pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.11717 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-13 · 📡 eess.SP

Recognition: unknown

Nonlinear Characterization of Thin-Film LiNbO3 Acoustic Filters

Omar Barrera , Bryan T. Bosworth , Taran Anusorn , Kenny Huynh , Ian Anderson , Nicholas R. Jungwirth , Michael Liao , Sinwoo Cho
show 5 more authors
Jack Kramer Lezli Matto Mark S. Goorsky Nathan D. Orloff Ruochen Lu
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 14:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords lithium niobateacoustic filtersnonlinear characterizationXBARmmWave filterssubstrate effectsintermodulation distortionthermal stability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Thin-film LiNbO3 acoustic filters on sapphire show higher IIP3 and better stability than on silicon at 22 GHz.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a measurement approach for tracking how power levels affect S-parameters and third-order intermodulation in millimeter-wave acoustic filters. It applies the approach to identical lithium niobate structures built on sapphire and silicon substrates. At roughly 22 GHz the sapphire versions deliver lower insertion loss, comparable bandwidth, and roughly 4 dBm higher in-band IIP3 together with visibly smaller thermal drift and passband warping. The contrast indicates that the choice of substrate can directly limit the nonlinear distortion that appears in high-frequency acoustic front-end modules.

Core claim

Filters fabricated on transferred single-crystal LiNbO3 films on Al2O3 substrates reach 1.48 dB insertion loss, 17.7 percent 3 dB fractional bandwidth, and 50.8 dBm in-band IIP3 at 21.8 GHz, while otherwise identical filters on silicon reach 2.47 dB loss, 18.6 percent bandwidth, and 46.5 dBm IIP3 at 21.6 GHz. Power-dependent measurements further show reduced thermal instability and less passband distortion when the substrate is Al2O3, demonstrating that substrate selection controls nonlinearity in these devices.

What carries the argument

A methodology for obtaining power-dependent S-parameters and third-order intermodulation (IMD3) data on high-frequency acoustic filters.

If this is right

  • Al2O3 substrates raise in-band IIP3 by approximately 4 dBm relative to Si at 22 GHz.
  • Reduced thermal drift on Al2O3 directly lowers passband distortion under power.
  • Lower insertion loss on Al2O3 improves overall efficiency of the acoustic filter.
  • Substrate thermal conductivity becomes a design variable for minimizing nonlinearity in mmWave acoustic modules.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The observed stability gain is consistent with Al2O3 having higher thermal conductivity than Si, suggesting that other high-conductivity substrates could be screened with the same measurement method.
  • The methodology can be reused to compare nonlinearity across different acoustic modes or film thicknesses without changing the core test setup.
  • Design rules for 5G/6G acoustic filters can now treat substrate selection as a first-order lever for power-handling limits.

Load-bearing premise

Measured differences in IIP3, thermal stability, and passband shape between the two substrates arise primarily from the substrate material itself rather than from uncontrolled variations in film transfer, electrode quality, or measurement setup.

What would settle it

Fabricating and measuring multiple sets of devices that use the same LiNbO3 film transfer process and electrode pattern but are placed on either Al2O3 or Si substrates; if the IIP3 gap and stability difference disappear, the substrate claim is falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.11717 by Bryan T. Bosworth, Ian Anderson, Jack Kramer, Kenny Huynh, Lezli Matto, Mark S. Goorsky, Michael Liao, Nathan D. Orloff, Nicholas R. Jungwirth, Omar Barrera, Ruochen Lu, Sinwoo Cho, Taran Anusorn.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Depiction of the filter passband shift under different power (P) conditions, i.e., P2 >> P1. For a suspended laterally excited bulk acoustic resonator (XBAR), thermally induced nonlinearity causes an increase in insertion loss (IL) and a shift in the passband frequency. An inset illustrates thermal effect in XBAR devices under different power levels. fc represents the center frequency of the filters, while… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) XBAR resonator top schematic. (b) Cross-sectional view of released XBAR resonator in LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3, where aSi bonding layer is sacrificed and an air cavity with defined thickness is formed. (c) Cross￾sectional view of released XBAR in LiNbO3-aSi-Si, where aSi layer and Si carrier are isotropically etched, creating a larger air cavity. usline N [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) FEA simulated XBAR admittance with extracted key modified Butterworth-Van Dyke (mBVD) fitted performance specifications. (b) Simulated third-order ladder filter response. Ports 1 and 2 of the filters are indicated as P1 and P2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (c) presents a top-down view of heat conduction, highlighting the preferential directions of heat dissipation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fabricated (a) shunt (b) series resonators and (c) measured admittance results in the LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3 stack [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Fabricated (a) shunt (b) series resonators and (c) measured admittance results in the LiNbO3-aSi-Si stack. hunt esonator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Fabricated filters in (a) LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3 and (b) LiNbO3-aSi-Si, with their transmission and reflection responses in (c) and (d), respectively. Note that the data here are all un er 50 Ω termination and without post impedance matching. Ports 1 and 2 of the filters are denoted as P1 and P2, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Measured (a) transmission and (b) zoomed-in passband responses of the LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3 filter under varying incident power levels. Insets highlight the degradation in ∆ L and ∆f under high-power excitation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Measured (a) transmission and (b) zoomed-in passband responses of the LiNbO3-aSi-Si filter under varying incident power levels. Insets highlight the egra ation in ∆ L and ∆f under high-power excitation. L 0 0 z [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Output power versus input power plots showing fundamental and third-order intermodulation components for devices on (a) LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3 and (b) LiNbO3-aSi-Si platforms, with extracted IIP3. (c) Extracted IIP3 across frequency for both platforms, as well as the reference on-chip through for dynamic range testing, highlighting superior linearity performance in LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3. a b LiNbO3 a i i Fun amental… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Compact, high-performance components in millimeter-wave (mmWave) communication systems demand new acoustic filter technology at increasingly higher frequencies. Among various promising mmWave platforms, first-order antisymmetric (A1) mode laterally excited bulk acoustic resonators (XBARs) in thin-film lithium niobate (LiNbO3) have perhaps the most impressive linear performance. Despite these advances, there are few reports of nonlinear characterization of LiNbO3 filters at mmWaves. Here, we address this gap by developing a new nonlinear methodology for high-frequency filters. The result is a methodology for performing power-dependent S-parameters and third-order intermodulation (IMD3) measurements. To test our methodology, we fabricated filters on transferred single-crystal LiNbO3 films on sapphire (Al2O3) and silicon (Si) substrates with amorphous silicon (aSi) sacrificial layer. At 21.8 GHz, the filters on Al2O3 demonstrated an insertion loss of 1.48 dB, a 3 dB fractional bandwidth (FBW) of 17.7%, and in-band third-order input intercept points (IIP3) of 50.8 dBm. At 21.6 GHz, the filters on silicon demonstrated an insertion loss of 2.47 dB, a 3 dB FBW of 18.6%, and in-band IIP3 of 46.5 dBm. The nonlinear results conclusively show that thermal stability and passband distortion improved on the Al2O3 substrate, confirming that substrate selection plays a pivotal role in mitigating nonlinearity in acoustic front-end modules.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper develops a methodology for nonlinear characterization of mmWave thin-film LiNbO3 XBAR acoustic filters via power-dependent S-parameters and IMD3 measurements. Filters fabricated on transferred LiNbO3 films on Al2O3 and Si substrates (with aSi sacrificial layer) are compared at ~21.7 GHz, with reported values of IL = 1.48 dB, FBW = 17.7%, IIP3 = 50.8 dBm on Al2O3 versus IL = 2.47 dB, FBW = 18.6%, IIP3 = 46.5 dBm on Si. The authors conclude that the nonlinear results demonstrate improved thermal stability and reduced passband distortion on Al2O3, confirming substrate selection as key to mitigating nonlinearity in acoustic front-end modules.

Significance. If the substrate-comparison results prove robust, the work fills a gap in nonlinear data for high-frequency LiNbO3 acoustic devices and supplies concrete IIP3 and stability metrics that could guide substrate choice for low-distortion mmWave filters. The measurement methodology itself is potentially reusable for other acoustic platforms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'nonlinear results conclusively show' improved thermal stability and passband distortion on Al2O3 (versus Si) rests on single-point IIP3 and IL values without reported statistics, error bars, multiple-device data, or matched fabrication runs. This leaves open the possibility that observed differences arise from film-transfer quality, electrode patterning variation, or measurement artifacts rather than substrate thermal/acoustic properties.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and fabrication description: no details are provided on how thermal stability was quantified (e.g., temperature-dependent S-parameter sweeps, specific metrics such as frequency shift or Q degradation) or on calibration procedures for the power-dependent measurements, undermining the attribution of stability gains specifically to the Al2O3 substrate.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the two center frequencies are given as 21.8 GHz and 21.6 GHz; clarify whether these are design targets or measured values and whether the slight offset affects the direct comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below and outline the revisions we will make to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'nonlinear results conclusively show' improved thermal stability and passband distortion on Al2O3 (versus Si) rests on single-point IIP3 and IL values without reported statistics, error bars, multiple-device data, or matched fabrication runs. This leaves open the possibility that observed differences arise from film-transfer quality, electrode patterning variation, or measurement artifacts rather than substrate thermal/acoustic properties.

    Authors: We agree that the wording in the abstract is overly strong given the presentation of single representative values. The devices on both substrates were fabricated in matched runs using the same LiNbO3 film transfer process to minimize variation, and the reported IIP3 and IL figures are from devices measured under identical conditions. However, we did not include statistics across multiple devices or error bars in the current version. We will revise the abstract to replace 'conclusively show' with 'indicate' and add a new supplementary figure or table reporting IIP3, IL, and FBW from at least five devices per substrate type, including mean values and standard deviations, to demonstrate that the observed differences are not due to fabrication artifacts. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and fabrication description: no details are provided on how thermal stability was quantified (e.g., temperature-dependent S-parameter sweeps, specific metrics such as frequency shift or Q degradation) or on calibration procedures for the power-dependent measurements, undermining the attribution of stability gains specifically to the Al2O3 substrate.

    Authors: The improved thermal stability on Al2O3 was inferred from the power-dependent S-parameter data, which showed smaller frequency shifts and less passband distortion under increasing input power compared to the Si devices, consistent with the higher thermal conductivity of sapphire. We acknowledge that the abstract and fabrication section lack explicit quantification details and calibration information. In revision we will expand the methods section to describe the calibration procedures (including de-embedding, power meter calibration, and reference plane definition) for the power-dependent S-parameter and IMD3 measurements. We will also add a paragraph clarifying the specific metrics used to assess stability (e.g., observed center-frequency shift versus input power) and note that dedicated temperature-chamber sweeps were not performed in this study. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Dedicated temperature-dependent S-parameter sweeps in a controlled thermal chamber were not performed; thermal stability was inferred solely from the power-dependent distortion metrics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: pure experimental characterization

full rationale

The paper reports fabrication of LiNbO3 filters on Al2O3 and Si substrates followed by direct power-dependent S-parameter and IMD3 measurements at ~21 GHz. All reported values (IIP3 of 50.8 dBm vs 46.5 dBm, insertion loss, FBW) are measured quantities, not outputs of any model, fit, or derivation. No equations, predictions, self-citations, or ansatzes appear in the abstract or claimed methodology; the central claim is an empirical comparison of measured performance. The derivation chain is therefore empty and self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental characterization paper. It relies on standard thin-film transfer and RF measurement practices already established in the acoustic filter community. No new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5650 in / 956 out tokens · 36617 ms · 2026-05-10T14:48:55.113310+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Transferre thin -film lithium niobate as millimeter - wave acoustic filter platforms,

    O. Barrera et al. , “Transferre thin -film lithium niobate as millimeter - wave acoustic filter platforms,” in Proc. IEEE 37th Int. Conf. Micro Electro Mech. Syst. (MEMS) , Austin, TX, USA, 2024, pp. 23 –26, doi: 10.1109/MEMS58180.2024.10439593

    work page doi:10.1109/mems58180.2024.10439593 2024

  2. [2]

    A filters for 5G ban s,

    R. Aigner, G. Fattinger, M. Schaefer, K. Karnati, R. Rothemund, and F. Dumont, “ A filters for 5G ban s,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM), San Francisco, CA, USA, Dec. 2018, pp. 14.5.1–14.5.4, doi: 10.1109/IEDM.2018.8614564

    work page doi:10.1109/iedm.2018.8614564 2018

  3. [3]

    Acoustic filters for F communication,

    Y. Qian, Y. Zhang, S. Bhattacharya, W. Yang, C. Liu, and Y. Zhu, “Acoustic filters for F communication,” IEEE Nanotechnol. Mag. , vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 23–33, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1109/MNANO.2023.3340382

    work page doi:10.1109/mnano.2023.3340382 2024

  4. [4]

    B. A. Auld, Acoustic Fields and Waves in Solids , vols. 1 –2. New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Interscience, 1973

    1973

  5. [5]

    5 volution an — hite aper,

    NTT OCO O, nc , “5 volution an — hite aper,” Jan 0 3 [Online]. Accessed: Sep. 22, 2025

    2025

  6. [6]

    Multiphoton non-local quantum interference controlled by an undetected photon,

    iribal i, L Colombo, imeoni, an inal i, “Compact an wideband nanoacoustic pass -band filters for future 5G and 6G cellular ra ios,” Nat. Commun. , vol. 15, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41467-023- 44038-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023- 2024

  7. [7]

    5 A technology Challenges an solutions,

    Aljoumayly, othemun , chaefer, an eeren, “5 A technology Challenges an solutions,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless and Microwave Technology Conf. (WAMICON), Clearwater, FL, USA, 2022, pp. 1–3, doi: 10.1109/WAMICON53991.2022.9786171

    work page doi:10.1109/wamicon53991.2022.9786171 2022

  8. [8]

    From microwave acoustic filters to millimeter-wave operation an new applications,

    A. Hagelauer et al , “From microwave acoustic filters to millimeter-wave operation an new applications,” IEEE J. Microw., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 484 – 508, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1109/JMW.2022.3226415

    work page doi:10.1109/jmw.2022.3226415 2023

  9. [9]

    Acoustic wave filter technology —A review,

    C C uppel, “Acoustic wave filter technology —A review,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control , vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 1390 – 1400, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2017.2690905

    work page doi:10.1109/tuffc.2017.2690905 2017

  10. [10]

    icrowave acoustic evices ecent a vances an outloo ,

    ong, Lu, ang, L ao, an A assanien, “ icrowave acoustic evices ecent a vances an outloo ,” IEEE J. Microw., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 601–609, 2021, doi: 10.1109/JMW.2021.3064825

    work page doi:10.1109/jmw.2021.3064825 2021

  11. [11]

    33 z overmo e bul acoustic resonator,

    Z chaffer, imeoni, an iazza, “33 z overmo e bul acoustic resonator,” IEEE Microw. Wireless Compon. Lett., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 656–659, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1109/LMWC.2022.3166682

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwc.2022.3166682 2022

  12. [12]

    illimeter wave thin -film bulk acoustic resonator in sputtere scan ium aluminum nitri e,

    S. Cho et al. , “ illimeter wave thin -film bulk acoustic resonator in sputtere scan ium aluminum nitri e,” J. Microelectromech. Syst ., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 529–532, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1109/JMEMS.2023.3321284

    work page doi:10.1109/jmems.2023.3321284 2023

  13. [13]

    A z all epitaxial Al0 8 c0 N casca e F A for F filtering applications,

    ar , J ang, ang, Z i, an A Ansari, “A z all epitaxial Al0 8 c0 N casca e F A for F filtering applications,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1341–1344, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1109/LED.2024.3404477

    work page doi:10.1109/led.2024.3404477 2024

  14. [14]

    A K-band bulk acoustic wave resonator using periodically pole Al0 c0 8N,

    Izhar et al., “A K-band bulk acoustic wave resonator using periodically pole Al0 c0 8N,” IEEE Electron Device Lett. , vol. 44, no. 7, pp. 1196–1199, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1109/LED.2023.3282170

    work page doi:10.1109/led.2023.3282170 2023

  15. [15]

    erio ically pole aluminum scan ium nitri e bul acoustic wave resonators an filters for communications in the era,

    Izhar et al., “ erio ically pole aluminum scan ium nitri e bul acoustic wave resonators an filters for communications in the era,” Microsyst. Nanoeng., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 19, 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41378-024-00857-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41378-024-00857-4 2025

  16. [16]

    A high -selectivity 11.9 -GHz filter realized in a perio ically pole piezoelectric Al cN,

    Fiagbenu et al , “A high -selectivity 11.9 -GHz filter realized in a perio ically pole piezoelectric Al cN,” IEEE Microw. Wireless Technol. Lett., early access, 2025, doi: 10.1109/LMWT.2025.3581841

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwt.2025.3581841 2025

  17. [17]

    A mm ave trilayer AlN/ cAlN/AlN higher or er mo e F A ,

    Nam, eng, ang, ang, Z i, an A ortazawi, “A mm ave trilayer AlN/ cAlN/AlN higher or er mo e F A ,” IEEE Microw. Wireless Technol. Lett. , vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 803 –806, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1109/LMWT.2023.3271865

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwt.2023.3271865 2023

  18. [18]

    5 - z epitaxial AlN F A s on iC substrates,

    Zhao et al , “ 5 - z epitaxial AlN F A s on iC substrates,” IEEE Electron Device Lett. , vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 903 –906, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1109/LED.2023.3268863

    work page doi:10.1109/led.2023.3268863 2023

  19. [19]

    X –Ka band epitaxial ScAlN/AlN/NbN/SiC high -overtone bulk acoustic resonators,

    J o hale, T ar y, Katzer, an owney, “X –Ka band epitaxial ScAlN/AlN/NbN/SiC high -overtone bulk acoustic resonators,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 674–677, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1109/LED.2023.3243437

    work page doi:10.1109/led.2023.3243437 2023

  20. [20]

    YODAS: Youtube-Oriented Dataset for Audio and Speech

    R. Vetury et al. , “A manufacturable Al cN perio ically polarize piezoelectric film bulk acoustic wave resonator (AlScN P3F BAW) operating in overtone mo e at X an Ku ban ,” in Proc. IEEE MTT-S Int. Microw. Symp. (IMS), 2023, doi: 10.1109/IMS37964.2023.10188141

    work page doi:10.1109/ims37964.2023.10188141 2023

  21. [21]

    cAlN -on-SiC Ku-band Sezawa solidly-mounted bidimensional mo e resonators,

    L. Colombo, L. Spagnuolo, K. Saha, G. Giribaldi, P. Simeoni, and M. inal i, “ cAlN -on-SiC Ku-band Sezawa solidly-mounted bidimensional mo e resonators,” IEEE Electron Device Lett ., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 660 – 663, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1109/LED.2025.3541373

    work page doi:10.1109/led.2025.3541373 2025

  22. [22]

    X-band bulk acoustic wave resonator (XBAW) using perio ically polarize piezoelectric films 3F ,

    A. Kochhar et al., “X-band bulk acoustic wave resonator (XBAW) using perio ically polarize piezoelectric films 3F ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS) , Montreal, QC, Canada, 2023, pp. 1 –4, doi: 10.1109/IUS51837.2023.10306825

    work page doi:10.1109/ius51837.2023.10306825 2023

  23. [23]

    Compact Modeling of Emerging IC Devices for Technology -Design Co -development,

    J. Kramer et al., “5 z acoustic resonator with of 3 an Q of 5 in thin -film lithium niobate,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM), San Francisco, CA, USA, Dec. 2022, pp. 16.4.1 –16.4.4, doi: 10.1109/IEDM45625.2022.10019391

    work page doi:10.1109/iedm45625.2022.10019391 2022

  24. [24]

    i eban hybri monolithic lithium niobate acoustic filter in the K -ban ,

    L ao, ang, an ong, “ i eban hybri monolithic lithium niobate acoustic filter in the K -ban ,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control , vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 1408 –1417, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2020.3035123

    work page doi:10.1109/tuffc.2020.3035123 2021

  25. [25]

    ecent a vances in high -performance millimeter -wave acoustic resonators and filters using thin -film lithium niobate,

    Lu, “ ecent a vances in high -performance millimeter -wave acoustic resonators and filters using thin -film lithium niobate,” Prog. Quantum Electron., vols. 100 –101, 2025, Art. no. 100565, doi: TABLE II SOA COMPARISONS OF ACOUSTIC FILTERS BEYOND 10 GHZ Ref. fc (GHz) IL (dB) 3 dB FBW (%) IIP3 (dBm) Size (mm2)

    2025

  26. [26]

    17.4 1.86 3.9 36 0.6 × 0.33 17.4 3.25 3.4 40 0.6 × 0.33

  27. [27]

    11.9 1.5 6.6 36.7 0.43 × 0.49

  28. [28]

    19 8 2.4 - 1.2 × 1.2

  29. [29]

    23.8 1.52 19.4 - 0.85 × 0.75

  30. [30]

    50 3.32 2.9 - 0.74 × 0.48 This work (LiNbO3-aSi-Al2O3) 21.8 1.48 17.7 50.8 0.75 × 0.74 This work (LiNbO3-aSi-Si) 21.6 2.47 18.6 46.5 0.75 × 0.74 10 10.1016/j.pquantelec.2025.100565

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pquantelec.2025.100565 2025

  31. [31]

    5 z Lamb wave resonator on LiNbO3 thin crystal plate an its application,

    Ka ota an T Ogami, “5 z Lamb wave resonator on LiNbO3 thin crystal plate an its application,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys ., vol. 50, no. 7S, Jul. 2011, doi: 10.1143/JJAP.50.07HD11

    work page doi:10.1143/jjap.50.07hd11 2011

  32. [32]

    esign an analysis of lithium –niobate-based high electromechanical coupling RF -MEMS resonators for wideband filtering,

    ong an iazza, “ esign an analysis of lithium –niobate-based high electromechanical coupling RF -MEMS resonators for wideband filtering,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn. , vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 403 – 414, Jan. 2013, doi: 10.1109/TMTT.2012.2228671

    work page doi:10.1109/tmtt.2012.2228671 2013

  33. [33]

    IEEE Int

    less y, “X A ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS), 2022, pp. 1–11, doi: 10.1109/IUS54386.2022.9957805

    work page doi:10.1109/ius54386.2022.9957805 2022

  34. [34]

    Thin-film lithium niobate acoustic resonator with high Q of 3 an of 5 at 50 z,

    J. Kramer et al., “Thin-film lithium niobate acoustic resonator with high Q of 3 an of 5 at 50 z,” in Proc. Joint Conf. Eur. Freq. Time Forum/IEEE Int. Freq. Control Symp. (EFTF/IFCS), May 2023, doi: 10.1109/EFTF/IFCS57587.2023.10272149

    work page doi:10.1109/eftf/ifcs57587.2023.10272149 2023

  35. [35]

    Acoustic resonators above 100 z,

    J. Kramer et al., “Acoustic resonators above 100 z,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 127, no. 1, Jul. 2025, Art. no. 012204, doi: 10.1063/5.0275691

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0275691 2025

  36. [36]

    Thin-film lithium niobate acoustic filter at 23.5 GHz with 38 L an 8 F ,

    O. Barrera et al., “Thin-film lithium niobate acoustic filter at 23.5 GHz with 38 L an 8 F ,” J. Microelectromech. Syst. , vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 622-625, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1109/JMEMS.2023.3314666

    work page doi:10.1109/jmems.2023.3314666 2023

  37. [37]

    3 8-GHz acoustic filter in periodically poled piezoelectric film lithium niobate with 1.52 - L an F ,

    S. Cho et al., “ 3 8-GHz acoustic filter in periodically poled piezoelectric film lithium niobate with 1.52 - L an F ,” IEEE Microw. Wireless Technol. Lett. , vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 391 -394, April 2024, doi: 10.1109/LMWT.2024.3368354

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwt.2024.3368354 2024

  38. [38]

    Frequency an ban wi th esign towar millimeter - wave thin-film lithium niobate acoustic filters,

    O. Barrera et al , “Frequency an ban wi th esign towar millimeter - wave thin-film lithium niobate acoustic filters,” IEEE Microw. Wireless Technol. Lett. , vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 796 -799, June 2025, doi: 10.1109/LMWT.2025.3559400

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwt.2025.3559400 2025

  39. [39]

    ractical emonstrations of F 3 -band thin -film lithium niobate acoustic filter esign,

    T. Anusorn et al , “ ractical emonstrations of F 3 -band thin -film lithium niobate acoustic filter esign,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control , vol. 72, no. 12, pp. 1650 -1662, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2025.3632215

    work page doi:10.1109/tuffc.2025.3632215 2025

  40. [40]

    50 GHz piezoelectric acoustic filter,

    O. Barrera, et al., “50 GHz piezoelectric acoustic filter,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.22549, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.22549

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.22549 2025

  41. [41]

    ehavior of A evices at high power levels,

    R. Aigner, N.-H. Huynh, M. Handtmann, and S. Marksteiner, “ ehavior of A evices at high power levels,” in Proc. IEEE MTT -S Int. Microw. Symp. Dig. , Long Beach, CA, USA, 2005, pp. 429 –432, doi: 10.1109/MWSYM.2005.1516620

    work page doi:10.1109/mwsym.2005.1516620 2005

  42. [42]

    Bhugra and G

    H. Bhugra and G. Piazza, Piezoelectric MEMS Resonators . Springer, 2017

    2017

  43. [43]

    rowth, optical an thermal properties of near - stoichiometric LiNbO 3 single crystal,

    S. Yao, et al. , “ rowth, optical an thermal properties of near - stoichiometric LiNbO 3 single crystal,” J. Alloys Compd. , vol. 455, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2007.02.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2007.02.001 2008

  44. [44]

    tu y of thermal nonlinearity in lithium niobate-base resonators,

    R. Lu and S. Gong, “ tu y of thermal nonlinearity in lithium niobate-base resonators,” in Proc. Transducers 2015 —18th Int. Conf. Solid -State Sensors, Actuators Microsyst. (TRANSDUCERS) , Anchorage, AK, USA, 2015, pp. 1993 -1996, doi: 10.1109/TRANSDUCERS.2015.7181345

    work page doi:10.1109/transducers.2015.7181345 2015

  45. [45]

    A vances in nonlinear measurement and modeling of bulk acoustic wave resonators invite ,

    A Fel , him, Foula i, an F ayatpur, “A vances in nonlinear measurement and modeling of bulk acoustic wave resonators invite ,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp. (IUS) , Chicago, IL, USA, 2014, pp. 264–272, doi: 10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0067

    work page doi:10.1109/ultsym.2014.0067 2014

  46. [46]

    Nonlinear behavior of F bul acoustic wave casca e components at high input power,

    V. Chauhan, et al. , “Nonlinear behavior of F bul acoustic wave casca e components at high input power,” in Proc. Asia –Pacific Microw. Conf. (APMC) , New Delhi, India, 2016, pp. 1 –4, doi: 10.1109/APMC.2016.7931351

    work page doi:10.1109/apmc.2016.7931351 2016

  47. [47]

    eciphering intermo ulation in AlN laterally vibrating resonators,

    Lu, A ao, an ong, “ eciphering intermo ulation in AlN laterally vibrating resonators,” in Proc. IEEE 29th Int. Conf. Micro Electro Mech. Syst. (MEMS) , Shanghai, China, 2016, pp. 671 –674, doi: 10.1109/MEMSYS.2016.7421715

    work page doi:10.1109/memsys.2016.7421715 2016

  48. [48]

    Thermal expansion of lithium tantalate an lithium niobate single crystals,

    Y. S. Kim and R. T. Smith, “Thermal expansion of lithium tantalate an lithium niobate single crystals,” J. Appl. Phys. , vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 4637–4641, Oct. 1969, doi: 10.1063/1.1657244

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1657244 1969

  49. [49]

    recise etermination of lattice parameter and thermal expansion coefficient of silicon between 300 and 1500 K,

    O a a an To umaru, “ recise etermination of lattice parameter and thermal expansion coefficient of silicon between 300 and 1500 K,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 314–320, Jul. 1984, doi: 10.1063/1.333965

    work page doi:10.1063/1.333965 1984

  50. [50]

    Yim \ and\ author R

    im an J aff, “Thermal expansion of AlN, sapphire, an silicon,” J. Appl. Phys. , vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 1456 –1457, Mar. 1974, doi: 10.1063/1.1663432

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1663432 1974

  51. [51]

    Thin-film lithium niobate acoustic resonator with high Q of 3 an of 5 at 50 z,

    V. Chulukhadze et al. , “Frequency scaling millimeter -wave acoustic devices in thin -film lithium niobate,” in Proc. Joint Conf. Eur. Freq. Time Forum/IEEE Int. Freq. Control Symp. (EFTF/IFCS) , May 2023, doi: 10.1109/EFTF/IFCS57587.2023.10272038

    work page doi:10.1109/eftf/ifcs57587.2023.10272038 2023

  52. [52]

    Two -port network analyzer calibration using an un nown ’thru’,

    A Ferrero an isani, “Two -port network analyzer calibration using an un nown ’thru’,” IEEE Microw. Guided Wave Lett , vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 505-507, Dec. 1992, doi: 10.1109/75.173410

    work page doi:10.1109/75.173410 1992

  53. [53]

    A multiline method of network analyzer calibration,

    R. B. Marks, “A multiline method of network analyzer calibration,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn. , vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 1205 -1215, July 1991, doi: 10.1109/22.85388

    work page doi:10.1109/22.85388 1991

  54. [54]

    ultiline TRL reveale ,

    D. C. DeGroot, J. A. Jargon and R. B. Marks, “ ultiline TRL reveale ,” in 60th ARFTG Conference Digest , Fall 2002., Washington, DC, USA, 2002, pp. 131-155, doi: 10.1109/ARFTGF.2002.1218696

    work page doi:10.1109/arftgf.2002.1218696 2002

  55. [55]

    eries -resistor calibration,

    F illiams an K al er, “ eries -resistor calibration,” in 50th ARFTG Conference Digest , Portland, OR, USA, 1997, pp. 131 -137, doi: 10.1109/ARFTG.1997.32726

    work page doi:10.1109/arftg.1997.32726 1997

  56. [56]

    A compact variable -temperature broadband series - resistor calibration,

    N. D. Orloff et al , “A compact variable -temperature broadband series - resistor calibration,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn., vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 188-195, Jan. 2011, doi: 10.1109/TMTT.2010.2091200

    work page doi:10.1109/tmtt.2010.2091200 2011

  57. [57]

    NIST Microwave Uncertainty Framework. (2011). National Institute of Standards and Technology. [Online]. Available: https://www.nist.gov/services-resources/software/wafer-calibration-software

    2011

  58. [58]

    The relationship between switch-term-corrected scattering -parameters and wave -parameters measured with a two-port vector network analyzer,

    J A Jargon, F illiams an A an ers, “The relationship between switch-term-corrected scattering -parameters and wave -parameters measured with a two-port vector network analyzer,” IEEE Microw. Wirel. Compon. Lett. , vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 951 -953, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1109/LMWC.2018.2867076

    work page doi:10.1109/lmwc.2018.2867076 2018

  59. [59]

    Nonlinear equivalent circuits of acoustic evices,

    Cho an J a ita, “Nonlinear equivalent circuits of acoustic evices,” in Proc. IEEE Ultrason. Symp., Baltimore, MD, USA, 1993, pp. 867–872, doi: 10.1109/ULTSYM.1993.339667

    work page doi:10.1109/ultsym.1993.339667 1993