Every question of this course

Q1.1 What powers an Ambient IoT device?

• Energy harvesting, with either no battery at all or a capacitor holding a little charge
• A battery that lasts ten years and is then replaced
• A very small rechargeable battery, topped up over the air

The founding study's own words are "powered by energy harvesting, being either battery-less or with limited energy storage capability (i.e., using a capacitor)". what an Ambient IoT device is, in the founding study

Q1.2 Which of these did the founding study name as a case existing technology did not cover?

• Video calls from moving vehicles
• Networks shared between two operators
• Devices that must be a millimetre thick and never maintained

The study named extreme conditions, millimetre-thin maintenance-free devices, and places where an ordinary battery cannot be used. the gap the founding study named

Q1.3 How small is the power target the radio solutions study set out to design for?

• About one microwatt at peak
• About one watt at peak
• About one milliwatt at peak

The report's scope names devices of "~1 µW peak power consumption, has energy storage". the scope of the RAN solutions study report

Q1.4 What does the architecture specification say the first release of this work is limited to?

• Any public 5G network worldwide
• Networks operating only above 24 GHz
• An isolated private network that does not interact with a public network

TS 23.369 states that in this Release the AIoT system is defined as an isolated private network, such as SNPN, that does not interact with a public network. the scope of the architecture specification

Q2.1 What does the prefix `FS_` on a work item's short name tell you?

• That it is a fast-tracked item with a shortened approval
• That it is a final specification ready for implementation
• That it is a feasibility study, which investigates and writes a report

A study item's short name always starts FS_, for "feasibility study". It investigates and produces a report, not a specification. 10 of them are studies

Q2.2 Which document opened the whole Ambient IoT area, and at which meeting?

• SP-250377, at plenary SP-107
• RP-232404, at plenary RP-101
• SP-220085, at plenary SP-95-e

SP-220085 was approved at SP-95-e and started the founding SA1 study. RP-232404 opened the RAN feasibility study later. SP-220085

Q2.3 What is the difference between a CR and a pCR?

• A CR edits a published specification, a pCR edits a report still being written
• A CR is proposed, a pCR is approved
• A CR comes from a company, a pCR from a working group

A CR is one edit to a published specification; a pCR is the same thing aimed at a report that is still being drafted. 1538 Ambient IoT documents of type CR

Q2.4 Which kind of document is the most common in this area?

• Letters between groups
• Discussion papers
• Change requests

3973 discussion papers, against 3620 pCRs, 1538 CRs and 351 letters. Most of the paper is argument, not text. 3973 Ambient IoT documents of type discussion

Q3.1 Which two groups filed the most Ambient IoT documents?

• RAN2 and RAN3
• SA1 and SA2
• RAN1 and SA2

RAN1 filed 2421 and SA2 filed 2125. The next group, SA3, filed 1349. RAN1

Q3.2 Which group sent by far the most letters to other groups?

• RAN1, with 36
• SA3, with 38
• SA2, with 139 of the area's 351

SA2 sent 139. The next two, SA3 and RAN2, sent 38 each. SA2

Q3.3 Four CT work items each show 959 documents. What does that mean?

• They share one short name, so the same 959 documents are counted against each
• Each of the four ran a separate effort of that size
• Their counts can be added together to give the total for the CT groups

Document counts are per short name. Four work items share the short name AmbientIoT-CT, so each shows the same figure. Adding them is wrong. AmbientIoT-CT

Q3.4 What is unusual about CT6 in this data?

• It is a plenary rather than a working group
• It leads a work item and has filed no document at all
• It filed more documents than any CT group

CT6 is the seventeenth group in the register and leads a work item, but the data holds no document from it. The data does not say why. CT6

Q3.5 Which group's Ambient IoT documents stop earliest?

• CT3, whose last one is dated 2026-05-26
• SA1, whose last one is dated 2025-05-09
• RAN5, which only started in 2026

SA1 started first, in 2022, and filed its last Ambient IoT document on 2025-05-09. Requirements work finishes before the rest. SA1

Q4.1 Which single study carries more documents than any other item in this area?

• The SA3 security study
• The SA1 founding study
• The RAN solutions study, FS_Ambient_IoT_solutions

FS_Ambient_IoT_solutions carries 2357 documents, more than any other work item or study item in the area. FS_Ambient_IoT_solutions

Q4.2 What did the RAN feasibility study set out to establish?

• How much operators would pay for it
• Which frequency bands were free
• Whether a new 3GPP IoT technology relying on ultra-low complexity, ultra-low power devices was possible

Its own words are "This study targets at a new 3GPP IoT technology, suitable for deployment in a 3GPP system, which relies on ultra-low complexity devices with ultra-low power consumption". what the RAN feasibility study set out to do

Q4.3 Which two documents did RAN1 and RAN2 respectively get out of the radio work?

• RAN1 the physical layer TS 38.291, RAN2 the medium access control protocol TS 38.391
• Both share TS 38.300 and nothing else
• RAN1 the medium access control protocol, RAN2 the physical layer

RAN1 owns TS 38.291, the physical layer. RAN2 owns TS 38.391, the medium access control protocol, and the overall description TS 38.300. TS 38.291

Q4.4 The architecture work item states its focus. What is it?

• Topology 2 only
• Device 1 in Topology 1
• Every device type in every topology

The work item says it specifies architecture support "as per conclusions documented in TR 23.700-13 (clause 8), focusing on Device 1 in Topology 1". what the architecture normative work set out to do

Q4.5 What does the protocol work item say about when stage 3 may start?

• Stage 3 is decided by each CT group separately
• Stage 3 runs in parallel with stage 2 from the beginning
• Stage 3 shall start only after the applicable normative stage 2 work is available

The CT work item description states it plainly — stage 3 work shall be started only after the applicable normative stage 2 work is available. what the protocol work set out to do

Q5.1 How does a specification get into this register at all?

• Its owning group asks for it to be listed
• It contains the words "Ambient IoT" in its title
• A work item description declares it impacted, or at least ten Ambient IoT documents name it

Those are the two ways in. Title wording is how the new documents are told apart from the pre-existing ones, not how they qualify. 53 specifications are touched by Ambient IoT

Q5.2 Which specification carries the most change requests in this area?

• TS 23.501, the architecture of the 5G system
• TS 23.369, the architecture support for Ambient IoT
• TS 38.413, the protocol between radio network and core

TS 23.369 carries 524 change requests on 816 documents. TS 38.413's 77 is the largest among the pre-existing documents. TS 23.369

Q5.3 What is the difference between the two piles TS 23.369 and TS 23.501 sit in?

• TS 23.369 was written for this work; TS 23.501 already existed and was edited
• TS 23.369 is a report and TS 23.501 a specification
• They belong to different working groups

TS 23.369 is new for Ambient IoT. TS 23.501, the architecture of the 5G system itself, is an ordinary 5G document that took 14 change requests. TS 23.501

Q5.4 What can this course say about TS 29.568 and TS 33.340?

• They are named as impacted, and nothing more — the catalogue holds no title, group or status for either
• They are the two newest Ambient IoT specifications
• They were withdrawn before phase 2 began

Both are declared impacted by phase 2 work item descriptions, but the specification catalogue on this machine holds nothing about them. 29.568

Q5.5 What happens to a technical report once it is published?

• It becomes a specification at the next release
• It is written, published once and then closed
• It is maintained alongside the specification it supports

A report records the thinking and is then closed. The specifications that follow it are separate documents. TR 22.840

Q6.1 How many of the 37 work items stand at 100 per cent complete?

• 10
• All 37
• 19

Nineteen of the 37 stand at 100 per cent, according to the completion field of each item's row in the 3GPP Work Plan. 19 of the 37 work items stand at 100%

Q6.2 Which of the ten studies is not finished?

• The phase 2 security study, FS_AIoT_SEC_Ph2
• The phase 2 charging study, FS_AmbientIoT_Ph2_CH, at 0 per cent
• The outdoor active-device study

Nine of the ten studies stand at 100 per cent. The phase 2 charging study, approved only at plenary SP-112, stands at 0 with a target of 2026-12-12. FS_AmbientIoT_Ph2_CH

Q6.3 What is a completion percentage in this data actually a reading of?

• Measured progress against the specification's text
• The completion field of that item's row in the 3GPP Work Plan, as fresh as its last edit
• A vote taken at the last plenary

It is a field in a work plan row. The row records when it was last modified, not whether anything has moved since. 19 of the 37 work items stand at 100%

Q6.4 The umbrella item Ambient_IoT_Solutions stands at 80 per cent while both parts under it stand at 100. What does the data say about that?

• The parts are wrong
• The umbrella is wrong
• Nothing — the data does not say which is right

The disagreement is real and unexplained. Reading either figure as the true one is a guess. Ambient_IoT_Solutions

Q6.5 Which piece of Rel-19 work is clearly still running?

• Conformance testing, at 37 per cent with a target of 2026-12-11
• The architecture work, AmbientIoT-ARC
• The RAN core work, Ambient_IoT_Solutions-Core

Conformance testing started on 2025-12-12 and is about a third done. The architecture and RAN core items both stand at 100 per cent. Ambient_IoT_Solutions_plus_CT1_SA3-ConTest

Q7.1 What is the right thing to type into a 3GPP document search to find this work?

• The name of the company that proposed it
• The work item's short name, such as AmbientIoT-ARC
• The phrase "battery-less device"

Every document is filed against a work item's short name. The acronym is the handle the database is organised around. 37 Ambient IoT work items and study items

Q7.2 Why must the outdoor active-device study's start date never be quoted?

• It is confidential
• It reads 2019-03-07, years before Ambient IoT existed — a leftover from a template
• It is missing from the data

The start date is a template leftover. Its finish date, 2026-03-03, is real. FS_Ambient_IoT_Outdoor_Active

Q7.3 What does this record hold about why a group decided something?

• The vote counts
• Nothing — only the outcome word beside a document number
• The debate, summarised

The data holds approved, agreed, revised, noted, merged or withdrawn, and nothing about the reasoning behind any of them. SP-220085

Q7.4 Four letters between groups are named in the register. What can be said about their contents?

• Their full text, which the register carries
• A summary written by the receiving group
• Their subject line and sender, and nothing more — the text is not on this machine

The register carries each letter by number, title, sender and meeting. What any of them actually said is not held here. S2-2605244

Q7.5 What can this record say about Ambient IoT products or deployments?

• Which chips have been announced
• How many networks have trialled it
• Nothing at all — it is 3GPP's paperwork and stops at the specification

Nothing here says whether anybody has built such a device, sold one, or run a network with them. 10771 Ambient IoT documents