Circuit Response
every model has an edge, and the figure carries it
Concept

Monte carlo — where it appears

Estimating a quantity by generating many random cases and measuring them, so the answer carries a spread that falls with the number of runs. It is the honest answer where a worst case is a bound nobody meets, and the spread it returns is quoted with the run count that produced it.

Named by 20 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The noise of a 1.6 kΩ resistor through a 10.0 kHz filter. computed by solving, not by drawing. A seeded white sequence of 5.06 nV/√Hz marched through the network gives 619.3 nV across six seeds, spread 1.79%. Integrating the same density against the solved |H(f)|² gives 620.6 nV — -0.21% apart, well inside the spread. The noise bandwidth is 15.03 kHz against a −3 dB point of 10.00 kHz.

The floor a resistor sets

A kilohm at room temperature produces 4.00 nanovolts per root hertz, and it does so because it is warm rather than because of anything about how it was made. That is the first boundary in this collection that bounds a model from below — gain does not help, because gain amplifies it too — and it is the only field here whose figures are samples.

noise · Johnson noise A divider of 4 equal 1.0% resistors, solved 3000 times. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every resistor drawn from its tolerance band and the divider solved, 3000 times. The worst case is ±1.000% — the part tolerance itself, and it does not improve when the divider is built from more parts — while the measured spread is 0.2944% and the worst of 3000 draws reached 82% of the bound. The root-sum-square, offered as though it were a standard deviation, is 1.70 of one here: for uniformly distributed parts it is √3 σ, a coverage of about 92%.

The tolerance that is not on any part

Four one per cent resistors in a divider give an answer whose worst case is one per cent, whose measured spread is 0.29 per cent, and whose root-sum-square bound — offered everywhere as though it were a standard deviation — is 1.70 of one. Adding parts does not move the worst case at all and shrinks the spread as one over their root, so the gap between the promise and the fact widens with every resistor. And the same arithmetic draws a boundary in tolerance rather than in frequency: an R–2R ladder is a twelve-bit converter only while its resistors are inside 0.14 per cent.

networks · Component tolerance A threshold crossed once, in 20k samples of noise. With no hysteresis the comparator changes its mind 22.7 times on average and as many as 29, on a signal that crosses the threshold once. The vertical bars are the range over twelve seeds. The expected number of extra transitions falls below a tenth at 3.57 standard deviations — so the hysteresis a threshold needs is set by the noise under it and not by the signal over it.

Two thresholds because there is a floor

A comparator with one threshold, watching a slow signal cross it once, changes its mind 22.7 times on average and as many as 29 — because there is noise under the signal and no threshold is ever crossed once. Hysteresis fixes it, and how much is needed is a multiple of the noise's own standard deviation rather than a voltage: 3.57 of them here. The multiple grows with how long the threshold is watched, and slowly — a hundredfold longer record needs three times the hysteresis, not a hundred times.

applied · Hysteresis Five tolerances, and the response moves in two directions. computed by solving, not by drawing. The eigenvalues of the relative second-derivative matrix of a fifth-order 0.5 dB Chebyshev ladder's magnitude at its lower ripple peak, over its five reactances. Two are of order one — -0.9473 and -0.8051, both negative — and the other three are 3.9e-9, which is zero at the precision the arithmetic has. So the quadratic form is negative semi-definite of rank two, and there is a three-dimensional subspace of component errors that the peak cannot see. The open circles are the same matrix computed by four re-solves per pair, sharing no adjoint arithmetic with the filled ones: they agree to parts in ten thousand on the two that are there and place the three zeros about two decades higher, which is the price of differencing a difference.

The three tolerances that do nothing

An earlier essay computed every second derivative of a ladder filter's magnitude at a ripple peak, found them all negative, and built six hundred ladder filters to argue that no combination of tolerances could raise the response. The whole matrix says so outright — and says something six hundred samples could not have found, because a sample of a five-dimensional box never lands on a three-dimensional subspace: two of the five eigenvalues are of order one and the other three are nine decades down.

networks · Sensitivity Three averagers passing the same noise, and three different half-power points. Integrated by eight-point quadrature on every lobe, with the tail past the last lobe in closed form. A mean over 20 ms has the response sin(πfT)/(πfT), and the area under its square is 25.000000 Hz against the 25 Hz of 1/(2T) — the brick wall drawn shaded. A mean over the window passes half its power at 22.147 Hz, so the noise bandwidth is 1.12880 times that frequency; A one-pole averager passes half its power at 15.915 Hz, so the noise bandwidth is 1.57080 times that frequency; Two means in cascade pass half their power at 23.919 Hz, so the noise bandwidth is 1.04521 times that frequency. Every curve drawn encloses the same area; they differ in where they spend it.

The filter an average is

A mean taken over a window is a filter, and the area under its squared response is exactly one over twice the window — 25 hertz of noise bandwidth for twenty milliseconds, passing half its power at 22.15. Built to the same noise, a one-pole averager passes half its power at 15.92 hertz and takes 2.33 times as long to settle to one per cent, and two means in cascade pass half at 23.92 and take 1.25 times as long. Between its nulls a mean rejects the mains no better than the one-pole does, and one per cent off a null it rejects it by forty decibels however many cycles the window holds.

noise · Noise bandwidth Three mismatches, and only one of them reaches the output. computed by solving, not by drawing. Each of the three quantities that can differ between the two transistors is given a spread of its own, one at a time, and 200 pairs are solved at each. The saturation currents produce a spread that follows them exactly — exponent 0.998, so 1.910 per cent of copy error for two per cent of mismatch. The current gains produce a line of slope 2.003, which is second order rather than first, and land at 2.20e-4 per cent for the same two. There is no third line because there is no third component: with no emitter resistors there is nothing for a resistor tolerance to be a tolerance of, and matching a mirror is a statement about emitter area and about nothing else.

The mismatch that cancels itself

A current mirror's copy error is spread by three things the two transistors can differ in, and the population that measures it has always drawn all three at once. Turned on one at a time, a two per cent spread of saturation currents gives 1.910 per cent of copy error and a two per cent spread of current gains gives 0.00022 — because the gains enter only as a sum of reciprocals, which has no first derivative where they are equal. Then the standard cure un-cancels it, by a factor of 86.

semiconductors · Current mirror Four 1% parts spread evenly across their band: the divider's error has a spread of 0.289%, and 8.6% of builds are beyond ±0.5%. computed by solving, not by drawing: a divider of four equal 10 kΩ resistors tapped at the middle, built 6000 times from seeded parts uniform across ±1%, each copy's output error taken from the ratio in closed form and the first four hundred also solved on the netlist, agreeing to 7e-16. The inset is the parts' own distribution; the histogram is the divider's error. Its standard deviation is 0.2894%, half the parts' 0.5780%, because each part moves the output by a quarter of its own error and four quarters add in quadrature to a half. 8.60% of builds fall beyond ±0.5%, which is half the worst case the printed tolerance allows.

The shape a tolerance does not print

A resistor marked 1% promises only that its value lies within one per cent. How the values fill that band is not printed, and it decides almost everything a design does with the part. Four populations that all honour ±1% — spread evenly, Gaussian with the band at three standard deviations, screened from a wider population, and sorted with the best parts removed — give a four-resistor divider spreads of 0.289, 0.168, 0.267 and 0.378 per cent, a factor of 2.26 under one label. Specify the divider at ±0.5 per cent and the yield is 91.4, 99.8, 93.7 and 85.3 per cent. The shape's signature fades as one over the number of parts, so it bites hardest in the circuits with fewest.

networks · Component tolerance One per cent more C moves the Q = 5 pair straight down, parallel to the axis, and the response by up to 3.20% at 1.093 ω₀. computed by solving, not by drawing. The upper pole of the Q = 5 series RLC low-pass before and after a 1% increase in C, solved from both netlists (upper panel: the displacement, magnified to a fixed length, beside the tangent to the circle |s| = ω₀ and the direction parallel to the axis), and the fractional change in the response's magnitude against frequency (lower panel): solved as the ratio of the two responses (solid) and predicted as the displacement projected onto the two legs (dashed, on top of it), agreeing to 3.9% of the largest change. The pole moves 0.00 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ towards the axis and 49.88 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ down. The largest change in the response is −3.198% at 1.093 ω₀: beside the peak, where the short leg is at forty-five degrees.

A tolerance is an arrow

Change one part of a series RLC low-pass by one per cent and its pole pair moves by a few ten-thousandths of ω₀ — and the response moves by the displacement projected onto the two distances that make it, to within four per cent of the solve. The direction is set by the part. A resistor moves the pair round its circle, away from the axis, and is felt at the peak: 0.99 per cent at Q = 5. A capacitor moves it straight down, parallel to the axis, and is felt beside the peak: +1.78 and −3.20 per cent at the half-power points and almost nothing at the peak itself. Because the short leg is ω₀/2Q long, the capacitor's effect grows by half a per cent for every unit of Q, to 10.1 per cent at Q = 20. Two hundred builds from 1% parts spread by ±2.5 per cent at the band edge.

frequency · Frequency response Parts sharing 90% of their error: the divider's ratio spreads 0.091% and the chain's total resistance 0.559% — one from the same four parts, cancelling, and one adding. computed by solving, not by drawing, over 20,000 seeded builds: four 1% resistors whose errors share a fraction ρ = 0.9 of their variance — as parts from one reel, one wafer or one temperature do — built into a divider tapped at the middle. The ratio's error (solid bars) has a standard deviation of 0.0912%, half the parts' 0.577% times √(1 − ρ); the total resistance of the same four in series (outline bars) has 0.5587%, the parts' spread times √(ρ + (1 − ρ)/4). Correlation that makes a ratio better makes a sum worse, by the same arithmetic.

What a ratio does not see

Parts from one reel, one wafer or one temperature share part of their error, and a circuit that uses them as a ratio cancels exactly the part they share. Four 1% resistors sharing ninety per cent of their error make a divider whose ratio spreads 0.091 per cent and a series chain whose total spreads 0.559 — the same four parts, one answer six times better than independent parts would give and one nearly twice as bad. The ratio's spread falls as √(1 − ρ), the total's rises as √(ρ + (1 − ρ)/4). From −40 to 85 °C the chain moves by up to 0.76 per cent and the ratio by 0.135, inside the ±25 ppm/K the coefficients differ by. And a resistor array whose parts share 99.5 per cent of their error puts a divider inside ±0.1 per cent every time that four discrete parts manage it one time in four.

networks · Component tolerance With 1 RC of tracking, sixteen samples average like 7.8 independent ones. computed by solving, not by drawing. The rms noise on the average of N consecutive held samples of a 1 pF capacitor, against N, for track times of 0.25, 1, 3 and 10 RC between samples, with the 1/√N law for independent samples dotted. A sample shares exp(−Tₜ/RC) of its value with the one before, so at 1 RC the correlation is 0.368 and sixteen samples are worth 7.81 independent ones; 1,024 are worth 473.6. The closed form is checked against a seeded march of the held sequence.

The average that is not N times quieter

Averaging sixteen samples of a 1 pF capacitor is supposed to take its 63.3 µV of kT/C noise down by four. With one RC of tracking between samples it takes it down by 2.8: the switch has not been closed long enough for the capacitor to forget the last sample, each shares 37 per cent of its value with the one before, and sixteen samples are worth 7.8 independent ones. At a quarter of an RC they are worth 2.6. Sampling faster never helps past a ceiling: however quickly the samples come, an average gathers at most one independent sample per 2RC of time — the continuous average's own limit. And a sampler that settles its signal to 8 bits has already waited long enough for its noise.

noise · kT/C noise 3 relaxations over two decades come back within 0.22% from readings good to 1e-5. computed by solving, not by drawing. A one-per-cent tail divided equally among 3 branches spread over two decades from 0.1 ms, read at 80 times with 1e-5 of seeded noise on each reading, and the amplitudes recovered by least squares with the time constants given to the fit. Dots: one recovery; bars: the rms spread over 200. The condition number of the fit is 8.29e+0, and the worst branch comes back with an rms error of 0.224 per cent.

How many relaxations a settling curve holds

A settling curve read at eighty times, each good to ten parts in a million of the step, returns the amplitudes of three relaxations spread over two decades to 0.22 per cent and of eight to 46 — even when the fit is handed every time constant exactly. The condition number of the inversion grows by a factor of 7.7 for each extra relaxation packed into a decade, so each tenfold improvement in the reading buys a little more than one more relaxation a decade and no more. A settling measurement can count the dielectric's slowest relaxations; it cannot resolve a crowded spectrum, and how crowded is readable before any amplitude is.

transients · Doublet An amplifier gain of 1000 caps a switched-capacitor integration at 8000 cycles' worth of averaging. computed by solving, not by drawing. The noise, referred to the input, of the estimate a switched-capacitor integrator makes by integrating a steady input for N cycles, with 1 pF sampling and 4 pF feedback capacitors, against N, for amplifier gains of 100, 1,000, 10,000 and infinity. Each cycle adds 2kT/Cs — 89.5 µV rms — and an ideal integrator averages it as 1/√N without limit. A finite gain leaks, and the noise stops falling at √(kT/(A·Cf)) = 1.000 µV for A = 1000, reached after about 8000 cycles. The closed form is checked against a seeded march.

The average an integrator can hold

A switched-capacitor integrator is an averager whose samples are exactly independent, because every cycle resets the sampling capacitor — and it pays for that with two switch phases, 2kT/Cs a cycle, 89.5 µV rms with a picofarad. An ideal integrator averages that as 1/√N without end. A real one leaks through its amplifier's finite gain, and the leak caps the average at 2A·Cf/Cs cycles: 8,000 for a gain of a thousand and a 4 pF feedback capacitor, where the noise stops at √(kT/(A·Cf)) = 1.00 µV. That floor contains the feedback capacitor and the gain and not the sampling capacitor at all, which decides only how long the integration takes to reach it.

noise · kT/C noise With the capacitor tracking the inductor, one per cent of drift moves the Q = 5 response by at most 1.00%, at the peak — against −2.73% beside it with the capacitor held. computed by solving, not by drawing, from two netlists. The Q = 5 series RLC low-pass with its inductor raised by 1% and its capacitor changed by (1.01)^(−t) − 1, so that at t = 1 their product is unchanged; here t = 1. The fractional change in the response against frequency (solid), against the inductor alone with the capacitor held (dashed). The upper pole moves 9.90 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ towards the axis and 0.99 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ up it, and ω₀ by 0.00%. The largest change is 1.00% at 1.000 ω₀; with the capacitor held it is −2.73% at 1.115 ω₀. The slider is the tracking.

Two parts that drift together

A one per cent change in the inductor of a Q = 5 resonant low-pass moves its pole pair mostly downwards, and the response by 2.73% beside the peak. Let the capacitor fall by the same fraction as the inductor rises and their product is fixed, so ω₀ is: the pair can only go round its circle, sideways near the top, and the response changes by 1.00% at the peak and nowhere else — the change a resistor makes. The difference grows with Q: at Q = 20 one per cent of drift moves the band edge 10.2% with the capacitor held, 20.7% with it drifting the same way, and 1.00% with it tracking. Over −40 to 85 °C an inductor of +150 ppm/K moves a Q = 20 band edge 9.1% with a zero-coefficient capacitor and 0.57% with a −150 ppm/K one. Correlation between two parts' errors is itself a tolerance.

frequency · Frequency response Two 1% parts sharing 90% of their error: the divider's output spreads 0.129% at a half, 0.236% at ten to one and 0.258% at a hundred to one. computed by solving, not by drawing, over 20,000 seeded builds at each of seven ratios, every ratio computed exactly: a divider of two 1% parts, each with a uniform part's 0.577% spread and sharing a fraction ρ = 0.9 of it, with the top resistor N times the bottom. The output ratio's standard deviation (dots) against N, beside N/(N + 1)·√2·σ·√(1 − ρ) (line) and the same law for the other shared fractions (faint). N 1: 0.1286%; N 2: 0.1712%; N 5: 0.2145%; N 10: 0.2356%; N 20: 0.2477%; N 50: 0.2536%; N 100: 0.2581%. What is shared cancels at every ratio; what is not reaches the output with a leverage of N/(N + 1), which is a half for a halving divider and nearly one for a large ratio — so the same two parts make a ten-to-one divider 1.83 times worse.

The small leg of a large ratio

A divider of two 1% parts sharing ninety per cent of their error spreads 0.129 per cent at a half and 0.236 at ten to one — the same two parts, nearly twice as bad, because what they do not share reaches the output with a leverage of N/(N + 1) rather than one half. Correlation cancels at every ratio; the leverage does not. Built from equal units of one array, a divider of N to one spreads as σᵤ·√(N/M), so at any one area a ten-to-one ratio costs √10 against a half and needs ten times the units to match it, and the units it needs are the bottom leg's. And a ratio far from a half heats its own parts unequally: at 50 V across 11 kΩ the top of a two-part ten-to-one divider runs 46 K hotter than the bottom and the ratio moves 1,055 ppm with perfectly matched coefficients, where a chain of eleven equal units moves at most 29.

networks · Component tolerance With a 300 ps skew and 5 mV of noise a core with 100 ns of headroom saturates after 502 periods on average — the 500 the skew alone gives — and one drive in a hundred by 184. Seeded: 2,000 drives of an ideal core by the event map at β = 0.5, 5 mV of threshold noise and a comparator skew of 300 ps, each run until the summed high-minus-low time leaves ±100 ns. A histogram of the counts on logarithmic bins, against the closed-form first-passage distribution, between two barriers, of a walk with drift 0.200 ns a period and spread 1.89 ns per root period. Mean 501.9 against 499.9; quantiles 1% 184, 10% 275, 50% 463; the empirical and closed-form cumulative distributions differ by at most 0.014.

The count a core survives

A relaxation oscillator with a 300 ps comparator skew and 5 mV of threshold noise saturates an ideal core with 100 ns of volt-second headroom after 502 periods on average — the 500 the skew alone gives — and one drive in a hundred by 184. The mean does not see the noise at all until the noise is large enough to saturate the core the other way first; the early tail sees nothing else. Every skew and noise level falls on one curve in one ratio, the skew's count over the count at which its ramp overtakes the walk. Read as a burst, a thousand periods with one failure in a thousand allows 150 ps of skew with no noise, 93.5 ps at a millivolt, and none at all above 2.41 mV.

applied · Hysteresis The gain a Wien oscillator needs, when one of its four parts is off its value. computed by solving, not by drawing: for each part moved alone from −5% to +5%, the gain at which the poles reach the axis, bisected on the netlist, against 1 + Rs/Rp + Cp/Cs (to ten digits at every point). A series resistor or shunt capacitor 1% high raises the gain needed to 3.0100; a shunt resistor or series capacitor 1% high lowers it to 2.9901. Every part moves the frequency the same way, by half its error: 1% high on any one of them, 1.58 kHz against 1.59 kHz. The gain needed moves by the error itself, a third of it relative to three.

The gain a tolerance demands

A Wien oscillator needs a gain of exactly three only when its four network parts are exactly equal. In general it needs 1 + Rs/Rp + Cp/Cs — bisected on the netlist to ten digits — so a series resistor 1% high asks for 3.0100 and a shunt resistor 1% high for 2.9901. Four thousand seeded oscillators from 1% parts set to the textbook's comfortable 3.02 leave a quarter of them silent; 99.9% start only at 3.072, and at that setting the median unit distorts 2.6% — the limiter has to absorb a margin the tolerance forced. The frequency spreads by one part's own spread, 0.58% for 1% parts, as large as the limiter's own 0.771% shift. Parts from one array, tracking to 0.05%, need only 3.0035, because the gain depends on ratios and the frequency on products.

applied · Oscillator A 10 mH winding read at 1 kHz while a 40 mH winding coupled to it at k = 0.99 is loaded from a short to an open. computed by solving, not by drawing at 61 loads for each coupling. Open, the first winding reads 10.0000 mH, its own inductance. Shorted, it reads 199.00 µH — L₁(1 − k²), the leakage seen from this side, because the second winding's current cancels all of the flux the two share. The change happens around a load equal to the second winding's reactance, 251 Ω. At k = 0.5, 0.9, 0.99 and 0.999 the shorted readings are 7500 µH, 1900 µH, 199.00 µH, 19.99 µH.

The leakage a series reading cannot see

The series-aiding and series-opposing readings recover a coupling coefficient to fifteen figures on a netlist, and on a bench with a 0.1% meter they recover it to about 0.001 at every coupling — which is useless exactly where transformers live. At k = 0.999 the leakage, L₁(1 − k²), is two thousandths of the winding, and the series route leaves it 133% uncertain: 88 of 400 seeded benches report a negative leakage. Shorting the other winding reads the leakage directly, to the meter's own 0.1%, and recovers k 943 times more precisely at 0.999. The short is a short only where the shorted winding's reactance dwarfs its resistance by 10k/√(1 − k²), and the winding to short is the one with the longer time constant.

magnetics · Mutual inductance What balancing the source resistances is worth, against how correlated the two input currents are, for a bias-cancelled input. computed by solving, not by drawing; 400 seeded parts at each correlation, each solved unbalanced and balanced at a 1 MΩ source, input currents of zero mean and 1 nA spread. The ratio of rms errors (dots) follows 1/√(2(1 − ρ)) (line): 0.72 for independent currents — balancing makes it 38% worse — one at ρ = ½, and 6.5 at 0.99. The cure removes what the two currents share, and is a cure only if they share more than half.

The cure that needs one current

Balancing the resistances an amplifier's inputs look into removes whatever its two input currents have in common and leaves their difference. On a plain bipolar input the two are one current at two pins, correlated at 0.991, and the cure is worth ten. On an input whose bias current has been cancelled they are two residues of either sign, correlated at 0.10, and over 400 seeded parts the cure makes the error 38 per cent worse. It is worth 1/√(2(1 − ρ)) for a zero-mean current, nothing at ρ = ½, and in general exactly the input current over the offset current.

instruments · Input bias current The gain a Wien oscillator needs above three, against its amplifier's gain–bandwidth product. computed by solving, not by drawing: the closed-loop gain at which the oscillating pair reaches the axis, bisected on the netlist with a one-pole amplifier of 100 dB direct-current gain, for equal 10 kΩ and 10 nF parts. At 10 times the frequency, 3.15339; at 30 times the frequency, 3.02349; at 100 times the frequency, 3.00257; at 1000 times the frequency, 3.00012. Every point agrees with 3(1 + δ) + 3ε²/(1 + δ + 3ε), where ε = kf₀/GBW and δ = k/a0, to two parts in ten million. The bandwidth's share falls as the square of the ratio; below it sits a floor of 9.00e-5 from the finite direct-current gain, and the two are equal near a ratio of √(3a0) = 548.

The gain an amplifier asks for, squared

A Wien oscillator built round a real amplifier needs more than a gain of three, and the excess is easy to overrate: the amplifier's lag moves the frequency in proportion to the lag and the required gain only in proportion to its square. At a gain–bandwidth product a hundred times the oscillation frequency the frequency is 4.22 per cent low and the gain needed is 3.00257 — fifty-one times smaller in proportion. The square is also what makes the bias spread: an amplifier 30 per cent slow asks for 1.94 times the typical excess. Against 1 per cent parts the amplifier matches the network's share at a ratio of 16; against a network matched to 0.05 per cent, not until 86.

applied · Oscillator Forty thousand periods at β = 0.5: each period's error against the same period's duty error, correlated by 0.008. Seeded: forty thousand periods of the event map, β = 0.5, 5 mV of threshold noise; one in twenty is drawn, each scaled by its own standard deviation (3.4 ns for the period, 2.49 ns for the high-minus-low time). A period is three draws with coefficients A, A + B, B and its duty error the same three with A, B − A, −B, so their covariance is σ²[A² + (A + B)(B − A) − B²], which is zero at every β. Measured, the correlation is 0.0080, inside the ±0.0100 that forty thousand samples resolve. With normal draws, uncorrelated is independent: the cloud is round.

Every draw shared, and nothing in common

A relaxation oscillator's period error and its volt-second error are made of the same threshold draws, and they are exactly uncorrelated. A period weighs its three draws A, A + B and B; the high half less the low weighs the same three A, B − A and −B; the products sum to A² + B² − A² − B², which is zero at every hysteresis. Over forty thousand periods the measured correlation is 0.008 against a resolution of 0.010. What the two do share is one draw with the period on either side, ±0.157 at β = 0.5, and over any whole burst those two lags cancel term for term. Four thousand bursts judged against twenty-five pairs of limits fail both ways exactly as often as the product of the two rates says: the margins specified separately double-count nothing.

applied · Hysteresis

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Seeded generatorComponent toleranceComponent sensitivityDesign tradeoffVoltage dividerDevice matchingModel rangeAveragingRandom walkTemperature coefficientBarkhausen criterionClosed form

All concepts