I. Field
This disclosure relates to systems and methods for frequency down-conversion.
II. Background
The conversion of signals from a first (high) frequency to a second (lower) frequency is a fundamental function in many fields of endeavor, such as communications.
Often, frequency down-conversation is accomplished via a process known as heterodyning. Unfortunately, various heterodyning circuits can be inefficient and may raise the noise-floor of those devices implementing the heterodyning circuits. Accordingly, new approaches to frequency down-conversion are desirable.
Various aspects and embodiments of the invention are described in further detail below.
In a first series of embodiments, an apparatus for down-converting a first signal having a first frequency to a lower frequency is disclosed. The apparatus can include one or more arrays of N over-damped, bi-stable circuits unidirectionally-coupled from element to element.
In another series of embodiments, an apparatus for down-converting a first signal having a first frequency to a lower frequency includes an input signal source and a first means for frequency reduction coupled to the input signal source.
In yet another series of embodiments, a method for down-converting a first signal having a first frequency to a lower frequency includes passing the first signal through a cascade of one or more arrays of unidirectionally coupled over-damped bi-stable elements.
The features and nature of the present disclosure will become more apparent from the detailed description set forth below when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which reference characters identify corresponding items.
The disclosed methods and systems below may be described generally, as well as in terms of specific examples and/or specific embodiments. For instances where references are made to detailed examples and/or embodiments, it should be appreciated that any of the underlying principals described are not to be limited to a single embodiment, but may be expanded for use with any of the other methods and systems described herein as will be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art unless otherwise stated specifically.
This disclosure is in part based upon a model-independent approach that emphasizes the symmetries of a network of coupled devices, such as Duffing elements, to demonstrate the idea that certain frequency down-conversion patterns can be induced by the network topology, i.e., number of elements and type of coupling. The proposed coupling schemes of this disclosure can extend to larger networks where even lower frequency down-conversion ratios can be achieved. Further, the frequency down-conversion approaches described here may have many applications in communication and signal processing where converting a high frequency signal down to a lower frequency is desirable to avoid the limitations (mainly speed) of analog-to-digital converters (ADCs), for example.
The down-conversion effect described herein is direct, very fast, efficient, and can avoid a noise floor that could be introduced by conventional frequency conversion devices, such as a reference generator of a heterodyne circuit. By suitably adjusting a particular array and coupling topologies, the down-conversion ratio in any given application can be readily adjusted to 1-to-m where m is an integer.
As is below shown in this disclosure, a high frequency signal can be down-converted by passing it through an array of unidirectionally coupled over-damped bi-stable elements. Such arrays may be coupled together to produce greater frequency division. The coupling scheme, as well as the choice of element dynamics, are very different from any other known approaches, and thus the underlying mechanism of down-conversion is also significantly different. As an example, the frequency down-conversion can be by a factor of ½, ⅕, or 1/11 for two coupled arrays of three elements (N=3; M=2). A generalization to larger M is also provided below.
For the purpose of the following disclosure, a “cell” can be defined as an individual element, typically represented via the evolution of a state variable: {dot over (x)}=f(x; α), with the overdot denoting a time derivative and αεRP with Rp being a vector of cell parameters. Further, f:Rn×Rp implies R is a smooth function.
There are inherent properties of the network dynamics that may be restricted by symmetry, including local properties (dictated by individual cell dynamics) and global properties (predicated by the coupling) symmetries. The dynamics of an individual cell in an array can be Eq. 1 below:
{dot over (x)}i=f(xi,α)+Σj→iλijh(yi,xi) Eq. (1)
where {dot over (x)}i=(xi1, . . . , xik)εRk denotes the state variables of cell EX-i, and the function h defines the coupling (having strength λij) between cells EX-i and EX-j.
We start with a special case of the more general setup by referring to
{dot over (x)}i=f(xi,α)+Σj→iλijh(yi,xi) Eq. (2)
{dot over (y)}i=f(yi,α)+Σj→iλijh(yi,xi)+cijk(yi,xi) Eq. (3)
where {dot over (y)}i=(yi1, . . . , yik)εRk denotes the state variables of cell EX-i in the second array, k is an inter-array coupling function, and cij is the corresponding coupling strength.
Returning to
To study the patterns of behavior for the M=2 case of the network 100 in
To begin the analysis, let us assume that both arrays exhibit a Traveling Wave (TW) pattern with period T. That is, the waveforms produced by each array are identical, but out-of-phase by a constant time lag ø=T/N. We also make a second assumption that the X2 array oscillates at m times the period of the X1 array, where m is a nonzero integer.
Thus, P(t) has the form:
P(t)=(x(t), x(t+(N−1)φ), . . . , x(t+φ), y(t), y(t+mφ), . . . , y(t+(N−1)mφ)) Eq. (4)
Note that where the X1 array exhibits a TW in the opposite direction of the X2 array as a direct result of the opposite orientation of their coupling schemes. For simplicity of explanation, assume that N=3, and that the units are coupled as is shown in
Now assume that P(t) has spatio-temporal symmetry described by the cyclic group Γ≡Z3×Z3 and by the group S1 of temporal shifts. Together, Γ≡Z3×Z3×S1 acts on P(t) as follows:
First, Γ acts as a permutation:
Then S1 shifts time by mT=3 so that
Since the cells are assumed to be identical, it follows that Γ≡Z3×Z3×S1 is a spatio-temporal symmetry of the network provided that X(t)=X(t+((m+1)/3)T) and Y(t)=Y(t+mT).
However, given X1 is T-periodic, this implies that m=3k−1, where k is a nonzero integer. As k increases (starting at one) we obtain the following values for m: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23 . . . .
When m=2, for instance, the X2-array oscillates at ½ the frequency of the X1-array. Likewise, m=5 suggests that the X2-array oscillates at ⅕ the frequency of the X1-array. The case when m=8 should be excluded, however, since m=8=22×2.
Continuing, as N increases, similar frequency down-conversion ratios emerge. A bifurcation analysis shows that the regions of existence of these frequency ratios form a well-defined partition, in parameter space (λ2, cxy), that is reminiscent of Arnold's tongue structures. In general (noting that N is odd) ωx1/ωx2=N−1, 2N−1, . . . , kN−1.
One would expect that analogous behavior is obtained when the cross-coupling topology is altered, as shown in
Γ:(3,2,1,1′,2′,3′)(2,1,3,2′,3′,1′). Eq. (8)
Repeating a similar analysis (not shown for brevity) leads one to conclude that this latest group of symmetries would force the Y-array to oscillate at (1, 4, 7, . . . , 3k−2) times the period of the X-array in addition to the 1=2 and 1=5 frequency relations of the previous network. Again a well-defined partition associated with the various down-conversion ratios are found, in the parameter space (λ2, cxy), for larger arrays.
SIMULATIONS: To verify the existence of these oscillations, one can define the individual dynamics of each cell to be that of a prototypical bistable system, such as an overdamped Duffing oscillator with internal dynamics given by f(x)=ax−bx3 and the (unidirectional) intra-array coupling functions by h(xi, xi+1)=xi−xi+1, and h(yi, yi
τ{dot over (x)}i=axi−bxi3+λ1(xi−xi+1)
τ{dot over (y)}i=ayi−byi3+λ2(yi−yi−1)+cxyxi, Eq. (9)
where i=1, . . . , N mod N, a and b are positive constants that describe the dynamics of the individual cells, λ1, and λ2 define the intra-array coupling strengths for the X1 and X2 arrays, respectively, with cxy being the inter-array coupling coefficient and τ being a system time constant.
First assume that there is no cross coupling, i.e., cxy=0. Then, λc=a/2 is the critical coupling strength beyond which the X1 elements oscillate. Accordingly, if the coupling strength of the X2 array is below the critical coupling strength, i.e., λ2<λc, and the coupling strength of the X1 array is above λ1>λC, then one can obtain the pattern shown in the left panel of
Continuing, increasing the cross-coupling strength cxy>0 induces the X2-array to oscillate (above a critical value of cxy) with frequency ωx2=ωx1/5, which is shown in the right panel of
Increasing further the cross coupling cxy causes the X2 array to oscillate at 1=2 the frequency of the X1-array. Additional frequency down-conversion ratios, (1/2, 1/5, 1/(3k−1)), where k=1, 2, 3, . . . are also observed as the cross-coupling, cxy, increases further.
THE CASE OF A TIME-SINUSOIDAL INCIDENT SIGNAL: So far, emergent oscillations have been considered for the frequency down-conversion resulting from the intra-array coupling depicted in
The above considerations allow one to follow a discussion of the down-conversion effect when an external sinusoidal signal ε sin ωt is applied to the X1-array. The network equations can be then augmented by the term ε sin ωt on the rhs of the xi dynamics.
Intuitively, one may be led to believe that, because of the unidirectional inter-array coupling, the above considerations (specifically, the frequency down-conversion ratios for ωx2/ωx1) still hold true once the response of the X-array is known as the frequency can be down-converted through a suitable choice of the coupling parameters λ2 and cxy. Numerical simulations indicate that this is, indeed, the case although additional frequency entrainment between the external signal and the oscillations of the X1-array must be taken into consideration.
The response of the X1-array to the external signal has been quantified in for a different (soft-potential) coupled system. It is shown (
One may expect that extending our results to a cascade of coupled networks (M>2) with each array down-converting the frequency of the preceding array via the rules already described above should be readily possible. In fact, a network of multiple arrays can achieve a lowering of frequencies in each successive array. A mathematical representation of the network is given by the following system of ODEs:
where i=1, . . . , N mod N, λj corresponds to the coupling of array j, for j=1, . . . , M, cxjl denotes the coupling from array j to array l, and M is the total number of arrays coupled together.
Again, notice that all the arrays are coupled unidirectionally from one to another, and the elements within each individual array are also unidirectionally coupled, but the direction of coupling alternates from one array to the next, i.e. from clockwise to counter-clockwise and so on. This pattern of coupling has been chosen so that the bifurcations can assure that the multi-frequency patterns are still present in the network.
As an example, let N=3, M=3, so that oscillations in the X1 array occur only when λ1>a/2=0:5. The existence of multi-frequency patterns in each successive array (j>1) requires λj<0.5. Thus, by setting the intra-array coupling strengths to (λ1, λ2, λ3)=(0.51; 0.3; 0.3) and the cross coupling to (cX12; cX23)=(0.14; 0.14), one may achieve a down-converting of frequency from the X1-array to the X2-array, and again from the X2-array to the X3-array.
Again, when the cross coupling (c12, c23) is turned off, or set below the critical values, the elements in the X2- and X3-arrays are quiescent. Thus, one may conclude that the oscillations emerge directly from the cross coupling terms. As seen in
BIFURCATION ANALYSIS: In order to quantify the actual mechanisms for the existence and stability of the various frequency down-conversion patterns, we now carry out a bifurcation analysis, employing a numerical computation package. Consider, for clarity, the case N=3, M=2, although the analysis can be readily extended to larger networks as well as networks with different inter-array coupling patterns. Holding λ1 fixed past the critical value λc (=a/2) that can be required for the X1-array to oscillate, the two-parameter bifurcation diagram (solid curves) shown in
Five distinct regimes are depicted in
Regime (I), Supercritical regime: both arrays oscillate in a TW pattern. Note that as λ2 increases, the frequency of the X2-array (ωx2) can lock during certain intervals of λ2, onto various sub-multiples of the frequency of the X1-array (ωx1) i.e., ωx2=ωx1/m, where m=2; 5; 11; 17; 23.
Regime (I′), Two in-phase regime: wherein two oscillatory units (of each array) share the same phase and same amplitude, but the third one is out of phase by ¼.
Regime (II), Subcritical regime: frequency down-conversion by 1=2; 1=5, . . . , 1/(3k−1) (where k=1, 2, 3 . . . ) of the frequency of the X1-array. By setting the X2-array coupling below the critical coupling (λ2=0.4<λc) and varying the frequency of the X1-array, the frequency down-conversion rates form a well-defined partition of the cxy-Frequency (X1) plane, as is shown in
Regime (III), Entrainment regime: frequency locking of each individual yi element to its corresponding xi element.
Regime (IV), no oscillations regime: oscillations do not exist and the system settles, instead, to a steady state. Note that the boundary curve that separates region II from I′ is not an actual bifurcation curve. Moving from region II to I′ does not change the characteristics (frequency and amplitude) of the oscillations, rather, only the phase of the TW pattern found in region II changes, with two of the units entraining their phases while the third unit oscillates out of phase by ¼. We show this boundary curve for completeness purposes, however. For larger values of the coupling strength in the X2-array, i.e., past the critical coupling, the partition of frequency down-conversion rates changes as it can be observed in
Note that
Continuing, one can compute an analytical expression for the critical cross coupling cxy curves shown in
The X1 array exhibits similar behavior except that the amplitude of the applied AC signal replaces the cross-coupling term:
Using Eqs. (11) and (12), the evolution of y1 (from Eq. (8)) can be given by
{dot over (y)}1=(a+λ2)y1−by13+λ2(y2m)+cxyx1m. Eq. (13)
Then, one can arrive at the following expression for the critical amplitude:
where F0=√{square root over (4(a+ë2)3/(27b))}{square root over (4(a+ë2)3/(27b))}, ω is the frequency of the applied AC signal, and k1 is a fitting parameter. The three roots for cxyc in Eq. (14) are
where e=√{square root over (4(a+2λ)/b))} and f=1/(2(a+2λ2)).
The first root represents the separation between the non-oscillating regime IV and the multi-frequency region II. The positive of the two conjugate roots defines the boundary between the supercritical regime I and the two in-phase regime I′. Since the coupling constant cannot be imaginary, one obtains a lower bound for the fitting parameter k1, which is given by
Next, there is a curve that separates the entrainment region III from the subcritical region II. The analytical expression
was found by transforming the governing equations for the X2-array into polar coordinates. The analytically obtained boundary curves, with k1=3.8β, are shown (dashed curves) on
In step 1004, an input frequency source can be provided to a first stage/array (such as the left-hand stage/array of
In step 1006, the first down-converted signal can be provided to a second stage/array (such as the middle stage/array of
In step 1008, the second down-converted signal can be provided to a third stage/array (such as the right-hand stage/array of
In various embodiments where the above-described systems and/or methods are implemented using a programmable device, such as a computer-based system or programmable logic, it should be appreciated that the above-described systems and methods can be implemented using any of various known or later developed programming languages, such as “C”, “C++”, “FORTRAN”, Pascal”, “VHDL” and the like.
Accordingly, various storage media, such as magnetic computer disks, optical disks, electronic memories and the like, can be prepared that can contain information that can direct a device, such as a computer, to implement the above-described systems and/or methods. Once an appropriate device has access to the information and programs contained on the storage media, the storage media can provide the information and programs to the device, thus enabling the device to perform the above-described systems and/or methods.
For example, if a computer disk containing appropriate materials, such as a source file, an object file, an executable file or the like, were provided to a computer, the computer could receive the information, appropriately configure itself and perform the functions of the various systems and methods outlined in the diagrams and flowcharts above to implement the various functions. That is, the computer could receive various portions of information from the disk relating to different elements of the above-described systems and/or methods, implement the individual systems and/or methods and coordinate the functions of the individual systems and/or methods related to communications.
What has been described above includes examples of one or more embodiments. It is, of course, not possible to describe every conceivable combination of components or methodologies for purposes of describing the aforementioned embodiments, but one of ordinary skill in the art may recognize that many further combinations and permutations of various embodiments are possible. Accordingly, the described embodiments are intended to embrace all such alterations, modifications and variations that fall within the spirit and scope of the appended claims. Furthermore, to the extent that the term “includes” is used in either the detailed description or the claims, such term is intended to be inclusive in a manner similar to the term “comprising” as “comprising” is interpreted when employed as a transitional word in a claim.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5509040 | Shimada | Apr 1996 | A |
5528445 | Cooke et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
6008642 | Bulsara et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6020782 | Albert et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6822522 | Brown et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6880400 | Fogliatti et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
7196590 | In et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
20070001719 | Hulfachor et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070057186 | Nakasuji et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20080258780 | Wood | Oct 2008 | A1 |