carriers in low performance group Cell Identification Delay (ms)

16. Observations on allowed ‘k’ and ‘s’ combinations • Lower bound on sidleand sDCH • Idle Mode • For all ‘k’, choose sidle>=5 to ensure at most 10% increase in current consumption • Cell_DCH/Cell_FACH • For k=2, choose sDCH>=1.7 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perf group • For k=3, choose sDCH>=3 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perf group • For k=4, choose sDCH>=5 to ensure low perf group has relaxed performance compared to normal perf group • For k=5, no need for sDCHsince there are no carriers in low performance group • Upper bound on sidle and sDCH • Depends on maximum tolerable reselection delay on low performance group • Operator input needed

17. Conclusion • Option D is preferable in general based on observations outlined in previous slides • Performance trade-off between reselection delay of normal and low performance group for CELL_DCH and CELL_FACH • Can fallback to either option ‘A’ or option ‘B’ depending on network configuration preference • Gives networks flexibility to configure ‘k’ and ‘s’ to optimize UE/system performance • Note: Rel-12 UE will perform worse than legacy UE for k=3,4,5 carriers in normal performance group

18. EUTRA • Same trends are expected for EUTRA • Similar conclusions can be made for EUTRA as well