1 / 10

Jose Costa Chairman, Canadian Evaluation Group (CEG) Tel.: +1 613 763-7574 FAX: +1 613 765-1225

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Radio Transmission Technologies (RTTs) for IMT-2000 (Overview of Recommendation ITU-R M.1225). Jose Costa Chairman, Canadian Evaluation Group (CEG) Tel.: +1 613 763-7574 FAX: +1 613 765-1225 E-mail: costa@nortel.ca. Scope of the Recommendation.

rubytaylor
Download Presentation

Jose Costa Chairman, Canadian Evaluation Group (CEG) Tel.: +1 613 763-7574 FAX: +1 613 765-1225

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Guidelines for the Evaluation of Radio Transmission Technologies (RTTs) for IMT-2000(Overview of Recommendation ITU-R M.1225) Jose Costa Chairman, Canadian Evaluation Group (CEG) Tel.: +1 613 763-7574 FAX: +1 613 765-1225 E-mail: costa@nortel.ca

  2. Scope of the Recommendation • Radio transmission technology (RTT) considerations • Technical evaluation criteria and attributes • Test environments • Evaluation procedure • Summary evaluation methodology • RTT description template • Detailed evaluation procedures

  3. RTT Considerations Radio transmission technologies (RTTs) Multiple Physical channel Frame Duplexing RF-channel Modulation access definition and multiplexing structure technology parameters technology technology Synchronization requirements Spectrum efficiency requirements Source coder Channel coding Interworking

  4. Criteria for evaluation • Spectrum efficiency* • Technology complexity – Effect on cost of installation and operation • Quality • Flexibility of radio technologies • Implication on network interfaces • Handportable performance optimization capability • Coverage/power efficiency* *Objective Criteria

  5. Test Environments • Indoor Office • Outdoor to indoor and pedestrian • Vehicular • Mixed-cell pedestrian/vehicular • Satellite

  6. Step 1 Annex 1 Evaluation procedure Submission of candidate set of Radio transmission technologies radio transmission technologies description template Annex 2 Step 2 Test environments and Comparison with requirements deployment models and objectives Recs. ITU-R M.687, ITU-R M.816, ITU-R M.819, ITU-R M.1079 and ITU-T Rec. G.174 Intellectual property rights Step 3 policy of ITU Preliminary verification of technologies Section 6 Evaluation criteria Annex 3 Step 4 Detailed evaluation procedures Evaluation of set of radio transmission technologies for one Section 9 or more test environments Evaluation methodology Annex 2 Test environments and deployment models Step 5 Modification Step 6 Rec. ITU-R M.1035 Synthesis and grouping Step 7 Evaluation report

  7. Summary Evaluation Methodology • An evaluation summary is required from each evaluation group, but Rec. M.1225 does not specify any methodology to determine evaluation summaries. • The evaluation summary methodology may be numerical (e.g., using weights and scores) or non-numerical (e.g., using performance classifications). • Each evaluation group can define each own methodology.

  8. RTT Description Template

  9. Detailed Evaluation Procedures

  10. Canadian Evaluation Group (CEG) Approach Considering that • most RTTs already will come with a self-evaluation (i.e., a “vertical” evaluation); • Rec. M.1225 states that the procedure evaluates the candidate SRTTs as a whole as it is difficult to evaluate transmission technologies independently of each other; • time and resources are limited (1 July - September 1998). Resolves that • the CEG will perform “horizontal” evaluations, that is for each evaluation criteria/attribute the various proposals will be compared and evaluated; • priority will be given to the most significant evaluation criteria/attributes and the results will be summarized.

More Related