R1-2508359
discussion
Modulation for 6GR air interface
From Ericsson
Summary
Ericsson presents 12 observations and 10 proposals on 6G modulation, advocating for 5G NR uniform QAM as the baseline. They provide link-level simulation results comparing PSCM and ATSC 3.0 NUC, highlighting that ATSC 3.0 2D-NUC shows consistent non-negative gains (0.2–0.9 dB) while PSCM exhibits sensitivity to fading channels and MIMO layers (−2.5 to +1 dB). They propose immediate calibration of simulation settings and request RAN4 input on high-order UL modulation power backoff.
Position
Ericsson proposes adopting 5G NR uniform QAM constellation as the baseline 6G modulation scheme and requires high-level decisions on supporting 5G modulation schemes at the early phase of Release 20. They present simulation evidence that ATSC 3.0 2D-NUC with modulation order 8 provides non-negative shaping gain (0.2–0.9 dB) while PSCM shows varied gain/loss (−2.5 to +1 dB) optimized for AWGN, arguing PSCM is sensitive to fading channels, closed loop MIMO implementation, and the number of transceivers. They propose multi-company calibration of closed-loop MIMO settings, PSCM shaping factor, and ATSC 3.0 2D-NUC results before drawing conclusions. For high-order modulation, Ericsson requests sending an LS to RAN4 for device-side power backoff assumptions on 1024 QAM in UL, citing calculated MPR of 10.22 dB for DFT-s-OFDM and 13.00 dB for CP-OFDM.
Key proposals
- Proposal 1 (Sec 2.1): Support 5G NR uniform QAM constellation as the basis modulation scheme for 6G.
- Proposal 4 (Sec 2.1): High level decisions on supporting 5G modulation schemes for 6G shall be made at the early phase of Release 20.
- Proposal 5 (Sec 2.1): High level decisions on new modulation schemes beyond 5G technology shall be made as early as possible in Release 20 after extensive evaluation results are available.
- Proposal 6 (Sec 2.2.3.2): MIMO settings with close loop MIMO shall be calibrated for comparing the baseline performance of NR 256 QAM.
- Proposal 7 (Sec 2.2.3.2): The PSCM shaping factor optimized for AWGN channel shall be calibrated across different companies with regard to a particular spectrum efficiency and RB allocations.
- Proposal 8 (Sec 2.2.3.2): Performance of PSCM in AWGN channel for 1T1R, TDL-A n30 channel for 1T1R and 4T4R, and CDL-B channel for 32T4R, based on optimized shaping factor for AWGN channel shall be calibrated across different companies.
- Proposal 9 (Sec 2.2.3.2): Results based on ATSC 3.0 with 2D-NUC and 256 QAM for SU-MIMO shall be calibrated across different companies.
- Proposal 10 (Sec 2.4.1): For study of 1024 QAM in UL, send an LS to RAN4 to request input on assumptions on the device side for power backoff requirement.
- Proposal 2 (Sec 2.1): Support at least QPSK, 16 QAM, 64 QAM and 256 QAM for uplink.
- Proposal 3 (Sec 2.1): Support at least QPSK, 16 QAM, 64 QAM, 256 QAM and 1024 QAM for downlink.
Revision chain
1 versions in this meeting · oldest first
-
R1-2508359 ← you are here discussion revised