Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 24 references

Fast, low noise, megapixel detector and readout systems for future X-ray astronomy missions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A 16-output CCD read by a custom ASIC reaches 6.7 frames per second with read noise below 3 electrons RMS, and the authors argue the full chain is ready for a near-term X-ray mission.

desk verdict Solid measured results in an X-ray CCD readout status report, but the mission-readiness claim is extrapolation until 3.5 MHz/20 fps and the flight board are actually demonstrated. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.02905 v1 pith:7RRRR3FX submitted 2026-08-03 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.HE

Sven Herrmann , Peter Orel , Tanmoy Chattopadhyay , Haley R. Stueber , Jill Juneau , Abigail Y. Pan , Kevan Donlon , Declan O'Neill
show 17 more authors
Gregory Prigozhin Eric D. Miller R. Glenn Morris Tonya L. Peshel Artem Poliszczuk Beverly LaMarr Catherine E. Grant Christopher Leitz Steven W. Allen Sebastian Albrecht Marshall W. Bautz Michael Cooper Ajay Dakshinamurthy Matthew Heine Anna Schweingruber Keith Warner Daniel Wilkins
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.HE PACS 95.55.Ka
keywords X-rayCCDreadoutASICMCRCCCID-100SiSeROsub-electronnoiseFPGAmachinelearningeventreconstruction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Next-generation X-ray observatories need detectors that read out quickly enough to avoid pile-up from bright sources and particle-background contamination in faint diffuse emission, while keeping read noise low for soft X-ray sensitivity. This paper reports a readout system built around a 2.1-megapixel CCD with 16 parallel outputs read by a custom ASIC, and states that the first four devices run at 6.7 frames per second with average read noise better than 3 electrons RMS. It also reports a SiSeRO output stage reaching 0.40 electrons RMS by averaging 200 non-destructive reads, plus machine-learning processing that reduces particle background and improves spectral resolution. If these results hold, the system would remove the frame-rate bottleneck that currently limits X-ray CCD cameras on future missions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is parallelization: a frame-transfer CCD with 16 short serial registers of 90 pixels each, read simultaneously by two eight-channel Multi-Channel Readout Chip (MCRC) ASICs, raises total pixel throughput without driving any single output node faster. At the output stage, SiSeRO (Single-electron Sensitive Read Out) uses a p-type buried-channel MOSFET over an internal gate, converting stored charge to drain-current modulation and permitting repeated non-destructive readout whose noise falls as $1/\sqrt{N}$. The FPGA firmware computes pixel values from digitized waveforms, and a 2D Gaussian fit to the charge cloud recovers split X-ray events; the AXIS-TAP board packages 16 ADC channels with a space-qualifiable FPGA to make the chain flight-like.

What would settle it

Run the CCID-100 through the full 16-channel MCRC chain at a 3.5 MHz serial rate and measure average read noise and frame rate: if 20 fps cannot be reached, or the average read noise exceeds about 3 electrons RMS, the readiness claim collapses; likewise, the claim fails if the AXIS-TAP board does not reproduce the prototype's waveform-to-event processing when connected to a live detector.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a fully parallel detector-and-readout chain satisfies near-future X-ray mission requirements. A 16-output CCID-100 frame-transfer CCD, two MCRC-V1 ASICs on a dual-ASIC board, and an FPGA-based digitizer together deliver 6.7 frames per second with average read noise below 3 electrons RMS at 1–2 MHz serial rates, with 20 fps targeted at 3.5 MHz. The SiSeRO output stage achieves deep sub-electron noise, 0.40 electrons RMS after 200 repeated non-destructive read cycles, and the paper's event-processing methods cut particle background while improving energy resolution, from 131.9 eV to 108.2 eV on Mg K-alpha events. The conclusion is that these components are ready for a near-term Probe-class X-ray mission.

Load-bearing premise

The mission-readiness claim rests on the assumption that read noise measured at 1–2 MHz serial rates will still meet requirements at the target 3.5 MHz rate, that the newly built but untested AXIS-TAP flight board will reproduce the prototype's behavior, and that the 0.40-electron repeated-readout result holds under practical flight-like operation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A near-term Probe-class X-ray camera can use this 16-output readout chain without waiting for a fundamentally new detector technology.
  • Bright-source observations will see far less pile-up, and faint diffuse emission will be less contaminated by particle background, broadening what a single telescope can measure.
  • Sub-electron SiSeRO readout at competitive speeds would extend soft X-ray sensitivity to lower energies and improve event grading for faint photons.
  • The modular dual-ASIC board can scale to larger focal planes, such as the 8-megapixel arrays the paper sketches, by adding readout channels.
  • The ML event-processing methods, if they survive flight validation, would shorten deep-survey exposure times; the paper quotes a factor over 1.65 for the WFI case.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves implicit that the same MCRC board, which supports both source-follower and drain readout, could read out JFET-output CCDs, SiSeRO CCDs, and other detector types, making it a reusable platform across missions.
  • If the 20 fps target at 3.5 MHz holds with read noise still near 3 electrons, the architecture would also enable time-domain X-ray observations, a capability beyond the stated pile-up and background goals.
  • The 2D Gaussian event reconstruction is a post-processing method and could be tested immediately on existing X-ray CCD datasets from current observatories, not just on the paper's Mg K-alpha example.
  • The 3x3 SiSeRO active-pixel proof of principle, if scaled, would combine CCD-grade spectral resolution with CMOS-style random access readout; that is a different detector trade space from the one this paper's CCD arrays occupy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports on a multi-thrust technology program for future X-ray astronomy missions. It describes the MCRC readout ASIC for CCDs, the large-format 16-output CCID-100 CCD, flight-like camera electronics (AXIS-TAP), SiSeRO detectors with repetitive non-destructive readout (RNDR), and machine-learning-based event processing and background rejection. The principal demonstrated results are: (i) a 6.7 frames/s readout of the 2.1 Mpixel CCID-100 with average read noise better than 3 e- RMS at serial pixel rates of 1 and 2 MHz; (ii) a SiSeRO read noise of 0.40 e- RMS after 200 RNDR cycles (~320 us); (iii) a >40% reduction in cosmic-ray background from a two-stage ML algorithm evaluated on test data drawn from a different dataset than the training data; and (iv) an improvement in all-grade event reconstruction energy resolution from 131.9 eV to 108.2 eV using a 2D Gaussian charge-cloud fit. The conclusion asserts that these components and technologies are 'ready to go for a near-term Probe-class X-ray mission.'

Significance. If the reported results hold, the work is significant for next-generation X-ray instrumentation. The 16-output CCD readout at <3 e- RMS noise is a useful step toward high-frame-rate, low-noise focal planes; the SiSeRO sub-electron result is a strong demonstration of RNDR in an X-ray CCD; and the ML background-reduction result, evaluated on a separate test dataset, is a credible proof of concept. The paper also demonstrates system integration (MCRC-ASIC-to-FPGA imaging). However, the central 'mission readiness' claim extends beyond the evidence presented: the CCID-100 noise and frame-rate numbers are obtained at 1-2 MHz serial rates, the AXIS-TAP flight-like board has not yet produced a reconstructed image from a real detector, and the speed of the SiSeRO sub-electron measurement is not clearly tied to the >10 kpix/s claim. The significance of the manuscript as a standalone contribution is therefore somewhat lower than its conclusion suggests; the underlying results appear sound but need either additional measurements or more carefully qualified claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3 and Section 4] The mission-readiness claim in the conclusion rests on an extrapolation to an unmeasured operating point. Section 3 reports CCID-100 performance 'measured at 1 and 2 MHz serial pixel rate' and states 'A frame rate of 6.7 frames/sec has been achieved with an average read noise of better than 3 e- RMS.' The mission-relevant mode, however, is described in Section 4 as a 3.5 MHz serial clock at 20 frames per second. Read noise in CCD output stages generally increases with serial clock rate, so the <3 e- result at 1-2 MHz does not by itself establish the noise at 3.5 MHz. In addition, the AXIS-TAP board in Section 4 is described as 'recently fabricated and populated' and 'now ready to port and scale' firmware, i.e., it has not yet been tested with a CCID-100. The conclusion that these components 'are ready to go for a near-term Probe-class X-ray mission' therefore requires either (a) a demonstration at 3.5 MHz/20 fps or (b) a clearly stated qualification that this target remains to be verified. Please provide the missing data or temper the conclusion accordingly.
  2. [Section 5, Figure 8] The sub-electron RNDR result of 0.40 e- RMS after 200 cycles, stated as about 320 us, is presented without uncertainties, number of devices, or operating details. More importantly, the conclusion states that SiSeRO devices reach 'deep into the sub-electron regime at speeds >10kpix/s.' A 200-cycle average taking ~320 us corresponds to roughly 3.1 kpix/s per output if the averaging is performed serially on each pixel. Please clarify the pixel rate at which the 0.40 e- measurement was obtained, report the number of measurements and devices, and reconcile the stated >10kpix/s operating speed with the presented RNDR timing, or provide a separate measurement at that speed.
  3. [Section 6, Figure 10] The ML background-reduction claim 'over 40% reduction in the CR background' with 'X-ray signal loss to just 1-2%' is presented without statistical uncertainties, sample sizes, or a description of the test dataset size. The ROC curve in Figure 10 is the sole evidence, and the operating point at which the 40% reduction is achieved is not specified. Since this is a headline result in the conclusion, please report the number of test events, the confidence intervals on the background reduction and signal loss, and the exact threshold on the ROC curve used for the 40% figure.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3] Please state explicitly at which serial clock rate (1 MHz or 2 MHz) the 6.7 frames/s frame rate was achieved; the text reports measurements at 1 and 2 MHz but does not tie the frame-rate number to one of them.
  2. [Section 4, Figure 6 caption] The Figure 6 caption labels the right panel as 'Dual MCRC CCID-100 readout board, with a nickel for scale,' but the text refers to 'the small image on the right side of Figure 6' as the reconstructed-image demonstration. The caption appears to be mismatched and should be corrected.
  3. [Section 6] The phrase 'over 1.28 improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio' should read 'an improvement by a factor of 1.28' or 'a 28% improvement in signal-to-noise ratio.'
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'Massachusets' in the author affiliation, 'mulit-output' in the Section 2.2 heading, 'and and debugging' in Section 2.1, and 'with a mask with the groups logo' in Section 3. A careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: central results are direct measurements; self-citations provide supporting detail only.

full rationale

The paper's central performance claims are direct measurements rather than quantities derived from fitted targets. The 6.7 frames/sec and better-than-3-e- RMS read noise on the CCID-100, measured at 1 and 2 MHz serial pixel rates (Section 3); the 0.40 e- RMS noise after 200 RNDR cycles (Figure 8); the ML background-reduction ROC evaluated on test photons sampled from a different dataset than the training data (Section 6); and the reconstructed X-ray images (Figures 4 and 12) are all exhibited measurements in this paper. The text explicitly distinguishes the demonstrated 1-2 MHz operation from the target 3.5 MHz / 20 fps mode, and it describes the AXIS-TAP board as recently fabricated, populated, and not yet tested; this is an extrapolation or readiness gap, not a circular reduction of a prediction to an input. Citations to the group's own prior work (e.g., Orel et al., Stueber et al., Prigozhin et al., Pan et al.) supply characterization details, design lineage, or companion analyses, but the load-bearing numbers are stated and plotted in the present manuscript, so the self-citations are not load-bearing. No equation or parameter is defined in terms of the claimed result, no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to force a choice, and no ansatz is smuggled in solely via self-citation. The 2D Gaussian charge-cloud model is a stated physical assumption with data comparison, not a circular reliance on a prior conclusion. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to its central claims.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental instrumentation status report rather than a derivation, so the ledger focuses on data-quality assumptions and per-analysis free choices. The central performance numbers are direct measurements, but they come from small device samples, lack quoted uncertainties, and are partly extrapolated to undemonstrated operating points. The ML and event-reconstruction results depend on per-event fits and a chosen rejection threshold.

free parameters (3)
  • 2D Gaussian charge-cloud sigma (per event) = not reported; per-event fit, method from [24]
    The claimed energy resolution improvement (131.9 eV to 108.2 eV for Mg K, Fig. 12) depends on fitting a 2D Gaussian to each multi-pixel event; the width sigma is a fitted free parameter per event and is not tabulated.
  • ML rejection threshold = chosen operating point near 2% X-ray signal loss (Fig. 10)
    The headline 'over 40% reduction' in cosmic-ray background is quoted at a tunable operating point on the ROC curve; the user-chosen threshold directly sets the reported background rejection versus signal loss trade-off.
  • RNDR averaging count = N = 200 cycles
    The 0.40 e- RMS sub-electron noise result is achieved only after 200 averaging cycles (Fig. 8); a different N gives a different noise value, so the headline number is conditional on this chosen parameter.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The ML test dataset, sampled from a different dataset than the training data, is representative of in-flight WFI background for the NewAthena mission.
    Section 6 reports a 40-60 percent background reduction and a 1.28x SNR gain without quantifying how the test distribution differs from real orbital background; on-flight background composition could change the ROC curve.
  • domain assumption The first four CCID-100 devices tested are representative of the production lot for read noise and cosmetics.
    Section 3 bases the 6.7 fps and sub-3 e- RMS claim on the 'first four devices' with no device-to-device variance and no statement of how the devices were selected.
  • domain assumption The X-ray fluorescence sources (4.5 keV Ti, Mg K) and the XOC beamline produce clean, monochromatic photon events as assumed.
    The reconstructed shadow image (Fig. 4) and the Mg K spectra (Fig. 12) are interpreted as single X-ray photon events; no independent calibration of source purity or event selection is provided in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fast, low noise, megapixel detector and readout systems for future X-ray astronomy missions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7RRRR3FX

@misc{pith2026260802905,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fast, low noise, megapixel detector and readout systems for future X-ray astronomy missions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7RRRR3FX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.02905}
}
read the original abstract

Next-generation strategic X-ray astronomy missions will require the simultaneous achievement of high angular resolution, large effective collecting area, and wide-field imaging with large-format focal plane detectors. Realizing the associated science objectives--ranging from precision measurements of bright point sources to the detection and characterization of faint diffuse emission-places stringent and, in some cases, competing requirements on detector performance. In particular, high frame rates are necessary to mitigate photon pile-up in observations of bright sources and to reduce contamination from particle-induced background in measurements of low surface brightness structures. At the same time, these instruments must preserve excellent soft X-ray response, which places tight constraints on read noise and on the fidelity of event characterization. State-of-the-art X-ray charge-coupled devices (CCDs) approach many of the key performance metrics required for these missions, but readout speed remains a primary limitation. Addressing this gap requires readout architectures that scale to high channel count, sustain high pixel throughput, and preserve the low-noise characteristics needed for soft X-ray sensitivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.02905 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Micro-photograph of the fabricated VERITAS 2.3.1 die for the readout of DEPFET detectors. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: Microscope image of an MCRC V1 ASIC readout chip. Dimensions are 4160 µm×2900 µm. The ASIC integrates eight analog readout channels for CCD readout.Right: Dual MCRC CCID-100 readout board used for 16 channel CCD readout, with a nickel for scale. 3. MULTI-OUTPUT CCDS MIT Lincoln Laboratory, in partnership with MIT and Stanford University, has been developing a large-format CCD sensor dubbed the CCID-100 for the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The CCID-100 is designed as a large format device with Frame Transfer architecture with an image [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: Detector mounted in the Gen 1.0 XOC X-ray beamline9 with “XOC” cutout aluminum cover secured over top of the imaging area. Right: Reconstructed CCID-100 image of single pixel events produced by Titanium (4.5 keV) fluorescence photons. 4. FLIGHT CAMERA ELECTRONICS…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The AXIS focal plane assembly and sensor module is a typical X-ray camera instrument for next [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: FPGA development hardware: on the left is an ADM00700 evaluation board for a MCP37D31- 200 ADC and on the right is a PolarFire Splash Kit evaluation board for a MPF300T FPGA. They are linked by a custom connector board that routes the ADC SPI bus and low-voltage …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: AXIS-TAP board that includes a full 16 channel complement of ADCs and a space ready Polarfire [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Read noise across 200 RNDR cycles. The red circles show the 200 individual read noise measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Left: SiSeRO output stage in two-dimensional Sentaurus TCAD model. The model includes p type silicon substrate, a p-MOSFET transistor, source and drain implants, polysilicon gate and an internal gate beneath the p-MOSFET. Right: Microphotograph of a recently fabricated…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: ROC curve for test data with photons sampled from a different dataset then the training data. Results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: X-ray imagers measure the charge packet that is generated by an X-ray photon in the detector. To [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: X-ray spectra of Magnesium K fluorescence for two different processing methods that both show all [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    VERITAS 2.0 a multi-channel readout ASIC suitable for the DEPFET arrays of the WFI for Athena,

    Porro, M., Bianchi, D., Vita, G. D., Herrmann, S., Wassatsch, A., B¨ ahr, A., Bergbauer, B., Meidinger, N., Ott, S., and Treis, J., “VERITAS 2.0 a multi-channel readout ASIC suitable for the DEPFET arrays of the WFI for Athena,” in [Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray], Takahashi, T., den Herder, J.-W. A., and Bautz, M., ed...

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    The VERITAS 2.3 readout ASIC for the ATHENA Wide Field Imager,

    Schweingruber, A.-K., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Dakshinamurthy, A. K., Mayr, A., M¨ uller-Seidlitz, J., Reiffers, J., Albrecht, S., Schnetler, H., Allen, S. W., and Morris, G., “The VERITAS 2.3 readout ASIC for the ATHENA Wide Field Imager,” in [Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2024: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray], den Herder, J.-W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakaz...

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Veritas 2.3.1: Optimisation and characterisation of the enhanced readout asic for the newathena wide field imager,

    Dakshinamurthy, A. K., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Schweingruber, A.-K., Mayr, A., M¨ uller-Seidlitz, J., Reiffers, J., Albrecht, S., Allen, S. W., and Morris, G., “Veritas 2.3.1: Optimisation and characterisation of the enhanced readout asic for the newathena wide field imager,” in [Proceedings of SPIE Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation], SPIE (July 2026)

    work page 2026

  4. [4]

    X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: a low noise CCD readout ASIC enabling readout speeds of 5 Mpixel/s/channel,

    Orel, P., Hermann, S. C., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, R. G., Prigozhin, G., Cooper, M. J., Donlon, K., Foster, R., Malonis, A., Allen, S. W., and Bautz, M. W., “X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: a low noise CCD readout ASIC enabling readout speeds of 5 Mpixel/s/channel,” in [X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy X],Society of Photo-Optical ...

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: prototype success and next generation upgrades,

    Orel, P., Pan, A. Y., Herrmann, S., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, G., Stueber, H., Allen, S. W., Wilkins, D., Prigozhin, G., LaMarr, B., Foster, R., Malonis, A., Bautz, M. W., Cooper, M. J., and Donlon, K., “X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: prototype success and next generation upgrades,” in [X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy XI], Hollan...

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    High-speed, low-noise, multi- megapixel CCDs for next generation x-ray observatories,

    Stueber, H. R., Chattopadhyay, T., Orel, P., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Cooper, M., Donlon, K., Grant, C. E., Herrmann, S., Juneau, J., LaMarr, B. J., Leitz, C., Miller, E. D., Morris, G., O’Neill, D., Pan, A. Y., Peshel, T. L., Poliszczuk, A., Prigozhin, G. Y., and Warner, K., “High-speed, low-noise, multi- megapixel CCDs for next generation x-ray obser...

    work page 2026

  7. [7]

    Noise and charge transfer characteristics of fast, low noise ccd sensors for axis,

    Prigozhin, G., Bautz, M. W., LaMarr, B. J., Donlon, K., Leitz, C., Miller, E. D., Gabutti, M., Juneau, J., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Chattopadhyay, T., Cooper, M., Pestana, N., Yang, D., Progozhin, I., Pan, A. Y., Stuber, H., O’Neill, D., Morris, G., and Allen, S. W., “Noise and charge transfer characteristics of fast, low noise ccd sensors for axis,” in [P...

    work page 2026

  8. [8]

    X-ray characterization of large-format, 16-channel CCD Sensors for future strategic X-ray missions,

    LaMarr, B. J., Bautz, M. W., Miller, E. D., Prigozhin, G. Y., Juneau, J., Gabutti, M., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., O’Neill, D., Chattopadhyay, T., Stueber, H. R., Pan, A. Y., Morris, R. G., Allen, S. W., Leitz, C., Cooper, M., Donlon, K., Pestana, N., Prigozhin, I., Volfson, D., Warner, K., Young, D. J., and Grant, C. E., “X-ray characterization of large-form...

    work page 2026

Show all 24 references
  1. [9]

    The XOC x-ray beamline: probing colder, quieter, and softer,

    Stueber, H. R., Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S. C., Orel, P., Gebre, T., Joshi, A., Allen, S. W., Morris, G., and Poliszczuk, A., “The XOC x-ray beamline: probing colder, quieter, and softer,” in [X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy XI], Holland, A. D. and Min...

    2024

  2. [10]

    Overview of the advanced x-ray imaging satellite (AXIS),

    Reynolds, C. S., Kara, E. A., Mushotzky, R. F., Ptak, A., Koss, M. J., Williams, B. J., Allen, S. W., Bauer, F. E., Bautz, M., Bogadhee, A., Burdge, K. B., Cappelluti, N., Cenko, B., Chartas, G., Chan, K.-W., Corrales, L., Daylan, T., Falcone, A. D., Foord, A., Grant, C. E., H...

    2023

  3. [11]

    The high-speed x-ray camera on AXIS: design and performance updates,

    Miller, E. D., Grant, C. E., Goeke, R., Bautz, M. W., Leitz, C., Donlon, K., Allen, S. W., Herrmann, S., Falcone, A. D., Angile, F. E., Chattopadhyay, T., Cooper, M., Jensen, M. A., Juneau, J., LaMarr, B., Malonis, A., Morris, R. G., Orel, P., Pan, A. Y., Persyn, S., Poliszczu...

    2025

  4. [12]

    The High-Speed FPGA Readout System for the Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite (AXIS),

    O’Neill, D., Juneau, J., Orel, P., Herrmann, S., Prigozhin, G. Y., Miller, E. D., Goeke, R., Angil` e, E., Bautz, M. W., Allen, S. W., Chattopadhyay, T., Donlon, K., Grant, C. E., LaMarr, B. J., Leitz, C., Morris, R. G., Pan, A. Y., Peshel, T. L., Stueber, H. R., and Warner, K...

    2026

  5. [13]

    Advancing the AXIS camera front- end electronics architecture through the AXIS-TAP technology platform,

    Juneau, J., O’Neill, D., Orel, P., Herrmann, S., Prigozhin, G. Y., Miller, E. D., Goeke, R., Angil` e, E., Bautz, M. W., Allen, S. W., Chattopadhyay, T., Donlon, K., Grant, C. E., LaMarr, B. J., Leitz, C., Morris, R. G., Pan, A. Y., Peshel, T. L., Stueber, H. R., and Warner, K...

    2026

  6. [14]

    First results on SiSeRO devices: a new x-ray detector for scientific instrumentation,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S., Burke, B. E., Donlon, K., Prigozhin, G., Morris, G., Orel, P., Cooper, M., Malonis, A., Wilkins, D. R., Suntharalingam, V., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., and Leitz, C., “First results on SiSeRO devices: a new x-ray detector for scientific instrum...

    2022

  7. [15]

    Demonstrating repetitive non-destructive readout with SiSeRO devices,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Donlon, K., Prigozhin, G., Morris, G., Cooper, M., LaMarr, B., Malonis, A., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., and Leitz, C., “Demonstrating repetitive non-destructive readout with SiSeRO devices,”Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instrume...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Demonstrating sub-electron noise performance in single electron sensitive readout (SiSeRO) devices,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Donlon, K., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Cantrall, B. J., Cooper, M., LaMarr, B., Leitz, C., Miller, E., Morris, G. R., Pan, A. Y., Prigozhin, G., Prigozhin, I., Stueber, H., and Wilkins, D. R., “Demonstrating sub-electron noise perfor...

    2024

  9. [17]

    A Sixteen Multiple-Amplifier-Sensing CCD and Characterization Techniques Targeting The Next Generation of Astronomical Instruments,

    Lapi, A. J., Irigoyen Gimenez, B. J., Gamero, M. E., Chavez Blanco, C. R., Chierchie, F., Fernandez Moroni, G., Holland, S. E., Estrada, J., and Tiffenberg, J., “A Sixteen Multiple-Amplifier-Sensing CCD and Characterization Techniques Targeting The Next Generation of Astronomi...

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    First results for second generation SiSeRO CCD devices,

    Pan, A. Y., O’Neill, D., Donlon, K., Orel, P., Herrmann, S., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Chattopadhyay, T., Cooper, M., Grant, C. E., Juneau, J., Leitz, C., LaMarr, B. J., Miller, E. D., Morris, R. G., Peshel, T. L., Poliszczuk, A., Prigozhin, G. Y., Prigozhin, I., and and Hal...

    2026

  11. [19]

    Output-Stage Design Optimization for High-Sensitivity SiSeRO CCDs and SiSeRO Active Pixel Sensors,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S., Donlon, K., Prigozhin, I., Orel, P., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Cooper, M., Grant, C. E., LaMarr, B. J., Leitz, C., Miller, E. D., Morris, R. G., Pan, A. Y., Peshel, T. L., Poliszczuk, A., Prigozhin, G., Stueber, H. R., and Warner, K., “Output...

    2026

  12. [20]

    Towards efficient machine-learning-based reduction of the cosmic- ray induced background in x-ray imaging detectors: increasing context awareness,

    Poliszczuk, A., Wilkins, D., Allen, S. W., Miller, E. D., Chattopadhyay, T., Schneider, B., Darve, J. E., Bautz, M., Falcone, A., Foster, R., Grant, C. E., Herrmann, S., Kraft, R., Morris, R. G., Nulsen, P., Orel, P., Schellenberger, G., and Stueber, H. R., “Towards efficient ...

    2024

  13. [21]

    Augmenting astronomical x-ray detectors with AI for enhanced sensitivity and reduced background,

    Wilkins, D. R., Poliszczuk, A., Schneider, B., Miller, E. D., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M., Chattopadhyay, T., Falcone, A. D., Foster, R., Grant, C. E., Herrmann, S., Kraft, R., Morris, R. G., Nulsen, P., Orel, P., and Schellenberger, G., “Augmenting astronomical x-ray detectors wi...

    2024

  14. [22]

    The wide field imager instrument for Athena,

    Meidinger, N., Eder, J., Eraerds, T., Nandra, K., Pietschner, D., Plattner, M., Rau, A., and Strecker, R., “The wide field imager instrument for Athena,” in [Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray], den Herder, J.-W. A., Takahashi, T., and Bautz, M...

    2016

  15. [23]

    Mitigating the effects of particle background on the Athena Wide Field Imager,

    Miller, E. D., Grant, C. E., Bautz, M. W., Molendi, S., Kraft, R., Nulsen, P., Bulbul, E., Allen, S., Burrows, D. N., Eraerds, T., Fioretti, V., Gastaldello, F., Hall, D., Hubbard, M. W. J., Keelan, J., Meidinger, N., Perinati, E., Rau, A., and Wilkins, D., “Mitigating the eff...

    2022

  16. [24]

    Measurement and simulation of charge diffusion in a small-pixel charge-coupled device,

    LaMarr, B. J., Prigozhin, G. Y., Miller, E. D., Thayer, C., Bautz, M. W., Foster, R., Grant, C. E., Malonis, A., Burke, B. E., Cooper, M., Donlon, K., and Leitz, C., “Measurement and simulation of charge diffusion in a small-pixel charge-coupled device,”Journal of Astronomical...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.