High-speed analog-to-digital converter using a unique gray code

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6816101
  • Patent Number
    6,816,101
  • Date Filed
    Friday, March 7, 2003
    21 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, November 9, 2004
    20 years ago
Abstract
A method for high speed communications uses an inventive Q-Gray code. The Q-Gray code simplifies the hardware needed to convert analog Q-Gray code signals to digital signals. An analog-to-digital converter can use a plurality of comparators for receiving the multilevel signal and a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal. Each decoder block can include an equal number of inputs. Specifically, each decoder block can also include a parity detector with an equal number of inputs. Each decoder block can also employ a bank of identical parity detectors relative to another decoder block. Each comparator of the analog to digital converter can have an individually or externally adjustable (or both) threshold level.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




The present invention is directed to analog-to-digital (ADC) converters and, more particularly, a very high-speed ADC is described for the level detection of, or equivalently, the data extraction from high-speed multilevel (ML) waveforms.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




Complex modulation schemes are desirable to obtain increased spectral efficiency and, therefore, increased data throughput for high-speed communications systems. The extraction of data from the multi-Giga symbol per second (Gsym/s) ML waveforms can be difficult, but is critical for effective implementation of a high-speed communications system.




Conventional flash ADC's are common in high-speed systems; however, these ADC's suffer three shortcomings. First, they are based on conventional Gray codes that result in asymmetric decoder circuitry in the sense that the circuitry for decoding the simplest bit channel can be significantly more complex than the circuitry for the most complex bit channel.




Conventional Gray codes are described in U.S. Pat. No. 2,632,058, entitled “Pulse Code Communication”, which issued to Gray on Mar. 17, 1953. This reflected-binary code (now generally called a Gray code) described in the '058 patent provides for improved performance of pulse coded communications based on encoding data in time vs. voltage.




With conventional Gray code analog to digital decoders, buffers are usually used to delay the result from the simplest bit channel to match the output delay of the most complex channel. The overall result is an ADC that has high complexity which translates into high power consumption and lower achievable speed.




The second shortcoming of flash ADC's based on conventional Gray codes is that the error rate on each of the bit channels is skewed. This skew can reduce the performance of error correction mechanisms where it is assumed each bit channel has the same error probability.




The third shortcoming of conventional flash ADC's is that they have uniformly spaced decoding thresholds. In many communication contexts, the received signal is distorted by signal dependent noise and the use of uniformly spaced thresholds is suboptimal.




In view of the foregoing, there is a need in the art for an ADC where the thresholds are independently and externally adjustable to provide a means for maintaining optimal decoding in the presence of (possibly time-varying) signal dependent distortions. There is a further need in the art for an ADC that can support the adjustable quantization of ML signals within the receiver of a high-speed telecommunication system. Another need exists in the art for an evenly distributed bit error rate across each of the bit channels in a multilevel signal. And further, a need exists in the art for a simpler ADC design for high speed communications.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




A design for an analog-to-digital converter that can decode a unique multilevel Gray code can be made more simple than conventional analog to digital converters. More specifically, because of certain properties of the inventive and exemplary Q-Gray codes of the present invention, the analog-to-digital converter can comprise a plurality of comparators for receiving the multilevel signal and a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal. Each decoder block can comprise an equal number of inputs. Specifically, each decoder block can also comprise a parity detector with an equal number of inputs. Each decoder block can also comprise a bank of identical parity detectors relative to another decoder block.




According to another exemplary aspect of the present invention, in one exemplary embodiment, each comparator of the analog to digital converter can have an individually adjustable threshold level. Further, each comparator can also have an externally controllable threshold level. With such individually adjustable thresholds, the comparators can process a multilevel signal comprising non-uniformly spaced decoding thresholds.




With this simple design, the analog to digital converter can reduce dissipated power and can increase achievable operational speeds for communications. Some unique properties of the Q-Gray coded multilevel signal that dictate the design of the aforementioned analog to digital converter are the following: The maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized. An example of a situation in which the above minimum-maximum criterion is satisfied is when the Q-Gray code has a transition density that is maximally evenly distributed among bits in the binary representation of the multilevel signal. This maximally even transition distribution results in the property that the bit error rate is substantially evenly distributed across each bit channel.




The present invention provides for a method of high speed communications using an inventive Q-Gray code. In turn, the Q-Gray code simplifies the hardware needed to convert multilevel Q-Gray coded signals to binary signals.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1A

is a block diagram of an exemplary 4-bit analog-to-digital converter (ADC) according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 1B

is a block diagram of an exemplary 3-bit ADC according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 1C

is a block diagram of an exemplary 5-bit ADC according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 1D

is a block diagram of an exemplary 4-bit ADC according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 2

is a top-level schematic circuit for the 4-bit ADC shown in

FIG. 1D

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 3

is a schematic circuit diagram of the VC4b block of

FIG. 2

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 4

is a schematic circuit diagram of the VC3b block of

FIG. 2

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 5

is a schematic circuit diagram of the input buffer, REFBUF, of

FIG. 2

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 6

is a schematic circuit diagram of the IREF circuit block of

FIG. 2

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 7

is a schematic circuit diagram of the comparator block, COMP, of FIG.


3


and

FIG. 4

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.





FIG. 8

is a graphical depiction of the simulation results for the exemplary 4-bit ADC shown in

FIG. 2

according to one exemplary embodiment of the present invention.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXEMPLARY EMBODIMENTS




The use of an innovative “Q-Gray code” described herein allows for simplification of the decoder of flash-based ADC's and in a faster ADC design. As an additional benefit, the Q-Gray code is also an optimal code for ML communication systems. The general class of Q-Gray codes has the unique property of allowing for a corresponding flash ADC to have minimal decoder complexity and therefore maximum conversion speed with minimal power consumption.




The Q-Gray codes of the present invention are a subset of the large class of Gray codes. Specifically, the Q-Gray codes of the present invention are Gray codes with the following property: letting M


b


denotes the maximum number of bit toggles incurred in bit position b as the code is incremented from 0 to 2


N


−1 and followed by 0 (where N is the number of bits comprising the code), a Q-Gray code achieves the minimum possible value of max


b


{M


b


}, (i.e. the largest number of toggles incurred over any bit position is minimized). Thus, a Q-Gray code distributes the number bit toggles (from adjacent level transitions) as evenly as possible over all the bit positions.




This defining property of Q-Gray codes minimizes the maximum number of aggregate number of bit toggles (on adjacent level transitions) on any bit position. In other words, for the inventive Q-Gray codes, the maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized. This not only allows for simple bit decoders within the ADC, but also offers the total bit error rate to be approximately 1/log


2


N of the symbol error rate (as with any Gray code) and an approximately equal error rate for each bit of the code words (which does not hold for most Gray codes).




In order to understand the impact of coding upon an ADC design, Table 1 lists several possible coding candidates, one of which is according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention. As in Table 1, much of this document will use N=4-bit coding (i.e. 16-level modulation) as an example; however, the extension to other numbers of bits will be clear to those skilled in the art and are included as part of the present invention. Table 1 presents a conventional binary code, a conventional Gray code, and one exemplary Gray code of the present invention that has been labeled as a “Q-Gray” code.












TABLE 1











Comparison of several possible 4-bit ML codes.


















Gray




Q-Gray







Level




Binary




Code




Code




















15




1111




1000




0000







14




1110




1001




0001







13




1101




1011




0011







12




1100




1010




0010







11




1011




1110




0110







10




1010




1111




0111







9




1001




1101




1111







8




1000




1100




1011







7




0111




0100




1001







6




0110




0101




1101







5




0101




0111




0101







4




0100




0110




0100







3




0011




0010




1100







2




0010




0011




1110







1




0001




0001




1010







0




0000




0000




1000















In order to appreciate the features of the Q-Gray code, it will be useful to first review some background material. First, a symbol for a simple ML communication system is simply an amplitude level. A symbol error occurs when a received symbol is different than the symbol that was transmitted. A bit error occurs when a received data bit is different than the transmitted data bit. Note that in general, a data error(s) will occur when a symbol error occurs, but the number of data errors which occur depends on the nature of the error as well as the way that the data bits represent the symbol (i.e. the coding used).




For a ML system, almost all errors result from the case where a received symbol is wrongly detected as an adjacent symbol level. Therefore, the coding used should minimize the number of bits that will be in error if a symbol is in error by one level. The traditional Gray-code does exactly this, by having the code words for any pair of adjacent levels differ in only one bit position.




In order to further explain this, define the following:




P(err


s


) is the symbol error probability (or rate),




P(err


b


) is the total bit error probability (or rate), and




P(err


b=A


), P(err


b=B


), P(err


b=C


), and P(err


b=D


) are the bit error probabilities (or rates) of bit A, B, C, and D, respectively.




The following discussion will also use the standard notation for conditional probabilities where P(X\Y) means “the probability of” X “given” Y. Multiple conditions will be separated by “,”'s as in P(X\Y,Z) means the probability of X given Y and Z.




For the following discussions, in regard to any given code, the bits will be termed A, B, C, and D, in sequence from left to right with A being the left-most bit and D being the right-most bit. The transmitted level will be referred to as L and the received level as {circumflex over (L)}. We will assume that each symbol is equally likely to be transmitted, i.e., P(L)={fraction (1/16)} where L=0, . . . ,15 is the symbol transmitted. The vast majority of communications channels have noise characteristics in which smaller noise perturbations are more likely than larger perturbations, e.g., Gaussian noise. In such situations, errors in detecting the symbol are almost always due to declaring a level adjacent to the one transmitted, i.e. declaring {circumflex over (L)}=L−1 or {circumflex over (L)}=L+1. If optimal detection is used, then the probability of these two types of errors is the same, i.e., P({circumflex over (L)}=L−1\L)=P({circumflex over (L)}=L+1\L).




If we additionally assume that optimal transmit level spacing is used, then the above error probabilities are independent of the transmit level, as shown in Equation (1):











1
2



P


(

err
s

)



=


P


(


L
^

=


L
-
1

|
L


)


=

P


(


L
^

=


L
+
1

|
L


)







(
1
)













for all L except in the degenerate case where {circumflex over (L)}=−1 and {circumflex over (L)}=16 for which the probability of these types of errors is zero since the receiver only makes detections corresponding to valid symbols.




The bit error probability can now be shown to approximately be the symbol error probability multiplied by a scalar that is a characteristic of the particular binary code used to represent the symbols. This scalar multiplier corresponds to the average number of bit toggles incurred as the binary representation is sequentially traversed. To be more specific, define the bit toggle counting function τ(L,L+1) to be the total number of bits toggled in transitioning from L to L+1 (or vice-verse). For example, in the traditional binary representation, τ(3,4)=4 since 3=0111


b


and 4=1000


b


differ in all four bit positions. It will also be useful to define the function φ(L,L+1)=τ(L,L+1)/N which is the fraction of bits toggled in transitioning from level L to L+1. The bit error probability can be determined by using these functions.




By the definition of conditional probabilities and the independent error rates of each level, the total bit error probability can be expressed in terms of levels, L, as shown in Equation (2):










P


(

err
b

)


=




L
=
0

15








P


(


err
b

|
L

)




P


(
L
)








(
2
)













Again applying the definition of conditional probabilities, Equation (2) can be further expanded in terms of errors occurring to the level above or below, as shown in Equation (3):










P


(

err
b

)


=


P


(
L
)







L
=
0

15







[



P


(



err
b

|

L
,





L
^



=

L
-
1


)




P


(


L
^

=


L
-
1

|
L


)



+


P


(



err
b

|

L
,





L
^



=

L
+
1


)




P


(


L
^

=


L
+
1

|
L


)




]







(
3
)













The total bit error conditional probabilities in Equation (3) are in fact equal to the previously defined average bit toggle function, φ. This can be understood by considering, for example, the first term P(err


b


\L,{circumflex over (L)}=L−1). This expression means, “the probability of a bit error given the transmitter level is L and the received level, {circumflex over (L)}, is L−1”. With the givens, a symbol error has occurred and the resulting probability will be ¼, {fraction (2/4)} or ¾ depending on how many bits toggled erroneously (1, 2, or 3; respectively) due to detecting the level as L−1 vs. L. This is precisely the definition of φ. Therefore,








P


(


err




b




\L,{circumflex over (L)}=L−


1)=φ(


L−


1,


L


)  (4)






and








P


(


err




b




\L,{circumflex over (L)}=L+


1)=φ(


L,L+


1)  (5)






Equations (4) and (5) can now be substituted into Equation (3), yielding Equation (6), as shown below:










P


(

err
b

)


=


P


(
L
)







L
=
0

15







[

&AutoLeftMatch;



φ


(

L
-

1
,




L


)




P


(


L
^

=


L
-
1

|
L


)



+


φ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)




P


(


L
^

=


L
+
1

|
L


)




]








(
6
)













The bit error rate can now be expressed in terms of the symbol error rate by applying Equation (1), as shown below, to generate Equation (7):










P


(

err
b

)


=


1
2



P


(

err
S

)




P


(
L
)







L
=
0

15







[


φ


(

L
-

1
,




L


)


+

φ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)



]







(
7
)













Since φ(−1,0) and φ(15,16) are zero, we can rewrite Equation (4) to provide the new Equation (8):










P


(

err
b

)


=


1
2



P


(

err
S

)




P


(
L
)







L
=
0

14







2



φ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)


.








(
8
)













A bit of trivial simplification gives the desired result in Equation (9):










P


(

err
b

)


=



P


(

err
S

)




1
16






L
=
0

14







φ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)




=


P


(

err
S

)




1

4
*
16







L
=
0

14







τ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)









(
9
)













Thus, as previously mentioned, the bit error probability is approximately the symbol error probability scaled by the average number of fractional bit toggles as the binary representation is sequentially traversed. It is not exactly the average due to the normalization factor of 16 (instead of 15) where the inconsistency arises due to boundary effects at the ends of the sequence. The scale factor (i.e., the summation in Equation (9)) is a property of the code used to represent the symbols, and is minimized by Gray-codes where each summand is the minimum value of 1 (only 1 bit toggles per level transition).




The definitions of τ(L,L+1) and φ(L,L+1) may be adapted to also provide the bit error probability for a given bit X=A, B, C, or D. To do this, we simply define











τ
X



(


L
,




L

+
1

)


=

{






0


:


if





bit





X





of





L





and





L

+

1





are





the





same













1


:


if





bit





X





of





L





and





L

+

1





are





different










(
10
)













Then, using τ


X


in place of τ in Equation (9) gives the bit error probability for bit X, i.e., P(err


b=X


). These values are tabulated in Table 2 for the conventional binary, conventional Gray, and Q-Gray codes.












TABLE 2











Normalized bit error rates for several exemplary coding examples.














Bit Error Rate








(normalized to the symbol error rate)




Total Bit
















Code




A




B




C




D




Error Rate









Binary




1/64




3/64




7/64




15/64




26/64






Gray Code




1/64




2/64




4/64




 8/64




15/64






Q-Gray Code




3/64




4/64




4/64




 4/64




15/64














From Table 2, it is seen that the Gray codes give a total bit error rate of somewhat better than 57% of a straight binary code. While the error rate analysis is present for N=4 bits, those skilled in the art will recognize that everything carries over to arbitrary values of N. In particular, Eq. (9) can be generalized to be










P


(

err
b

)


=



P


(

err
S

)




1
M






L
=
0


M
-
2








φ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)




=


P


(

err
S

)




1

N
*
M







L
=
0


M
-
2








τ


(


L
,




L

+
1

)









(
11
)













where M=2


N


is the number of levels.




The distribution of bit errors within the individual bits (labeled A, B, C, and D) is almost ideally distributed by the use of the Q-Gray Code, thereby demonstrating a significant advantage over the conventional Gray Code. While this uniform distribution of the error over the bits is advantageous in that it eliminates the need for customized processing to account for skewed error rates, the largest benefit of this uniform distribution is that it allows for an improved realization of a flash ADC. In order to understand this benefit, the basic operation of each necessary bit decoder needs be explored.




The ADC is assumed a flash type converter with M−1=15 comparators (in the case of 16-level or 4-bit converters). These 15 comparators are referenced with 15 reference voltages that set the decision point between the expected symbol levels. Therefore, in general, they will be positioned mid-point (perhaps scaled according with the noise variances) between the ideal level voltages. Note that implementation of any of the exemplary codes will take M−1 comparators—this is a fundamental property of a flash converter.




A given bit decoder can be viewed as asserting its output based on the relationship of the input voltage as compared to the bit toggle thresholds required for a given bit. That is, if a given bit has say, for example four bit toggles, over the symbol input range, a four-input conventional odd-parity function gate connected to the appropriate four comparators is all of the hardware that's required to decode the bit.




Referring back to Table 1, we note that the numerator of each cell in the middle four columns is the summation shown below in Equation (12):












L
=
0


M
-
2










τ
X



(


L
,




L

+
1

)






,
&AutoLeftMatch;





(
12
)













which counts the total number of times bit X is toggled as symbols are sequentially reversed. For example, bit A of traditional binary coding will only require a one-input odd-function gate (i.e. a buffer or no logic) to be the implemented. On the other hand, bit D of a traditional binary coding, will required a 15-input odd-function gate to bit decode—a large level of complexity that will undoubtedly be difficult to build at high speed. The traditional Gray code represents a significantly improved situation, but for example, bit D still requires an 8-input odd-function logic gate.




In contrast, the Q-Gray code has a minimum-maximum number of bit toggles per bit with 3 bits having 4 toggles and 1 bit having 3 toggles. Therefore, each bit requires at most a 4-input odd-parity logic gate for bit decoding. As will be seen below, a 4-input odd-parity gate can be implemented with 3 standard exclusive OR (XOR) gates.




Since the number of inputs to an odd-function gate will directly impact the gate's speed, the Q-Gray code represents a significant increase in ADC speed.




It is believed that the exemplary Q-Gray codes of the present invention are unique and that they exist for at least N=2, 3, 4, and 5 with larger searches being restricted by computer resources. In order to explore this further, the case of N=4 is considered in more detail, as shown in Table 3.












TABLE 3











Exemplary 4-bit Q-Gray Code.














Bit
















Level




A




B




C




D


















0




1




0




0




0






1




1




0




1




0






2




1




1




1




0






3




1




1




0




0






4




0




1




0




0






5




0




1




0




1






6




1




1




0




1






7




1




0




0




1






8




1




0




1




1






9




1




1




1




1






10




0




1




1




1






11




0




1




1




0






12




0




0




1




0






13




0




0




1




1






14




0




0




0




1






15




0




0




0




0














The search for a Q-Gray code can be a very challenging endeavor if done by brute force. The 16 values of an N=4 (4 bit word) can be selected in 16 factorial ways (20,922,789,888,000 possibilities), which is a somewhat restrictively large number for a computer search unless care is taken with the search algorithm used.




For example, if 10 million candidates are tested per second (optimistic workstation search speed), it would still take 24 days for even this simple N=4 search to complete. Fortunately, if the problem is cast into the underlying bit transition operator lists (BTOL's), there are only 4


15


possible trial lists (1,073,741,824 possibilities).




A BTOL is a list of sequential bit transition operations required to produce a valid Gray code. A BTOL inverts the indicated bit of the binary word. In particular, if the K


th


element of the list is bit A, then that means the binary representation of the decimal number K is obtained by taking the binary representation of K−1 and inverting the “A” bit (and similarly for the other bits). If a list results in a non-repeating sequence of binary words, it represents a valid Gray code.




Furthermore, the resulting sequence of binary words represents a Gray code regardless of the seed word. Because Gray codes are produced by BTOL's, one can search among valid BTOL's (instead of the much larger set of sequences of binary words) for a Q-Gray code as previously stated. This search could be significantly further reduced by symmetry arguments and other simple rules, but this is a manageable search space for low-end computers and was selected as the starting point.




A computer search resulted in 5712 BTOL's that produce Gray codes. These operator lists can be “seeded” with 16 possible starting levels (represents all possible bit inversions) plus 4! ways to arrange the bit columns, resulting in a total number of “Gray” codes of 2,193,408.




This list of 5712 possibilities was further filtered to find desired “optimal” Q-Gray codes which minimize the maximum number of transitions per bit. There must be 15 transitions total that are divided between the 4 bits. This results in the optimal number of transitions per bit being 4 with one bit having 3. This search resulted in 384 operator sequences.




These 384 sequences were all observed to be based on a single basic bit-transition operator sequence:






CBCADABCBADBDCD  (13)






and with operator A returning the original “seed” from the last element in the resulting code. The sequence in Eq. 13 produces the Q-Gray code listed in Table 3 when a seed of “1000” is used.




Since any column operator can be interchanged with another, and the sequence can be started at any position, the total number of sequences is 4!*16=384, which is correctly identical to the search result. Note that the sequence can be reversed, but in fact, reversal of the sequence only makes the sequence with a bit interchanged (therefore accounted for in the 4! term). Finally, since again, there are 16 possible seeds for the operator lists, there are a total of 384*16=6,144 rather good Q-Gray code sequences. It appears that all 6,144 of these possible codes are unique, but are really just forms of one another.




The N=2 case is trivial as the only Gray Code is a Q-Gray code. Additional computer searches found Q-Gray codes for the 3 and 5 bit (8 and 32 level) resolutions. The exemplary Q-Gray code for the N=3 bit case is given by the BTOL:






ABCBABC  (14)






with operator B returning the original seed from the last word in the code. Table 4 gives the Q-Gray code resulting from this BTOL when a binary seed value of “000” is used.




The exemplary Q-Gray code for the N=5 bit case is given by the BTOL:






ABACABADABEBDCDEBEDCACDECEBDCDE  (15)






with operator D returning the original seed from the last word in the code. Table 5 gives the Q-Gray code resulting from this BTOL when a binary seed value of “00000” is used.




It is believed that a Q-Gray code exists for higher resolutions (N>5) but are limited in search due to finite computer resources (the brute force search scales by (2{circumflex over ( )}N)!, which quickly explodes and other methods also scale poorly). Further, additional unique Q-Gray codes for each of the three bit, four bit, and five bit examples discussed above can be derived by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list to yield alternate and inventive Q-Gray codes. Similarly, additional unique Q-Gray codes can be derived from the three, four, and five bit examples mentioned above by interchanging bit channel assignments.












TABLE 4











Exemplary 3-bit Q-Gray Code













Bit
















Level




A




B




C











0




0




0




0







1




1




0




0







2




1




1




0







3




1




1




1







4




1




0




1







5




0




0




1







6




0




1




1







7




0




1




0























TABLE 5











Exemplary 5-bit Q-Gray Code.













Bit


















Level




A




B




C




D




E






















0




0




0




0




0




0







1




1




0




0




0




0







2




1




1




0




0




0







3




0




1




0




0




0







4




0




1




1




0




0







5




1




1




1




0




0







6




1




0




1




0




0







7




0




0




1




0




0







8




0




0




1




1




0







9




1




0




1




1




0







10




1




1




1




1




0







11




1




1




1




1




1







12




1




0




1




1




1







13




1




0




1




0




1







14




1




0




0




0




1







15




1




0




0




1




1







16




1




0




0




1




0







17




1




1




0




1




0







18




1




1




0




1




1







19




1




1




0




0




1







20




1




1




1




0




1







21




0




1




1




0




1







22




0




1




0




0




1







23




0




1




0




1




1







24




0




1




0




1




0







25




0




1




1




1




0







26




0




1




1




1




1







27




0




0




1




1




1







28




0




0




1




0




1







29




0




0




0




0




1







30




0




0




0




1




1







31




0




0




0




1




0















Exemplary embodiments of the present invention will hereinafter be described with reference to the drawings, in which like numerals represent like elements throughout the several figures.




An exemplary embodiment of a 4-bit ADC


100


based on the Q-Gray code in Table 3 is illustrated in FIG.


1


A.

FIG. 1A

is a block diagram of a flash converter


100


with the normal 2


N


−1 (=15) input comparators


105


with threshold voltages (labeled Vr


i


) set between the expected input symbol levels. It is noted that conventional flash ADC's use thresholds that are uniformly spaced in a set decoding range.




The present invention, in contrast, allows fully independent and externally adjustable control of the threshold voltages Vr


i


. This flexibility provides more freedom in the signal decoding. Such flexibility is needed in communication settings where one has signal dependent noise or distortions and the optimal decoding thresholds are not uniformly spaced.




The comparator outputs are appropriately routed to the necessary bit decoders


110


of decoder blocks


120


to realize the desired coding. The decoder blocks


120


further comprise latches


115


. Because the Q-Gray code of this exemplary embodiment is a Gray code, each comparator only drives one decoder input. This one-to-one assignment results in low gate loading and hence high speed as with all Gray-coded converters.




The one-to-one assignment between comparator outputs and decoder inputs is directly obtained from the BTOL and seed word for the Gray code. In particular, the inputs to a parity-detection decoder block


110


are (i) the comparator outputs corresponding to the list locations of the bit in the BTOL and (ii) the seed value for that bit.




Since the exemplary ADC


100


of

FIG. 1A

uses the Q-Gray code, the 4 necessary bit decoders


110


are simple 4-input odd-parity functions as discussed above. And as previously stated, the inputs to the decoders


110


are taken from the BTOL and seed value.




For example, the A-bit decoder


110


A takes as inputs logical 1 (from the seed value) and comparator outputs Vc4, Vc6, and Vc10 since A occurs in the BTOL sequence in Eq. 13 at the fourth, sixth, and tenth positions. Similarly, the B-bit decoder


110


B takes Vc2, Vc7, Vc9, and Vc12 as inputs because the B operator occurs in the second, seventh, ninth, and twelfth positions in the BTOL in Eq. 13.




Furthermore, because the seed value is “0” for the B-bit in Table 4, it is unnecessary to provide this input to the odd-parity decoder block. Input assignments for the C and D-bit decoders


110


C,


110


D are similarly obtained from the BTOL. The 4 outputs of the bit decoders


110


are finally latched by the clock signal at a desired sample time.




The distribution of toggles as the code is traversed (i.e. the number of occurrences of a bit operator in the BTOL) directly impacts the structure of any Gray code decoder. The advantage of the even bit error distribution provided by the Q-gray code of the present invention can now be explained.




The complexity of a decoder circuit is determined by the number of gates in the circuit which increases linearly with respect to the number of inputs to the parity detection circuit. Furthermore, buffers must to added to the simpler decoder blocks


120


to match the overall delay to the slowest decoder block (i.e. the one with the most inputs).




Thus, to minimize aggregate decoder complexity, it is desirable to minimize the largest number of inputs to any given decoder block. In other words, it is desirable to have an even distribution of inputs to each decoder block


120


. This is precisely what the Q-Gray code allows. Therefore, the Q-Gray code provides a means for minimal decoder circuit complexity which reduces dissipated power and increases achievable operational speeds.





FIGS. 1B and 1C

illustrate exemplary embodiments for ADC's based on the 3-bit Q-Gray code (based on the BTOL in Eq. 14) and the 5-bit Q-Gray code (based on the BTOL in Eq. 15), respectively. Specifically, in

FIG. 1B

, the A-bit decoder


110


A takes as inputs logical “0” (from the seed value) and comparator outputs Vc1 and Vc5 since A occurs in the BTOL sequence in Eq. 14 at the first and fifth positions. Similarly, in

FIG. 1C

, the A-bit decoder


110


A takes as inputs logical “0” (from the seed value) and comparator outputs Vc1, Vc3, Vc5, Vc7, Vc9, and Vc21 since A occurs in the BTOL sequence in Eq. 15 at the first, third, fifth, seventh, ninth, and twenty-first positions.




Referring now to

FIG. 1D

, this Figure illustrates a more specific realization of FIG.


1


A. In particular, it shows how the 4-input odd-parity functions are realized by using 3 XOR gates. The exemplary ADC circuit


100


illustrated in

FIG. 1D

has been realized in a 2 μm GaAs HBT process and has been verified to be fully operational.




The circuit blocks used in

FIG. 1D

can be implemented in a variety of circuit technologies and by a variety of design techniques by one skilled-in-the-art. One-skilled-in-the-art will realize that ADC's


100


with other bit resolutions can be similarly implemented in view of the teachings presented herein and the present art.




Another advantage of a Q-Gray code-based ADC is apparent from

FIGS. 1A

,


1


B, and


1


C. The decoder blocks


120


(i.e. odd-parity detector


110


followed by a latch


115


enclosed in a dashed box) are identical for each of the bits. The only difference is in the inputs assigned to each odd-parity detector. Thus, a single and simple decoder circuit can be designed, which can then be replicated for the other bit decoder blocks


120


. This is in contrast to ADC's based on the conventional Gray code where each decoder block must be separately designed due to the high variation in the number of inputs to each block.




Referring now to

FIG. 2

, this Figure illustrate a top-level schematic diagram of the exemplary ADC


100


shown in FIG.


1


D. Comparing this schematic to the block diagram of

FIG. 1D

, it can be seen that the Vr1 to Vr15 comparator reference inputs of

FIG. 1D

correspond to the Vre1 to Vre15 comparator inputs on the left-hand side of the schematic shown in FIG.


2


.




And the bit decoders and the associated comparators are absorbed within the circuit blocks labeled VC4b and VC3b. The voltage input is labeled Vin and is first buffered by the two buffering amplifiers, REFBUF (X58 and X59) circuit, before being routed to the comparator array, which is included within the VC3b and VC4b circuits (X54 through X57).




The outputs of the VC blocks are latched using 4 D-type flip-flop (DFF) circuit blocks. The latched outputs are then buffered to 50 Ω output impedance by a circuit block named OUTBUF2. One skilled in the art will realize that the functions of the DFF, BUF, INBUF, CLKBUF10U, DCDET, and OUTBUF2 circuit blocks can be realized in a variety of forms and representative circuit embodiments.




Referring now to

FIG. 3

, this Figure illustrates the VC4b circuit that comprises four comparators, COMP (X1 through X4), and three exclusive-OR gates, XOR (X5 through X7). The VC circuits include the bit decoder and corresponding comparators, as required in

FIG. 1D

, to determine a given bit's value.




Referring briefly to

FIG. 4

, this Figure illustrates a simplified VC circuit. Referring to

FIG. 5

, this Figure illustrates the REFBUF circuit that comprises an emitter follower amplifier.

FIG. 6

illustrates the IREF circuit used to bias the other circuits. And

FIG. 7

illustrates the circuit diagram of the comparator (COMP) circuit. Bit A has only three bit toggles and therefore a simplified VC circuit as shown in

FIG. 4

was used.





FIG. 8

illustrates a simulation result for the exemplary ADC circuit of FIG.


2


. The input signal


802


is the trace labeled Vin at the top of the first graph


804


. The top most level corresponds to level 15 of Table 3 and the lowest voltage level corresponds to level 0. A careful inspection of the outputs A, B, C, and D illustrated in Graphs 800A, 800B, 800C, and 800D demonstrate that the ADC's operation exactly matches the codes of Table 3 (notwithstanding the output delay of one symbol period, i.e. 333 ps), as desired.




It should be understood that the foregoing relates only to illustrative embodiments of the present invention, and that numerous changes may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the following claims.



Claims
  • 1. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal generated according to a code for which the maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs, whereby the analog to digital converter has a design that reduces dissipated power and increases achievable operational speeds for communications.
  • 2. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein the comparators can process a multilevel signal comprising non-uniformly spaced decoding thresholds.
  • 3. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein the multilevel signal is decoded into bit channels for which the bit error rates are substantially evenly distributed.
  • 4. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein each decoder block comprises a parity detector with an equal number of inputs.
  • 5. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein each decoder block comprises a bank of identical parity detectors relative to another decoder block.
  • 6. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein each comparator has an individually adjustable threshold level.
  • 7. The analog to digital converter of claim 1, wherein each comparator has an externally controllable threshold level.
  • 8. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators with adjustable thresholds for receiving a multilevel signal; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to the comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises a plurality of identical parity detectors relative to another decoder block, whereby the analog to digital converter has a design that reduces dissipated power and increases communication speed.
  • 9. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein the multilevel signal is decoded into bit channels for which the bit error rates are substantially evenly distributed.
  • 10. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein the multilevel signal is decoded according to a code for which the maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized.
  • 11. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 12. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein each parity detector has an equal number of inputs.
  • 13. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein each comparator has an individually adjustable threshold level.
  • 14. The analog to digital converter of claim 8, wherein each comparator has an externally controllable threshold level.
  • 15. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal generated by a code for which the bit error rate is substantially evenly distributed across each bit channel when decoded; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to the comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of parity detectors, whereby the analog to digital converter reduces power consumption.
  • 16. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein the comparators can process a multilevel signal comprising non-uniformly spaced decoding thresholds.
  • 17. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein the multilevel signal is decoded according to a code for which the maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized.
  • 18. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 19. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein each parity detector has an equal number of inputs.
  • 20. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein each comparator has an individually adjustable threshold level.
  • 21. The analog to digital converter of claim 15, wherein each comparator has an externally controllable threshold level.
  • 22. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal, each comparator having an individually adjustable threshold level; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to the comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises identical hardware relative to another decoder block, whereby the analog to digital converter has a design that increases communication speeds.
  • 23. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein the multilevel signal is decoded according to a code for which the maximum number of bit-toggles incurred in a bit channel while sequentially traversing the code is minimized.
  • 24. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein the comparators can process a multilevel signal comprising non-uniformly spaced decoding thresholds.
  • 25. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein the hardware comprises parity detectors.
  • 26. The analog to digital converter of claim 25, wherein each parity detector has an equal number of inputs.
  • 27. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 28. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein each comparator has an externally controllable threshold level.
  • 29. The analog to digital converter of claim 22, wherein inputs are evenly distributed to each decoder block.
  • 30. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal generated according to a three bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising ABCBABC with an operator comprising B and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the three bit Gray code; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 31. The analog to digital converter of claim 30, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list.
  • 32. The analog to digital converter of claim 30, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by interchanging bit channel assignments.
  • 33. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal generated according to a four bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising CBCADABCBADBDCD with an operator comprising A and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the four bit Gray code; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 34. The analog to digital converter of claim 33, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list.
  • 35. The analog to digital converter of claim 33, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by interchanging bit channel assignments.
  • 36. An analog to digital converter comprising:a plurality of comparators for receiving a multilevel signal generated according to a five bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising ABACABADABEBDCDEBEDCACDECEBDCDE, with an operator comprising D and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the five bit Gray code; a plurality of decoder blocks coupled to comparators for decoding the multilevel signal, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 37. The analog to digital converter of claim 36, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list.
  • 38. The analog to digital converter of claim 36, wherein the code producing the multilevel signal is further derived by interchanging bit channel assignments.
  • 39. A method for high speed communications comprising:receiving data; modulating the data to produce a multilevel signal according to a three bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising ABCBABC with an operator comprising B and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the three bit Gray code; receiving the multilevel signal; and converting the multilevel signal to a set of binary signals with decoder blocks, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 40. The method of claim 39, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list to yield an alternate code.
  • 41. The method of claim 39, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by interchanging bit channel assignments.
  • 42. A method for high speed communications comprising:receiving data; modulating the data to produce a multilevel signal according to a four bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising CBCADABCBADBDCD with an operator comprising A and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the four bit Gray code; receiving the multilevel signal; and converting the multilevel analog signal to a set of binary signals with decoder blocks, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 43. The method of claim 42, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list to yield an alternate code.
  • 44. The method of claim 42, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by interchanging bit channel assignments.
  • 45. A method for high speed communications comprising:receiving data; modulating the data to produce a multilevel signal to produce a five bit Gray code derived from a bit translation operating list comprising ABACABADABEBDCDEBEDCACDECEBDCDE, with an operator comprising D and the operator returning an original seed from a last word in the five bit Gray code; receiving the multilevel signal; and converting the multilevel signal to a set of binary signals with decoder blocks, wherein each decoder block comprises an equal number of inputs.
  • 46. The method of claim 45, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by cyclically rotating the bit translation operating list to yield an alternate code.
  • 47. The method of claim 45, further comprising deriving the multilevel signal by interchanging bit channel assignments.
STATEMENT REGARDING RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) to provisional patent application entitled, “HIGH-SPEED ANALOG-TO-DIGITAL CONVERTER USING A UNIQUE GRAY CODE,” filed on Mar. 8, 2002 and assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 60/362,721, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.

US Referenced Citations (188)
Number Name Date Kind
2632058 Gray Mar 1953 A
3445771 Clapham et al. May 1969 A
3571725 Kaneko et al. Mar 1971 A
3714437 Kinsel Jan 1973 A
3806915 Higgins et al. Apr 1974 A
3977795 Buschmann Aug 1976 A
4287756 Gallagher Sep 1981 A
4349914 Evans Sep 1982 A
4363127 Evans et al. Dec 1982 A
4386339 Henry et al. May 1983 A
4387461 Evans Jun 1983 A
4393499 Evans Jul 1983 A
4464771 Sorensen Aug 1984 A
4470126 Haque Sep 1984 A
4479266 Eumurian et al. Oct 1984 A
4521883 Roche Jun 1985 A
4584720 Garrett Apr 1986 A
4618941 Linder et al. Oct 1986 A
4651026 Serfaty et al. Mar 1987 A
4751497 Torii Jun 1988 A
4830493 Giebeler May 1989 A
4847521 Huignard et al. Jul 1989 A
4864590 Arnon et al. Sep 1989 A
4912726 Iwamatsu et al. Mar 1990 A
4942593 Whiteside et al. Jul 1990 A
4959535 Garrett Sep 1990 A
4978957 Hotta et al. Dec 1990 A
5007106 Kahn et al. Apr 1991 A
5008957 Kiyono Apr 1991 A
5012475 Campbell Apr 1991 A
5067126 Moore Nov 1991 A
5072221 Schmidt Dec 1991 A
5111065 Roberge May 1992 A
5113278 Degura et al. May 1992 A
5115450 Arcuri May 1992 A
5121411 Fluharty Jun 1992 A
5128790 Heidemann et al. Jul 1992 A
5132639 Blauvelt et al. Jul 1992 A
5151698 Pophillat Sep 1992 A
5181034 Takakura et al. Jan 1993 A
5184131 Ikeda Feb 1993 A
5208833 Erhart et al. May 1993 A
5222103 Gross Jun 1993 A
5223834 Wang et al. Jun 1993 A
5225798 Hunsinger et al. Jul 1993 A
5237590 Kazawa et al. Aug 1993 A
5243613 Gysel et al. Sep 1993 A
5252930 Blauvelt Oct 1993 A
5282072 Nazarathy et al. Jan 1994 A
5283679 Wedding Feb 1994 A
5291031 MacDonald et al. Mar 1994 A
5293406 Suzuki Mar 1994 A
5300930 Burger et al. Apr 1994 A
5321543 Huber Jun 1994 A
5321710 Cornish et al. Jun 1994 A
5327279 Farina et al. Jul 1994 A
5343322 Pirio et al. Aug 1994 A
5351148 Maeda et al. Sep 1994 A
5355240 Prigent et al. Oct 1994 A
5361156 Pidgeon Nov 1994 A
5371625 Wedding et al. Dec 1994 A
5373384 Hebert Dec 1994 A
5376786 MacDonald Dec 1994 A
5382955 Knierim Jan 1995 A
5387887 Zimmerman et al. Feb 1995 A
5408485 Ries Apr 1995 A
5413047 Evans et al. May 1995 A
5416628 Betti et al. May 1995 A
5418637 Kuo May 1995 A
5424680 Nazarathy et al. Jun 1995 A
5428643 Razzell Jun 1995 A
5436752 Wedding Jul 1995 A
5436756 Knox et al. Jul 1995 A
5450044 Hulick Sep 1995 A
5481389 Pidgeon et al. Jan 1996 A
5481568 Yada Jan 1996 A
5504633 Van Den Enden Apr 1996 A
5510919 Wedding Apr 1996 A
5528710 Burton et al. Jun 1996 A
5548253 Durrant Aug 1996 A
5574743 van der Poel et al. Nov 1996 A
5589786 Bella et al. Dec 1996 A
5612653 Dodds et al. Mar 1997 A
5625360 Garrity et al. Apr 1997 A
5644325 King et al. Jul 1997 A
5670871 Man et al. Sep 1997 A
5675600 Yamamoto Oct 1997 A
5678198 Lemson Oct 1997 A
5689356 Rainal Nov 1997 A
5706008 Huntley, Jr. et al. Jan 1998 A
5721315 Evans et al. Feb 1998 A
5723176 Keyworth et al. Mar 1998 A
5754681 Watanabe et al. May 1998 A
5757763 Green et al. May 1998 A
5761243 Russell et al. Jun 1998 A
5764542 Gaudette et al. Jun 1998 A
5783630 Evans et al. Jul 1998 A
5784032 Johnston et al. Jul 1998 A
5798854 Blauvelt et al. Aug 1998 A
5801657 Fowler et al. Sep 1998 A
5802089 Link Sep 1998 A
5812578 Schemmann et al. Sep 1998 A
5825211 Smith et al. Oct 1998 A
5825257 Klymyshyn et al. Oct 1998 A
5825825 Altmann et al. Oct 1998 A
5828329 Burns Oct 1998 A
5839105 Ostendorf et al. Nov 1998 A
5841841 Dodds et al. Nov 1998 A
5844436 Altmann Dec 1998 A
5848139 Grover Dec 1998 A
5850409 Link Dec 1998 A
5850505 Grover et al. Dec 1998 A
5852389 Kumar et al. Dec 1998 A
5859862 Hikasa et al. Jan 1999 A
5861966 Ortel Jan 1999 A
5872468 Dyke Feb 1999 A
5878390 Kawai et al. Mar 1999 A
5880870 Sieben et al. Mar 1999 A
5883910 Link Mar 1999 A
5887022 Lee et al. Mar 1999 A
5889759 McGibney Mar 1999 A
5896392 Ono et al. Apr 1999 A
5912749 Harstead et al. Jun 1999 A
5920600 Yamaoka et al. Jul 1999 A
5923226 Kakura et al. Jul 1999 A
5942576 Evans et al. Aug 1999 A
5943380 Marchesani et al. Aug 1999 A
5943457 Hayward et al. Aug 1999 A
5949926 Davies Sep 1999 A
5959032 Evans et al. Sep 1999 A
5959750 Eskildsen et al. Sep 1999 A
5965667 Evans et al. Oct 1999 A
5983178 Naito et al. Nov 1999 A
5985999 Dominguez et al. Nov 1999 A
5999300 Davies et al. Dec 1999 A
6002274 Smith et al. Dec 1999 A
6009424 Lepage et al. Dec 1999 A
6021110 McGibney Feb 2000 A
6028658 Hamada et al. Feb 2000 A
6031048 Evans et al. Feb 2000 A
6031866 Oler et al. Feb 2000 A
6031874 Chennakeshu et al. Feb 2000 A
6034996 Herzberg Mar 2000 A
6035080 Henry et al. Mar 2000 A
6041299 Schuster et al. Mar 2000 A
6072364 Jeckeln et al. Jun 2000 A
6072615 Mamyshev Jun 2000 A
6078627 Crayford Jun 2000 A
6084931 Powell, II et al. Jul 2000 A
6091782 Harano Jul 2000 A
6093496 Dominguez et al. Jul 2000 A
6093773 Evans et al. Jul 2000 A
6108474 Eggleton et al. Aug 2000 A
6111477 Klymyshyn et al. Aug 2000 A
6118563 Boskovic et al. Sep 2000 A
6118567 Alameh et al. Sep 2000 A
6127480 Dominguez et al. Oct 2000 A
6140416 Evans et al. Oct 2000 A
6140858 Dumont Oct 2000 A
6140972 Johnston et al. Oct 2000 A
6141127 Boivin et al. Oct 2000 A
6141387 Zhang Oct 2000 A
6148428 Welch et al. Nov 2000 A
6151150 Kikuchi Nov 2000 A
6154301 Harvey Nov 2000 A
6163638 Eggleton et al. Dec 2000 A
6181454 Nagahori et al. Jan 2001 B1
6191719 Bult et al. Feb 2001 B1
6201916 Eggleton et al. Mar 2001 B1
6208792 Hwang et al. Mar 2001 B1
6212654 Lou et al. Apr 2001 B1
6214914 Evans et al. Apr 2001 B1
6219633 Lepage Apr 2001 B1
6226112 Denk et al. May 2001 B1
6236963 Naito et al. May 2001 B1
6259836 Dodds Jul 2001 B1
6259847 Lenz et al. Jul 2001 B1
6268816 Bult et al. Jul 2001 B1
6271944 Schemmann et al. Aug 2001 B1
6281824 Masuda Aug 2001 B1
6288668 Tsukamoto et al. Sep 2001 B1
6289055 Knotz Sep 2001 B1
6289151 Kazarinov et al. Sep 2001 B1
6298459 Tsukamoto Oct 2001 B1
6304199 Fang et al. Oct 2001 B1
6317469 Herbert Nov 2001 B1
6341023 Puc Jan 2002 B1
6473131 Neugebauer et al. Oct 2002 B1
Foreign Referenced Citations (10)
Number Date Country
0 527 966 Sep 1994 EP
0 584 865 Mar 2000 EP
2 223 369 Apr 1990 GB
2 306 066 Apr 1997 GB
62082659 Oct 1988 JP
1990000063162 Nov 1991 JP
04187738 Jul 1992 JP
08079186 Mar 1996 JP
WO 9945683 Sep 1999 WO
WO 0141346 Jun 2001 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (50)
Entry
André; InP DHBT Technology and Design Methodology for High-Bit-Rate Optical Communications Circuits; IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits; vol. 33, No. 9, Sep. 1998; pp. 1328-1335.
Borjak et al.; High-Speed Generalized Distributed-Amplifier-Based Transversal-Filter Topology for Optical Communication Systems; IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques; vol. 45, No. 8, Aug. 1997; pp. 1453-1457.
Buchali et al.; Fast Eye Monitor for 10 Gbit/s and its Application for Optical PMD Compensation; Optical Society of America; (2000); pp. TuP5-1-TuP1-3.
Cartledge et al.; Performance of Smart Lightwave Receivers With Linear Equalization; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 10, No. 8; Aug. 1992; pp. 1105-1109.
Cimini et al., Can Multilevel Signaling Improve the Spectral Efficiency of ASK Optical FDM Systems?; IEEE Transactions on Communications; vol. 41, No. 7; Jul. 1993; pp. 1084-1090.
Downie et al.; Performance Monitoring of Optical Networks with Synchronous and Asynchronous Sampling; p. WDD50-1 no date.
Enning et al.; Design and Test of Novel Integrate and Dump Filter (I&D) for Optical Gbit/s System Applications; Electronics Letters; (Nov. 21, 1991); vol. 27, No. 24; pp. 2286-2288.
Godin et al.; A InP DHBT Technology for High Bit-rate Optical Communications Circuits; IEEE; (1997); pp. 219-222.
Haskins et al.; FET Diode Linearizer Optimization for Amplifier Predistortion in Digital Radios; IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave Letters; vol. 10, No. 1; Jan. 2000; pp. 21-23.
Hranilovic et al.; A Multilevel Modulation Scheme for High-Speed Wireless Infrared Communications; IEEE; (1999); pp. VI-338-VI-341.
Jutzi, Wilhelm; Microwave Bandwidth Active Transversal Filter Concept with MESFETs; IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Technique, vol. MTT-19, No. 9; Sep. 1971; pp. 760-767.
Lee et al.; Effects of Decision Ambiguity Level on Optical Receiver Sensitivity; IEEE Photonics Technology Letters; vol. 7, No. 19; Oct. 1995; pp. 1204-1206.
D. Marcuse; Calculation of Bit-Error Probability for a Lightwave System with Optical Amplifiers and Post-Detection Gaussian Noise; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 9, No. 4; Apr. 1999; pp. 505-513.
Megherbi et al.; A GaAs-HBT A/D Gray-code converter; IEEE; (1997); pp. 209-212.
Nazarathy et al.; Progress in Externally Modulated AM CATV Transmission Systems; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 11, No. 1; Jan. 1993; pp. 82-105.
Oehler et al.; A 3.6 Gigasample/s 5 bit Analog to Digital Converter Using 0.3 μm AlGaAS-HEMT Technology; IEEE; (1993); pp. 163-164.
Ota et al.; High-Speed, Burst-Mode, Packet-Capable Optical Receiver and Instantaneous Clock Recovery for Optical Bus Operation; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 12; Feb. 1994; pp. 325-331.
Poulton et al.; An 8-Gsa/s 8-bit ADC Systems; Symposium on VLSI Circuits Digest of Technical Papers; (1997); pp. 23-24.
Poulton et al.; A 6-b, 4 Gsa/s GaAs HBT ADC; IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits; vol. 30, No. 10.; Oct. 1995; pp. 1109-1118.
Poulton et al.; A 6-bit, 4 Gsa/s ADC Fabricated in a GaAs HBT Process; IEEE; (1994); pp. 240-243.
Prasetyo et al.; Application for Amplitude Gain Estimation Techniques for Multilevel Modulation in OFDM Systems; IEEE; (1998); pp. 821-824.
Shtaif et al.; Limits on the Spectral Efficiency of Intensity Modulated Direct Detection Systems with Optical Amplifiers; AT&T Labs Research; pp. MM1-1-MM1-3, no date.
Su et al.; Inherent Transmission Capacity Penalty of Burst-Mode Receiver for Optical Multiaccess Networks; IEEE Photonics Technology Letters; vol. 6, No. 5; May 1994; pp. 664-667.
Wang et al.; Multi-Gb/s Silicon Bipolar Clock Recovery IC; IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications; vol. 9, No. 5; Jun. 1991; pp. 656-663.
Webb, William T.; Spectrum Efficiency of Multilevel Modulation Schemes in Mobile Radio Communications; IEEE Transactions on Communications; vol. 43, No. 8; Aug. 1995; pp. 2344-2349.
Wedding et al.; Fast Adaptive Control for Electronic Equalization of PMD; Optical Society of America; (2000); pp. TuP4-1-TuP-3.
Wilson et al.; Predistortion of Electroabsorption Modulators for Analog CATV Systems at 1.55 μm; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 15, No. 9; Sep. 1997; pp. 1654-1662.
Author: Unknown; Digital Carrier Modulation Schemes; Title: Unknown; Date: Unknown; pp. 380-442, no date.
Fürst et al.; Performance Limits of Nonlinear RZ and NRZ Coded Transmission at 10 and 40 Gb/s on Different Fibers; pp. 302-304, no date.
Garrett, Ian; Pulse-Position Modulation for Transmission Over Optical Fibers with Direct or Heterodyne Detection; IEEE Transactions on Communications; vol. COM-31; No. 4; Apr. 1983; pp. 518-527.
Idler et al; 40 Gbit/s Quaternary Dispersion Supported Transmission Field Trial Over 86 km Standard Singlemode Fibre; 24th European Conference on Optical Communication; Sep., 1998; pp. 145-147.
Ohtsuki et al.; BER Performance of Turbo-Coded PPM CDMA Systems on Optical Fiber; Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 18; No. 12; Dec., 2000; pp. 1776-1784.
Vorenkamp et al.; A IGs/s, 10b Digital-to-Analog Converter, ISSCC94/Session 3/Analog Techniquest/Paper WP 3.3; pp. 52-53, no date.
Walkin et al.; A 10 Gb/s 4-ary ASK Lightwave System; ECOC; 1997; pp. 255-258.
Walklin et al.; Multilevel Signaling for Extending the Dispersion-Limited Transmission in High-Speed, Fiber Optic Communication Systems; IEEE; 1996; pp. 233-236.
Walklin et al.; Multilevel Signaling for Increasing the Reach of 10 Gb/s Lightwave Systems; IEEE Journal of Lightwave Technology; vol. 17; No. 11; Nov., 1999; pp. 2235-2248.
Wedding et al.; Multi-level Dispersion Supported Transmission at 20 Gbit/s Over 46 km Installed Standard Singlemode Fibre; 22nd European Conference on Optical Communications; 1996; pp. 91-94.
International Search Report dated May 29, 2003 for International Application No. PCT/US03/04626.
Wang, Z. et al., “Multi-Gb/s Silicon Bipolar Clock Recovery IC”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 9., No. 5, Jun. 1991, pp. 656-663.
Vodhanel, R. et al. “Performance of directly modulated DFB lasers in 10-Gb/s ASK, FAK, and DPSK lightwave system” Journal of Lightwave Technology, Sep. 1990. vol. 8, No. 9: 1379-1386.
Chiang et al. “Implementation of STARNET: a WDM computer communications network.” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications. Jun. 1996. vol. 14, No. 5:824-839.
Kaiser et al. “Reduced complexity optical duobinary 10-Gb/s transmitter setup resulting in an increased transmission distance.” IEEE Photonics Technology Letters. Aug. 2001. vol. 13, No. 8: 1041-1135.
Ohm, M. and J. Speidel. “Quaternary optical ASK-DPSK and receivers with direct detection.” IEEE Photonics Technology Letters. Jan. 2003. vol. 15, No. 1: 159-161.
Search Report for PCT/US03/12422 dated Aug. 11, 2003.
Kaess, F. et al., “New Encoding Scheme for High-Speed Flash ADC's” 1977 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Jun. 9-12, 1997, Hong Kong, pp. 5-8.
Wakimoto, Tsutomu et al., Si Bipolar 2-GHz 6-bit Flash A/D Conversion LSI, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 23, No. 6, Dec. 1988, pp. 1345-1350.
International Search Report dated Sep. 24, 2003 for International Application No. PCT/US03/06774.
Chi, N. et al., “Transmission performance of all-optically labeled packets using ASK/DPSK orthogonal modulation.” The 15th Annual Meeting of the IEEE Lasers and Electro-Optics Society, 2002. LEOS 2002. Nov. 10-14, 2002. vol. 1:51-52. the whole document.
Runge et al.; High-Speed Circuits for Lightwave Communications; 1999; World Scientific, pp. 181-184.
Westphal et al.; Lightwave Communications; 1994; Thursday Afternoon/CLEO '94; pp. 337-338.
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60/362721 Mar 2002 US