Resonance Tiling of a Frequency Range

How many Lorentzian resonances of quality factor Q are needed to cover a frequency band without gaps, and where should their centres sit? Because the linewidth Δf = f0/Q grows in proportion to the centre frequency, the optimal placement is geometric (logarithmic), not uniform: each centre is a fixed ratio above the previous one.

f 1 ½ f₁ f₂ f₃ neighbours cross at half power → no gap in coverage

Frequency range to cover

Linewidth of a resonance centred at f0 is FWHM = f0/Q. Must be > 0.5. The response of the combined comb never drops below this fraction of a single peak. 0.5 is the FWHM-overlap criterion.

Formulas

Lorentzian lineshape. A resonance of centre frequency f0 and quality factor Q has the normalised response

Why the spacing is geometric. The linewidth is proportional to the centre frequency, so a resonance at 1 THz is ten times wider than one at 100 GHz. Uniform spacing would therefore be wasteful at the top of the band and leave gaps at the bottom. Demanding that the upper band edge of resonance n coincide with the lower band edge of resonance n+1,

Number of resonances. Covering [fmin, fmax] requires

Placement. Rounding N up leaves a little slack, which is spread evenly in log-frequency. Two limits fix the end resonances: the first centre may sit no higher than A = fmin/(1−k) (otherwise its lower band edge would leave a gap below fmin), and the last centre no lower than B = fmax/(1+k). Pinning both and distributing the rest geometrically gives

Note that the naive choice ρ = span1/N with centres at the geometric midpoints of equal log-bins does not work: the upper edge requires √ρ ≤ 1+k, which is a stricter condition than ρ ≤ r, and the top of the range ends up slightly uncovered.

Comparison with uniform spacing. If instead you spaced the centres uniformly, you would have to use the narrowest linewidth (the one at fmin) everywhere, needing Nuniform = ⌈ Q (fmax/fmin − 1) ⌉ resonances. For a decade that is 9 Q instead of 2.3 Q — a factor of about 4 wasted.

Note: the criterion here is that the envelope (the maximum over all resonances) never falls below α. If instead you coherently sum overlapping resonances the combined response is slightly higher in the gaps, so this placement is the conservative choice.

Back