A method of establishing wireless communications between an interrogator and individual ones of multiple wireless identification devices, the method comprising utilizing a tree search method to establish communications without collision between the interrogator and individual ones of the multiple wireless identification devices, a search tree being defined for the tree search method, the tree having multiple levels respectively representing subgroups of the multiple wireless identification devices, the method further comprising starting the tree search at a selectable level of the search tree. A communications system comprising an interrogator, and a plurality of wireless identification devices configured to communicate with the interrogator in a wireless fashion, the respective wireless identification devices having a unique identification number, the ingerrogator being configured to employ a tree search technique to determine the unique identification numbers of the different wireless identification devices so as to be able to establish communications between the interrogator and individual ones of the multiple wireless identification devices without collision by multiple wireless identification devices attempting to respond to the interrogator at the same time, wherein the interrogator is configured to start the tree search at a selectable level of the search tree. RFID devices are selected by an interrogator. The interrogator sends a signal to a plurality of RFID devices. The signal indicates a bit string and a memory range comprising multiple bit locations. RFID devices compare the bits stored in their respective memory ranges to the bit string to determine which of the RFID devices are selected.
|
35. A system in accordance with 34 wherein the interrogator is configured to input and store the predetermined number a number representing the specified group.
36. A system in accordance with 34 wherein the devices are configured to respectively determine if their chosen random values fall within a specified group and, if so, send a reply, upon receiving respective identify commands.
24. A communications system comprising an interrogator, and a plurality of wireless identification devices configured to communicate with the interrogator in a wireless fashion, the wireless identification devices having respective identification numbers, the interrogator being configured to employ a tree search in a search tree having multiple selectable levels, to determine the identification numbers of the different wireless identification devices with sufficient precision so as to be able to establish one-on-one communications between the interrogator and individual ones of the multiple wireless identification devices, wherein the interrogator is configured to start the tree search at any selectable level of the search tree selectable level other than the top level of the search tree.
0. 48. A method comprising:
disposing a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag in a communication field of an interrogator, the tag including tag memory;
sending a select command from the interrogator to the tag after disposing the tag in the field and before the tag communicates to the interrogator, the select command including parameters that describe a memory range and a bit string;
receiving the select command at the tag, and in response thereto, comparing the bit string against the memory range of the tag memory to determine if the tag is selected, the memory range of the tag memory storing at least two bits; and
communicating a random number generated by the tag from the tag to the interrogator in accordance with an arbitration scheme if the tag is determined to be selected.
1. A method of establishing wireless communications between an interrogator and individual ones of multiple wireless identification devices, the wireless identification devices having respective identification numbers and being addressable by specifying identification numbers with any one of multiple possible degrees of precision, the method comprising utilizing a tree search in an arbitration scheme to determine a degree of precision necessary to establish one-to-one communications between the interrogator and individual ones of the multiple wireless identification devices, a search tree being defined for the tree search method, the tree having multiple selectable levels respectively representing subgroups of the multiple wireless identification devices, the level at which a tree search starts being variable the method further comprising starting the tree search at any selectable level of the search tree selectable level other than the top level of the search tree.
27. A system comprising:
an interrogator;
a number of communications devices capable of wireless communications with the interrogator;
means for establishing a predetermined number of bits to be used as random numbers, and for causing respective devices to select random numbers respectively having the predetermined number of bits;
means for inputting a predetermined number indicative of the maximum number of devices possibly capable of communicating with the receiver interrogator;
means for causing the interrogator to transmit a command requesting devices having random values within a specified group of random values to respond, the specified group being chosen in response to the inputted predetermined number;
means for causing devices receiving the command to determine if their chosen random values fall within the specified group and, if so, send a reply to the interrogator; and
means for causing the interrogator to determine if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, create a new, smaller, specified group.
0. 70. A method comprising:
disposing a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag in a communication field of an interrogator;
sending a first command from the interrogator to the tag after disposing the tag in the field and before the tag communicates to the interrogator, the first command including a first set of fields comprising at least two first bit values;
the tag wirelessly receiving the first command;
the tag backscattering a first reply based, at least in part, on whether the two first bit values received from the interrogator match two corresponding bit values stored in the tag, the first reply including a random number generated by the tag;
sending a second command from the interrogator to the tag, the second command including a second set of fields comprising at least two second bit values;
the tag wirelessly receiving the second command; and
the tag backscattering a second reply based, at least in part, on whether the two second bit values received from the interrogator match the two corresponding bit values stored in the tag, the second reply including a random number generated by the tag.
0. 43. A method comprising:
affixing a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag to an object, the tag including tag memory;
disposing the tag in a communication field of an interrogator;
sending a first signal from the interrogator to the tag after disposing the tag in the field and before the tag communicates to the interrogator, the first signal including parameters that describe a memory range and a bit string;
receiving the first signal at the tag, and in response thereto, comparing the bit string against the memory range of the tag memory to determine if the tag is selected, the memory range of the tag memory storing a plurality of bits;
the tag picking a random value and associating the random value with a slot in accordance with an arbitration scheme for an inventory operation if the tag is determined to be selected;
sending a second signal from the interrogator to the tag;
backscattering a random number generated by the tag from the tag to the interrogator in accordance with the slot in response to receiving the second signal; and
sending a acknowledge command from the interrogator to the tag in response to the interrogator receiving the random number.
7. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications device, the method comprising:
establishing for respective devices unique identification numbers respectively having a first predetermined number of bits;
establishing a second predetermined number of bits to be used for random values;
causing the devices to select random values, wherein respective devices choose random values independently of random values selected by the other devices;
determining the maximum number of devices potentially capable of responding to the interrogator;
transmitting a command from the interrogator requesting devices having random values within a specified group of random values to respond, by using a subset of the second predetermined number of bits, the specified group being chosen in response to the determined maximum number;
receiving the command at multiple devices, devices receiving the command respectively determining if the random value chosen by the device falls within the specified group and, if so, sending a reply to the interrogator; and
determining using the interrogator if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, creating a new, smaller, specified group.
30. A system comprising:
an interrogator configured to communicate to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices;
a plurality of communications devices;
the devices being configured to select random values, wherein respective devices choose random values independently of random values selected by the other devices, different sized groups of devices being addressable by specifying random values with differing levels of precision;
the interrogator being configured to transmit a command requesting devices having random values within a specified group of a plurality of possible groups of random values to respond, the specified group being less than the entire set of random values, the plurality of possible groups being organized in a binary tree defined by a plurality of nodes at respective levels, wherein the size of groups of random values decrease in size by half with each node descended, wherein the specified group is below a node on the tree selected based on a predetermined maximum number of devices capable of communicating with the interrogator;
devices receiving the command being configured to respectively determine if their chosen random values fall within the specified group and, if so, send a reply to the interrogator; and, if not, not send a reply; and
the interrogator being configured to determine if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, create a new, smaller, specified group by descending in the tree.
12. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices, the method comprising:
causing the devices to select random values for use as arbitration numbers, wherein respective devices choose random values independently of random values selected by the other devices, the devices being addressable by specifying arbitration numbers with any one of multiple possible degrees of precision;
transmitting a command from the interrogator requesting devices having random values within a specified group of a plurality of possible groups of random values to respond, the specified group being less than the entire set of random values, the plurality of possible groups being organized in a binary tree defined by a plurality of nodes at respective levels, wherein the size of groups of random values decrease in size by half with each node descended, wherein the specified group is below a node on the tree selected based on the maximum number of devices capable of communicating with the interrogator;
receiving the command at multiple devices, devices receiving the command respectively determining if the random value chosen by the device falls within the specified group and, if so, sending a reply to the interrogator; and, if not, not sending a reply; and
determining using the interrogator if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, creating a new, smaller, specified group by descending in the tree.
0. 63. A method comprising:
disposing a plurality of radio frequency (RFID) tags in a communication field of an interrogator;
sending a first signal from the interrogator to first and second tags of the plurality of tags after disposing the plurality of tags in the field and before any of the plurality of tags communicate to the interrogator, the first signal including a bit string and indicating a portion of memory, the portion of memory comprising multiple bit storage locations, the first tag having stored therein a first set of bits in bit storage locations corresponding to the portion of memory, and the second tag having stored therein a second set of bits in bit storage locations corresponding to the portion of memory;
the first tag receiving the first signal and comparing the bit string against the first set of bits to determine if the first tag is selected;
the second tag receiving the first signal and comparing the bit string against the second set of bits to determine if the second tag is selected;
the first tag picking a first random value and associating the first random value with a first slot in accordance with an arbitration scheme;
the second tag picking a second random value and associating the second random value with a second slot in accordance with the arbitration scheme;
the first tag backscattering a first identification code that identifies a first object to which the first tag is affixed; and
the second tag backscattering a second identification code that identifies a second object to which the second tag is affixed.
0. 38. A method comprising:
disposing a plurality of radio frequency identification (RFID) tags in a communication field of an interrogator, each respective tag of the plurality of tags including respective memory storing a respective identification code that identifies a respective object to which each respective tag is affixed;
sending a select command from the interrogator to the plurality of tags after disposing the plurality of tags in the field and before any of the plurality of tags communicate to the interrogator, the select command including a set of parameters, the set of parameters including a bit string and describing a memory range, the memory range comprising multiple bit locations;
each respective tag of the plurality of tags receiving the select command and comparing the bit string against the memory range of the respective memory of each respective tag to determine if the respective tag is a member of a population of tags;
each respective tag of the population picking a respective random value and associating the random value with a respective slot, wherein a sequence in which the population of tags are to reply to the interrogator is determined by each respective slot;
each respective tag of at least a portion of the population backscattering a respective reply to the interrogator, each respective reply including a respective random number generated by each respective tag, each respective tag replying in accordance with the sequence; and
sending an acknowledge command from the interrogator in response to the interrogator receiving a respective reply from a respective tag and determining the respective reply to be collision-free.
16. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices, the method comprising:
establishing for respective devices a predetermined number of bits to be used for random values, the predetermined number being a multiple of sixteen;
causing the devices to select random values, wherein respective devices choose random values independently of random values selected by the other devices;
transmitting a command from the interrogator requesting devices having random values within a specified group of a plurality of possible groups of random values to respond, the specified group being equal to or less than the entire set of random values, the plurality of possible groups being organized in a binary tree defined by a plurality of nodes at respective levels, wherein the maximum size of groups of random values decrease in size by half with each node descended, wherein the specified group is below a node on a level of the tree selected based on the maximum number of devices known to be capable of communicating with the interrogator;
receiving the command at multiple devices, devices receiving the command respectively determining if the random value chosen by the device falls within the specified group and, only if so, sending a reply to the interrogator, wherein sending a reply to the interrogator comprises transmitting both the random value of the device sending the reply and the unique a unique identification number of the device sending the reply;
using the interrogator to determine if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, creating a new, smaller, specified group using a level of the tree different from the level used in the interrogator transmitting, the interrogator transmitting a command requesting devices having random values within the new specified group of random values to respond; and
if a reply without collision is received from a device, the interrogator subsequently sending a command individually addressed to that device.
34. A system comprising:
an interrogator configured to communicate to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices;
a plurality of RFID devices, respective devices being configured to store unique identification numbers respectively having a first predetermined number of bits, respective devices being further configured to store a second predetermined number of bits to be used for random values, respective devices being configured to select random values independently of random values selected by the other devices;
the interrogator being configured to transmit an identify command requesting a response from devices having random values within a specified group of a plurality of possible groups or random of random values, the specified group being less than or equal to the entire set of random values, the plurality of possible groups being organized in a binary tree defined by a plurality of nodes at respective levels, wherein the maximum size of groups of random values decrease in size by half with each node descended, wherein the specified group is below a node on a level of the tree selected based on the maximum number of devices known to be capable of communicating with the interrogator;
devices receiving the command respectively being configured to determine if their chosen random values fall within the specified group and, only if so, send a reply to the interrogator, wherein sending a reply to the interrogator comprises transmitting both the random value of the device sending the reply and the unique identification number of the device sending the reply;
the interrogator being configured to determine if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, create a new, smaller, specified group using a level of the tree different from the level used in previously transmitting an identify command, the interrogator transmitting an identify command requesting devices having random values within the new specified group of random values to respond; and
the interrogator being configured to send a command individually addressed to a device after communicating with a device without a collision.
2. A method in accordance with
3. A method in accordance with
4. A method in accordance with
5. A method in accordance with
6. A method in accordance with
8. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
9. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
10. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
11. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
13. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
14. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
15. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of communications devices in accordance with
17. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
18. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
19. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
20. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
21. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
22. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
23. A method of addressing messages from an interrogator to a selected one or more of a number of RFID devices in accordance with
25. A communications system in accordance with
26. A communications system in accordance with
28. A system in accordance with
29. A system in accordance with
31. A system in accordance with
32. A system in accordance with
33. A system in accordance with
37. A system in accordance with
0. 39. The method of
0. 40. The method of
0. 41. The method of
0. 42. The method of
0. 44. The method of
0. 45. The method of
0. 46. The method of
0. 47. The method of
0. 49. The method of
0. 50. The method of
0. 51. The method of
0. 52. The method of
0. 53. The method of
0. 54. The method of
0. 55. The method of
0. 56. The method of
0. 57. The method of
0. 58. The method of
0. 59. The method of
0. 60. The method of
0. 61. The method of
0. 62. The method of
0. 64. The method of
the first tag backscattering a first random number generated by the first tag;
and the second tag backscattering a second random number generated by the second tag.
0. 65. The method of
the interrogator receiving the first random number from the first tag during a period of time associated with the first slot, and, in response thereto, the interrogator sending a first acknowledge signal to acknowledge the first tag; and
the interrogator receiving the second random number from the second tag during a period of time associated with the second slot, and, in response thereto, the interrogator sending a second acknowledge signal to acknowledge the second tag.
0. 66. The method of
0. 67. The method of
0. 68. The method of
0. 69. The method of
the interrogator sending a first acknowledge signal to acknowledge the first tag;
and the interrogator sending a second acknowledge signal to acknowledge the second tag.
0. 71. The method of
0. 72. The method of
0. 73. The method of
0. 74. The method of
0. 75. The method of
0. 76. The method of
|
The device 12 transmits and receives radio frequency communications to and from an interrogator 26. An exemplary interrogator is described in commonly assigned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/907,689, filed Aug. 8, 1997and , now U.S. Pat. No. 6,289,209, which is incorporated herein by reference. Preferably, the interrogator 26 includes an antenna 28, as well as dedicated transmitting (e.g., modulator) and receiving circuitry, similar to that implemented on the integrated circuit 16.
Generally, the interrogator 26 transmits an interrogation signal or command 27 via the antenna 28. The device 12 receives the incoming interrogation signal via its antenna 14. Upon receiving the signal 27, the device 12 responds by generating and transmitting a responsive signal or reply 29. The responsive signal 29 typically includes information that uniquely identifies, or labels the particular device 12 that is transmitting, so as to identify any object or person with which the device 12 is associated.
Although only one device 12 is shown in FIG. 1, typically there will be multiple devices 12 that correspond with the interrogator 26, and the particular devices 12 that are in communication with the interrogator 26 will typically change over time. In the illustrated embodiment in FIG. 1, there is no communication between multiple devices 12. Instead, the devices 12 respectively communicate with the interrogator 26. Multiple devices 12 can be used in the same field of an interrogator 26 (i.e., within communications range of an interrogator 26).
The radio frequency data communication device 12 can be included in any appropriate housing or packaging. Various methods of manufacturing housings are described in commonly assigned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/800,037, filed Feb. 13, 1997, and now U.S. Pat. No. 5,988,510, which is incorporated herein by reference.
FIG. 2 shows but one embodiment in the form of a card or badge 19 including a housing 11 of plastic or other suitable material supporting the device 12 and the power supply 18. In one embodiment, the front face of the badge has visual identification features such as graphics, text, information found on identification or credit cards, etc.
FIG. 3 illustrates but one alternative housing supporting the device 12. More particularly, FIG. 3 shows a miniature housing 20 encasing the device 12 and power supply 18 to define a tag which can be supported by an object (e.g., hung from an object, affixed to an object, etc.). Although two particular types of housings have been disclosed, the device 12 can be included in any appropriate housing.
If the power supply 18 is a battery, the battery can take any suitable form. Preferably, the battery type will be selected depending on weight, size, and life requirements for a particular application. In one embodiment, the battery 18 is a thin profile button-type cell forming a small, thin energy cell more commonly utilized in watches and small electronic devices requiring a thin profile. A conventional button-type cell has a pair of electrodes, an anode formed by one face and a cathode formed by an opposite face. In an alternative embodiment, the power source 18 comprises a series connected pair of button type cells. Instead of using a battery, any suitable power source can be employed.
The circuitry 16 further includes a backscatter transmitter and is configured to provide a responsive signal to the interrogator 26 by radio frequency. More particularly, the circuitry 16 includes a transmitter, a receiver, and memory such as is described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/705,043, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,130,602.
Radio frequency identification has emerged as a viable and affordable alternative to tagging or labeling small to large quantities of items. The interrogator 26 communicates with the devices 12 via an electromagnetic link, such as via an RF link (e.g., at microwave frequencies, in one embodiment), so all transmissions by the interrogator 26 are heard simultaneously by all devices 12 within range.
If the interrogator 26 sends out a command requesting that all devices 12 within range identify themselves, and gets a large number of simultaneous replies, the interrogator 26 may not be able to interpret any of these replies. Therefore, arbitration schemes are provided.
If the interrogator 26 has prior knowledge of the identification number of a device 12 which the interrogator 26 is looking for, it can specify that a response is requested only from the device 12 with that identification number. To target a command at a specific device 12, (i.e., to initiate point-on-point communication), the interrogator 26 must send a number, identifying a specific device 12 along with the command. At start-up, or in a new or changing environment, these identification numbers are not known by the interrogator 26. Therefore, the interrogator 26 must identify all devices 12 in the field (within communication range) such as by determining the identification numbers of the devices 12 in the field. After this is accomplished, point-to-point communication can proceed as desired by the interrogator 26.
Generally speaking, RFID systems are a type of multi-access communication system. The distance between the interrogator 26 and devices 12 within the field is typically fairly short (e.g., several meters), so packet transmission time is determined primarily by packet size and baud rate. Propagation delays are negligible. In such systems, there is a potential for a large number of transmitting devices 12 and there is a need for the interrogator 26 to work in a changing environment, where different devices 12 are swapped in and out frequently (e.g., as inventory is added or removed). In such systems, the inventors have determined that the use of random access methods work effectively for contention resolution (i.e., for dealing with collisions between devices 12 attempting to respond to the interrogator 26 at the same time).
RFID systems have some characteristics that are different from other communications systems. For example, one characteristic of the illustrated RFID systems is that the devices 12 never communicate without being prompted by the interrogator 26. This is in contrast to typical multiaccess systems where the transmitting units operate more independently. In addition, contention for the communication medium is short lived as compared to the ongoing nature of the problem in other multiaccess systems. For example, in a RFID system, after the devices 12 have been identified, the interrogator can communicate with them in a point-to-point fashion. Thus, arbitration in a RFID system is a transient rather than steady-state phenomenon. Further, the capability of a device 12 is limited by practical restrictions on size, power, and cost. The lifetime of a device 12 can often be measured in terms of number of transmissions before battery power is lost. Therefore, one of the most important measures of system performance in RFID arbitration is total time required to arbitrate a set of devices 12. Another measure is power consumed by the devices 12 during the process. This is in contrast to the measures of throughput and packet delay in other types of multiaccess systems.
FIG. 4 illustrates one arbitration scheme that can be employed for communication between the interrogator and devices 12. Generally, the interrogator 26 sends a command causing each device 12 of a potentially large number of responding devices 12 to select a random number from a known range and use it as that device's arbitration number. By transmitting requests for identification to various subsets of the full range of arbitration numbers, and checking for an error-free response, the interrogator 26 determines the arbitration number of every responder station capable of communicating at the same time. Therefore, the interrogator 26 is able to conduct subsequent uninterrupted communication with devices 12, one at a time, by addressing only one device 12.
Three variables are used: an arbitration value (AVALUE), an arbitration mask (AMASK), and a random value ID (RV). The interrogator sends an Identify command (IdentifyCmnd) causing each device of a potentially large number of responding devices to select a random number from a known range and use it as that device's arbitration number. The interrogator sends an arbitration value (AVALUE) and an arbitration mask (AMASK) to a set of devices 12. The receiving devices 12 evaluate the following equation: (AMASK & AVALUE)==(AMASK & RV) wherein “&” is a bitwise AND function, and wherein “═” is an equality function. If the equation evaluates to “1” (TRUE), then the device 12 will reply. If the equation evaluates to “0” (FALSE), then the device 12 will not reply. By performing this in a structured manner, with the number of bits in the arbitration mask being increased by one each time, eventually a device 12 will respond with no collisions. Thus, a binary search tree methodology is employed.
An example using actual numbers will now be provided using only four bits, for simplicity, reference being made to FIG. 4. In one embodiment, sixteen bits are used for AVALUE and AMASK. Other numbers of bits can also be employed depending, for example, on the number of devices 12 expected to be encountered in a particular application, on desired cost points, etc.
Assume, for this example, that there are two devices 12 in the field, one with a random value (RV) of 1100 (binary), and another with a random value (RV) of 1010 (binary). The interrogator is trying to establish communications without collisions being caused by the two devices 12 attempting to communicate at the same time.
The interrogator sets AVALUE to 0000 (or “don't care” for all bits, as indicated by the character “X” in FIG. 4) and AMASK to 0000. The interrogator transmits a command to all devices 12 requesting that they identify themselves. Each of the devices 12 evaluate (AMASK & AVALUE)═(AMASK & RV) using the random value RV that the respective devices 12 selected. If the equation evaluates to “1” (TRUE), then the device 12 will reply. If the equation evaluates to “0” (FALSE), then the device 12 will not reply. In the first level of the illustrated tree, AMASK is 0000 and anything bitwise ANDed with all zeros results in all zeros, so both the devices 12 in the field respond, and there is a collision.
Next, the interrogator sets AMASK to 0001 and AVALUE to 0000 and transmits an identify command. Both devices 12 in the field have a zero for their least significant bit, and (AMASK & AVALUE)═(AMASK & RV) will be true for both devices 12. For the device 12 with a random value of 1100, the left side of the equation is evaluated as follows (0001 & 0000)=0000. The right side is evaluated as (0001 & 1100)=0000. The left side equals the right side, so the equation is true for the device 12 with the random value of 1100. For the device 12 with a random value of 1010, the left side of the equation is evaluated as (0001 & 0000)=0000. The right side is evaluated as (0001 & 1010)=0000. The left side equals the right side, so the equation is true for the device 12 with the random value of 1010. Because the equation is true for both devices 12 in the field, both devices 12 in the field respond, and there is another collision.
Recursively, the interrogator next sets AMASK to 0011 with AVALUE still at 0000 and transmits an Identify command. (AMASK & AVALUE)═(AMASK & RV) is evaluated for both devices 12. For the device 12 with a random value of 1100, the left side of the equation is evaluated as follows (0011 & 0000)=0000. The right side is evaluated as (0011 & 1100)=0000. The left side equals the right side, so the equation is true for the device 12 with the random value of 1100, so this device 12 responds. For the device 12 with a random value of 1010, the left side of the equation is evaluated as (0011 & 0000)=0000. The right side is evaluated as (0011 & 1010)=0010. The left side does not equal the right side, so the equation is false for the device 12 with the random value of 1010, and this device 12 does not respond. Therefore, there is no collision, and the interrogator can determine the identity (e.g., an identification number) for the device 12 that does respond.
De-recursion takes place, and the devices 12 to the right for the same AMASK level are accessed when AVALUE is set at 0010, and AMASK is set to 0011.
The device 12 with the random value of 1010 receives a command and evaluates the equation (AMASK & AVALUE)═(AMASK & RV). The left side of the equation is evaluated as (0011 & 0010)=0010. The right side of the equation is evaluated as (0011 & 1010)=0010. The right side equals the left side, so the equation is true for the device 12 with the random value of 1010. Because there are no other devices 12 in the subtree, a good reply is returned by the device 12 with the random value of 1010. There is no collision, and the interrogator 26 can determine the identity (e.g., an identification number) for the device 12 that does respond.
By recursion, what is meant is that a function makes a call to itself. In other words, the function calls itself within the body of the function. After the called function returns, de-recursion takes place and execution continues at the place just after the function call: i.e. at the beginning of the statement after the function call.
For instance, consider a function that has four statements (numbered 1,2,3,4 ) in it, and the second statement is a recursive call. Assume that the fourth statement is a return statement. The first time through the loop (iteration 1) the function executes the statement 2 and (because it is a recursive call) calls itself causing iteration 2 to occur. When iteration 2 gets to statement 2, it calls itself making iteration 3. During execution in iteration 3 of statement 1, assume that the function does a return. The information that was saved on the stack from iteration 2 is loaded and the function resumes execution at statement 3 (in iteration 2), followed by the execution of statement 4 which is also a return statement. Since there are no more statements in the function, the function de-recurses to iteration 1. Iteration 1, had previously recursively called itself in statement 2. Therefore, it now executes statement 3 (in iteration 1 ). Following that it executes a return at statement 4. Recursion is known in the art.
Consider the following code which can be used to implement operation of the method shown in FIG. 4 and described above.
Arbitrate(AMASK, AVALUE)
{
collision=IdentifyCmnd(AMASK,AVALUE)
if (collision) then
{
/* recursive call for left side */
Arbitrate((AMASK>>1)+1, AVALUE)
/* recursive call for right side */
Arbitrate((AMASK>>1)+1, AVALUE+(AMASK+1))
} /* endif */
}/* return */
The symbol “<<” represents a bitwise left shift. “<<” means shift left by one place. Thus, 0001<<1 would be 0010. Note, however, that AMASK is originally called with a value of zero, and 0000<<1 is still 0000. Therefore, for the first recursive call, AMASK=(AMASK<<1)+1. So for the first recursive call, the vale of AMASK is 0000+0001=0001. For the second call, AMASK=(0001<<)+1=0010+1=0011. For the third recursive call, AMASK=(0011<<1)+1=0110+1=0111.
The routine generates values for AMASK and AVALUE to be used by the interrogator in an identify command “IdentifyCmnd.” Note that the routine calls itself it there is a collision. De-recursion occurs when there is no collision. AVALUE and AMASK would have values such as the following assuming collisions take place all the way down to the bottom of the tree.
AVALUE
AMASK
0000
0000
0000
0001
0000
0011
0000
0111
0000
1111*
1000
1111*
0100
0111
0100
1111*
1100
1111*
This sequence of AMASK, AVALUE binary numbers assumes that there are collisions all the way down to the bottom of the tree, at which point the Identify command sent by the interrogator is finally successful so that no collision occurs. Rows in the table for which the interrogator is successful in receiving a reply without collision are marked with the symbol “*”. Note that if the Identify command was successful at, for example, the third line in the table then the interrogator would stop going down that branch of the tree and start down another, so the sequence would be as shown in the following table.
AVALUE
AMASK
0000
0000
0000
0001
0000
0011*
0010
0011
. . .
. . .
This method is referred to as a splitting method. It works by splitting groups of colliding devices 12 into subsets that are resolved in turn. The splitting method can also be viewed as a type of tree search. Each split moves the method one level deeper in the tree.
Either depth-first or breadth-first traversals of the tree can be employed Depth first traversals are performed by using recursion, as is employed in the code listed above. Breadth-first traversals are accomplished by using a queue instead of recursion. The following is an example of code for performing a breadth-first traversal.
Arbitrate(AMASK, AVALUE)
{
enqueue(0,0)
while (queue != empty)
(AMASK, AVALUE) = dequeue( )
collision=IdentifyCmnd(AMASK,AVALUE)
if (collision) then
{
TEMP = AMASK+1
NEW_AMASK = (AMASK>>1)+1
enqueue(NEW_AMASK, AVALUE)
enqueue(NEW_AMASK, AVALUE+TEMP)
} /* endif */
endwhile
}/* return */
The symbol “!=” means not equal to. AVALUE and AMASK would have values such as those indicated in the following table for such code.
AVALUE
AMASK
0000
0000
0000
0001
0001
0001
0000
0011
0010
0011
0001
0011
0011
0011
0000
0111
0100
0111
. . .
. . .
Rows in the table for which the interrogator is successful in receiving a reply without collision are marked with the symbol “*”.
FIG. 5 illustrates an embodiment wherein the interrogator 26 starts the tree search at a selectable level of the search tree. The search tree has a plurality of nodes 51, 52, 53, 54 etc. at respective levels. The size of subgroups of random values decrease in size by half with each node descended. The upper bound of the number of devices 12 in the field (the maximum possible number of devices that could communicate with the interrogator) is determined, and the tree search method is started at a level 32, 34, 36, 38, or 40 in the tree depending on the determined upper bound. In one embodiment, the maximum number of devices 12 potentially capable of responding to the interrogator is determined manually and input into the interrogator 26 via an input device such as a keyboard, graphical user interface, mouse, or other interface. The level of the search tree on which to start the tree search is selected based on the determined maximum possible number of wireless identification devices that could communicate with the interrogator.
The tree search is started at a level determined by taking the base two logarithm of the determined maximum possible number. More particularly, the tree search is started at a level determined by taking the base two logarithm of the power of two nearest the determined maximum possible number of devices 12. The level of the tree containing all subgroups of random values is considered level zero (see FIG. 5), and lower levels are numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. consecutively.
By determining the upper bound of the number of devices 12 in the field, and starting the tree search at an appropriate level, the number of collisions is reduced, the battery life of the devices 12 is increased, and arbitration time is reduced.
For example, for the search tree shown in FIG. 5, if it is known that there are seven devices 12 in the field, starting at node 51 (level 0 ) results in a collision. Starting at level 1 (nodes 52 and 53 ) also results in a collision. The same is true for nodes 54, 55, 56, and 57 in level 2. If there are seven devices 12 in the field, the nearest power of two to seven is the level at which the tree search should be started. Log2 8=3, so the tree search should be started at level 3 if there are seven devices 12 in the field.
AVALUE and AMASK would have values such as the following assuming collisions take place from level 3 all the way down to the bottom of the tree.
AVALUE
AMASK
0000
0111
0000
1111*
1000
1111*
0100
0111
0100
1111*
1100
1111*
Rows in the table for which the interrogator is successful in receiving a reply without collision are marked with the symbol “*”.
In operation, the interrogator transmits a command requesting devices 12 having random values RV within a specified group of random values to respond, the specified group being chosen in response to the determined maximum number. Devices 12 receiving the command respectively determine if their chosen random values fall within the specified group and, if so, send a reply to the interrogator. The interrogator determines if a collision occurred between devices that sent a reply and, if so, creates a new, smaller, specified group, descending in the tree, as described above in connection with FIG. 4.
Another arbitration method that can be employed is referred to as the “Aloha” method. In the Aloha method, every time a device 12 is involved in a collision, it waits a random period of time before retransmitting. This method can be improved by dividing time into equally sized slots and forcing transmissions to be aligned with one of these slots. This is referred to as “slotted Aloha.” In operation, the interrogator asks all devices 12 in the field to transmit their identification numbers in the next time slot. If the response is garbled, the interrogator informs the devices 12 that a collision has occurred, and the slotted Aloha scheme is put into action. This means that each device 12 in the field responds within an arbitrary slot determined by a randomly selected value. In other words, in each successive time slot, the devices 12 decide to transmit their identification number with a certain probability.
The Aloha method is based on a system operated by the University of Hawaii. In 1971, the University of Hawaii began operation of a system named Aloha. A communication satellite was used to interconnect several university computers by use of a random access protocol. The system operates as follows. Users or devices transmit at any time they desire. After transmitting, a user listens for an acknowledgment from the receiver or interrogator. Transmissions from different users will sometimes overlap in time (collide), causing reception errors in the data in each of the contending messages. The errors are detected by the receiver, and the receiver sends a negative acknowledgment to the users. When a negative acknowledgment is received, the messages are retransmitted by the colliding users after a random delay. If the colliding users attempted to retransmit without the random delay, they would collide again. If the user does not receive either an acknowledgment or a negative acknowledgment within a certain amount of time, the user “times out” and retransmits the message.
There is a scheme known as slotted Aloha which improves the Aloha scheme by requiring a small amount of coordination among stations. In the slotted Aloha scheme, a sequence of coordination pulses is broadcast to all stations (devices). As is the case with the pure Aloha scheme, packet lengths are constant. Messages are required to be sent in a slot time between synchronization pulses, and can be started only at the beginning of a time slot. This reduces the rate of collisions because only messages transmitted in the same slot can interfere with one another. The retransmission mode of the pure Aloha scheme is modified for slotted Aloha such that if a negative acknowledgment occurs, the device retransmits after a random delay of an integer number of slot times.
Aloha methods are described in a commonly assigned patent application naming Clifton W. Wood, Jr. as an inventor, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/026,248, filed Feb. 19, 1998, titled “Method of Addressing Messages and Communications System,” filed concurrently herewith, and , now U.S. Pat. No. 6,275,476, which is incorporated herein by reference.
In one alternative embodiment, an Aloha method (such as the method described in the commonly assigned patent application mentioned above) is combined with determining the upper bound on a set of devices and starting at a level in the tree depending on the determined upper bound, such as by combining an Aloha method with the method shown and described in connection with FIG. 5. For example, in one embodiment, devices 12 sending a reply to the interrogator 26 do so within a randomly selected time slot of a number of slots.
In another embodiment, levels of the search tree are skipped. Skipping levels in the tree, after a collision caused by multiple devices 12 responding, reduces the number of subsequent collisions without adding significantly to the number of no replies. In real-time systems, it is desirable to have quick arbitration sessions on a set of devices 12 whose unique identification numbers are unknown. Level skipping reduces the number of collisions, both reducing arbitration time and conserving battery life on a set of devices 12. In one embodiment, every other level is skipped. In alternative embodiments, more than one level is skipped each time.
The trade off that must be considered in determining how many (if any) levels to skip with each decent down the tree is as follows. Skipping levels reduces the number of collisions, thus saving battery power in the devices 12. Skipping deeper (skipping more than one level) further reduces the number of collisions. The more levels that are skipped, the greater the reduction in collisions. However, skipping levels results in longer search times because the number of queries (Identify commands) increases. The more levels that are skipped, the longer the search times. Skipping just one level has an almost negligible effect on search time, but drastically reduces the number of collisions. If more than one level is skipped, search time increases substantially. Skipping every other level drastically reduces the number of collisions and saves battery power without significantly increasing the number of queries.
Level skipping methods are described in a commonly assigned patent application 09/026,045 naming Clifton W. Wood, Jr. and Don Hush as inventors, titled “Method of Addressing Messages, Method of Establishing Wireless Communications, and Communications Systems,” filed concurrently herewith, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,072,801, and incorporated herein by reference.
In one alternative embodiment, a level skipping method is combined with determining the upper bound on a set of devices and starting at a level in the tree depending on the determined upper bound, such as by combining a level skipping method with the method shown and described in connection with FIG. 5.
In yet another alternative embodiment, both a level skipping method and an Aloha method (as described in the commonly assigned applications described above) are combined with the method shown and described in connection with FIG. 5.
In compliance with the statute, the invention has been described in language more or less specific as to structural and methodical features. It is to be understood, however, that the invention is not limited to the specific features shown and described, since the means herein disclosed comprise preferred forms of putting the invention into effect. The invention is, therefore, claimed in any of its forms or modifications within the proper scope of the appended claims appropriately interpreted in accordance with the doctrine of equivalents.
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
11480670, | Sep 13 2017 | SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO , LTD | Tag and tag position determination device and method |
8115595, | Apr 25 2006 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8115604, | Apr 25 2006 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8354917, | Feb 21 2007 | IMPINJ, INC | RFID tag chips and tags complying with only a limited number of remaining commands and methods |
8378790, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
8384522, | Sep 03 2008 | CommScope, Inc. of North Carolina | Radio frequency identification triangulation systems for communications patching systems and related methods of determining patch cord connectivity information |
8446258, | Feb 21 2007 | IMPINJ, INC | Causing RFID tag to change how many remaining commands it will comply with |
8482389, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8508343, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
8598989, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
8604913, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
8624712, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
8653948, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8665066, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8698604, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc | Reader control system |
8749355, | Jun 09 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
9014077, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Methods and apparatus for conducting financial transactions |
9672395, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
9679172, | Apr 25 2005 | LG Electronics Inc. | Reader control system |
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
4075632, | Aug 27 1974 | The United States of America as represented by the United States | Interrogation, and detection system |
4761778, | Apr 11 1985 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | Coder-packetizer for random accessing in digital communication with multiple accessing |
4796023, | Dec 05 1986 | Stabilized binary tree protocol | |
4799059, | Mar 14 1986 | Itron, Inc | Automatic/remote RF instrument monitoring system |
4845504, | Apr 08 1987 | AMP Incorporated; AMP INVESTMENTS, INC ; WHITAKER CORPORATION, THE | Mobile radio network for nationwide communications |
4862453, | Oct 03 1986 | MARCONI COMPANY LIMITED, THE, THE GROVE, WARREN LANE, STANMORE, MIDDLESEX HA7 4LY, UNITED KINGDOM | Communication system |
4926182, | May 30 1986 | Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha | Microwave data transmission apparatus |
4955018, | Nov 10 1987 | Echelon Systems Corporation | Protocol for network having plurality of intelligent cells |
4969146, | Nov 10 1987 | Echelon Systems Corporation | Protocol for network having a plurality of intelligent cells |
5019813, | Apr 13 1987 | N V NEDERLANDSCHE APPARATENFABRIEK NEDAP, A CORP OF THE NETHERLANDS | System for the contactless exchange of data |
5025486, | Dec 09 1988 | Dallas Semiconductor Corporation | Wireless communication system with parallel polling |
5046066, | Feb 09 1987 | Cisco Technology, Inc | Wireless local area network |
5055968, | Jul 04 1988 | Sony Corporation | Thin electronic device having an integrated circuit chip and a power battery and a method for producing same |
5121407, | Sep 27 1990 | PITTWAY CORPORATION, A CORP OF PA | Spread spectrum communications system |
5124697, | Oct 16 1989 | Motorola, Inc. | Acknowledge-back pager |
5142694, | Jul 24 1989 | Motorola, Inc. | Reporting unit |
5144313, | Apr 24 1991 | Q-Free ASA | Method for processing transmitted and reflected signals for removing unwanted signals and noise from wanted signals |
5144668, | Jan 25 1991 | Motorola, Inc.; MOTOROLA, INC , A CORP OF DE | Signal overlap detection in a communication system |
5150114, | Nov 10 1989 | NXP B V | Polling-type information transmission system |
5150310, | Aug 30 1989 | AMPERSAND SPECIALTY MATERIALS VENTURES, L P ; MORGAN, HOLLAND FUND II, L P | Method and apparatus for position detection |
5164985, | Oct 27 1987 | CEDCOM NETWORK SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED | Passive universal communicator system |
5168510, | Mar 06 1984 | DBI Corporation | Spread spectrum-time diversity communications systems and transceivers for multidrop area networks |
5194860, | Nov 16 1989 | ABB METERING SYSTEMS LIMITED | Radio telemetry systems with channel selection |
5231646, | Mar 16 1992 | Kyros Corporation | Communications system |
5266925, | Sep 30 1991 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Electronic identification tag interrogation method |
5307463, | Mar 08 1990 | Allen-Bradley Company, Inc. | Programmable controller communication module |
5365551, | Dec 15 1992 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Data communication transceiver using identification protocol |
5373503, | Apr 30 1993 | Information Technology, Inc. | Group randomly addressed polling method |
5449296, | Mar 07 1994 | Cabel-Con, Inc. USA | Cable connector apparatus for preventing radiation leakage |
5461627, | Dec 24 1991 | Proxim Wireless Corporation | Access protocol for a common channel wireless network |
5479416, | Sep 30 1993 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Apparatus and method for error detection and correction in radio frequency identification device |
5500650, | Dec 15 1992 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Data communication method using identification protocol |
5530702, | May 31 1994 | Mobile Technics LLC | System for storage and communication of information |
5550547, | Sep 12 1994 | INTERMEC IP CORP , A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE | Multiple item radio frequency tag identification protocol |
5583850, | Dec 15 1992 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Data communication system using identification protocol |
5608739, | Sep 30 1993 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Apparatus and method for error detection and correction in radio frequency identification device |
5619648, | Nov 30 1994 | Alcatel Lucent | Message filtering techniques |
5621412, | Apr 26 1994 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Multi-stage transponder wake-up, method and structure |
5625628, | Mar 15 1995 | U S BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Aloha optimization |
5627544, | Dec 15 1992 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Data communication method using identification protocol |
5640151, | Jun 15 1990 | OL SECURITY LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY | Communication system for communicating with tags |
5649296, | Jun 19 1995 | THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AS COLLATERAL AGENT | Full duplex modulated backscatter system |
5686902, | Jun 15 1990 | SAVI TECHNOLOGY, INC | Communication system for communicating with tags |
5790946, | Jul 15 1993 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Wake up device for a communications system |
5805586, | May 02 1995 | Motorola, Inc | Method, device and data communication system for multilink polling |
5841770, | Dec 15 1992 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Data communication system using indentification protocol |
5914671, | Feb 27 1997 | Round Rock Research, LLC | System and method for locating individuals and equipment, airline reservation system, communication system |
5936560, | Dec 04 1996 | HANGER SOLUTIONS, LLC | Data compression method and apparatus performing high-speed comparison between data stored in a dictionary window and data to be compressed |
5940006, | Dec 12 1995 | THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AS COLLATERAL AGENT | Enhanced uplink modulated backscatter system |
5942987, | Sep 09 1994 | INTERMEC IP CORP , A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE | Radio frequency identification system with write broadcast capability |
5952922, | Dec 31 1996 | THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AS COLLATERAL AGENT | In-building modulated backscatter system |
5966471, | Dec 23 1997 | United States of America | Method of codebook generation for an amplitude-adaptive vector quantization system |
5974078, | Mar 17 1993 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Modulated spread spectrum in RF identification systems method |
5988510, | Feb 13 1997 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Tamper resistant smart card and method of protecting data in a smart card |
6038455, | Sep 25 1995 | Cirrus Logic, INC | Reverse channel reuse scheme in a time shared cellular communication system |
6061344, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications system |
6072801, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages, method of establishing wireless communications, and communications system |
6075973, | May 18 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of communications in a backscatter system, interrogator, and backscatter communications system |
6097292, | Apr 01 1996 | Cubic Corporation | Contactless proximity automated data collection system and method |
6104333, | Dec 19 1996 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Methods of processing wireless communication, methods of processing radio frequency communication, and related systems |
6118789, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications system |
6130602, | May 13 1996 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Radio frequency data communications device |
6130623, | Dec 31 1996 | THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AS COLLATERAL AGENT | Encryption for modulated backscatter systems |
6150921, | Oct 17 1996 | RF TECHNOLOGIES | Article tracking system |
6157633, | Jun 10 1996 | AT&T MOBILITY II LLC | Registration of mobile packet data terminals after disaster |
6169474, | Apr 23 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of communications in a backscatter system, interrogator, and backscatter communications system |
6177858, | Dec 01 1995 | WINSTEAD ASSESTS LTD | Method for remotely interrogating tags, and station and tag implementing said method |
6185307, | Jul 16 1997 | Gilbarco Inc | Cryptography security for remote dispenser transactions |
6192222, | Sep 03 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Backscatter communication systems, interrogators, methods of communicating in a backscatter system, and backscatter communication methods |
6216132, | Nov 20 1997 | IBM Corporation | Method and system for matching consumers to events |
6226300, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages, and establishing communications using a tree search technique that skips levels |
6229987, | May 18 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of communications in a backscatter system, interrogator, and backscatter communications system |
6243012, | Dec 31 1996 | Lucent Technologies Inc | Inexpensive modulated backscatter reflector |
6265962, | Sep 03 1997 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method for resolving signal collisions between multiple RFID transponders in a field |
6265963, | Dec 19 1996 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Methods of processing wireless communication, methods of processing radio frequency communication, and related systems |
6275476, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications system |
6282186, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications system |
6288629, | May 23 1997 | INTERMEC IP CORP , A CORPORATION OF DELAWARE | Method of using write--ok flag for radio frequency (RF) transponders (RF Tags) |
6307847, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications systems |
6307848, | Apr 18 2000 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages, method of establishing wireless communications, and communications system |
6324211, | Apr 24 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Interrogators communication systems communication methods and methods of processing a communication signal |
6415439, | Feb 04 1997 | MUSICQUBED INNOVATIONS, LLC | Protocol for a wireless control system |
6459726, | Apr 24 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Backscatter interrogators, communication systems and backscatter communication methods |
6483427, | Oct 17 1996 | RF TECHNOLOGIES, INC | Article tracking system |
6566997, | Dec 03 1999 | ASSA ABLOY AB | Interference control method for RFID systems |
6570487, | Jan 24 1997 | AXCESS INTERNATIONAL, INC | Distributed tag reader system and method |
6707376, | Aug 09 2002 | SENSORMATIC ELECTRONICS, LLC | Pulsed power method for increased read range for a radio frequency identification reader |
6714559, | Dec 04 1991 | INNOVATIO IP VENTURES | Redundant radio frequency network having a roaming terminal communication protocol |
6771634, | Jun 10 1996 | AT&T MOBILITY II LLC | Registration of mobile packet data terminals after disaster |
6778096, | Nov 17 1997 | Lenovo PC International | Method and apparatus for deploying and tracking computers |
6784787, | Nov 14 1997 | Zebra Technologies Corporation | Identification system |
6850510, | Oct 05 1995 | AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES GENERAL IP SINGAPORE PTE LTD | Hierarchical data collection network supporting packetized voice communications among wireless terminals and telephones |
6919793, | Sep 09 1994 | Intermec IP CORP | Radio frequency identification system write broadcast capability |
7026935, | Nov 10 2003 | IMPINJ, INC | Method and apparatus to configure an RFID system to be adaptable to a plurality of environmental conditions |
7315522, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Communication methods using slotted replies |
7385477, | May 13 1996 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Radio frequency data communications device |
7672260, | Feb 19 1998 | Round Rock Research, LLC | Method of addressing messages and communications system |
20030235184, | |||
20050060069, | |||
20050207364, | |||
20060022800, | |||
20060022801, | |||
20060022815, | |||
20060056325, | |||
20060209781, | |||
20070139164, | |||
20070176751, | |||
20080007412, | |||
20080042806, | |||
20080048832, | |||
20080048835, | |||
20080129485, | |||
20080180221, | |||
20090322491, | |||
EP779520, | |||
EP1072128, | |||
WO1999043127, | |||
WO2008094728, | |||
WO9748216, |
Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
Oct 23 2003 | Round Rock Research, LLC | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / | |||
Jun 28 2007 | Micron Technology, Inc | Keystone Technology Solutions, LLC | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 019825 | /0542 | |
Dec 22 2009 | Keystone Technology Solutions, LLC | Micron Technology, Inc | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 023839 | /0881 | |
Dec 23 2009 | Micron Technology, Inc | Round Rock Research, LLC | ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 023786 | /0416 |
Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
Date | Maintenance Schedule |
Aug 17 2013 | 4 years fee payment window open |
Feb 17 2014 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Aug 17 2014 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
Aug 17 2016 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
Aug 17 2017 | 8 years fee payment window open |
Feb 17 2018 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Aug 17 2018 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
Aug 17 2020 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
Aug 17 2021 | 12 years fee payment window open |
Feb 17 2022 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Aug 17 2022 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
Aug 17 2024 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |