MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115413847 · doi:10.1117/12.643453

Noise analysis of fault tolerant active pixel sensors with and without defects

2006· article· en· W2115413847 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle L. La Haye, Cory Jung, Mohammad Hadi Izadi, Glenn H. Chapman, Karim S. Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelNoise (video)Sensitivity (control systems)Image sensorRedundancy (engineering)PhotocurrentShot noiseMaterials scienceStandard deviationOpticsComputer sciencePhysicsOptoelectronicsElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringImage (mathematics)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the sizes of imaging arrays become larger both in pixel count and area, the possibility of pixel defects increases during manufacturing and packaging, and over the lifetime of the sensor. To correct for these possible pixel defects, a Fault Tolerant Active Pixel Sensor (FTAPS) with redundancy at the pixel level has been designed and fabricated with only a small cost in area. The noise of the standard Active Pixel Sensor (APS) and FTAPS, under normal operating conditions as well as under the presence of optically stuck high and low faults, is analyzed and compared. The analysis shows that under typical illumination conditions the total noise of both the standard APS and FTAPS is dominated by the photocurrent shot noise. In the worst case (no illumination) the total mean squared noise of the FTAPS is only 15.5% larger than for the standard APS, while under typical illumination conditions the FTAPS noise increases by less than 0.1%. In the presence of half stuck faults the noise of the FTAPS compared to the standard APS stays the same as for the FTAPS without defects. However, simulation and experimental results have shown that the FTAPS sensitivity is greater than two times that of the standard APS leading to an increased SNR by more than twice for the FTAPS with no defects. Moreover, the SNR of a faulty standard APS is zero whereas the SNR of the FTAPS is reduced by less than half.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207