MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance of 3D Photon-to-Digital Converters

2025· article· W4417471059 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. Pépin, F. Vachon, T. Rossignol, Julie Bergeron, Samuel Parent, Geneviève Lessard, N. Roy, A. L. Steinhebel, Paul Hausladen, Sylvain Martel, L. Fabris, H. Dautet, J.‐F. Pratte, Serge A. Charlebois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsDalsa CorporationInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Nuclear Security AdministrationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCMOSPhotodetectorTrenchShallow trench isolationConvertersDetectorSensitivity (control systems)Integrated circuitFootprint

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photon-to-digital converter (PDC) detectors are versatile photodetector arrays based on singlephoton avalanche diode (SPAD). They are adaptable to multiple applications, like medical imaging, high-energy physics experiments and lidar, among others. Renowned for their high sensitivity and subnanosecond timing resolution performance, they are suitable for large-scale, low-cost detection infrastructures where the compactness of their data readout can be leveraged. The development of 3D vertically integrated PDC (3D PDC) is ongoing for some years at Universite de Sherbrooke. With its custom <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$64 \times 64$</tex> SPAD array technology, leveraging Teledyne Dalsa's MEMS and CCD capabilities for deep trench isolation and high optical performance, coupled with CMOS electronics readout integrated circuit design (TSMC CMOS 180 nm), the 3D PDCs are designed using standardized industrial foundries processes for large-scale manufacturing capability. Two 3D PDC production lots have been completed since October 2024. We report on performance assessment at die level and wafer level.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207