Jitter Characterization
Jitter Characterization
Jitter Characterization
Summary
Today's topic concerns the characterization of jitter. I wish I could begin by stating the
definition of jitter. Wouldn't it be great if there was only one definition? Unfortunately, the
subject isn't that simple. Here's a sampling of definitions from various sources:
Jitter, “Abrupt, spurious variations in… [time, amplitude, frequency, or phase].” IEEE
Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms.
This IEEE definition seems to me very general and somewhat obtuse, like it was written by
definitions from all the IEEE standards developed over the years. In an open standard,
anybody can join the process, and anybody can propose a definition. No matter how poorly
worded a definition may be, if it doesn’t break anything it will get voted into the standard, the
SONET and similar systems with multiple stages of signal propagation. It is very mathematical.
I prefer the term "unwanted" rather than "abrupt", because "unwanted" implies that the
definition of jitter depends on you and what you expect from your circuit, which is precisely the
case. The term "abrupt" implies an absolute delineation between "fast" and "slow" events.
Such a delineation does not exist. What's fast in one application is slow in another, and
vice-versa. OK, now let’s get down to a definition written by people who have actually
made lots of high-speed digital system measurements: the Fibre Channel committee. That
group was among the first to write an explicit procedure for measuring jitter.
Jitter, "Deviation from the ideal timing of an event.” Methodology of Jitter Specification,
NCITS (National Committee for Information Technology Standards), T11.2. This document is
communications hardware battled out the details of how jitter should be defined and
characterized. If you haven’t read this piece of work, I highly recommend it. Steve
Joiner of HP did a beautiful job of technical editing for the document. It forms the
I like this definition because it highlights the relative nature of the problem.
The definition suggests a comparison between actual events and ideal events. That's not
quite what we measure in real life, though. In actual practice jitter is always measured
as deviations between one signal and another. The other is never ideal.
Random Processes
Imagine in front of you a jittery data stream. Think of jitter as a second signal,
separate from the data stream, that encodes only information about timing variations
in the data. When a data edge arrives early, the jitter swings negative. When the data
is late, the jitter goes positive. In a system with slowly-wobbling timing variations,
the jitter signal may undulate from one extreme to the other over a period of thousands
or millions of bits. In a system with sudden, quick variations the jitter signal might
jump around like a drop of water sizzling on a hot stove. Either way, the jitter signal
Many random processes, jitter included, can be characterized by two types of statistics:
predictability of a waveform, while the histogram speaks only to the distribution of amplitude
values, independent of time. Both specifications play an important role in jitter analysis.
For example, consider the familiar term "white Gaussian noise" (WGN). When used
to describe a random process, the word "white" implies no auto-correlation between the
value at any one point of time and the value at any other time. In other words, the signal
is not predictable. In frequency-domain terms, the power in a white signal distributes
The hiss of escaping steam, or the sound you hear on an FM radio when tuned
independent of time. A Gaussian histogram is shaped like a bell. It has one central blob
surrounded on either side by long lingering tails. Any random process built from a large
The distribution of SAT math scores forms a Gaussian curve (truncated at 0 and
800).
No physical random process can ever be truly white, because a truly white process
implies spectral content (and thus power) extending from DC to infinite frequency. That's
not possible. All physical processes that we know of have limited bandwidth. In practical
terms a random processes is "white" (i.e., the power density spectrum is flat) only over
Similarly, no physical random process can ever be truly Gaussian, because a truly
Gaussian histogram includes values extending to plus and minus infinity. All physical
processes that we know have upper limits to their extreme values. What we call Gaussian is
usually a distribution that looks Gaussian over the range of several standard deviations to
either side of the mean. Beyond that limit the distribution falters.
Let's look at an example of jitter using three different tools: amplitude
Amplitude histogram
jitter.
The signal under test is a 1.25 Gb/s data signal, transmitting a repeating 10-bit
JK pattern. The display shows the histogram of received jitter. The histogram is the
pink blob in the center of the screen. The horizontal axis represents the range of
superposition of two Gaussian blobs at different positions. The width of each blob is related to
random Gaussian effects, while the separation between blobs is, apparently, related to some
deterministic effect that causes some data edges to consistently appear 20 ps earlier than
others.
A jitter histogram tells you how much jitter exists and how often
it occurs. It may also give clues as to the nature of deterministic
effects.
Spectral plot
The density of jitter power in this signal appears 30 dB higher at 125 KHz than it is at the
right side of the picture (at 1.25 MHz). Apparently, some process operating above 125 KHz
acts to attenuate the jitter in this signal. The steepness of the spectral curve indicates the
other PLL
locking issues. Combined with advanced triggering concepts it also serves
to identify rare and erratic events.
Conclusions