MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093957447 · doi:10.1116/1.1676395

Reset noise in active pixel image sensors

2004· article· en· W2093957447 on OpenAlexaff
Jackson Lai, Arokia Nathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and Films · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlicker noiseReset (finance)Noise (video)Noise generatorImage noiseNoise floorShot noiseBurst noiseEffective input noise temperatureNoise measurementNoise spectral densityElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsAcousticsEngineeringCMOSNoise reductionArtificial intelligenceNoise figureTelecommunicationsDetectorImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In most image sensor pixel architectures, signal detection involves the reset of charge in a capacitive node. This operation gives rise to reset noise, and in particular, partition noise. In modern day transistors, with the shrinkage of device critical dimensions and increase of clock frequency, reset noise impacts many aspects of active pixel sensor operation. An additional spurious noise component has been observed from the reset noise model that is closely related to the switching operation, and is known as partition noise. Partition noise has been found to relate closely to the fall times of the applied reset pulse. However, existing noise models assume a constant charge density at the onset of transistor pinch-off, thus resulting in an underestimation of partition noise. This work investigates the influence of reset noise and other related noise generation on active pixel sensor performance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and FilmsSame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207