A 60 GHz CMOS I/Q Receiver for High-Speed Wireless Communication System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

thank you for your very interesting paper describing a 60 GHz CMS I/Q receiver for High-Speed wireless communication system. 

In general the paper is clear and well written, I only have few minor linguistic comments:

- Line 31: accurate, I/Q signals --> accurate I/Q signals
- Line 32: are introduced, however --> are introduced. However
- Line 33-34: and it is challenging to make a wideband baseband amplifier --> and as a consequence making a wideband baseband amplifier is a challenging task.
- Line 51: compensate for the loss of the balun using --> compensate for the loss using
- Line 54: thus, we --> thus we
- Line 75-76: The common source amplifier issued in the third stage for high linearity. --> missing verb?

Best regards

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This work deals with a 60 GHz CMOS I/Q receiver for high-speed wireless communication system. The measured conversion gain of 51 dB is achieved. The baseband bandwidth of 300 MHz is achieved from 55 GHz to 62 GHz. The 90 degree tandem coupler was implemented for I/Q signal generation, which has a phase error of < 6 degree and an amplitude imbalance of < 1 dB from 55 to 62 GHz. The Marchand balun is used to convert the I/Q signal to differential which has a phase error of < 3 0. A 60 GHz CMOS I/Q receiver was designed and fabricated using a commercial 40 nm CMOS bulk process. The size of the receiver is 2.02 mm× 1.45 mm including the pads. The circuit is operated from a 0.9 V supply. The power consumption is 172 mW at maximum gain mode. It is an interesting work. However, it is suggested that some improvements should be performed before publishing.

1. The proposed 60 GHz I/Q receiver consists of a low noise amplifier (LNA), single-to-differential (S2D) amplifier, double balanced passive mixer, LO buffer amplifier, quadrature generator (IQGEN) and baseband amplifier (BBA). Every part for the proposed 60 GHz I/Q receiver should be carefully designed in theory. However, the authors just provide the measured results. The detailed parameters for every electrical element should be carefully discussed.
2. For Fig. 8 and 10, the pictures are not clear.
3. All figures should be discussed carefully in the main body of the text.
4. Table I should be carefully explained in the body of the text, since it will reveal the novelty of this work.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1.The introduction section is very short and poorly described. It doesn't present the reference to the manuscript scope. In the introduction section, Authors should make an in-depth literature review on this topic. 
2.There are some of grammatical mistakes and drawbacks in the manuscript, Please improve the English and try to present a concise expression.
3. The experimental details of the tests are not sufficient. Details must be given.
4. Results and discussion: - To increase the scientific value of the manuscript Authors should consider extension of the all results section with comparison of obtained results with the results described in previous publications.
5. Indeed, there are impressive amount of results. However, the conclusions section needs to improve with selected and highlighted main findings.
6. The authors should prepare Figure 8 and Figure 10 with better resolution.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have made an obvious improvements. And I think the version is suitable for publication in this journal.