MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2212854264 · doi:10.1109/led.2015.2410304

Direct-Conversion CMOS X-Ray Imager With <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$5.6 ~\mu \text{m} \times 6.25~\mu \text{m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> Pixels

2015· article· en· W2212854264 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Parsafar, Christopher C. Scott, Abdallah El-Falou, Peter M. Levine, Karim S. Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Electron Device Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCMC Microsystems
KeywordsPixelCMOSDot pitchPhysicsNoise (video)Image sensorOptoelectronicsMaterials scienceElectrical engineeringOpticsComputer scienceEngineeringImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a monolithic direct-conversion X-ray imager capable of detecting diagnostic level X-rays. The imager is constructed by combining a custom 32×32 CMOS four-transistor active pixel sensor (4T APS) array with an amorphous selenium photoconductive layer deposited on top of the array via a post processing step. A 4T APS with an explicit per-pixel integration capacitor is employed to increase the pixel dynamic range. Under dark conditions, an input-referred electronic noise of <;90 electrons (rms) is estimated based on measured noise data for a 40-ms integration time. The very first X-ray images of copper and stainless-steel objects are included to demonstrate the performance of what is, to the best of our knowledge, a direct-conversion X-ray imager with the smallest pixel pitch reported to date.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Electron Device LettersSame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207