MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102582812 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2002.1010581

Gain/phase imbalance and DC offset compensation in quadrature modulators

2003· article· en· W2102582812 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Amplifier Design
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffset (computer science)Quadrature (astronomy)DC biasElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)Computer sciencePhysicsOpticsElectrical engineeringVoltageEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a technique to estimate gain and phase imbalances and DC offsets in a quadrature modulator and to pre-compensate the in-phase and quadrature signals, so that image suppression is maximized and LO leakage is minimized at the modulator output. To validate the technique, an experiment with two 2.5 GHz direct modulators was conducted, and the results show that both the image suppression and LO leakage can be improved by at least 20 dB.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Power Amplifier DesignFrench-language works237,207