MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088830863 · doi:10.1088/1361-6501/abba4b

Measuring count rates free from correlated noise in digital silicon photomultipliers

2020· article· en· W3088830863 on OpenAlexafffund
F. Vachon, Samuel Parent, F. Nolet, H. Dautet, J.‐F. Pratte, Serge A. Charlebois

Bibliographic record

VenueMeasurement Science and Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCMC Microsystems
KeywordsSilicon photomultiplierComputer scienceNoise (video)PhysicsPhoton countingElectronic engineeringPhotomultiplierCrosstalkOpticsPhotonDetectorArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The characterization of nuisance parameters in digital silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) is important to their understanding and future development. Methods able to distinguish the types of events are necessary to obtain fair and legitimate measurements. In this work, the zero photon probability (ZPP) method and the time delay (TD) method are used to measure the dark noise of digital SiPMs free from the contribution of correlated noise such as afterpulsing and crosstalk. It highlights the unique features of digital SiPMs such as the holdoff delay, the digital output signal, and the embedded processing (e.g. the selection of the interval sampling width). The two methods correctly separate the correlated and uncorrelated events in digital SiPMs and therefore the determination of a true photon detection efficiency (PDE) is possible. The ZPP method is also implemented inside a digital SiPM using embedded digital signal processing.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeasurement Science and TechnologySame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207