Effects of Charge Carrier Trapping on Image Resolution of Multilayer Photoconductive Detectors: Application to Amorphous Selenium X-ray Detectors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of charge carrier trapping on image resolution in multilayer photoconductive imaging detectors was analyzed by developing an analytical model for calculating the modulation transfer function (MTF) of the imaging detectors. The MTF model was developed by considering the charge carrier trapping/recombination in the blocking layer and the distributed trapping in the bulk photoconductor layer of multilayer photoconductive imaging detectors. The relative importance of the bulk and blocking layer trapping, as well as the K-fluorescence reabsorption on the resolution, was also analyzed. The model was applied to amorphous selenium- (a-Se) based multilayer detectors for both chest radiographic and mammographic applications. The theoretical model agreed well with experimental results. The charge carrier trapping/recombination in the blocking layer and K-fluorescence reabsorption mainly controlled the resolution of the a-Se mammographic detectors. In addition to these two effects, the bulk trapping also had a significant effect on the resolution of chest radiographic detectors. The blocking layer thickness had more of a profound effect on the resolution than the amount of trap centers in the blocking layer. The resolution deteriorated drastically with increased blocking layer thickness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".