改进频谱共享干扰标准:对测量的关键需求的调查

A. Clegg, Sarah A. Seguin, C. Baylis, Austin Egbert, R. Marks
{"title":"改进频谱共享干扰标准:对测量的关键需求的调查","authors":"A. Clegg, Sarah A. Seguin, C. Baylis, Austin Egbert, R. Marks","doi":"10.1109/EMCSI39492.2022.9889673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As radio spectrum becomes more congested and more valuable, an increasing number of potential conflicts is occurring between or among disparate systems and services. Such potential conflicts can be related to systems sharing the same band or even the same channel. Because of unwanted emissions (which include out-of-band emissions and spurious emissions), potential conflicts can arise in immediately adjacent bands, and even bands that are far removed from the operating frequencies of the potentially interfering system. We refer to these issues as potential conflicts, because whether a conflict does or does not exist in reality is often far from clear. Such claims are typically based on paper studies that combine interference criteria for a particular service, propagation models, deployment models, usage assumptions, and other factors. The inputs, assumptions, and even the applicability of any or all of these specific factors are debatable, with the potential interferer relying on liberal interpretations, and the potential victim assuming conservative parameters. In the end, often the potential interfering operator concludes with certainty that no harmful interference will occur, and the potential victim operator concludes with certainty that harmful interference will occur. The regulator, which is often understaffed with appropriate resources to perform its own detailed technical analyses, must make a judgment call, which is usually based on a combination of policy goals, politics, and the “loudest voice.” Sometimes that judgment call results in overly restrictive requirements that causes inefficient spectrum use, or policies that may in fact lead to harmful interference in actual deployments. In this paper, we make an argument that the current situation could be significantly improved if one or more independent third-party “co-existence labs” were established that can help provide neutral input to regulators on the compatibility between various systems and services in the radio spectrum.","PeriodicalId":250856,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility & Signal/Power Integrity (EMCSI)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving Spectrum Sharing Interference Criteria: A Survey of a Critical Need for Measurements\",\"authors\":\"A. Clegg, Sarah A. Seguin, C. Baylis, Austin Egbert, R. Marks\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/EMCSI39492.2022.9889673\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As radio spectrum becomes more congested and more valuable, an increasing number of potential conflicts is occurring between or among disparate systems and services. Such potential conflicts can be related to systems sharing the same band or even the same channel. Because of unwanted emissions (which include out-of-band emissions and spurious emissions), potential conflicts can arise in immediately adjacent bands, and even bands that are far removed from the operating frequencies of the potentially interfering system. We refer to these issues as potential conflicts, because whether a conflict does or does not exist in reality is often far from clear. Such claims are typically based on paper studies that combine interference criteria for a particular service, propagation models, deployment models, usage assumptions, and other factors. The inputs, assumptions, and even the applicability of any or all of these specific factors are debatable, with the potential interferer relying on liberal interpretations, and the potential victim assuming conservative parameters. In the end, often the potential interfering operator concludes with certainty that no harmful interference will occur, and the potential victim operator concludes with certainty that harmful interference will occur. The regulator, which is often understaffed with appropriate resources to perform its own detailed technical analyses, must make a judgment call, which is usually based on a combination of policy goals, politics, and the “loudest voice.” Sometimes that judgment call results in overly restrictive requirements that causes inefficient spectrum use, or policies that may in fact lead to harmful interference in actual deployments. In this paper, we make an argument that the current situation could be significantly improved if one or more independent third-party “co-existence labs” were established that can help provide neutral input to regulators on the compatibility between various systems and services in the radio spectrum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":250856,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility & Signal/Power Integrity (EMCSI)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility & Signal/Power Integrity (EMCSI)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMCSI39492.2022.9889673\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility & Signal/Power Integrity (EMCSI)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMCSI39492.2022.9889673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

随着无线电频谱变得越来越拥挤和越来越有价值,越来越多的潜在冲突正在不同系统和服务之间或之间发生。这种潜在的冲突可能与共享相同频带甚至相同信道的系统有关。由于不需要的发射(包括带外发射和杂散发射),潜在的冲突可能出现在紧邻的频段,甚至是远离潜在干扰系统的工作频率的频段。我们将这些问题称为潜在冲突,因为现实中是否存在冲突往往远不清楚。此类声明通常基于结合了特定服务的干扰标准、传播模型、部署模型、使用假设和其他因素的论文研究。输入,假设,甚至任何或所有这些特定因素的适用性都是有争议的,潜在的干扰依赖于自由的解释,而潜在的受害者假设保守的参数。最后,往往潜在的干扰者肯定不会发生有害干扰,而潜在的受害者肯定会发生有害干扰。监管机构往往人手不足,没有适当的资源来进行自己的详细技术分析,它必须做出判断,这通常是基于政策目标、政治和“最响亮的声音”的综合考虑。有时,这种判断调用会导致过于严格的需求,从而导致频谱使用效率低下,或者在实际部署中实际上可能导致有害干扰的策略。在本文中,我们提出了一个论点,即如果建立一个或多个独立的第三方“共存实验室”,可以帮助向监管机构提供关于无线电频谱中各种系统和服务之间兼容性的中立输入,那么目前的情况可以得到显著改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Improving Spectrum Sharing Interference Criteria: A Survey of a Critical Need for Measurements
As radio spectrum becomes more congested and more valuable, an increasing number of potential conflicts is occurring between or among disparate systems and services. Such potential conflicts can be related to systems sharing the same band or even the same channel. Because of unwanted emissions (which include out-of-band emissions and spurious emissions), potential conflicts can arise in immediately adjacent bands, and even bands that are far removed from the operating frequencies of the potentially interfering system. We refer to these issues as potential conflicts, because whether a conflict does or does not exist in reality is often far from clear. Such claims are typically based on paper studies that combine interference criteria for a particular service, propagation models, deployment models, usage assumptions, and other factors. The inputs, assumptions, and even the applicability of any or all of these specific factors are debatable, with the potential interferer relying on liberal interpretations, and the potential victim assuming conservative parameters. In the end, often the potential interfering operator concludes with certainty that no harmful interference will occur, and the potential victim operator concludes with certainty that harmful interference will occur. The regulator, which is often understaffed with appropriate resources to perform its own detailed technical analyses, must make a judgment call, which is usually based on a combination of policy goals, politics, and the “loudest voice.” Sometimes that judgment call results in overly restrictive requirements that causes inefficient spectrum use, or policies that may in fact lead to harmful interference in actual deployments. In this paper, we make an argument that the current situation could be significantly improved if one or more independent third-party “co-existence labs” were established that can help provide neutral input to regulators on the compatibility between various systems and services in the radio spectrum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Advanced Chip Interposer with Micro-Bump Duality SOC Level Mitigations of RFI to WI-FI Bands from GDDR6 Clocks Automatic SPICE- Integrated Reinforcement Learning for Decap Optimization for EMI and Power Integrity HFSS Simulation Predicts the Radiated Emission from Complex Cable Harness Configuration A Segmentation Strategy for Structures with Common Mode Coupling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1