MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801417207 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2018.8351608

Direct Time-of-Flight TCSPC Analytical Modeling Including Dead-Time Effects

2018· article· en· W2801417207 on OpenAlexaff
Foad Arvani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime of flightDead timeComputer sciencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optimization of a TCSPC system requires modeling which considers the design specifications and parameters of the target application under different operating scenarios. Since single-photon detection is fundamentally a stochastic process, extensive behavioral Monte Carlo simulations are normally used. Their accuracy depends upon computation time. However, the trend towards larger SPAD arrays and emerging complex TDC sharing architectures requires much faster simulation methods. In this paper, a simple, fast and accurate analytical model is presented to address this need. It accounts for dead time effects which result in missed photon counts through the analysis of inhomogeneous continuous time Markov chain. The effective received power and photon detection rate are determined and the corresponding analytical histogram is created. This histogram is the basis for calculating time of flight and can be used to explore architectural alternatives and accelerate design verification. Outputs of the presented analytical model match those of Monte Carlo simulations, and are produced considerably faster. The computation time improvement grows with array sizes and this enables parametric analysis of TCSPC system.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207