doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 1 Project: IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [SG3a Down Selection Subcommittee Closing Report] Date Submitted: [13Nov02] Source: [Mary DuVal] Company [Texas Instruments] Address [P.O. Box , MS 847 Plano, TX USA 75086] Voice:[+1 (972) ], FAX: [+1 (972) ], Source: [Ian Gifford] Company [Consultant] Address [23 Kelshill Road, Chelmsford, MA USA 01863] Voice:[ ], FAX: [ ], Re: [02/385r0] Abstract:[SG3a Closing Report for Down Selection Subcommittee.] Purpose:[The purpose of this submission is to summarize decision made during the down selection subcommittee meetings in the November Plenary Session.] Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release:The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 2 IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) SG3a Down Selection Subcommittee Closing Report

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 3 Contents Down Selection Decision Summary Scoring Discussion

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 4 Down Selection Process Options Considered with Straw Poll Results –Separate Evaluation/Down Selection Voting: 42 –Evaluation is the Down Selection Voting (combined) : 3 –Down Selection Voting only: 0 –Abstain: 14 Red = Winner straw poll

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 5 Evaluation Process Evaluation is Really 2 discussions (or phases) –Criteria Importance Level Mandatory/Optional ABC –A: Mandatory requirement –B: Important desired requirement –C: A nice to have requirement Weighted values (0 – 10) None –Scoring Pass/Fail Pugh Matrix –Better (+), Same, Worse (-) than a Baseline Solution Rating (n > 2) None

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 6 Evaluation Process Options Matrix Scoring Criteria Importance Level Mandatory/ Optional ABC RatingWeighted Values Pass/Fail  Pugh Matrix  Rating (0-5) 

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 7 Evaluation Process NoCriteria Importance LevelScoringStraw Poll Count 1Mandatory/OptionalPass/Fail0 2Mandatory/OptionalRating (n >2)7 3ABC RatingPass/Fail0 4ABC RatingRating (n>2)40 5Weighted ValuesPugh Matrix0 6Weighted ValuesRating (n>2)5 7NonePass/Fail 8NonePugh Matrix 9NoneRating (0-5) 10None 11Abstain1 Grey = Voted off the straw poll Red = Winner straw poll

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 8 Criteria Importance Level Results

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 9 Criteria Importance Level Results (cont.)

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 10 Down Selection Voting Procedure Options Considered with Straw Poll Results –Ranking vote (lowest rank voted off): 2 –Vote for desired proposal (lowest # of votes is off): 14 –2 staged vote (eliminate low support proposals, vote for desired proposal): 22/32 –Two votes per voting member (lowest number off): 18/21 –Abstain: 5/5 Red = Winner straw poll

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 11 Down Selection Procedure Activity Ad-Hoc group met Tuesday evening to develop proposed text for sub-committee Sub-committee reviewed on Thursday, just prior to this presentation (update in minutes of this session)

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 12 Scoring Discussion Document scoring method in Annex for inclusion in IEEE P /105 Alternate PHY Selection Criteria Next Decisions –Extent of Scoring: tabulated information vs. tabulated information with committee analysis –Criteria to Score: only most important (A’s only) vs. all criteria –Definition of N > 2 Rating ++ / + / 0 / - / -- + / 0 / - Unacceptable / Acceptable / Superior

doc.: IEEE /477r0 Submission November 2002 Mary DuVal, TI and Ian Gifford, ConsultantSlide 13 Thank you to everyone for driving towards solid decisions!!!!