MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410294770 · doi:10.1109/lmwt.2025.3566330

Extending the Dynamic Range of Square-Law Power Detectors for Large-Scale Receiver Arrays

2025· article· en· W4410294770 on OpenAlexaff
Yasser Bigdeli, Pascal Burasa, Ke Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Microwave and Wireless Technology Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSquare (algebra)Range (aeronautics)Dynamic rangeScale (ratio)DetectorPower lawComputer sciencePhysicsOpticsEngineeringTelecommunicationsMathematicsAerospace engineeringStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter proposes and investigates a solution to extend the compression point (P1dB) and dynamic range (DR) of square-law power detectors. A nonlinear driver stage is incorporated before the detector to compensate for the detector’s <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">I</i>–<italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">V</i> curve nonideality, enabling distortion-free mixing over a wider range of input RF signals. The modified MOSFET-based detector demonstration achieves a 14-dB increase in P1dB, raising the baseline from −10 to over 4 dBm while maintaining a bias current consumption of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$5~\mu $</tex-math> </inline-formula>A. An off-the-shelf BJT proof-of-concept verification shows an 11-dB P1dB extension, reaching 0 dBm. The enhanced performance, combined with its compatibility with integrated circuit (IC) implementation and low-power local oscillator (LO) requirements, makes it a promising alternative to heterodyne mixers in the development of large-scale receiver arrays for integrated millimeter-wave and terahertz applications.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Microwave and Wireless Technology LettersSame topicAntenna Design and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207