MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PSIJ Transfer Function Response Prediction via NARNET and KBNNs

2023· article· en· W4385624991 on OpenAlexaff
Ahsan Javaid, Ramachandra Achar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrostatic Discharge in Electronics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJitterArtificial neural networkAutoregressive modelComputer scienceTransfer functionNonlinear systemRange (aeronautics)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, nonlinear autoregressive neural network is combined with knowledge-based neural network in order to develop an efficient method that further expands the bandwidth of the jitter transfer function. In the proposed hybrid approach, a knowledge-based neural network is developed using the training data from two types of models: fast-to-evaluate analytical model for jitter transfer function and computationally expensive circuit simulator generated accurate jitter transfer function response. Knowledge-based neural network can efficiently produce relatively accurate prediction of the jitter profile within the desired frequency range, using which a large number of data points is generated. In the next step, nonlinear autoregressive neural network is trained using data obtained from knowledge-based neural network. Proposed nonlinear autoregressive neural network ensures reasonable accuracy even beyond the frequency range of the original accurate data that is used in developing the knowledge-based neural network. A case study with 32nm CMOS technology is presented to demonstrate the validity of the proposed approach compared to a circuit simulator.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrostatic Discharge in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207