MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403967941 · doi:10.1117/12.3030966

Next generation CMOS TDI detectors

2024· article· en· W4403967941 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Rodrigues, Rohit Saraf, Mitchell Faguy, Wu Lei, Mike Miethig, Sukhbir Kullar, Dirk Viehmann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsDalsa Corporation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMOSDetectorComputer scienceOptoelectronicsMaterials scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the evolving landscape of imaging technology, the development of next-generation CMOS Time Delay and Integration (TDI) detectors represents a significant leap forward in high-resolution imaging capabilities. This paper presents an advanced CMOS TDI detector, tailored for applications demanding high resolution, sensitivity, and speed. By integrating novel semiconductor materials and leveraging cutting-edge CMOS fabrication techniques, our detector exhibits superior performance characteristics compared to conventional CCD TDI systems. We detail the innovative architecture of our CMOS TDI sensor, which includes an enhanced pixel design for improved charge collection efficiency and a specialized readout circuitry to minimize noise, thereby achieving higher dynamic range and image quality. The experimental results demonstrate the detector's exceptional ability to capture high-resolution images under low-light conditions, making it an ideal solution for a wide range of applications, including satellite imaging, medical diagnostics, and high-speed industrial inspection. Additionally, we explore the implications of this technology for future imaging systems, highlighting its potential to drive advancements in various scientific and commercial fields. Through rigorous analysis and testing, this paper underscores the pivotal role of next-generation CMOS TDI detectors in pushing the boundaries of what is achievable in high-resolution imaging.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207