MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385757487 · doi:10.1109/jstqe.2023.3304294

Single Photon Detectors for Automotive LiDAR Applications: State-of-the-Art and Research Challenges

2023· article· en· W4385757487 on OpenAlexaff
Xuanyu Qian, Wei Jiang, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarRangingAutomotive industryDetectorComputer sciencePhoton countingRemote sensingFocus (optics)Range (aeronautics)Aerospace engineeringOpticsTelecommunicationsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the fast growth of the autonomous vehicles industry, there is a growing need for distance sensing systems. Among such systems, the light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system is very attractive because of their wide detection range, good spatial resolution, and high precision. For various LiDAR systems, detectors that have single photon counting (SPC) abilities are becoming increasingly popular as they have high sensitivity and can achieve long detection range. However, many publications about LiDAR only focus on the data processing and the algorithms, without sufficient considerations on the sensor-design stage. Only a few studies investigated the sensor's performance in various LiDAR applications. To assist in the future improvement and application of SPC LiDAR, this article provides a new perspective by reviewing the optical sensors and the related circuits architectures in LiDAR systems, focusing on automotive applications. The principles, architectures, emerging techniques, research challenges and future directions are critically discussed.

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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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