MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988982642 · doi:10.1109/jqe.2003.821485

On the Performance Analysis and Design of an Integrated Front-End PIN/HBT Photoreceiver

2004· article· en· W1988982642 on OpenAlexaff
N. R. Das, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransimpedance amplifierAmplifierGain–bandwidth productPhotodetectorFully differential amplifierCommon emitterBandwidth (computing)Power bandwidthDirect-coupled amplifierHeterojunction bipolar transistorOperational amplifierElectronic engineeringOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsEngineeringTransistorVoltageTelecommunicationsBipolar junction transistor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A detailed study on the performance analysis and optimum design of an integrated front-end PIN/HBT photoreceiver for fiber-optic communication is presented. Receiver circuits with two different transimpedance amplifiers-a single-stage common emitter (CE) amplifier and a three-stage amplifier comprising a CE amplifier and two emitter followers (EFs), are analyzed assuming a standard load of 50 /spl Omega/. A technique to include the transit-time effect of a PIN photodetector on the overall receiver circuit analysis is introduced and discussed. Gain-bandwidth product (GB) and gain-bandwidth-sensitivity measure product (GBS) are obtained as functions of feedback resistance (R/sub F/) and various device parameters. Hence, some optimum designs are suggested using a photodetector of area 100 /spl mu/m/sup 2/ and with a feedback resistance of 500 /spl Omega/. The bandwidth plays a major role in determining the optimum designs for maximum GB and maximum GBS. A bandwidth >8 GHz has been obtained for the photoreceiver even with a single-stage CE amplifier. The optimum design for a receiver with a three-stage amplifier shows a bandwidth of 35 GHz which is suitable for receivers operating well beyond 40 Gb/s; however, in this case, the gain is reduced. The performance of different fixed square-emitter structures are investigated to choose the optimum designs corresponding to different gains. Very low power dissipation has been estimated for the optimized devices. The noise performance of the devices with optimum designs was calculated in terms of the minimum detectable optical power for a fixed bit-error rate of 10/sup -9/. The present design indicates that GB and noise performance can be improved by using an optimum device design.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Quantum ElectronicsSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207