125-211 GHz Low Noise MMIC Amplifier Design for Radio Astronomy

Anthony Readhead; Danielle George; Daniel White; Gary A. Fuller; Gerry Mei; Kieran Cleary; Richard Lai; William McGenn

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 18 references

125-211 GHz Low Noise MMIC Amplifier Design for Radio Astronomy

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A simulated HEMT amplifier achieves under 58 K noise across the 125–211 GHz band, a span now served only by SIS mixers.

desk verdict A competent simulation-only LNA design that hits the noise spec on paper but misses gain by 15 dB, and the proposed cascade fix is never simulated. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00466 v1 pith:XY35KCZT submitted 2019-08-01 astro-ph.IM

Daniel White , William McGenn , Danielle George , Gary A. Fuller , Kieran Cleary , Anthony Readhead , Richard Lai , Gerry Mei This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.IM

keywords lownoiseamplifierInPHEMTMMICtemperaturecryogenicreceivermillimetre-waveastronomySISmixerradiofront-end

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that transistor-based low-noise amplifiers can now serve as front-end receivers in the 125–211 GHz window, a range dominated by superconductor-insulator-superconductor (SIS) mixers. It presents a four-stage MMIC design in a 35 nm indium phosphide HEMT process whose simulated performance at 20 K is a noise temperature—the equivalent added noise in kelvin—below 58 K across the entire band, averaging 38.8 K, with a flat 20.5 ± 0.85 dB gain and unconditional stability. If a fabricated chip matches these simulations, one amplifier could combine two existing telescope receiver bands into a single 15 K front-end, cutting cryogenic cost and complexity while keeping sensitivity competitive. The paper's claim, in short, is that HEMT amplifiers have reached parity with SIS mixers in this sub-millimetre range.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a four-stage, common-source cascade of two-finger, 10 µm gate-width transistors in a 35 nm InP HEMT process. The first two stages are noise-optimized and the last two are optimized for flat gain and low output reflection; this staging works because the Friis cascaded noise equation makes the noise of later stages negligible once the early stages provide enough gain. Passive matching networks and bias lines are microstrip structures verified with electromagnetic simulation, and the claim of unconditional stability rests on the Rollett stability factor remaining above 7 from 0 to 400 GHz.

What would settle it

Fabricate the MMIC and measure its noise temperature and S-parameters on a 20 K cryostat across 125–211 GHz; the central claim fails if any measured noise point exceeds 58 K, if the band average exceeds 38.8 K beyond measurement uncertainty, or if the gain departs from 20.5 ± 0.85 dB by more than the test error.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a simulated MMIC LNA that covers 125–211 GHz in one continuous band. At a physical temperature of 20 K, its simulated noise temperature stays below 58 K across the entire band, with a minimum of 34.6 K, a maximum of 57.9 K, and an average of 38.8 K; its forward gain is 20.5 ± 0.85 dB; input and output reflections are better than −6 dB and −12 dB, respectively; and the Rollett stability factor exceeds 7, so the amplifier is unconditionally stable. The design satisfies the stated noise specification for both sub-bands, but gain falls short of the 35–40 dB target, so two modules connected through an isolator would be needed to reach the full specification. The authors attribute the plausibility of these numbers to a prior W-band LNA in the same process that showed close agreement between simulation and measurement.

Load-bearing premise

Every simulated number depends on the proprietary transistor model and the electromagnetic simulation of the matching networks being as accurate at 125–211 GHz and 20 K as they were for the W-band design that validated them; no in-band measurement exists yet.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single 15 K LNA cartridge could replace two 4 K SIS receiver cartridges covering 125–211 GHz, simplifying cryogenics and freeing a receiver slot.
Connecting two amplifier modules through a microwave isolator brings the gain up to the specified 35–40 dB while preserving the noise and stability properties.
The full 86 GHz of instantaneous bandwidth would let one receiver observe both sub-bands at once, enabling spectral-line surveys that currently require two separate tunings.
If the fabricated part tracks the simulation, the result demonstrates that HEMT front-ends can match SIS mixer noise performance up to at least 211 GHz, challenging the superconducting receivers' hold on this range.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Because the same 35 nm InP process has already produced amplifiers beyond 270 GHz, the 125–211 GHz design looks like an intermediate step; if the noise model holds, similar four-stage designs should reach higher sub-millimetre windows without changing technology.
A complete receiver built around this LNA will have a higher system noise temperature than the 58 K amplifier figure once feedhorn, polariser and optics noise are added, so the paper's result is a front-end claim; the fair end-to-end comparison to SIS receivers remains to be measured.
The simulated noise temperature peaks at 57.9 K in the 163–211 GHz sub-band, only about 1 K below the headline 58 K; testing fabricated devices densely across that sub-band is the fastest way to see whether the model's margin is real.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Daniel, here's my read on the White et al. LNA paper. The one thing you should know: this is a legitimate, well-scoped simulation study, but it does not actually meet its own specification as claimed. The gain is 20.5 dB against a 35–40 dB spec, and the proposed fix—two modules in series—is never simulated. So the headline noise result is the only part that meets specification, and even that is simulation-only.

What's new is the band coverage. As far as the paper can show, no single LNA design covers 125–211 GHz. Extending their earlier W-band work up to 211 GHz is a real step, and the design choices (four-stage common-source, 2x10 um InP HEMTs, stage-by-stage noise/gain optimization) are sensible. The simulated noise performance is impressive: average Te of 38.8 K, below 58 K across the whole band, and the authors are careful to compare against SIS receiver noise with appropriate caveats about the feed/OMT/optics contributions. The stability factor and reflection coefficient plots are a nice touch.

Where it gets soft: first, the load-bearing assumption is that the proprietary Northrop Grumman 35 nm HEMT model, validated only up to 116 GHz in their prior paper, extrapolates reliably to 211 GHz at 20 K. The model card isn't shown, so I can't check that. This is not a fatal flaw, but it means the noise curves are a prediction, not a measurement. Second, the gain shortfall is not just a detail—the spec asks for 35–40 dB, and 20 dB is a standard gain block, not a full LNA. The two-module cascade with an isolator is a reasonable idea, but without a simulation of the cascade, we don't know if the input return loss or noise will hold up. Third, the conclusion overstates: it says the design 'satisfies the LNA specification' in the first paragraph, which is only true for noise, not gain. The body is honest about this, so it's a fixable wording issue.

Overall, I agree with the reader's conditional verdict. It's a competent engineering paper, not a breakthrough, and it deserves to be published as a design study with revisions: add uncertainty estimates, simulate the cascade, and correct the overclaim. Measured data would be the real test, and the authors say a wafer run is planned.

Recommendation: send to peer review. It's a solid, honestly presented design that the mm-wave instrumentation community will want to see. I'd cite it once measured results appear, not before.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper presents a simulation-only design study of a four-stage 35-nm InP HEMT MMIC low-noise amplifier intended to cover the 125–211 GHz range, combining ALMA Bands 4 and 5. The authors report a simulated noise temperature below 58 K across the full band (average 38.8 K), a forward gain of 20.5 ± 0.85 dB, input/output reflection coefficients better than −6/−12 dB, reverse isolation better than −47 dB, and a Rollett stability factor above 7. They propose that two such modules, connected through an isolator, could meet the 35–40 dB gain specification in the ESO target specification. The central claim is that the simulated noise performance satisfies the specification and that a fabricated MMIC would be capable of meeting the noise requirements, challenging the dominance of SIS mixers in this frequency range. No measured results are presented; the design is scheduled for a future wafer run.

Significance. If the simulated noise performance were confirmed in a fabricated device, this design would be a significant step toward an LNA-based front-end covering ALMA Bands 4 and 5, potentially reducing cryogenic complexity and operational cost relative to SIS mixers. The explicit use of an externally defined specification (Table 1) and the detailed description of the MMIC topology are strengths, as is the recognition that a complete receiver must include feed, OMT, and optics noise contributions. The paper's contribution, however, is currently a simulation prediction with no measured verification and no uncertainty quantification; its significance therefore depends entirely on the trustworthiness of the proprietary transistor model at 125–211 GHz and of the electromagnetic simulations of the matching networks. The authors also claim to 'satisfy' the specification while falling short on gain and input match, which undermines the stated conclusion. With appropriate hedging and additional validation or explicit simulation-only framing, the design study could be a useful contribution to the millimeter-wave receiver community.

major comments (3)

[Section 3 and Conclusion] The manuscript states that the MMIC 'satisfies' the LNA specification of Table 1, but the simulated forward gain of 20.5 ± 0.85 dB does not meet the required 35–40 dB, and the simulated input reflection coefficient of −6 dB does not meet the required < −10 dB. The proposed remedy of cascading two modules through an isolator is not simulated, so the cascade's gain, noise, input match, and stability remain unverified. The claims should be restricted to the noise-temperature portion of the specification, or the cascade must be designed and simulated before claiming overall specification compliance.
[Sections 2 and 3] The central noise-temperature result (Te < 58 K, average 38.8 K) rests entirely on the proprietary 35-nm InP HEMT model at 125–211 GHz and on Momentum electromagnetic simulations of the passive networks, with no in-band measured verification. The only cited validation is the prior W-band design [9] at 67–116 GHz, a different frequency range and bias condition; the model card and any noise-parameter validation are not shown. Since the noise claim is the paper's central load-bearing contribution, the authors should provide measured validation, a quantitative model-uncertainty estimate (e.g., process corners or Monte Carlo), or explicitly frame the result as an unvalidated simulation prediction rather than a demonstrated capability.
[Section 3] The statement that the stability factor is greater than 7 at all frequencies from 0 to 400 GHz is not substantiated by a plot or numerical table, and the definition of the stability factor (Rollett K or μ) is not given in Section 3. Given that the amplifier is four-stage with independent bias lines, a claim of unconditional stability over that entire range requires detailed out-of-band and bias-variation checks; as written, the claim is unverifiable from the manuscript.

minor comments (7)

[Abstract] The phrase 'To the authors knowledge' is missing an apostrophe; it should read 'To the authors' knowledge'.
[Section 1] The sentence 'Advances in HEMT technology have produced that LNAs are able to operate' is ungrammatical; it should be revised to something like 'Advances in HEMT technology have produced LNAs that are able to operate'.
[Section 1] The text uses 'LNA’s' with an apostrophe in 'using LNA’s at higher frequencies'; the correct plural is 'LNAs'.
[Section 3] The paper reports S21 as '20.5 ± 0.85 dB' in the abstract and Section 3, but later says the S21 'averages 20 dB'; these numbers should be reconciled for consistency.
[Figure 2 caption] The caption states 'Dotted blue and red lines indicate the 80 and 100 % noise temperature LNA specifications' but does not specify which color corresponds to which sub-band (125–163 GHz versus 163–211 GHz), whose 80% and 100% requirements differ; this should be made explicit.
[Acknowledgements] The name 'Northrup Grumann Corporation' is misspelled; it should be 'Northrop Grumman Corporation'.
[Section 2] The phrase 'two-ﬁnger devices with gate width of 10 µm' is ambiguous; it should specify whether 10 µm is the width per finger or the total gate width of the device.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the simulated noise and gain results are forward outputs of the foundry device model and EM simulation, not fitted to the target specification.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a conventional forward MMIC design flow: choose a foundry 35 nm InP HEMT model, design four common-source stages, simulate passive networks with Momentum, and report ADS noise/gain S-parameters. The claimed Te < 58 K, average 38.8 K, and S21 = 20.5 ± 0.85 dB are outputs of that simulation; no parameter is fitted to the 125–211 GHz noise specification or to any measured data in this band. The only self-referential element is the sentence 'Previous results from this process indicate that the measured performance matches the simulated performance closely [9]', citing the authors' prior W-band LNA. That citation is independent supporting evidence (measured S-parameters and noise at 67–116 GHz) rather than an input that defines the present Te values, so it does not make the derivation circular. The paper also explicitly labels the results as simulations and states 'This MMIC will be included on a future wafer run, and will be cryogenically tested to verify simulation results,' which is a stated limitation rather than a hidden reuse of the target result. The quantum-limit comparison is only a normalization of the simulated Te. The main weaknesses—extrapolation of the proprietary device model above W-band, unverified EM passive loss, gain below the 35–40 dB spec, and the two-module cascade proposed but not simulated—are correctness or risk concerns, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central simulated performance depends on the foundry device model, EM simulation accuracy, and design choices such as gate width and matching network values. The paper does not provide the model details or component values, so these remain unverified assumptions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)

Transistor gate width = 10 µm
Chosen for low noise performance across the band; not derived from first principles.
Physical temperature for simulation = 20 K
Simulations at 20 K while the target ALMA operation is 15 K; the discrepancy is not addressed.
Matching network component values = not reported
Tuned via ADS/Momentum simulations to meet noise and gain targets; exact values are omitted from the paper.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The 35 nm InP HEMT foundry model accurately predicts cryogenic noise and gain at 125 to 211 GHz.
The simulated Te relies on the device model; only prior W-band validation is cited, not this band.
domain assumption The passive matching networks are accurately modeled by Momentum EM simulation.
MMIC performance depends on EM accuracy for microstrip lines, capacitors, and resistors.
standard math Friis cascade formula is applicable.
Used to justify the first-stage noise optimization; a standard result in receiver design.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of 125-211 GHz Low Noise MMIC Amplifier Design for Radio Astronomy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XY35KCZT

@misc{pith2026190800466,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: 125-211 GHz Low Noise MMIC Amplifier Design for Radio Astronomy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XY35KCZT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00466}
}

read the original abstract

To achieve the low noise and wide bandwidth required for millimeter wavelength astronomy applications, superconductor-insulator-superconductor (SIS) mixer based receiver systems have typically been used. This paper investigates the performance of high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) based low noise amplifiers (LNAs) as an alternative approach for systems operating in the 125 - 211 GHz frequency range. A four-stage, common-source, unconditionally stable monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) design is presented using the state-of-the-art 35 nm indium phosphide HEMT process from Northrop Grumman Corporation. The simulated MMIC achieves noise temperature (Te) lower than 58 K across the operational bandwidth, with average Te of 38.8 K (corresponding to less than 5 times the quantum limit (hf/k) at 170 GHz) and forward transmission of 20.5 +/- 0.85 dB. Input and output reflection coefficients are better than -6 and -12 dB, respectively, across the desired bandwidth. To the authors knowledge, no LNA currently operates across the entirety of this frequency range. Successful fabrication and implementation of this LNA would challenge the dominance SIS mixers have on sub-THz receivers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.00466 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

[9]

Cuadrado-Calle et al., Broadband MMIC LNAs for ALMA Band 2+3 With Noise Temperature Below 28 K

D. Cuadrado-Calle et al., Broadband MMIC LNAs for ALMA Band 2+3 With Noise Temperature Below 28 K. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 65, no. 5, 1589-1597, (2017), doi: 10.1109/TMTT.2016.2639018

arXiv 2017
[1]

Mimura, Invention of High Electron Mobility Transistor (HEMT) and Contributions to Information and Communications Field

T. Mimura, Invention of High Electron Mobility Transistor (HEMT) and Contributions to Information and Communications Field. Fujitsu Scientiﬁc & Technical Journal, Vol. 54, No. 5, pp. 3 - 8, (2018)

work page 2018
[2]

Palacios, A

T. Palacios, A. Chakraborty, S. Heikman, S. Keller, S. P. DenBaars and U. K. Mishra, AlGaN/GaN high electron mobility transistors with InGaN back-barriers. IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 13-15, Jan. 2006. doi: 10.1109/LED.2005.860882

work page arXiv 2006
[3]

Lee, H-S

J-H. Lee, H-S. Yoon, C-S. Park and H-M. Park, Ultra low noise characteristics of Al- GaAs/InGaAs/GaAs pseudomorphic HEMT’s with wide head T-shaped gate. IEEE Elec- tron Device Letters, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 271-273, June 1995. doi: 10.1109/55.790732

work page doi:10.1109/55.790732 1995
[4]

Claude et al., The Band 3 receiver (84-116 GHz) for ALMA

S. Claude et al., The Band 3 receiver (84-116 GHz) for ALMA. 2005 Joint 30th In- ternational Conference on Infrared and Millimeter Waves and 13th International Con- ference on Terahertz Electronics, Williamsburg, VA, USA, 2005, pp. 407-408 vol. 2. doi: 10.1109/ICIMW.2005.1572585

work page arXiv 2005
[5]

Fujii et al., The First Six ALMA Band 10 Receivers

Y. Fujii et al., The First Six ALMA Band 10 Receivers. IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 39-49, Jan. 2013. doi: 10.1109/TTHZ.2012.2236147

work page arXiv 2013
[6]

Cuadrado-Calle, D

D. Cuadrado-Calle, D. George, B. Ellison, G. A. Fuller, K. Cleary, Celestial Signals: Are Low-Noise Ampliﬁers the Future for Millimeter-Wave Radio Astronomy Receivers?. IEEE Microwave Magazine, Vol. 18, no. 6, 90 -99, (2017), doi: 10.1109/MMM.2017.2712038

work page arXiv 2017
[7]

Suemitsu, InP and GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors for Millimeter- wave Applications

T. Suemitsu, InP and GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors for Millimeter- wave Applications. IEICE Electronics Express, Vol. 12, No. 13, 1-12, (2015), doi: 10.1587/elex.12.20152005

work page doi:10.1587/elex.12.20152005 2015

Show all 18 references

[8]

E. W. Byerton, M. Morgan, M. W. Pospieszalski, Ultra Low Noise Cryogenic Ampliﬁers for Radio Astronomy. 2013 IEEE Radio and Wireless Symposium, Austin, TX, USA, doi: 10.1109/RWS.2013.6486740

2013
[10]

Asayama et al, Development of ALMA Band 4 (125 - 163 GHz) receiver

S. Asayama et al, Development of ALMA Band 4 (125 - 163 GHz) receiver. Pub- lications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, Volume 66, Issue 3, June 2014, 57, https://doi.org/10.1093/pasj/psu026

2014 doi
[11]

Belitsky et al, ALMA Band 5 receiver cartridge - Design, performance, and commis- sioning

V. Belitsky et al, ALMA Band 5 receiver cartridge - Design, performance, and commis- sioning. Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 611, 2018, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731883

2018 doi
[12]

X. B. Mei et al., 35nm InP HEMT For Millimeter and Sub-Millimeter Wave Applica- tions. 2007 International Conference in Indium Phosphide and Related Materials Confer- ence Proceedings, vol. 19, 59 - 62, (2007)

2007
[13]

Varonen et al., 160-270-GHz InP HEMT MMIC Low-Noise Ampliﬁers

M. Varonen et al., 160-270-GHz InP HEMT MMIC Low-Noise Ampliﬁers. 2012 IEEE Compound Semiconductor Integrated Circuit Symposium, La Jolla, CA, 2012, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CSICS.2012.6340058

2012
[14]

Fung et al., Low Noise Ampliﬁer Modules from 220-270 GHz

A. Fung et al., Low Noise Ampliﬁer Modules from 220-270 GHz. 2013 European Mi- crowave Integrated Circuit Conference, Nuremberg, 2013, pp. 224-227. 8 Daniel White 1,2 et al

2013
[15]

P. V. Larkoski et al., Low Noise Ampliﬁers for 140 GHz Wide-Band Cryogenic Receivers. 2013 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest (MTT), Seattle, WA, 2013, pp. 1-4. doi: 10.1109/MWSYM.2013.6697674

2013
[16]

Varonen et al., A WR4 Ampliﬁer Module Chain With an 87 K Noise Temperature at 228 GHz

M. Varonen et al., A WR4 Ampliﬁer Module Chain With an 87 K Noise Temperature at 228 GHz. in IEEE Microwave and Wireless Components Letters, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 58-60, Jan. 2015. doi: 10.1109/LMWC.2014.2369963

2015
[17]

https://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5988- 3326EN.pdf?id=921864 (2017)

Keysight, Advanced Design System. https://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5988- 3326EN.pdf?id=921864 (2017). Accessed 4 Sep. 2018

2017
[18]

H. T. Friis, Noise Figures of Radio Receivers. Proceedings of the IRE, Vol 32, No. 7, 419 - 422, (1944), doi: 10.1109/JRPROC.1944.232049

1944

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [9]

Cuadrado-Calle et al., Broadband MMIC LNAs for ALMA Band 2+3 With Noise Temperature Below 28 K

D. Cuadrado-Calle et al., Broadband MMIC LNAs for ALMA Band 2+3 With Noise Temperature Below 28 K. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 65, no. 5, 1589-1597, (2017), doi: 10.1109/TMTT.2016.2639018

arXiv 2017

[2] [1]

Mimura, Invention of High Electron Mobility Transistor (HEMT) and Contributions to Information and Communications Field

T. Mimura, Invention of High Electron Mobility Transistor (HEMT) and Contributions to Information and Communications Field. Fujitsu Scientiﬁc & Technical Journal, Vol. 54, No. 5, pp. 3 - 8, (2018)

work page 2018

[3] [2]

Palacios, A

T. Palacios, A. Chakraborty, S. Heikman, S. Keller, S. P. DenBaars and U. K. Mishra, AlGaN/GaN high electron mobility transistors with InGaN back-barriers. IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 13-15, Jan. 2006. doi: 10.1109/LED.2005.860882

work page arXiv 2006

[4] [3]

Lee, H-S

J-H. Lee, H-S. Yoon, C-S. Park and H-M. Park, Ultra low noise characteristics of Al- GaAs/InGaAs/GaAs pseudomorphic HEMT’s with wide head T-shaped gate. IEEE Elec- tron Device Letters, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 271-273, June 1995. doi: 10.1109/55.790732

work page doi:10.1109/55.790732 1995

[5] [4]

Claude et al., The Band 3 receiver (84-116 GHz) for ALMA

S. Claude et al., The Band 3 receiver (84-116 GHz) for ALMA. 2005 Joint 30th In- ternational Conference on Infrared and Millimeter Waves and 13th International Con- ference on Terahertz Electronics, Williamsburg, VA, USA, 2005, pp. 407-408 vol. 2. doi: 10.1109/ICIMW.2005.1572585

work page arXiv 2005

[6] [5]

Fujii et al., The First Six ALMA Band 10 Receivers

Y. Fujii et al., The First Six ALMA Band 10 Receivers. IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 39-49, Jan. 2013. doi: 10.1109/TTHZ.2012.2236147

work page arXiv 2013

[7] [6]

Cuadrado-Calle, D

D. Cuadrado-Calle, D. George, B. Ellison, G. A. Fuller, K. Cleary, Celestial Signals: Are Low-Noise Ampliﬁers the Future for Millimeter-Wave Radio Astronomy Receivers?. IEEE Microwave Magazine, Vol. 18, no. 6, 90 -99, (2017), doi: 10.1109/MMM.2017.2712038

work page arXiv 2017

[8] [7]

Suemitsu, InP and GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors for Millimeter- wave Applications

T. Suemitsu, InP and GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors for Millimeter- wave Applications. IEICE Electronics Express, Vol. 12, No. 13, 1-12, (2015), doi: 10.1587/elex.12.20152005

work page doi:10.1587/elex.12.20152005 2015