Improving Spectrum Sharing Interference Criteria: A Survey of a Critical Need for Measurements
Improving Spectrum Sharing Interference Criteria: A Survey of a Critical Need for Measurements
复制标题
改进频谱共享干扰标准：对测量的关键需求的调查
DOI：
10.1109/emcsi39492.2022.9889673
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Marks
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Clegg;Sarah A. Seguin;C. Baylis;Austin Egbert;R. Marks
随着无线电频谱变得更加拥挤和更有价值，在不同的系统和服务之间或在不同的系统和服务之间发生的潜在冲突越来越多。这种潜在的冲突可能与共享相同频段甚至相同通道的系统有关。由于不想要的发射(包括带外发射和杂散发射)，在紧邻的频段中可能会出现潜在的冲突，甚至在远离潜在干扰系统的工作频率的频段中也会出现潜在的冲突。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非明朗。这些主张通常基于论文研究，这些研究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。输入、假设，甚至所有这些特定因素的适用性都是有争议的，潜在的干扰者依赖自由的解释，潜在的受害者假设保守的参数。最后，通常，潜在干扰操作员肯定不会发生有害干扰，而潜在受害者操作员肯定会发生有害干扰。监管机构通常人手不足，没有适当的资源来执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”的组合。有时，这种判断会导致过于严格的要求，从而导致频谱使用效率低下，或者导致实际部署中的有害干扰。在本文中，我们认为，如果建立一个或多个独立的第三方“共存实验室”，帮助监管机构就无线电频谱中各种系统和服务之间的兼容性提供中立的意见，目前的情况可能会得到显著改善。
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.