MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082583466 · doi:10.1049/joe.2014.0044

CMOS time‐to‐digital converters for mixed‐mode signal processing

2014· article· en· W2082583466 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in PLL and VCO Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationCMOSComputer scienceSampling (signal processing)Electronic engineeringFilter (signal processing)EngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides an in‐depth review of the principles, architectures and design techniques of CMOS time‐to‐digital converters (TDCs). The classification of TDCs is introduced. It is followed by the examination of the parameters quantifying the performance of TDCs. Sampling TDCs including direct‐counter TDCs, tapped delay‐line TDCs, pulse‐shrinking delay‐line TDCs, cyclic pulse‐shrinking TDCs, direct‐counter TDCs with interpolation, vernier TDCs, flash TDCs, successive approximation TDCs and pipelined TDCs are studied and their pros and cons are compared. Noise‐shaping TDCs that reduce in‐band noise below technology limit are investigated. These TDCs include gated ring oscillator TDCs, switched ring oscillator TDCs, relaxation oscillator TDCs, ΔΣ TDCs and MASH TDCs. The performance of sampling and noise‐shaping TDCs is compared. The direction of future research on TDCs is explored.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.200 · 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