R1-2601830
discussion
On remaining aspects of energy efficiency evaluations
From Nokia
Nokia's prior position on
10.4
at
RAN1#124
· AI-synthesized, paraphrased
verify sources →
Proposes adopting the 5G BS power consumption model (TR38.864 Category 2) as the 6G baseline while defining a new Category 2-plus category with 10-20% relative power improvements across sleep and active states, plus faster transition times (light sleep 640ms→100ms, deep sleep 10s→5s) with common deep sleep normalization to enable meaningful 5G/6G comparison. Proposes reusing the 5G scaling framework where only active-state dynamic power scales while static power remains fixed at P3 or 1.5*P3. For UE power saving, proposes supporting two adaptation delay values with T in {≥1ms, ≤5ms} and omitting adaptation interruption in TDD, and presents scaling factors for PDCCH+PDSCH, PDCCH-only, and micro-sleep slots across bandwidth utilization ratios from 5% to 400%. Requires CFO inaccuracy of ~1ppm for WUS reception assuming SSS availability, arguing that 5ppm would impair coherent combining, and restricts WUS RX chains to 1 during ultra-deep/deep sleep states. For idle-mode WUS design, argues the number of monitoring occasions (MOs) must be optimized as a function of subgroups to mitigate false wake-up probability.
Summary
This Nokia Tdoc presents 17 proposals and 16 observations on 6G energy efficiency evaluation assumptions across BS power consumption models (CAT 2.1 parameters, SBFD modeling, antenna adaptation), UE power consumption model updates (scaling bounds for micro/light sleep, channel-specific scaling factors), and WUS power model (CFO accuracy).
Position
Nokia proposes that single baseband components can handle Set 4's 256 Tx/Rx RUs in practice, supporting CAT 2.1 transition times identical to Sets 1-3 (2s deep sleep, 100ms light sleep) with higher transition energies (6300/210). They require the 6G BS CAT 2.1 and 5G BS CAT 2 to share a common deep sleep absolute power normalization level for meaningful comparison. For spatial domain antenna adaptation, Nokia proposes focusing only on data channels for RRC-connected UEs, opposes introducing new power states, and argues against scaling P_static based on Tx/Rx RU count. They present a technical case for SBFD BS power being modeled as the sum of a full TDD BS plus a second dedicated UL reception component requiring double hardware except PAs and TDD switches. On UE power, they oppose applying bandwidth/RX scaling to light sleep, propose lower-bounding micro-sleep at 30 power units, and recommend specific scaling factors for SSB (0.85 for single SSB) and PDCCH BD candidate reduction (0.9). For WUS, they propose reducing assumed CFO inaccuracy from 5ppm to ~1ppm based on SSS availability.
Key proposals
- Proposal 1 (Sec 2.1): Values of transition time for Set 4 with CAT 2.1 should be the same as the other Set 1,2 and 3, where the transition time for deep sleep is 2s and for light sleep is 100ms.
- Proposal 3 (Sec 2.1): RAN1 agree on or to conclude that the relative power values for CAT 2.1 are the same as CAT 2 for all reference configuration sets.
- Proposal 4 (Sec 2.3): Spatial domain adaptation shall focus on the data channel similar as Rel18 NES and mainly focus on the UE in RRC connected state.
- Proposal 5 (Sec 2.3): No new Power State is needed for 6G BS power model, since there is no dedicated low power module (that separate module from MR) is foreseen for 6G BS hardware.
- Proposal 6 (Sec 2.3): Set 1 is used for sub-6 GHz spectrum of FR1 in 6GR SI.
- Proposal 8 (Sec 2.3): The 5G BS power consumption scaling method shall be reused as a starting point for 6G BS power model...
- Proposal 9 (Sec 3): The SBFD BS power consumption can be modelled as P_total = P_static,SBFD + P_dynamic,DL,TDD + P_dynamic,UL,TDD + P_SIC_new...
- Proposal 10 (Sec 4.1): Do not apply scaling to light sleep.
- Proposal 11 (Sec 4.1): Limit (lower bound) the micro-sleep value to 30 units when scaling is applied.
- Proposal 13 (Sec 4.1): For SSB scaling, for one SSB only, it is proposed to assume scaling factor of 0.85.
- Proposal 14 (Sec 4.1): For power scaling for PDCCH BD candidate reduction, it is proposed to assume scaling factor of 0.9.
- Proposal 15 (Sec 4.2): For VoIP traffic, assume activity based on VoIP model in both link directions, DL and UL.
- Proposal 16 (Sec 4.2): For XR traffic, it is proposed to assume that UE has a periodic UL activity at [5ms or 10ms] periodicity or aligned with C-DRX cycle.
- Proposal 17 (Sec 5): RAN1 should consider CFO inaccuracy of ~1ppm assuming the availability of SSS or other synchronization signals before WUS reception.
- Proposal 7 (Sec 2.3): No scaling of P_static based on the number of Tx/Rx RUs for both DL and UL.