2. Proposed Approach
We start by analyzing the properties of the circuit in
Figure 1 that can be regarded as the cascade of a JFET CS amplifier followed by an ideal transimpedance amplifier (TIA) stage with gain
AR. In the actual circuit, the TIA is implemented with an OA in shunt-shunt feedback configuration [
21]. The (ideal) circuit in
Figure 1 can be regarded as a good representation of the actual circuit as long as the input impedance of the
TIA is much smaller than the impedance of the capacitor
CD at all frequencies of interest. We assume a dual supply operation (that is required, in any case, for a simple implementation of the TIA). In our design we employ an IF3601 large area JFET by InterFet, capable of providing transconductance gains (
gm) in the order of a few tens of mA/V with a bias drain current in the order of a few mA [
18]. This device is characterized by an equivalent input noise that can be as low as 0.3 nV/√Hz at 100 Hz. As is characteristic of JFET devices, DC and AC parameters are quite spread. The datasheet for IF3601 lists a pinch off voltage in the interval from −2 up to −0.35 V, while only a minimum value for the saturation current at
VGS = 0 is given. Assuming that the JFET is in the active region of operation and that the gate current is negligible, in the circuit configuration in
Figure 1, we have
While the actual value of
ID depends on the characteristic of the particular JFET used in the circuit, the fact that −
VGS is certainly smaller than 2 V (typically in the order of a few hundred mV for currents in the order of a few mA) means that for
VSS equal to 6 V or more, the bias current (
ID) can be set with a reasonable error (typically less than 10%) by the ratio
VSS/RS. In other words, with the simple bias configuration in
Figure 1, the effect of parameter dispersion is modest, as far as the bias point is concerned. Note, however, that this does not imply in any way that we can ensure, by design, a predictable and known gain for the amplifier, since even for the same bias current, the transconductance gain can change significantly depending on the particular device being used. When employing the amplifier in
Figure 1 as part of a noise measurement system, the knowledge of the actual gain is, of course, necessary. In principle, one could perform calibration measurements once each single amplifier is built or change some circuit parameter until the desired gain is obtained [
22]. However, since the gain can change with the temperature and also because of ageing of the components, the only way to ensure accuracy in actual measurements is to frequently repeat the calibration procedure. Before discussing the approach we propose for addressing this issue, we need to devote our attention to the frequency response that can be obtained from the amplifier in
Figure 1. Indeed, since we are interested in an amplifier to be used in LFNM applications, we need to extend the lower frequency limit well below 1 Hz. The small signal input–output transfer function of the circuit in
Figure 1 can be calculated starting from the small signal equivalent circuit in
Figure 2, where all the relevant noise sources are also included. As far as the transfer function is concerned, we can assume all noise sources inactive and we obtain:
where
From Equation (2), it is apparent that since (
τ′
s <
τs), a constant frequency response is obtained for frequencies above the one corresponding to the pole with the largest magnitude. As far as the pole corresponding to
τA is concerned, since the resistance
RA can be in the order of a few MΩ, its frequency can be easily set below a few tens of mHz by employing for
CA capacitances in the tens of μF range. In the case of the pole frequencies corresponding to
τD and, especially,
τ′
s, the situation is quite different. With reference to
Figure 1 and Equation (1),
RS must be in the order of 1 kΩ in order to obtain bias currents in the order of a few mA. As a consequence,
RD must also be in the same order of magnitude (with
RD conveniently lower that
RS in order to ensure that the JFET operates in the active region). When JFETs such as the one employed in our design are biased with a drain current in the order of a few mA, the transconductance gain
gm is typically in the order of a few tens of mA/V. This means that the equivalent resistance
RS′ (the resistance seen toward the source of the JFET) may be as low as a few tens of ohms. In this situation, the only way to obtain a value of
τ′
S in the order of a few seconds or tens of seconds (to obtain a pole frequency well below 1 Hz) is to resort to a capacitor value in the order of 1 F or more for
CS (few tens of mF in the case of
CD for obtaining
τD >> 10 s).
While up to a few years ago, employing capacitances in the order of 1 F would have been largely impractical, supercapacitors in very compact size are nowadays easily available with capacitances ranging from a few mF to a few F. Unlike other high specific capacitance devices (electrolytic capacitors), supercapacitors have been shown to be compatible with instrumentation intended for LFNM applications [
23,
24,
25]. Note that because of the circuit configuration in
Figure 1, the DC voltage drop across the capacitor
CS is −
VGS that, in the case of the JFET we employ in our design, is typically below 1 V, and this allows for employing supercapacitors in the order of a few farads with a bias voltage well below the maximum rated value. As far as the BN is concerned, for the sake of simplicity, we will limit our analysis at frequencies well above the lower frequency corner of the amplifier. In this situation, we can replace all capacitors in
Figure 2 with short circuits, obtaining, for the passband input output signal gain
AVPB,
Note that if the TIA is obtained employing the classical approach of an OA in shunt-shunt feedback configuration, the gain
AR coincides with the value of the feedback resistance
RR between the output and the inverting input of the OA [
21]. In the assumption of all capacitors replaced by short circuits, the noise sources
enRA and
enRS (due to the resistances
RA and
RS, respectively) do not contribute to the output noise. Assuming all noise sources are uncorrelated, the power spectral density (PSD)
SENO of the noise at the output of the amplifier can be written as
where
SEND is the PSD of the noise source
enRD due to the thermal noise introduced by the resistance
RD and
SIT is the PSD of the equivalent input current noise source
int at the input of the transimpedance amplifier. It must be noted that in most cases,
SIT essentially coincides with the PSD of the current noise source due to the thermal noise of the feedback resistance
RR used in the transimpedance amplifier. Therefore, we can write
where
k is the Boltzmann constant and
T the absolute temperature.
The performances of a low noise amplifier are better appreciated in terms of the equivalent input noise, whose PSD
SENI can be obtained from Equation (5) by dividing by the modulus of the passband gain squared. We obtain, using also Equation (6),
The contribution of the noise due to the resistance decreases as the value of the resistance increases. As we have noted before, RD is typically in the order of 1 kΩ, while gm is in the order of a few tens of mA/V. This means that the contribution of the second term in Equation (7) is equivalent to the thermal noise of a resistance of a few ohms that is well below 1 nV/√Hz, and represents, especially at low frequencies, a very small (even negligible) contribution with respect to the noise introduced by the JFET. As far as the contribution of the third term is concerned, from the previous argument, it follows that it is sufficient to design the transimpedance amplifier with a feedback resistance in excess of 10 kΩ to make its contribution negligible. By following the design guidelines we have discussed so far, therefore, it is possible to design a voltage amplifier whose equivalent input voltage noise reduces to the equivalent input voltage noise of a single low noise JFET device.
As we have noted before, the main problem with the design we propose is that the passband voltage gain is directly proportional to the transconductance gain
gm of the JFET and, therefore, a large spread in the actual value of the gain is to be expected depending on the particular device used in otherwise nominally identical realizations. We believe that for the approach we propose to be feasible in LFNM applications, a sufficiently simple and reliable approach for the calibration of the amplifier gain must be devised. To this end, we propose the approach schematically illustrated in
Figure 3.
With reference to
Figure 3, the amplifier
A1 is a very low noise amplifier designed according to the guidelines discussed above. The other two amplifiers (
A2 and
A3) are nominally identical OA-based voltage amplifiers with known gain. Since the three amplifiers have their inputs connected together, it is mandatory that the current noise at the inputs of the amplifiers
A2 and
A3 be as low as possible in order not to degrade the equivalent input current noise (EICN) of the overall system. This can be obtained by resorting to either JFET or MOSFET input OAs that are characterized by extremely low levels of EICN. Typically, low noise JFET input OAs are characterized by a lower level of flicker noise with respect to low noise MOSFET input OAs. However, as it will become clear in the following, for the approach we propose to be effective, we are interested in a low level of voltage noise in the white noise region for
A2 and
A3. Suppose now that we can perform cross spectra measurements among any two outputs in
Figure 3. Let us also assume that such cross spectra estimation is performed in a frequency range in which the voltage gains
AV1,
AV2, and
AV3 of the amplifiers are constant, and their values can be well represented by real numbers. Without loss of generality, we can assume the gains to be positive numbers. Since amplifiers
A2 and
A3 are identical,
AV2 =
AV3 =
AV. With these assumptions, we would obtain for the cross spectra
S12 and
S23 between outputs
VO1 and
VO2 and outputs
VO2 and
VO3, respectively,
where
SI is the power spectral density of the voltage noise at the input of the system. Note that the contribution of the equivalent input voltage noise (EIVN) sources at the inputs of the amplifiers is completely rejected. Since
AV is known, independently of the value of
SI, Equation (8) can be used to estimate the voltage gain
AV1 of the low noise amplifier as follows:
Because of Equation (8), it might be proposed that since the cross spectra approach allows for complete rejection of the contribution of the EIVN of the amplifiers, employing just the two amplifiers
A2 and
A3 and estimating the cross spectrum
S23 is all we need to obtain the PSD of the input noise, without the trouble of resorting to the design in
Figure 1. The fact is, however, that the process of estimating cross spectra involves the averaging of the estimated spectra over several time records of the signal to be analyzed. It is indeed the very process of averaging that leads to the cancellation of the uncorrelated noise sources, allowing only the correlated ones to emerge as the number of averages increases [
14]. As a general rule, the magnitude of the uncorrelated noise decreases with the square root of the number of averages, i.e., with the number of time records being elaborated. When using a discrete Fourier transform (DFT)-based spectrum analyzer, the duration of each time record is the inverse of the resolution bandwidth Δ
f that is also the minimum frequency (other than DC) at which the DFT and, hence, spectra and cross spectra can be estimated. Actually, as has been discussed in detail in [
26], in the low frequency range, where flicker noise is dominant, the resolution bandwidth needs to be much smaller than the minimum frequency of interest. Suppose now that one is interested in estimating a spectrum at 1 kHz. Employing a very low noise voltage amplifier based on IF3601 [
18], one can obtain, at that frequency, a BN less than 1 nV/√Hz (10
−18 V
2/Hz). If we want to employ a cross correlation configuration using only amplifiers
A2 and
A3 in the figure, we can obtain an estimate of the time that is required to obtain an equivalent BN of 1 nV starting from the knowledge of their EIVN. Let us assume that
A2 and
A3 are based on the MOSFET input OA TLC070 (the one that is actually used in our design). The manufacturer lists, for these devices, an EIVN of 7 nV/√Hz (49 × 10
−18 V
2/Hz) at 1 kHz that is 49 times the EIVN of the low noise amplifier. This means that in order to reduce the equivalent BN by means of cross correlation to the same level of the low noise amplifier, we need about 2500 averages (49
2). Assuming Δ
f = 100 Hz << 1 kHz, one time record lasts 10 ms, so that the required measurement time is about 25 s, which can be considered a quite manageable time in most applications. Things change dramatically, however, if we are interested in very low frequencies as in the case of LFNMs on electron devices. Let us assume that
fmin = 1 Hz is the minimum frequency of interest (although LFNMs often extend well below 1 Hz). The EIVN of an IF3601-based low noise amplifier can be as low as 1.4 nV/√Hz or 2 × 10
−18 V
2/Hz [
18]. As far as the TLC070 is concerned, although the manufacturer only lists the equivalent input noise down to 10 Hz, since we are well within the flicker region, we can extrapolate the noise at 1 Hz to be about 90 nV/√Hz (≈ 8 × 10
−15 V
2/Hz), that is, 4 × 10
3 times larger than that of the low noise amplifier. As before, we assume that we can employ Δ
f =
fmin/10 = 100 mHz, resulting in a record duration of 10 s. With a factor of 4 × 10
3 between the noise of the TLC070 and the one of a good low noise voltage amplifier, we would therefore require a measurement time of 160 × 10
6 s (about 5 years) to obtain, by cross correlation between the outputs of
A2 and
A3, a BN equivalent to that of
A1. This clearly demonstrates that at very low frequencies, cross correlation is unpractical if the uncorrelated noise to be reduced is large compared to the desired BN. It is therefore important to design voltage amplifiers characterized by intrinsically low equivalent input voltage noise. At the same time, as long as we restrict to frequencies above a few hundred Hz, a few tens of seconds are usually sufficient for obtaining a good estimate of the quantities in Equation (8). In light of these considerations, the approach we propose can be quite effective. As long as we can assume a flat gain for the amplifier
A1 at all frequencies of interest, we can perform cross spectra measurement in a conveniently high frequency range so that a correct estimate of the cross spectra in Equation (9) can be obtained in a matter of a few tens of seconds; immediately afterwards, once the actual gain of the low noise amplifier is known, noise measurement at the output
VO1 can be started down to the lowest frequency of interest. Typical noise measurements down to frequencies below 1 Hz can last several minutes or several tens of minutes so that the initial measurement session for the calibration of the gain has a very low impact on the overall measurement time, especially because it can be performed with the actual device to be characterized already connected to the measurement system. Moreover, as we shall demonstrate in the section devoted to the experimental results, if proper advanced elaboration approaches are used for spectral estimation, the gain estimation can be obtained as part of the very same measurement session employed for the estimation of the noise produced by the DUT.
A key factor for the application of the approach we propose is the determination of the measurement time required for the correct estimation of the gain according to Equation (9). As we have noted above, the smaller the
SI is compared to the equivalent input noise of the amplifiers, the longer the measurement time for obtaining the correct estimation of the gain
A1. When performing spectra and cross spectra measurements employing a DFT-based spectrum analyzer, we obtain their estimate at discrete frequencies
fk =
kΔ
f, with
k being an integer number. Let
S11M(
fk) and
S23M(
fk) be the estimates of the cross spectra
S11 and
S23 in Equation (9) after averaging over
M records. Since we assume
AV1 to be constant, we can obtain an improved estimate of this parameter by averaging Equation (9) over several frequencies
fk as follows:
As will be shown in the next section, the quantity AV1,M can be monitored vs. M (i.e., vs. measurement time) until it stabilizes, at which point its value can be assumed to be the correct estimate of the gain of the low noise amplifier.
3. System Design and Experimental Results
In order to test the effectiveness of the approach we propose, we designed the system reported in
Figure 4 following the guidelines discussed in the previous section. The complete component list is reported in
Table 1. A single AC coupling filter (
CA,
RA) is used for removing the DC across the DUT connected to the input. The amplifier
A1 is the actual implementation of the circuit in
Figure 1, while
A2 and
A3 are identical two-stage voltage amplifiers with a passband gain of 1111 (61 dB). This is the result of the first (
OA2) and second (
OA3) stage, having a gain of 11 and 101, respectively.
The higher frequency corner of the amplifier
A2 is set by the second stage to about 100 kHz (the gain bandwidth product of OA TLC070 used for
OA2 and
OA3 is 10 MHz). The AC coupling network
CA2–
RA2, that removes the DC introduced by the offset of the first stage, introduces a low frequency corner at about 16 mHz that, in combination with the input AC filter (
CA,
RA), sets the lower frequency corner for the response from the input to the output
VO2. Since the auxiliary amplifiers
A2 and
A3 are only used for gain calibration (frequency range of interest above a few hundred Hz) the time constant
CA2RA2 is not critical. From the point of view of the input of the system, the connection of the inputs of the amplifiers
A2 and
A3 to the gate of the JFET results in a negligible contribution in terms of current noise (the equivalent input current noise for the TLC070 is 0.6 fA/√Hz) and in a contribution of a few tens of pF to the input capacitance of the system that is, however, dominated by the JFET (the typical gate to source and gate to drain capacitances for the IF3601 are 300 and 200 pF, respectively). As far as the low noise amplifier is concerned, the JFET is biased in such a way as to obtain a drain current of about 2.5 mA and a drain to source voltage of about 2 V, sufficient to ensure operation in the active region. In these bias conditions, we expect to obtain a transconductance in the range from 20 to 50 mA/V. As far as the frequency response is concerned, there are three pole frequencies to be set, one of which—the one associated with
CS—depends on the value of the transconductance
gm. With a target passband extending well below 1 Hz, we must ensure that all pole frequencies are well below this limit. With the values of the parameters in
Table 1, the pole frequency associated to
CS remains below 10 mHz regardless of the value of
gm in the range from 20 to 50 mA/V. The pole associated to
CA is set at 2 mHz, while the pole associated to
CD is set at 10 mHz with these values, regardless of the actual frequency of the pole due to
CS, we can expect an essentially flat response above 200 mHz. Depending on the value of
gm, with
RR = 50 kΩ, the passband gain of the low noise amplifier ranges from 60 up to 68 dB (from 1000 up to 2500).
The actual prototype that was implemented and used for testing is shown in
Figure 5. The yellow line superimposed to the picture represents the wiring that needs to be added to connect the gate of the JFET J1 to the inputs of the amplifiers
A2 and
A3 as in
Figure 4. Removing the yellow connection allowed to test each amplifier independently of the others. A block diagram of the measurement setup is also shown in
Figure 6. The amplifier, together with the battery pack for its supply and the DUT, as is typically the case in LFNMs, is enclosed in aluminum box that acts as a shield with respect to interferences coming from the environment. The DUTs used for the test experiments are simple resistors, but in the case of noise measurement on electron devices, the bias system for the device would also typically be contained in the shielded box. Three BNC connectors are used to allow connection from the outputs of the amplifiers (
VO1,
VO2, and
VO3) to the input of the acquisition and elaboration system.
As shown in
Figure 6, for the acquisition and elaboration of the output signals, we resorted to a National Instruments 4-channel DSA board (PCI 4462) and dedicated software developed around the public domain library QLSA [
27]. While the development of dedicated software is not mandatory, as we have discussed in the previous paragraph, resorting to the QLSA library in this specific application can be extremely convenient. As discussed in [
27], QLSA operates very much like a large number of conventional DFT spectrum analyzers all receiving the same input signal, but with each one operating with the same record length but in a different frequency range and, hence, with a different resolution bandwidth. In particular, at higher frequencies, the resolution bandwidth is larger, resulting in time records with shorter duration, while at lower and lower frequencies, the resolution bandwidth is proportionally reduced. All these virtual analyzers operate in parallel, and this means, with reference to the calibration approach we propose, that the higher frequency ranges can be exploited for the calibration of the gain according to the procedure discussed in the previous paragraph while, at the same time, power spectra estimation at the output
VO1 can proceed with the proper (small) Δ
f required to correctly estimate power spectra in the frequency range below 1 Hz.
As a first test experiment, we used an unbiased 50 kΩ resistor as a DUT at the input of the system. The thermal noise of a 50 kΩ resistor at room temperature is about 29 nV/√Hz (8.3 × 10
−16 V
2/Hz) and it is, therefore, much larger than the expected equivalent input voltage noise of the low noise amplifier in the entire frequency range of interest. Hence, regardless of the actual value of the gain, the spectrum at the output
VO1 can be used to verify the shape of the frequency response. The result of the estimation of the PSD of the noise at the output
VO1 is reported in
Figure 7 (black curve labeled
S11). As can be verified, the curve is flat, indicating a constant frequency response from 200 mHz up to above 1 kHz, after which the PSD decreases. However, this decrease can be traced back to the low pass filtering effect due to the capacitance at the input of the JFET that, in the passband and in the configuration in
Figure 4, is essentially the sum of the gate-to-source and of the gate-to-drain capacitances of the device, in the order of 500 pF. Indeed, an RC low pass filter with
R = 50 kΩ (the resistance of the DUT at the input) and
C = 500 pF would result in a pole frequency of about 6.4 kHz, consistent with the behavior for
S11 observed in
Figure 7. All spectra and cross spectra shown in
Figure 7 are obtained by resorting to QLSA. The sampling frequency is 51.2 kHz. In the uppermost frequency range (above 1 kHz), the resolution bandwidth Δ
f is 100 Hz, while in the lowest frequency range, Δ
f = 25 mHz. In order to obtain very smooth spectra at very low frequencies, averaging for the spectra in
Figure 7 was carried on for about 2 h. However, the correct estimate of the gain
AV1 was obtained just after a few seconds, as confirmed from the plot of |
AV1,M| vs. time in
Figure 8a.
To verify the robustness of the approach we propose, the estimation of
AV1,M was carried out over two frequency ranges. The circles in
Figure 8a are relative to the estimation of the gain performed in the frequency range from 200 Hz to 1 kHz (with Δ
f = 6.25 Hz) where the recorded spectra appear to be flat, while the squares are relative to the estimation of the gain in the frequency range from 2 to 15 kHz (with Δ
f = 100 Hz), where
SI, regarded as the noise at the input of the gate of the JFET, changes with frequency because of the filtering effect due to the input capacitance of the amplifier combined with the resistance of the DUT, as previously discussed. A careful observation of
Figure 8a indicates that the time required for the correct estimation of
AV1 is shorter, as expected, in the case of the estimation with the larger resolution bandwidth. In any case, after 20 seconds, the two estimates essentially coincide (
AV1 = 2160), with a difference between the two of less than 0.3%. This result also demonstrates that the gain from the gate of the JFET toward the output is flat up to frequencies well above 10 kHz. Note that the ability to obtain the correct estimate of the gain after a few seconds, also in the case of a relatively small Δ
f, is due to the fact that the noise introduced by the DUT is also large with respect to the EIVN of the amplifiers
A2 and
A3 in the frequency range in which the gain estimation was performed. In order to test our approach in a much more demanding case, we used a 100 Ω resistance as a DUT. The thermal noise of a 100 Ω resistor at room temperature is about 1.29 nV/√Hz (≈1.66 × 10
−18 V
2/Hz). In terms of PSD, this noise level is about 30 times smaller than the EIVN of
A2 and
A3 for
f = 1 kHz, and it is in the same order of magnitude of the BN of the best low noise amplifiers for LFNM applications. The spectra obtained in this case, in the same measurement conditions as before, are reported in
Figure 7 (gray curves). To avoid complicating the figure, the plot of the cross spectra is, in this case, shown only in the highest frequency range, that is, the one used for gain calibration. The behavior of
AV1,
M vs. time is shown in
Figure 8b. As can be noted, in this situation, since
SI is very small compared to the EIVN of
A2 and
A3 even at higher frequencies, we need to wait a few minutes before reaching the situation in which the estimated value no longer changes with time. In any case, after 2 min, the estimated value sets are within ±2% of the asymptotic value. Therefore, even in this demanding situation, we obtain the conclusion that a quite good estimate of the amplifier gain can be reached in a fraction of the time required for the measurement of the DUT noise.
With the value of the calibrated gain as obtained from
Figure 8, we obtain the equivalent noise at the input of the amplifier, as reported in
Figure 9. Note that our approach requires a DUT to generate noise that is present at the input of the amplifier to calibrate the gain. In order to evaluate the BN of the low noise amplifier, that is, the equivalent input noise when the input is shorted, we used the value of the gain obtained in the case in which the DUT was a 100 Ω resistance. To ensure that no appreciable change in the gain could occur, the measurement with the shorted input was performed immediately after the measurement with a 100 Ω DUT was completed. As can be noted in
Figure 9, the low noise amplifier is characterized by excellent noise performances, especially when we take into account its very simple structure. The EIVN at 200 mHz is about 6 nV/√Hz and becomes less than 1 nV/√Hz above 2 Hz.
While the main purpose of this work was to demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach we propose, it is worth noting that the performances of the amplifier we have designed, in terms of EIVN, compare very well with other designs resorting to the IF-3601 as the active device. A comparison with two of such designs is summarized in
Table 2.
The design in [
22] relies on a single JFET stage and requires either dedicated measurements for gain calibration or acting on a variable component in the circuit for gain adjustment. As can be noted, noise performances are essentially comparable, notwithstanding the fact that the bias current for the JFET in our design is smaller than the one used in [
22] (the equivalent input noise for a JFET decreases for increasing bias current). The design in [
18] relies on a feedback configuration employing an IF 3602 (a pair of IF3601 in a single device) for the differential input stage. In this case, we can observe a lower level of noise in the proposed design for a lower bias current. It must be noted that at higher frequencies, the EIVN in [
18] increases as a result of the effect of the compensation network employed to insure stability. In any case, what we believe sets our approach apart from others is its degree of flexibility. The fact that we do not resort to a feedback configuration greatly simplifies the design of the low noise amplifier. Different JFETs with different characteristics of noise and input capacitances can be used to quickly and effectively design the low noise amplifier: the same measurement configuration, with the same auxiliary amplifiers can be used for obtaining gain calibration while performing measurements. In the same way, different OAs can be used for the auxiliary amplifiers as long as they are characterized by low input noise current. While the auxiliary amplifiers are used at higher frequencies, resorting to JFET input OAs that have lower low frequency corners would allow, in many cases, a reduction in the time required for gain calibration by extending the frequency interval used for the estimation of the gain toward lower frequencies according to Equation (10). As a final remark, it must be noted that the gain calibration approach we propose works as long as the noise level introduced by the DUT in the frequency interval used for gain estimation is non-negligible. In the rare situations in which this condition cannot be satisfied, we would, however, not be worse off than in the case of the amplifier in [
22], with the advantage that the presence of the auxiliary amplifiers would still allow the measurement of the gain of the low noise amplifier by connecting a simple resistor at the input of the system prior to the measurement on the actual DUT.