MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902567401 · doi:10.1002/mop.31614

Delay‐compensation block for first‐order low‐pass delta‐sigma modulators

2018· article· en· W2902567401 on OpenAlexaff
Anis Ben Arfi, Mohamed Helaoui, Fadhel M. Ghannouchi

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrowave and Optical Technology Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelta-sigma modulationField-programmable gate arrayElectronic engineeringLatency (audio)Compensation (psychology)Transfer functionComputer scienceEngineeringComputer hardwareElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsCMOS

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Implementing the Delta Sigma Modulator (DSM) processing blocks on hardware is challenging due to the additional tap delays required by the digital processing blocks to process and output the result. The tap‐delays, known as latency, are necessary for the Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) operation to allow the logic gates to process the data at a given clock rate. These latencies alter the transfer function of the first‐order DSM as they present additional tap‐delays to the inherent delays within the DSM loop. A compensation block for the first‐order DSM is proposed to cancel‐out the effect of these latencies. By studying the transfer function, a combination of delays able to reconstruct the correct transfer function is determined. The solution was implemented on FPGA and tested using a 2.5 MHz signal. The post‐compensated DSM achieved a Signal‐to‐Noise‐and‐Distortion Ratio (SNDR) = 42 dB and an Adjacent Channel Leakage Ratio (ACLR) = 39 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrowave and Optical Technology LettersSame topicAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit DesignFrench-language works237,207