CATT · 9.1.2

CATT proposes that timing information for a channel measurement be associated with only one quality indicator to reduce overhead, and that LMF provide quality thresholds to filter low-quality training samples. They support sample-based measurements for cases 2b and 3b, specifying candidate values for Nt' (9, 16, 24) and k (0-5), and prefer supporting phase measurement reporting subject to capability. CATT argues against reporting legacy LOS/NLOS indicators when timing is derived from AI/ML, deeming them misleading. For performance monitoring, they support label-based options A-1, A-2, and B-1, and propose that UE report monitoring outcomes including metrics and LCM decisions upon LMF request or condition satisfaction. Finally, they propose using associated IDs to implicitly handle TRP geographical coordinates for consistency and privacy.

CATT strongly advocates FOR sample-based channel measurements over path-based measurements due to superior AI/ML performance and reduced ambiguity, unified starting time across multiple TRPs using configured/predefined offsets rather than implementation-dependent methods, and treating AI/ML positioning as an independent method requiring specialized assistance information. They push AGAINST separate quality indicators for different measurement components and unnecessary LOS/NLOS reporting when AI/ML derives timing information.