Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Thread Links	Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Hello, Steve and Zinan

Agree with Steve….I prefer the following way of _expression_….and keep the original equation

Regards

Junghoon

From: Steve Shellhammer [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: July 29, 2022 4:12 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Hi Zinan,

The size of the field for gamma is 12 bits. But the value of gamma is not necessarily 12, it is the value of the 12-bit integer. So, I think the correct term is 12/8 = 1.5 octets.

Hopefully, that is clear.

Regards,

Steve

From: Zinan Lin <Zinan.Lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2022 12:50 PM
To: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Steve,

Thanks for your prompt response.

If 1.5 comes from 12/8, I think it is better to write equation E as (gamma is the scaling factor)

Thanks,

Zinan

From: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2022 2:19 PM
To: Zinan Lin <Zinan.Lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Dong, Rojan, and Zinan,

Thanks for the feedback. I switched toe the Alternative notation for Table B, and I added the reference to “k” as Zinan suggested.

I think this version looks good and I plan to post on Mentor later today.

Zinan,

To your question below, the number 1.5 comes from 12/8, since the scaling factor is 12 bits.

Regards,

Steve

From: Zinan Lin <000019c80da359b9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2022 7:26 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Hi Steve et al,

If Alternative notation is chosen, the meaning of “k” may need to be added in meaning of Table B

Steve, I have one question on Equation (E)

Does 1.5 in equation E come from scaling factor/8? If it is the case, do you think it is clearer to indicate as Scaling Factor/8? It is more general and consistent with other expressions, N_TX, N_RX, N_b and N_sc which symbols.

Thanks,
Zinan

From: stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Rojan Chitrakar
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 10:10 PM
To: Dong Wei <dong.wei@xxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Hi Steve,

Agree with Dong, I also prefer the alternative notation.

Best Regards,

Rojan

From: Dong Wei <dong.wei@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, 28 July 2022 5:50 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Hi Steve,

I prefer the Alternative notation.

Thanks and regards,

Dong

From: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 4:44 PM
To: Dong Wei <dong.wei@xxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Caution: EXT Email

Dong, et. al.,

Based on your comment I would like to ask you and others which of the following two notations do you prefer for Table B. Here is the Current Notation for a few rows and an Alternative notation for those rows.

What is people’s preference?

Regards,

Steve

------------------------

Current Notation for Table B

Field	Size (bits)	Meaning
Scaling Factor ()	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 1
Scaling Factor ()	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 2

Scaling Factor ()	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna

CSI ()		CSI for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 1
CSI ()		CSI for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 2

Alternative Notation for Table B

Field	Size (bits)	Meaning
	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 1
	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 2

	12	Scaling Factor for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna

		CSI for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 1
		CSI for Transmit Antenna 1 and Receive Antenna 2

From: Steve Shellhammer
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 4:42 PM
To: Dong Wei <dong.wei@xxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Dong,

That is an interesting suggestion. If we did that maybe, we would do the same with the CSI. We can then use the notation from the equations.

If we did it that way we would make the following changes,

· Change “Scaling Factor(TX = 1, RX = 3)” to “”

· Similarly for the CSI we would change “CSI(TX=1, RX=3)” to “”

Do people prefer this notation for that table?

Regards,

Steve

From: Dong Wei <dong.wei@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 4:34 PM
To: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Hi Steve,

I have a comment on Table B. For example, in the fifth row and first column, , “RX” is used as a variable/index and as an abbreviation for receiver simultaneously. I would like to suggest that Scaling Factor () be replaced with Scaling Factor () or , and similar replacement for all entries in the first column.

Thanks,

Dong

From: stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Steve Shellhammer
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 4:48 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EXT] RE: Updated PDT

Caution: EXT Email

Junghoon, Zinan, and Rui, et. al.,

Thanks Zinan and Junghoon.

I first accepted the changes we have been making to the document and posted that as R3.

I then made the following changes,

· Generated a draft R4 document

· Added Zinan as a co-author

· Made the changes suggested by Zinan (using Track changes)

· Edited Equation (A)

· Edited the sentence after Equation (A) to fit with the edits to the equation

· Added a sentence in b) describing how may be used in the selection of the scaling factor , which I hope addresses the comment that Rui made.

Hopefully, these address the comment from the call this morning. If this looks good, I can post this as R4. Or if other edits are needed, I can make those changes and post the edited version as R4.

Regards,

Steve

From: Junghoon Suh <000017d35818e7c0-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 10:11 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] Updated PDT

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Hi, Zinan

I am ok with this version as well. It is more clearly described.

I just wanted to mean two bits are not necessary to indicate the I_ng parameter, unless we want to keep one more bits for the forward compatibility like for the next generation Sensing.

Regards

Junghoon

From: Zinan Lin [mailto:000019c80da359b9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: July 26, 2022 12:24 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBF] Updated PDT

Hi Steve,

Thank you very much for presenting 11-22/1020r2.

Attached please find my suggestions on Table A, which also incorporates Junghoon’s suggestion to put NOTE in the column of Ing meaning.

Please take a look at the document.

Best,

Zinan

From: stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx stds-802-11-tgbf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Steve Shellhammer
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2022 12:01 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Updated PDT

Hi Tony,

With help from a number of people I have updated the following PDT and would like to review it on the Task Group call.

11-22/1020r2 “PDT Formatting of CSI”, Steve Shellhammer (20 minutes)

Regards,

Steve

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1