Analysis and design of a high‐compliance ultra‐high output resistance current mirror employing positive shunt feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY This paper reports a novel high‐compliance, very accurate and ultra‐high output resistance current mirror. These features are achieved by employing a combination of negative and positive feedbacks in the proposed circuit. This makes the proposed current mirror unique in gathering ultra‐high output resistance, high compliance, and high accuracy ever demanded merits. The principle of operation of this structure is discussed, its main formulas are derived and its outstanding performance is verified by Cadence post‐layout simulations. Designed in the IBM 130‐nm standard CMOS process, the circuit consumes 230 × 110 µm 2 of silicon area. Post‐layout simulation results indicate that with a 3.3‐V power supply, output voltage compliance of 0.93V Supply is achieved at a maximum output current of 96 μA. Moreover, an extremely ultra‐high output resistance of 320 GΩ is achieved, which is one of the highest reported values of output resistance for current mirrors implemented using regular CMOS technology. The −3 dB upper cut‐off frequency of the proposed circuit is 100 MHz and the output/input current transfer error is 0.1%. The whole circuit, including bias circuitry, consumes 0.57 mW when delivering 96 μA to the load. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".