A Switching-Based Phase Noise Model for CMOS Ring Oscillators Based on Multiple Thresholds Crossing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a ring oscillator with an arbitrary voltage swing, core transistors in delay cells typically move between saturation and triode region This can result in the overall timing jitter being dominated by timing jitter accumulated within a particular region. Based on multiple thresholds crossing concept, a new and more accurate way of handling such region change is developed. Specifically any crossing between two such regions, prior to the actual crossing of the threshold that triggers the next stage delay cell, is treated as an internal threshold crossing. The timing jitter is then the sum (in the rms sense) of the timing jitter accumulated across multiple thresholds crossing. The model agrees to within 2 dB with measurements, on differential pair based (both replica bias and physical resistor load) and current starved inverter based ring oscillators, fabricated in CMOS. Design insights from the model show that, for a differential pair ring oscillator that is originally designed with a given voltage swing such that the input transistors can be in triode, if voltage swing is reduced so that input transistors just do not go into triode, phase noise can be improved. A 7-dB phase noise improvement on an example design using a replica bias differential ring oscillator, based on this insight, is demonstrated.
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 | 0.001 | 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".