MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323945109 · doi:10.1109/jstqe.2014.2344034

CMOS SPADs: Design Issues and Research Challenges for Detectors, Circuits, and Arrays

2014· article· en· W2323945109 on OpenAlexaff
Darek Palubiak, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMOSMiniaturizationElectronic circuitDetectorPhotonicsIntegrated circuitSingle-photon avalanche diodeOptoelectronicsElectronic engineeringAvalanche photodiodeComputer scienceElectrical engineeringMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solid-state single photon detectors are playing a significant role in the development of high-performance single-photon imaging systems for fluorescence lifetime imaging, time-of-flight positron emission tomography and Raman Spectroscopy applications. The main driving factors are the unparalleled levels of miniaturization and portability, low fabrication costs, and high overall performance resulting from the integration of single-photon avalanche diodes (SPADs) with mixed-signal circuits in deep-submicron (DSM) complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) technology. At the heart of such imaging systems is the SPAD, capable of single-photon sensitivity and sub-nanosecond time resolution, and its associated circuitry, which in DSM CMOS, is capable of high-speed, low-power mixed-mode signal processing. In this paper, we review and discuss the most recent developments in DSM CMOS SPAD detectors, circuits and arrays and investigate issues of scalability, miniaturization and performance trade-offs involved in designing SPAD imaging systems. Design considerations, research challenges, and future directions for CMOS SPAD image sensors will be highlighted and addressed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations114
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum ElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207