MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074825541 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277499

A Systematic Approach Towards the Implementation of a Low-Noise Amplifier in Sub-Micron CMOS Technology

2006· article· en· W2074825541 on OpenAlexaff
Niladri Roy, Mani Najmabadi, R. Raut, Vijay Devabhaktuni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadio Frequency Integrated Circuit Design
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronic engineeringDesign flowComputer scienceCMOSModular designIntegrated circuit designElectronic design automationLow-noise amplifierNoise (video)AmplifierCircuit designPhase noiseElectrical engineeringEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-noise amplifiers (LNAs) are critical components for a wide variety of electronic circuits ranging from aerospace to Bluetooth applications. Typically, in the design phase preceding fabrication, an LNA needs to be designed/tuned for a given set of specifications (e.g. noise figure, power consumption, voltage gain etc.), which tend to be application-dependent. Traditional design based on simulation tools and trial-and-error is human-intensive and requires a high-degree of expertise from the circuit designer. As such, computer aided design (CAD) tools for LNA design are in great demand. This paper presents a new and systematic CAD approach for the design and tuning of LNAs in sub-micron CMOS technology. The approach has multiple phases. In the first phase, a detailed pre-analysis of the design specifications is carried out leading to knowledge-based ranking and selection of an appropriate LNA topology. In the design phase, concepts of single-stage design are exploited and the actual circuit is designed in a modular fashion leading to the initial design. Finally, as in any CAD approach, this design is put through a tuning phase so as to meet the given specifications. LNA design examples presented in the paper illustrate the proposed approach. Resulting circuits are shown to exceed the given specifications confirming its usefulness to designers

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio Frequency Integrated Circuit DesignFrench-language works237,207