A comparative study of lock range of injection-locked active-inductor oscillators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the first study of the locking mechanism and lock range of injection-locked active inductor oscillators. A comparable study on the phase noise and lock range of active inductor oscillators and corresponding LC oscillators is carried out. Two 2.4 GHz oscillators, one active inductor oscillator and the other passive LC oscillator, are designed in IBM 0.13 μm 1.2 V CMOS technology and analyzed using Spectre using BSIM4 device models. Simulation results demonstrate that the phase noise of the active inductor oscillator is -70.45 dBc/Hz at 1 MHz frequency offset without locking and -117.9 dBc/Hz when locked to an external 2.4 GHz reference of phase noise -126.6 dBc/Hz. The phase noise of the LC oscillator is -105.1 dBc/Hz without locking and -126.1 dBc/Hz when locked. The upper and lower bounds of the frequency of the locking signal at which the injection-locked LC oscillator is locked are 2.4+0.02 GHz and 2.4-0.02 GHz, respectively where those of the injection-locked active inductor oscillator are 2.4+0.24 GHz and 2.4-0.12 GHz, respectively. The lock range of the injection-locked active inductor oscillator is 9 times that of the corresponding injection-locked passive LC oscillator with comparable phase noise.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".