IP Library Granted Patent US 12,452,721
Granted Patent B2
US 12,452,721 · App. 18/252,380 · Granted Oct 21, 2025

Minimization of drive test report validation

Inventors: Hasan Farooq (Santa Clara, CA); Julien Forgeat (San Jose, CA); Michael Liljenstam (Sunnyvale, CA); Meral Shirazipour (Santa Clara, CA)
Assignee: Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ)
H04W24/10H04W24/02
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,452,721
App. No.
18/252,380
Granted
Oct 21, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

According to some embodiments, a method performed by a network node for validating minimization of drive test (MDT) reports comprises: receiving a MDT report generated by a wireless device: determining to perform validation on the received MDT report: correlating the MDT report with MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device to determine a first correlation value; determining a trust score for the MDT report based on one or more correlation values, the one or more correlation values at least comprising the first correlation value; determining whether the trust score is below a validation threshold; and upon determining the trust score is below the validation threshold, performing a corrective action with respect to the received MDT report.

Claims (34)

1. A method performed by a network node for validating minimization of drive test (MDT) reports, the method comprising:

receiving a MDT report generated by a wireless device;

determining to perform validation on the received MDT report;

correlating the MDT report with MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device to determine a first correlation value;

determining a trust score for the MDT report based on one or more correlation values, the one or more correlation values at least comprising the first correlation value;

determining whether the trust score is below a validation threshold; and

upon determining the trust score is below the validation threshold, performing a corrective action with respect to the received MDT report.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein correlating the MDT report with MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device includes comparing similarity of hardware components between the wireless device and the one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device.

3. The method of claim 1 , further comprising correlating the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device to determine a second correlation value, and wherein determining the trust score for the MDT report is further based on the second correlation value.

4. The method of claim 3 , wherein correlating the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device includes comparing similarity of hardware components between the wireless device and the one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device.

5. The method of claim 3 , wherein correlating the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device includes determining whether a network configuration has changed between a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a reporting time of the received MDT report.

6. The method of claim 3 , wherein correlating the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device includes determining a similarity of a weather condition at a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a weather condition at a reporting time of the received MDT report.

7. The method of claim 3 , wherein correlating the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device includes determining a similarity of a cell load at a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a cell load at a reporting time of the received MDT report.

8. The method of claim 1 , further comprising correlating the MDT report with MDT output from a network planning tool or network simulator to determine a third correlation value, and wherein determining the trust score for the MDT report is further based on the third correlation value.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the validation threshold is based on a category type of the wireless device.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining to perform validation on the received MDT report comprises detecting that the MDT report includes anomalous values.

11. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining to perform validation on the received MDT report comprises detecting that the MDT report is received from a suspect wireless device.

12. A network node capable of validating minimization of drive test (MDT) reports, the network node comprising processing circuitry operable to:

receive a MDT report generated by a wireless device;

determine to perform validation on the received MDT report;

correlate the MDT report with MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device to determine a first correlation value;

determining a trust score for the MDT report based on one or more correlation values, the one or more correlation values at least comprising the first correlation value;

determine whether the trust score is below a validation threshold; and

upon determining the trust score is below the validation threshold, perform a corrective action with respect to the MDT report.

13. The network node of claim 12 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to correlate the MDT report with MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device by comparing similarity of hardware components between the wireless device and the one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device.

14. The network node of claim 12 , the processing circuitry further operable to correlate the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device to determine a second correlation value, and wherein the processing circuitry is operable to determine the trust score for the MDT report further based on the second correlation value.

15. The network node of claim 14 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to correlate the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device by comparing similarity of hardware components between the wireless device and the one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device.

16. The network node of any one of claim 14 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to correlate the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device by determining whether a network configuration has changed between a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a reporting time of the received MDT report.

17. The network node of claim 14 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to correlate the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device by determining a similarity of a weather condition at a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a weather condition at a reporting time of the received MDT report.

18. The network node of claim 14 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to correlate the MDT report with historical MDT reports from one or more wireless devices in proximity to the wireless device by determining a similarity of a cell load at a reporting time of the historical MDT reports and a cell load at a reporting time of the received MDT report.

19. The network node of claim 12 , the processing circuitry further operable to correlate the MDT report with MDT output from a network planning tool or network simulator to determine a third correlation value, and wherein the processing circuitry is operable to determine the trust score for the MDT report further based on the third correlation value.

20. The network node of claim 12 , wherein the validation threshold is based on a category type of the wireless device.

21. The network node of claim 12 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to determine to perform validation on the received MDT report by detecting that the MDT report includes anomalous values.

22. The network node of claim 12 , wherein the processing circuitry is operable to determine to perform validation on the received MDT report by detecting that the MDT report is received from a suspect wireless device.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 10, 2023
From: FAROOQ, HASAN; FORGEAT, JULIEN; SHIRAZIPOUR, MERAL; LILJENSTAM, MICHAEL
To: TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL)
Reel/Frame 063591/0126 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240015554A1 · Jan 11, 2024
References Cited (26)
US 10650142B1 · Chen · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20140128057A1 · Siomina · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20170019795A1 · Takahashi · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170331670A1 · Parkvall · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20190289433A1 · Arunkumar et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20230180042A1 · Bansal · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230189315A1 · Haustein · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230189382A1 · Haustein · 2023 [cited by examiner]
WO 2019024939A1 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
3GPP TSG-RAN WG2#92, Anaheim, USA, Nov. 16-20, 2015; Title: Logged MDT Under IDC Interference; Source: ZTE; Agenda item: 7.13.2 (R2-156236). [cited by applicant]
PCT International Search Report issued for International application No. PCT/IB2020/060592—Jul. 15, 2021. [cited by applicant]
PCT Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority issued for International application No. PCT/IB2020/060592—Jul. 15, 2021. [cited by applicant]
A. Imran and A. Zoha, “Challenges in 5g: how to empower son with big data for enabling 5g,” Network, IEEE, vol. 28, No. 6, pp. 27-33, Nov. 2014. [cited by applicant]
O. G. Aliu, A. Imran, M. A. Imran, and B. Evans, “A Survey of Self Organisation in Future Cellular Networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 336-361, 2013. [cited by applicant]
3GPP TS 37.320, “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA) and Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio measurement collection for Minimization of Dr… [cited by applicant]
S. Hämäläinen, H. Sanneck, and C. Sartori, LTE Self-Organising Networks (SON): Network Management Automation for Operational Efficiency. John Wiley & Sons, 2012. [cited by applicant]
Joshua J. Drake, Pau Oliva Fora, Zach Lanier, Collin Mulliner, Stephen A. Ridley, Georg Wicherski, “Android Hacker's Handbook”, John Wiley & Sons, 2014 [due to size, this reference has been split into three parts]. [cited by applicant]
Gokce Gorbil, Omer Abdelrahman, Mihajlo Pavloski, Erol Gelenbe, “Modeling and Analysis of RRC-Based Signalling Storms in 3G Networks”, accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Collin Mulliner, Steffen Liebergeld, Matthias Lange, and Jean-Pierre Seifert, “Taming Mr Hayes: Mitigating Signaling Based Attacks on Smartphones”, Proceedings of the 2012 42nd Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference … [cited by applicant]
Ralf-Philipp Weinmann, “Baseband Attacks: Remote Exploitation of Memory Corruptions in Cellular Protocol Stacks”, Proceedings of the 6th USENIX Conference on Offensive Technologies WOOT'12, 2012. [cited by applicant]
Ralf-Philipp Weinmann, “All Your Baseband Are Belong to Us”, Laboratory for Algorithmics, Cryptology & Computer Security, University of Luxembourg. http://archive.hack.lu/2010/Weinmann-All-Your-Baseband-Are-Belong-To-Us… [cited by applicant]
Anonymous, “Your own mobile network”, srsLTE. [cited by applicant]
H. Y. Lateef, A. Imran, and A. Abu-dayya, “A framework for classification of Self-Organising network conflicts and coordination algorithms,” in 2013 IEEE 24th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobi… [cited by applicant]
O. Onireti, A. Zoha, J. Moysen, A. Imran, L. Giupponi, M. Imran, and A. Abu Dayya, “A cell outage management framework for dense heterogeneous networks,” Vehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PP, No. 99, pp. … [cited by applicant]
P. V. Klaine, M. A. Imran, O. Onireti and R. D. Souza, “A Survey of Machine Learning Techniques Applied to Self-Organizing Cellular Networks,” in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 2392-2431, F… [cited by applicant]
M. T. Raza, F. M. Anwar, and S. Lu, “Exposing LTE Security Weaknesses at Protocol Inter-Layer, and Inter-Radio Interactions,” in International Conference on Security and Privacy in Communication Systems. Springer, 2017,… [cited by applicant]