WO2008135092A1

WO2008135092A1 - Remuneration method for information providers in a sensor network

Info

Publication number: WO2008135092A1
Application number: PCT/EP2007/054424
Authority: WO
Inventors: Srdjan Krco
Original assignee: Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
Priority date: 2007-05-08
Filing date: 2007-05-08
Publication date: 2008-11-13

Abstract

The present invention relates to a method for service remuneration in a network with a main service provider (3) and at least one sub-provider (5a; 5b; 5c), where the main service provider provides a service to an end user (2), comprising the steps of receiving a service request message from the end user, determining which information the service request requires, collecting information from the at least one sub-provider, calculating the remuneration for the collected information, delivering a service response to the end user, and sending remuneration information to the at least one sub-provider. The advantage of the inventive method is that remuneration can be given in an easy way to sub-providers, and that the remuneration method takes account on the type of information given by the sub-provider.

Description

TITLE

REMUNERATION METHOD FOR INFORMATION PROVIDERS IN A SENSOR NETWORK

TECHNICAL FIELD

The invention relates to a method for service remuneration and charging in a network with service providers and sub-service providers.

BACKGROUND

Today, mobile network services, e.g. a mobile phone broadcast system, are provided by the mobile network operators or by third party companies that have appropriate agreements and contracts with the mobile network operators. The end user, i.e. the person using a hand-held mobile phone, is charged for the services used depending on, among others, the duration of the calls, the dialled number, i.e. the used network, the amount of downloaded data and/or according to some other similar principle. The services provided to the end user are pushed from the core network towards the network edges, i.e. the end users in the network.

The systems used today are suitable for situations where each service provider is responsible for the handling of the complete service, including the creation of the service, creation of the content and the charging, and where the service is provided directly to the customers.

However, in new and coming network scenarios, e.g. in a sensor network, one service will be created combining information from a number of entities, with the main service provider coordinating their inputs, interacting with the service users and providing charging mechanism. In other words, the main service providers are in these scenarios not themselves responsible for creating the service content, but are using mini information providers, or sub- providers, to obtain the information required for creating a service response in order to be able to deliver the content of the service. These sub-providers may be individual mobile subscribers that own a number of sensors and are willing to share the information these sensors produce for a small fee. A sub- provider may also be a company having different sensors installed at the company ground, either on one site or distributed on several sites. These sensors may be used internally at the company, but the company may also be prepared to share the information provided by the sensors. Hence, a solution for crediting or paying the sub-providers for the information they provide is required.

In a simple service, the input from one sub-provider may suffice in order to create a service response. In a more complex service, the service request from a user may require the input from more than one sensor and also from different types of sensors. These sensors may be located at one or a number of different locations and may belong to different sub-providers, which will inevitably lead to a variable cost of service provision.

The charging mechanisms of today do not take these parameters into account. Therefore, a new approach is required.

SUMMARY

An object of the invention is therefore to provide a method for service remuneration and charging in a network with a main service provider and sub-providers.

The solution to this problem according to the invention is described in claim 1 regarding the method. The other claims contain advantageous embodiments and further developments of the method according to the invention.

With a method for service remuneration in a network with a main service provider and at least one sub-provider, where the main service provider provides a service to an end user, comprising the steps of receiving a service request message from the end user, determining which information the service request requires, collecting information from at least one sub- provider, calculating the remuneration for the collected information and delivering a service response to the end user, the object of the invention is achieved in that remuneration information is sent to at least one sub-provider.

By this first embodiment of the method according to the invention, a method is provided in which remuneration can be given to one or more sub-providers which delivers information to the main service provider. In this way, a main service provider can deliver services to an end user without having to provide the complete service. The sub-providers will deliver information to the main service provider in exchange for remuneration. This makes it possible for a main provider to pay small amounts to several different sub-providers depending on how a service has been composed utilizing information from the sub-providers.

In an advantageous development of the invention, a share of the total remuneration belonging to a particular sub-provider is estimated using an availability factor and an information significance factor. The advantage of this is that the sub-providers are remunerated in dependence of the significance of the information that they supply.

In an advantageous development of the invention, the availability factor is dependent on the required number of sensors and the available number of sensors. This means that if more sensors are available, the information from each sensor will be cheaper.

In an advantageous development of the invention, a service complexity factor for the requested service is calculated and this service complexity factor is used to estimate the service cost for the service. The service cost will determine the remuneration, since the remuneration will be a part of the complete service cost.

In an advantageous development of the invention, the service complexity factor is dependent on one or more of the following parameters: the number of different sensor types required, the availability factor, the processing cost factor and/or the roaming factor. By using one or more of these parameters, an estimate of the service cost can be made.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention will be described in greater detail in the following, with reference to the embodiments that are shown in the attached drawings, in which

Fig. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a schematic communication system used for an embodiment according to the invention, and

Fig. 2 is a sequence diagram illustrating exchange of messages for an embodiment according to the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The embodiments of the invention with further developments described in the following are to be regarded only as examples and are in no way to limit the scope of the protection provided by the patent claims.

The inventive solution is designed and adapted for sensor network service provisions in a network system, e.g. a mobile communication network. In the inventive method, the main service provider provides a complete service to the end users, by using information from one or more sub-provider in order to create the service.

In order to allow for a more flexible charging model taking into account a number of different parameters, such as availability, complexity of the service and network factors, the inventive method will allow for the calculation of the cost for each individual service delivery.

In a first embodiment of the inventive method, the service provision chain will comprise a mini information provider, also called a sub-provider. A sub- provider may be any mobile subscriber that provides access via a mobile station to any sensor or actuator in the surrounding area. The main service provider interacts with the service end users and provides requested service to the end users based on inputs from a number of sub-providers. Since the inputs are gathered from a variable number of different sub-providers the actual cost of the service creation and delivery depends on the service request and is hence variable.

The inventive method thus comprises a service cost calculation algorithm to determine the service complexity and consequently the service cost for each service request based on a number of parameters. Due to the involvement of sub-providers in the service chain, the method allows the main service provider to provide remuneration to the sub-providers for the information they provided in the course of a service delivery.

The contribution from each sub-provider is normally not equal when a service response is created. The inventive method will thus comprise an algorithm to determine the level of contribution of each sub-provider in relation to the other sub-providers based on a number of parameters.

An example of a communication system to be used for the service charging model is shown in fig. 1. The communication system 1 may be any wireless communication system but is preferably a mobile phone communication system of any kind, such as GSM or WCDMA. In the communication system 1 , a service end user 2 may communicate with a main service provider 3 through a communication link, indicated with arrow 4. The main service provider 3 may in turn communicate with a number of sub-providers 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d. The number of sub-providers that the main provider may access may be any number, depending on the service requested by the end user.

The main service provider 3 may communicate with the sub-providers through a communication link using either a home access network 7 or a visiting access network 9. The home access network 7 is the network owned or run by the main service provider 3. Using this network will not require any roaming which will thus be cheaper for the end user. The communication with the sub-providers through the home access network 7 is indicated with arrow 6. The visiting access network 9 is one or more network owned or run by a competitor to the main service provider 3. Using this network will require a roaming agreement with the owner of the network. The communication with the sub-providers through the visiting access network 9 is indicated with arrow 8.

A sub-provider may be a mobile subscriber with sensors attached to the mobile station, e.g. a mobile phone or any other device with mobile network interface. The sensors may be built into the mobile station or may be accessible via infrared or a short range radio link like Bluetooth. The sub- provider will provide the information gathered by the sensors when requested by the main service provider.

Each sub-provider 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d may be a mobile phone or a device using the same communication technique as a mobile phone. All sub- providers can thus be accessed by the main service provider through either the home access network 7 or the visiting access network 9. Each sub- provider comprises one or more sensors. In this embodiment, sub-provider 5a comprises sensors 5a1 , 5a2 and 5a3, sub-provider 5b comprises sensors 5b1 , 5b2 and 5b3, sub-provider 5c comprises sensors 5c1 , 5c2 and 5c3, and sub-provider 5d comprises sensors 5d1 , 5d2 and 5d3. The sub-providers may comprise different numbers and different types of sensors, depending on the services provided by the main service provider 3. The sensors may output e.g. temperature, humidity or different air quality parameters.

In fig. 2, a sequence diagram of the inventive method is shown. In the sequence diagram, the messages sent and received during service provision in relation to service charging are shown. The actions and messages will be described below. The process is initiated by a service end user 2 who issues a "Service Request" message 201 to its main service provider 3. After receiving a service request, the service provider performs an analysis of the request to determine the type, number and location of the sensors that have to be contacted in order to generate an accurate service response. The sub- providers, and thus the available types of information, that are available to the main service provider are advantageously known to the main service provider in advance, and stored in a table. In an embodiment, it is also possible that the main service provider seeks the required information when it receives the service request.

Based on the results of the analysis, an availability factor is determined. The number of sensors that are available at the required location and at the given time and that thus can be contacted in order to obtain the required information will determine the availability factor. More available sensors will give a higher availability factor.

The available sensors may be accessed through the home access network or a visiting access network. The ratio of the number of sensors accessible through the visiting access network to the number of sensors accessible through the home access network will determine the roaming factor. A higher percentage of sensors accessible through the home access network will give a lower roaming factor.

Depending on the user request, different post processing and data aggregation algorithms are used. This means that if the service request is a simple one, e.g. a question regarding the temperature in an area, the data processing and aggregation is simple. In this example, the final result may equal the average of the collected inputs after filtering out sensors located in air conditioned rooms. A more complex request, e.g. a question regarding the traffic conditions in a street or an area, will require correlation and aggregation of different types of data in an intelligent manner, i.e. will require more processing power and more complex algorithms. Based on the complexity of utilized algorithms, the processing cost factor will be determined. The more complex algorithms that are used, the higher the processing cost factor will be.

The overall complexity level of the service request is determined by combining the factors described above, i.e. the availability factor, the roaming factor and the processing cost factor. The complexity level defines the service cost based on a predefined mapping between these parameters. The service end user is informed about the service cost in step 202.

The end user may, depending on the service agreement with the service provider, abort the request when he/she has received the information of the service cost. If the request is aborted, no cost or only a small query cost will be imposed to the end user. It may also be such that the end user agrees to the service when he/she sends the request. When this is the case, the main service provider may start gathering the requested information in parallel with the estimation of the cost, which will save some time, especially for a more complex request.

When the end user agrees to the cost, or when there is no possibility to abort the service, the main service provider will send an "Information Request" message to the sub-providers selected in the analysis after the "Service Request" message 201. In this case, the sub-providers 5a, 5b ...5n will be queried with an "Information Request" message in step 203a, 203b ...203n. This "Information Request" message will trigger the sub-providers to output the information from the sensors corresponding to the information request. The sub-providers may e.g. output the temperature measured with sensors in different locations.

The "Information Request" message may be only a question that will output all information available to the addressed sub-provider. This will be efficient if the sub-provider only manages one or a few sensors. The "Information Request" message may also specify the requested output. This may be advantageous when the sub-provider manages several sensors or when the outputted response involves some computation by the sub-provider. One example is when the sub-provider will take the results from the sensors and process these in order to obtain an output. This may e.g. be the average temperature in an area measured by several sensors or a measure of the wind chill factor deducted from both temperature and wind speed.

The sub-providers will respond by sending an "Information Response" message 204a, 204b ...204n back to the main service provider. The "Information Response" message will contain the requested information.

When the main service provider has received the response from the sub- providers, the response to the end user will be processed and then forwarded to the end user in step 205.

The main service provider will also calculate the remuneration for the supplied information. The service fee charged to the end user by the main service provider for a particular service request is shared between the service provider and all sub-providers involved in creation of the corresponding service response.

The remuneration information is sent to the sub-providers with a "Remuneration Information" message 206a, 206b ...206n. The actual share each sub-provider receives is determined based on the availability factor and the information significance factor.

The availability factor is calculated during the service cost calculation. The availability factor depends on the number of available sensors that can measure the required value. A high availability factor means that there are several sub-providers available to provide the required information. The higher the availability factor is, the lower the price for the information will be.

The information significance factor depends on the level of significance of the provided information. Each input provided by the sub-providers contributes to the final result, but the level of contribution, i.e. the level of significance of the provided information for creation of the final results, may vary among them. For example, information from a more accurate sensor is more valuable than from a less accurate sensor, or a mean temperature value may be more valuable than a single temperature value. The higher the significance factor is, the higher the remuneration to a particular sub-provider will be.

The combination of the availability factor and the information significance factor gives the overall share indicator that defines the percentage of the available remuneration that belongs to a particular sub-provider.

The sum of remuneration given to the sub-providers equals a predefined percentage of the overall service cost charged to the end user.

The overall service cost may be determined based on different parameters.

In one embodiment, the service cost may be calculated as described in the following example.

A service end user with asthmatic problems may request information about the air quality in the city centre to make sure that he will not suffer major problems while shopping there. This is done by sending a "Service Request" message to the main service provider requesting information about the air quality in the city centre. The service provider will then analyse the request and may determine that two types of sensors are required. The air quality may in this example be estimated by using relative humidity and pollen count. In order to ensure a higher accuracy, it is advantageous to use more than one value for each type of information. E.g. three sensors of each type could be queried for information in order to receive a more reliable service result.

In one embodiment, the requested accuracy may be decided by the end user. The end user will in this case indicate the required accuracy, e.g. high, medium or low, when the request message is sent. The selected accuracy may influence the price and/or the response time. The main service provider will then determine how many sensors of the given type are available at the given location at present time. In this example, there are 25 relative humidity sensors and 10 pollen count sensors. Since only three sensors are required for the requested accuracy in this example, the availability factor is high. The availability factor Af may thus be calculated in the following way:

Af - ' rs. as,

where

Af = availability factor, rsi = number of required sensors of type i, as; = number of available sensors of type i.

Using the numbers of this example, the availability factor Af will be:

Af = 1/(3/25 + 3/10) = 1/0.42 = 2.38.

The only processing of the collected measurements required is averaging which is a simple operation. Therefore, the processing cost is low and the processing cost factor Pf may e.g. be set to equal 1. Medium processing cost may equal 2 and high processing cost may e.g. equal 3.

In this example, all the available sensors are accessible through a visiting access network only. This will make the roaming factor high. The roaming factor Rf may thus be calculated in the following way:

Rf = (number of sensors using visiting access network) / (total number of selected sensors).

Using the numbers of this example, the roaming factor Rf will be:

Rf = (3 relative humidity + 3 pollen count) / (3 relative humidity + 3 pollen count)] = 6/6 = 1. Based on the above, the complexity factor Cf may thus be calculated in the following way:

Cf = w, * Nt * — * w, * Pf * w_Λ * Rf

where Cf - complexity factor,

Nt - number of different sensor types required, Af = availability factor, Pf - processing cost factor, Rf - roaming factor, wi, W₂, W₃ and W₄ are weighting factors for each parameter determined by the main service provider.

The complexity factor Cf is then mapped to the service cost based on predefined rules determined by the main service provider.

The inventive method thus provides a number of advantages.

One advantage is that the service charging model for charging the service end users and the service remuneration model to remunerate the sub- providers are adapted for the new service environment. Thus, mobile subscribers can be sub-providers and they can be acknowledged in the service chain.

The inventive method also provides a new algorithm for the determination of the service cost that takes into consideration all specifics of the new service environment. The service cost is among others determined based on its level of complexity.

The inventive method further provides a new algorithm for the remuneration of sub-providers. The remuneration algorithm for the sub-providers will enable an adequate remuneration to all participants, i.e. sub-providers, in the service chain based on their contribution. The invention is not to be regarded as being limited to the embodiments described above, a number of additional variants and modifications being possible within the scope of the subsequent patent claims. The inventive method is applicable to different types of network, i.e. a wireless network, a wired network, a mobile network, a fixed network or any combination of these networks. Thus, the inventive method is applicable to all data and telecommunication networks where information is collected and where the information should be remunerated.

Claims

1. Method for service remuneration in a network with a main service provider (3) and at least one sub-provider (5a; 5b; 5c), where the main service provider provides a service to an end user (2), comprising the steps of:

receiving a service request message from the end user,

determining which information the service request requires,

collecting information from the at least one sub-provider,

- calculating the remuneration for the collected information,

delivering a service response to the end user, and

sending remuneration information to the at least one sub- provider.

2. Method according to claim 1 , wherein a percentage of the total remuneration belonging to a particular sub-provider, when information is collected from more than one sub-provider, is estimated using an availability factor and an information significance factor.

3. Method according to claim 2, wherein said availability factor Af is calculated using the following equation:

Af = ¹ rs.

Σ-:

where rsi = number of required sensors of type i, as; = number of available sensors of type i.

4. Method according to claim 2 or 3, wherein said information significance factor is dependent on the level of contribution that each sub-provider provides to the service response.

5. Method according to any of the preceding claims, further comprising the step of:

calculating a service complexity factor for the requested service and using the service complexity factor to estimate a service cost.

6. Method according to any of the preceding claims, further comprising the step of:

sending the service cost information to the end user.

7. Method according to claim 5 or 6, wherein the service complexity factor comprises on or more of: the number of different sensor types required, the availability factor, the processing cost factor and/or the roaming factor.

8. Method according to claim 7, wherein said complexity factor Cf is calculated using the following equation:

Cf = w, * Nt * — * w, * Pf * w_Λ * Rf

where Nt - number of different sensor types required,

Af = availability factor,

Pf - processing cost factor,

Rf - roaming factor, wi, W2, W3 and W₄ are weighting factors.

9. Method according to any of the preceding claims, wherein a sub- provider may comprise a plurality of further sub-providers.