RAN1 / #124bis / FS_6G_Radio / Verify

Spreadtrum · 10.5.2.1

Downlink transmission scheme(s) for downlink control channels · RAN1#124bis · Source verification
the AI's delta shifted vs RAN1#124
Spreadtrum hardened its monitoring simplification from requires a unified framework to an explicit hard position: supports only slot-based monitoring capability while opposing span-based and slot-group-based monitoring, and requires defining upper limits on monitored PDCCH candidates and non-overlapped CCEs per slot applied to all device types. A new specificity added: REG must consist of one RB in one OFDM symbol to avoid resource fragmentation. The QPSK position now explicitly permits higher-order modulations only for 2nd-stage DCI in a two-stage DCI structure, whereas the prior meeting had no modulation restriction linked to DCI stages. New proposals added: transparent MU-MIMO via overlapping CORESET resources with different DMRS scrambling IDs, PDCCH repetition for reliability enhancement, and transparent or non-transparent time-frequency resource sharing between 5G and 6G CORESETs for MRSS coexistence. Dropped: the explicit preference for one-port precoder-cycling between REG bundles over SFBC, and the proposal for a harmonized PDCCH monitoring adaptation mechanism to replace NR's overlapping functionalities (PDCCH skipping, SSSG switching, DCI format 2_6, PEI, LP-WUS).
AI-synthesized from contributions · all text is paraphrased
Every position summary on this site is generated by an AI from the actual Tdoc contributions. This page shows you the exact source documents the AI read to produce the summary above, so you can verify it yourself. Click any Tdoc ID to view its detail page, or click "3gpp.org ↗" to read the original on the official 3GPP server.

Contributions at RAN1#124bis · 1 doc

R1-2601810 discussion not treated 3gpp.org ↗
Discussion on downlink transmission scheme(s) for downlink control channels
Position extracted by AI
Spreadtrum proposes largely inheriting the NR PDCCH structure (CORESET, CCE, REG, REG bundles, hash functions) as the baseline for 6GR, requiring REG to consist of one RB in one OFDM symbol to avoid resource fragmentation. They require supporting only QPSK modulation for 1-stage DCI due to robustness and BD complexity concerns, while proposing further study of higher-order modulations only for 2nd-stage DCI in a 2-stage DCI structure. They propose studying longer CORESET durations beyond NR's 3-symbol limit to address capacity and coverage for IoT devices with narrow bandwidths, and support time-first REG indexing within CORESETs. Spreadtrum requires defining upper limits on monitored PDCCH candidates and non-overlapped CCEs per slot, applied to all device types, and supports only slot-based monitoring capability while rejecting span-based and slot-group-based monitoring to reduce implementation complexity. They propose transparent MU-MIMO transmission via overlapping CORESET resources with different DMRS scrambling IDs, and require studying PDCCH repetition for reliability enhancement as well as transparent or non-transparent time-frequency resource sharing between 5G and 6G CORESETs for MRSS coexistence.
Summary
This Spreadtrum contribution to the 3GPP 6G study item provides a comprehensive framework for the 6G-R (6GR) downlink control channel (PDCCH) design, largely reusing NR as a baseline. It contains 45 total proposals and 4 observations covering general PDCCH structure, transmission parameters, CORESET design, search space configuration, blind decoding limits, DMRS, transmission schemes, and multi-TRP operation.

Prior contributions at RAN1#124 · 1 doc · Feb 09, 2026

R1-2600115 discussion not treated 3gpp.org ↗
Discussion on downlink transmission scheme(s) for downlink control channels for 6GR
Position extracted by AI
Spreadtrum proposes inheriting NR PDCCH physical structure (CCE/REG/REG bundle framework, ALs 1/2/4/8/16, time-first REG mapping, hash-based search space) as baseline for 6GR. They prefer one port precoder-cycling between REG bundles for transmit diversity over SFBC, arguing comparable performance with simpler implementation. They propose studying longer CORESET duration (4/6/12 symbols) to address capacity in hotspot areas and coverage for narrow-bandwidth UEs. They require a unified framework for sub-slot/slot/slot group-level PDCCH monitoring to replace three separate monitoring capability types from NR, reducing UE and gNB implementation complexity. They propose studying a harmonized PDCCH monitoring adaptation mechanism, criticizing NR's overlapping functionalities (PDCCH skipping, SSSG switching, DCI format 2_6, PEI, LP-WUS) and suggesting alternatives like two-stage DCI or dynamic candidate indication by LP-WUS.
Summary
This document contains 78 proposals and 18 observations discussing 6GR PDCCH design, where Spreadtrum identifies NR limitations including insufficient CORESET duration (max 3 symbols), overlapping monitoring adaptation mechanisms, and three monitoring capability types increasing complexity, while proposing NR-based baseline with enhancements for coverage, simplified monitoring, and unified frameworks.
How this was derived
The AI extracted the "position extracted" field above directly from each Tdoc during summarization. For the delta summary at the top, the AI compared Spreadtrum's consolidated stance at RAN1#124bis against their stance at RAN1#124 and classified the change as shifted. Always verify critical claims against the original Tdocs linked above.