On the difference between two widely publicized methods for analyzing oscillator phase behavior

Authors:
Piet Vanassche;Georges Gielen;Willy Sansen
Affiliations:
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven - ESAT/MICAS, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium;Katholieke Universiteit Leuven - ESAT/MICAS, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium;Katholieke Universiteit Leuven - ESAT/MICAS, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, B-3001 Leuven, Belgium
Venue:
Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE/ACM international conference on Computer-aided design
Year:
2002

Citing 2
Cited 8

Phase noise in oscillators: DAEs and colored noise sources

Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE/ACM international conference on Computer-aided design
Multi-time simulation of voltage-controlled oscillators

Proceedings of the 36th annual ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference

A Generalized Method for Computing Oscillator Phase Noise Spectra

Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/ACM international conference on Computer-aided design
Bibliography on cyclostationarity

Signal Processing
Full time-varying phase noise analysis for MOS oscillators based on Floquet and Sylvester theorems

Analog Integrated Circuits and Signal Processing
Analysis of oscillator injection locking by harmonic balance method

Proceedings of the conference on Design, automation and test in Europe
Smoothed form of nonlinear phase macromodel for oscillators

Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design
Preferred transmission frequency for size-constrained ultralow-power short-range CMOS oscillator transmitters

IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems Part I: Regular Papers
Population encoding with Hodgkin-Huxley neurons

IEEE Transactions on Information Theory - Special issue on information theory in molecular biology and neuroscience
The spectrum of a noisy free-running oscillator explained by random frequency pulling

IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems Part I: Regular Papers

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.01

Visualization

Abstract

This paper describes the similarities and differences between two widely publicized methods for analyzing oscillator phase behavior. The methods were presented in [3] and [6]. It is pointed out that both methods are almost alike. While the one in [3] can be shown to be, mathematically, more exact, the approximate method in [6] is somewhat simpler, facilitating its use for purposes of analysis and design. In this paper, we show that, for stationary input noise sources, both methods produce equal results for the oscillator's phase noise behavior. However, when considering injection locking, it is shown that both methods yield different results, with the approximation in [6] being unable to predict the locking behavior. In general, when the input signal causing the oscillator phase perturbations is non-stationary, the exact model produces the correct results while results obtained using approximate model break down.