1 / 25

Analysis and Modeling of Neural-Recording ADC

Progress Update : Summer Internship. Analysis and Modeling of Neural-Recording ADC. Vaibhav Karkare. Mentors: Wolfgang Eberle Vito Giannini. Neural Recording System. Traditional neural recording approach Transmission of raw data using wires Amplification and processing performed off-site

yvonne
Download Presentation

Analysis and Modeling of Neural-Recording ADC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Progress Update: Summer Internship Analysis and Modeling of Neural-Recording ADC Vaibhav Karkare Mentors: Wolfgang Eberle Vito Giannini

  2. Neural Recording System • Traditional neural recording approach • Transmission of raw data using wires • Amplification and processing performed off-site • Motivation for implantable integrated recording systems • Wireless transmission • Processing larger number of channels • Real-time control for BMIs

  3. Constraints for Neural Recording System • Design constraints • Power density < 800 mW/mm2 • Low area for ease of integration • Low sampling rates of 30 kHz/Channel • Approximate ADC constraints: • 10-bit resolution • Sampling frequency: 1 MSa/sec • Design goal: • Minimize power and area [1] Lowest power ADCs are SAR CR ADCs

  4. Notation for Non-Idealities of ADC [2] Static error definitions for a ADC

  5. Design Constraints for ADC • Constraints on ADC for neural recording not well defined in literature • Need to formulate constraints based on end result of the processing [3] Spike-sorting process

  6. Strategy for Defining Specifications Spike-Sorting Spike-Sorting • Sample neural data • Read from Neuralynx format into Matlab • Quantized and converted back into Neuralynx format • Osort software used for spike sorting [4] • Only known hardware-friendly clustering algorithm • Two clustering accuracy metrics are defined • Difference being inclusion of detection errors and false alarms [5] Sample Neural Data Non-ideal quantizer Compare classification results Bird’s eye view of analysis approach

  7. Number of bits needed • Most previous analysis calculates number of bits based on electrode thermal noise [6] • Making quantization noise equal to thermal noise degrades SNR by up to 3 dB • Thermal noise is uncorrelated with data while quantization noise is not • Knee of the curve lies around 9 bits • Reasonable assumption for the ADC • Matches commonly used number for ADC design in neural recording systems

  8. Clustering Accuracy vs. DNL • Non-monotonic behavior of curves precludes identification of clear trend • Need for statistical averaging

  9. CA Over Multiple DNL profiles • The mean classification accuracy is not a strong function of DNL • Indicates that the design of the ADC can sacrifice some DNL in favor of savings in power / area

  10. Variance of Accuracy • Higher DNLs also lead to higher variance in classification accuracy • Non-monotonic nature implies more averaging is needed

  11. Conclusions: Part 1 • Summary of this work: • Created automated simulation setup for evaluation of impact of quantization error on spike-sorting results • Initial results point towards classification accuracy being a weak function of DNL • DNL around 1.5 LSB can be tolerated without significantly affecting classification accuracy • Higher DNLs lead to lower classification accuracy and higher variance in classification results • Future Work: • Simulation over larger number of DNL profiles and large number of data sets is required to establish validity of results • Similar analysis can be performed to include other non-idealities in analog front-end

  12. SAR ADC: Architecture • Operation governed by passive charge sharing • Size of capacitor array dictated by matching requirements and size of unit capacitor • Water-level analogy of ADC operation [7] Architecture of SAR ADC

  13. Ideal Case Model • Comparator makes decisions using voltage difference • Model ADC using charge conservation • Solve for differential and common mode voltages

  14. An Interesting Side-Note • We model three port capacitive network as an equivalent two-port capacitor • No return path for charge in Carri from GND • Also a valid approximation in presence of parasitics • Provided sum of parasitic caps. is lower than array and sampling caps. • Not possible if Carri were replaced by two separate single-ended capacitors

  15. Symmetric Array Parasitics • Solution to the above system of simultaneous linear equations gives:

  16. Effect of Symmetric Parasitics • Common mode drift with each conversion step • Due to top and bottom plate capacitances charged to different values • Can affect comparator decisions • Gain error in ADC characteristics • Assuming parasitics are proportional to array capacitance

  17. Asymmetric Array Parasitics • Separate terms for Vif1 and Vif2 , solve for Vif1 and Vif2 to obtain:

  18. Effect of Parasitic Mismatch • Dependence of O/P on absolute single-ended voltage leads to DNL • Differential Voltage now depends on absolute voltage values across parasitics • Estimated DNL of up to 3 LSB for 10% parasitics (with extreme mismatch in top and bottom plate cap)

  19. Modeling Junction Capacitances • In this analysis we focus on the non-linear S-D drain capacitances • Gate capacitances are expected not to significantly impact the linearity of the ADC

  20. Polynomial Approximation • Diode equation leads to non-integer exponents • Equations do not easily converge with numerical methods • Use polynomial fit instead • Fits equally well with monotonic characteristics over range of interest

  21. Modeling with Junction Parasitics • Re-write charge conservation with non-linear capacitors • We have two equations in two variables and 5th order of the form: • Need to use numerical methods • Unique solution does not exist • The initial condition is derived by solving the equation without parasitic junction capacitances

  22. Effect of Junction Parasitics • Even with symmetric parasitic values the non-linearity of the junction caps leads to DNL in the ADC • Junction caps are charged to different voltages • ADC with 1.04 mm switch for 60 fF capacitor has DNL contribution of 0.3 LSB due to parasitic junction capacitors • DNL contribution dependent on ratio between array capacitor and switch size

  23. Conclusions: Part 2 • Summary of this work: • Modeled the effect of non-linearities on static characteristics of ADC • Matlab model integrated with existing model which also includes comparator mismatch and thermal noise • Parasitics of array capacitance lead to a CM drift • Mismatch in parasitic capacitances leads to DNL • Junction capacitances lead to DNL even when switches are perfectly symmetric • Future Work: • Validation of model with Cadence simulations • Modeling dynamic non-idealities of ADC • Combining Part 1 and Part 2 to have a application-specific optimized ADC • Check out for options to better performance of previous ADC using trends shown by models

  24. References/Acknowledgments REFERENCES [1] B. Murmann, “ADC Performance Survey 1997-2009”,[Online] Available: http://www.stanford.edu/~murmann/adcsurvey.html [2] B.Razavi, “Principles of Data Conversion System Design”, IEEE Press, 2005 [3] V. Karkare, S. Gibson, and D. Markovic, “A 130 mW, 64-Channel Spike-Sorting DSP Chip”, ASSCC, Nov’09 [4] U. Reutishauser, E. Schuman, and A. Mamelak, “Online detection and sorting of extracellularly recorded action potentials in human medial temporal lobe recordings in vivo”, JNM, May’05 [5] S. Gibson, J.W.Judy, and D. Markovic, “Comparison of Spike-Sorting Algorithms for Future Hardware Implementation”, EMBC, Aug’08 [6] M.Chae, et. al., “Design Optimization for Integrated Neural Recording Systems”, JSSC, Sep’08 [7] J. Craininckx and G. Van der Plaas, “A 65fJ/Conversion-Step 0-to-50 MS/s 0-to-0.7 mW 9b Charge Sharing SAR ADC in 90nm Digital CMOS”, ISSCC, Feb’07 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Wolfgang Eberle, Vito Gianniani, Dejan Markovic, Sarah Gibson, and Ivan Gligorijevic.

  25. Questions / Comments?

More Related