Dark Current Leakage in Optoelectronic Hermetic Packages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, the root cause of the increase in dark current occurring over time at high temperature in hermetic packages, such as those used in optoelectronic devices, was investigated. It was observed that hermetic Receiver Optical Subassembly (ROSA) devices show continuously increasing dark current when stressed and monitored at 85°C over an extended period of time, reaching, in some cases, values greater than 500nA. However, this increase in leakage current was recoverable once the package seal is broken, and this behavior was found to be very repeatable. Photodetectors from two different suppliers were tested and found to have dark current which is dependent on the fabrication process, as the photodetector (PD) from supplier 1 (PD1) showed three times higher leakage than the photodetector from supplier 2 (PD2). The main difference between the two photodetectors is that the polyimide layer in PD1 in significantly greater than in PD2. It was also observed that 48 hour pre-seal baking at 120°C keeps the dark current constant at much lower levels, but does not stop it completely from rising over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".