MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402892289 · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3469090

A 3.5 to 4.7-GHz Fractional-N ADPLL With a Low-Power Time-Interleaved GRO-TDC of 6.2-ps Resolution in 65-nm CMOS Process

2024· article· en· W4402892289 on OpenAlexaff
K.J. Cho, Joonho Gil, Chulhyun Park, Kyu‐Jin Cho, Jae-Woo Shin, Eun‐Seong Kim, Yun Seong Eo, Ramesh Harjani, Nam‐Young Kim, Taehyoun Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
FundersKwangwoon University
KeywordsCMOSProcess (computing)Power (physics)Materials scienceResolution (logic)Low-power electronicsOptoelectronicsElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsPower consumptionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a low-power design method and a low-noise phase offset calibration technique for a gated ring-oscillator time-to-digital converter (GRO-TDC), which normally consumes a large percentage of most all-digital phase-locked loop (ADPLL) power. A single coarse counter logic structure along with time-interleaved even/odd paths significantly reduces the complexity and speed of the TDC logic. The proposed TDC consumes only 0.44 to 24 mW for 0.077 to 24.42 ns of detection range. The multi-path GRO accelerates the oscillation speed and achieves approximately 6.2 ps of time resolution. The GRO-TDC shows –1.43 to 1.35 least-significant bits (LSB) of differential non-linearity (DNL) and –1.32 to 1.96 LSB of integral non-linearity (INL) over a 11-bit dynamic range (DR). The entire ADPLL including the proposed TDC has been fabricated in a 65 nm CMOS process and occupies 0.67 mm2 of active area. The prototype ADPLL consumes 12.22 mW from 1.2 V supply and the TDC consumes only 0.65 mW for a 50-phase offset code. A modified integrating structure in the subsequent digital loop filter (DLF) has been developed to mitigate dithering noise on$V_{ctrl}$code and the measured reference spur is –69.38 dBc at 3.6 GHz center frequency. The tuning range of the implemented ADPLL is 3.5 to 4.7 GHz by using 2-bit band switching and 5-bit coarse control, while maintaining low-$K_{DCO}$values to suppress in-band quantization noise. The measured root-mean-square (RMS) jitter is 0.94 ps and 0.99 ps at 3.6 GHz integer-mode and 3.60743 GHz fractional-mode respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207