Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

High-Efficiency and Low-Noise Detectors for the Upgraded CLASS 90 GHz Focal Plane

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Redesigned TES bolometers nearly double the sensitivity of the CLASS 90 GHz camera and show detector efficiency above 90 percent.

desk verdict Solid detector-upgrade paper with credible measured gains; the '>0.90 detector efficiency' claim is the one number to treat with caution. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12705 v2 pith:FPDEZGMP submitted 2024-11-19 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.CO

Carolina Núñez , John W. Appel , Rahul Datta , Charles L. Bennett , Michael K. Brewer , Sarah Marie Bruno , Ricardo Bustos , David T. Chuss
show 17 more authors
Nick Costen Jullianna Denes Couto Sumit Dahal Kevin L. Denis Joseph R. Eimer Thomas Essinger-Hileman Jeffrey Iuliano Yunyang Li Tobias A. Marriage Jennette Mateo Matthew A. Petroff Rui Shi Karwan Rostem Deniz A. N. Valle Duncan Watts Edward J. Wollack Lingzhen Zeng
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.CO
keywords transition-edgesensorbolometer90GHzcosmicmicrowavebackgroundpolarimetrydetectorefficiencynoise-equivalenttemperatureCLASS
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

This paper reports that a detector redesign successfully fixed the main weaknesses of the CLASS 90 GHz focal plane: unstable bias ranges and low optical efficiency. Four of seven detector wafers were replaced with versions featuring revised terminations, a unified thermal mass with direct metal contact to the TES, and stronger bias filtering. The upgrade made 94 percent of detectors stable down to 15 percent of normal resistance, raised the median telescope efficiency from about 0.42 to 0.65 among upgraded wafers, and halved the array's noise-equivalent temperature from 19 to 9.7 µK√s. These results matter because improved detector efficiency and stability translate directly into more sensitive measurements of the cosmic microwave background polarization.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a set of three coordinated changes to the TES bolometer pixel: (1) stepped-impedance Nb-to-PdAu terminations that replace the previous tapered gold terminations and avoid superconducting proximity effects; (2) a single contiguous palladium film that provides the bolometer heat capacity and is connected directly to the MoAu TES bilayer through a normal-metal contact, suppressing internal thermal fluctuation noise; and (3) revised bias-line filters that extend RF chokes onto the long support legs. These changes are what make the detectors both more efficient at absorbing incoming radiation and more stable in bias, and they carry the argument from design to measured performance.

What would settle it

Measure the receiver optics efficiency directly by placing a calibrated cryogenic blackbody source at the receiver window and comparing the detected power with that from a full-aperture source; if the product of spill and absorption/reflection efficiencies comes out significantly above 0.71, the inferred detector efficiency would drop below 0.90, whereas a lower product would push it higher.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the upgraded 90 GHz transition-edge-sensor (TES) bolometers achieve their design optical efficiency and much better stability than the original detectors. Based on observations of Jupiter and a modeled receiver optics efficiency (spill 0.78, absorption plus reflection 0.91), the measured telescope efficiency of 0.65 implies a detector efficiency exceeding 0.90. The upgrade also produced a wide, overlapping voltage bias range across each wafer, with 94 percent of detectors staying on their superconducting transition down to 15 percent of normal resistance, enabling nearly the entire array to be biased simultaneously. The array noise-equivalent temperature improved from 19 to 9.7 µK√s, a factor of two gain in sensitivity that the authors attribute mainly to lower dark NEP and higher optical efficiency.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that detector efficiency exceeds 0.90 rests on an assumed split of the telescope efficiency into a spill efficiency of 0.78 and an absorption/reflection efficiency of 0.91; if the real receiver optics efficiency differs from this scenario, the implied detector efficiency changes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claimed detector efficiency above 0.90 holds, then the remaining loss in telescope efficiency sits in the receiver optics, so replacing or upgrading the three original detector wafers should push the full array toward the 0.65 efficiency level and further reduce the array NET.
  • A wide common bias range across each wafer means nearly all detectors on a wafer can be biased at their optimal transition point, improving the effective yield and the fidelity of polarization maps without redesigning the readout.
  • The observed uniformity of optical efficiency across upgraded wafers indicates the microwave circuit design is robust to fabrication variation, simplifying production of additional wafers.
  • The lower dark NEP of the upgraded detectors, combined with higher optical efficiency, yields background-limited performance at lower optical loading, which is advantageous for observing the faint large-angular-scale CMB polarization.
  • The authors suggest that yield (around 60 percent) can be improved by routing bias leads to multiple wafer edges, a straightforward change that would increase the number of working detectors in future modules.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The inference that detector efficiency exceeds 0.90 is sensitive to the assumed spill (0.78) and absorption/reflection (0.91) efficiencies; if the true optics efficiency is higher, the detector efficiency would be correspondingly lower, and if it is lower, the detector efficiency would be even higher than claimed.
  • The design choices validated here—stepped-impedance absorbing terminations and a direct normal-metal thermal link to the TES—are likely transferable to the 150/220 GHz CLASS detectors and to other kilopixel TES arrays that face the same proximity-effect and internal-fluctuation-noise issues.
  • The paper's alternative scenarios for reconciling measured thermal parameters (a 10 mK higher critical temperature or a thermal conductance index of 3.77 instead of 4) could be tested by re-measuring Tc with a calibrated thermometer or by directly measuring the short silicon beam's conductance; such a test would refine thermal design rules for ballistic phonon beams.
  • A direct calibration of the receiver optics throughput (e.g., placing a chopped source at the receiver window and comparing with a full-aperture source) would turn the inferred detector efficiency into a measured quantity and would also clarify whether the 0.78 spill estimate or the 0.91 absorption/reflection estimate needs revision.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports the design, in-lab characterization, and on-sky performance of the upgraded CLASS 90 GHz focal plane, in which four of seven detector wafers were replaced during the 2022 austral winter. The design changes include revised magic-tee and crossover terminations, a direct normal-metal thermal contact between the MoAu TES and the Pd heat capacity, and revised bias-line filtering. The central reported results are: 94% of upgraded detectors are stable down to 15% of their normal resistance; the median telescope optical efficiency for the four upgraded wafers is 0.65 with a 68% interval of ±0.06; the full-array NET improved from 19 to 9.7 µK√s; and, under an assumed receiver optics efficiency, the implied detector efficiency exceeds 0.90. The paper also presents measurements of electrothermal parameters, bandpasses, noise, and yield, and discusses discrepancies with design targets.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a valuable instrument paper: the upgrade substantially improves the sensitivity and stability of a deployed CMB polarimeter, and the design changes are likely relevant to future TES bolometer arrays. The paper's strengths are its direct measurements: I-V curve stability statistics, laboratory and on-sky noise spectra, and Jupiter photometry. The 94% stability figure, the median telescope efficiency of 0.65 for the upgraded wafers, and the array NET of 9.7 µK√s are credible as reported. The main caveats are that the 'detector efficiency exceeding 0.90' headline is an inference resting on an assumed receiver-optics efficiency, and that the array-level improvement comparison includes a selection effect from replacing the poorest original wafers. These issues are fixable by reframing or additional analysis, and they do not undermine the directly measured performance gains.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6, Eq. (4), Abstract] The headline claim that detector efficiency exceeds 0.90 is not directly measured. The measured quantity is the telescope efficiency η = 0.65 from Jupiter observations. The detector efficiency is inferred as η_det = η / (ε_spill ε_abs) with ε_spill = 0.78 from Iuliano (2020) and ε_abs = 0.91, which the text in Section 6 explicitly calls 'a plausible scenario' and for which no independent measurement is presented. The result is highly sensitive to this assumption: if ε_abs = 1.0, then η_det ≈ 0.83, below the claimed threshold; if the older estimate ε_abs = 0.58 were used, the implied η_det would exceed unity, which is unphysical and indicates that either the older optics model or the measured telescope efficiency is biased. The Abstract and Conclusions should either present η = 0.65 as the direct measured result with the detector-efficiency value explicitly labeled as scenario-dependent, or provide a direct measurement of the optics absorption/reflection efficiency.
  2. [Abstract, Table 3, Section 7] The array-level improvements quoted in the Abstract compare the original seven-wafer array with a new array that contains the four upgraded wafers and only the three best original wafers. The paper itself notes in Section 7 that the retained originals have NEP ≈ 33 aW√s whereas the full original array had NEP ≈ 47 aW√s. Therefore the improvement from 19 µK√s to 9.7 µK√s, and similarly the telescope-efficiency improvement from 0.42 to 0.60, partly reflects the decision to replace the least-well-performing modules rather than the detector design change alone. The paper should separate the design improvement from the selection effect, for example by reporting the NET of the four replaced original wafers before and after the upgrade, or by stating plainly in the Abstract and Conclusions that the quoted array comparison includes replacement of the four poorest original wafers.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.4] In the sentence 'Setting n = 3.77 would shift the average measured κ from 15.2 nW/K4 to the target 10 nW/Kn', the final unit 'nW/Kn' should read 'nW/K4' (or 'nW/K^n').
  2. [Section 9] The statement that 'telescope optical efficiencies are nearly all above 60%' is stronger than the data support: Table 3 gives wafer 1 a median efficiency of 0.61 with a 68% interval extending down to 0.21, and Figure 7 shows a substantial tail of upgraded detectors with efficiencies below 0.4. A phrase such as 'the median telescope efficiency is above 60%' would be accurate.
  3. [Abstract vs Section 6] The Abstract says 'Given our efficiency estimate for the receiver optics,' while Section 6 describes the corresponding input as 'a plausible scenario.' The language should be consistent and should make clear that the detector-efficiency value is conditional on an assumed optics model.
  4. [Table 4] The fitted parameter Poffset introduced in Section 7 does not appear in the parameter index in Table 4; it should be included with its estimation method so that the index is complete.
  5. [Section 5 and Eq. (4)] The measured FTS bandpass shows a roughly 50% decrement above 100 GHz that the paper attributes to the test setup, and the simulated bandpass is preferred for the bandwidth Δν. This choice is stated in Section 5, but it is also load-bearing for Eq. (4) and Eq. (11); a cross-reference should be added at those points so that readers immediately see that the absolute efficiency calibration depends on the simulated bandwidth.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The 'detector efficiency exceeding 0.90' claim is an assumed scenario restated as an implication; the directly measured performance claims are independent.

  1. self definitional [Section 6 (Optical Efficiency Improvements); Abstract; Section 9 (Conclusions)]
    "A plausible scenario consistent with the upgraded detector telescope optical efficiency of 0.65 includes spill efficiency of 0.78, detector efficiency of 0.91, and telescope absorption and reflection efficiency of 0.91. ... Observations of Jupiter confirm that the telescope optical efficiencies are nearly all above 60%, implying detector efficiencies in excess of 90%."

    Footnotes define eta_tel = eta_det * eps_spill * eps_abs, and Equation 4 gives eta_tel = A_obs/A_J. With measured eta_tel = 0.65 and eps_spill = 0.78 from Iuliano (2020), the claim eta_det > 0.90 requires eps_abs ~ 0.91. The paper does not measure eps_abs; it asserts a 'plausible scenario' that already contains eta_det = 0.91 and eps_abs = 0.91. Since 0.78*0.91*0.91 = 0.646 ~ 0.65, the scenario is constructed so the assumed eta_det reproduces the measured telescope efficiency. The abstract's 'implies a detector efficiency exceeding 0.90' and the conclusion's 'implying detector efficiencies in excess of 90%' restate the assumed scenario rather than derive it from data.

full rationale

The core experimental results are direct measurements and are not circular: 94% stability down to 15% R_N is read from I-V curves; median telescope efficiency 0.65 is measured from Jupiter amplitudes via Equation 4; array NET 9.7 uK sqrt(s) is computed from measured noise spectra. The NEP model in Section 7 has a fitted offset P_offset = 1.1 pW, but that parameter is not used to produce the reported NET, so no prediction reduces to that fit. The simulated bandpass used for calibration is checked against FTS data and is not derived from the efficiency target. The one circular step is the headline detector-efficiency inference: the paper's 'plausible scenario' in Section 6 already assumes a detector efficiency of 0.91 together with an absorption/reflection efficiency of 0.91, chosen so that the product 0.78 x 0.91 x 0.91 matches the measured telescope efficiency of 0.65. The abstract and conclusions then present this assumed value as an implication of the measurement. That is a partial, construction-level circularity for that specific claim, while the rest of the paper's quantitative claims are self-contained and externally grounded.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims are measurements, so the ledger is short. The only true fitted parameter is Poffset, used in the NEP model comparison. The receiver optics efficiency decomposition is a hand-chosen scenario supporting the '>0.90 detector efficiency' statement. The main domain assumptions are the ballistic phonon exponent, the Jupiter calibration, and the preference for simulated over measured bandpass.

free parameters (2)
  • Poffset = 1.1 pW
    Introduced in Section 7 to shift the optical-loading axis in the NEP model (Equation 8) so the model matches measured NEP versus Pgamma data. Motivated by hypothesized optical heating of the detector wafer, but the value is fit to the data.
  • Receiver optics efficiency scenario = spill 0.78, absorption/reflection 0.91
    Chosen by hand in Section 6 to decompose the telescope efficiency 0.65 into detector efficiency 0.91 and optics losses. The absorption/reflection value is acknowledged as likely overestimated, and no uncertainty is given for this decomposition.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Thermal conductance power-law index n = 4 (ballistic phonon limit)
    Used in Equation 1 to fit Tc and kappa from IV curves (Section 4.2). The paper later explores n = 3.77 as an alternative scenario, showing the choice is not essential for the main measured quantities.
  • domain assumption Jupiter brightness temperature TJ = 172.8 K at 90 GHz from WMAP
    Adopted in Section 6 as the absolute calibration for optical efficiency (Equation 3). If the true Jupiter temperature differs, all absolute efficiency values shift.
  • domain assumption Simulated bandpass (FWHP 31 GHz) is more reliable than the measured FTS bandpass
    Section 5 attributes the measured high-frequency decrement to a test artifact and uses the simulated FWHP in Equations 3, 8, and 11. This choice affects absolute efficiency and NEP model calculations.
  • standard math Photon noise model (NEP_gamma)^2 = h nu0 Pgamma + Pgamma^2 / Delta nu
    Standard semiclassical photon noise expression used in Section 7 (Equation 7) to compare with measured NEP.
  • ad hoc to paper Poffset arises from optical heating of the detector wafer rather than other systematic effects
    Section 7 hypothesizes that the fitted offset is due to wafer temperature rise, following Appel et al. (2019). The NEP fit does not depend strongly on the physical mechanism, but the offset is a fitted parameter.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-Efficiency and Low-Noise Detectors for the Upgraded CLASS 90 GHz Focal Plane." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FPDEZGMP

@misc{pith2026241112705,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-Efficiency and Low-Noise Detectors for the Upgraded CLASS 90 GHz Focal Plane},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FPDEZGMP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12705}
}
abstract

We present the in-lab and on-sky performance for the upgraded 90 GHz focal plane of the Cosmology Large Angular Scale Surveyor (CLASS), which had four of its seven detector wafers updated during the austral winter of 2022. The update aimed to improve the transition-edge-sensor (TES) stability and bias range and to realize the high optical efficiency of the sensor design. Modifications included revised circuit terminations, electrical contact between the TES superconductor and the normal metal providing the bulk of the bolometer's heat capacity, and additional filtering on the TES bias lines. The upgrade was successful: 94% of detectors are stable down to 15% of the normal resistance, providing a wide overlapping range of bias voltages for all TESs on a wafer. The median telescope efficiency improved from $0.42^{+0.15}_{-0.22}$ to $0.60^{+0.10}_{-0.32}$ (68% quantiles). For the four upgraded wafers alone, median telescope efficiency increased to $0.65^{+0.06}_{-0.06}$. Given our efficiency estimate for the receiver optics, this telescope efficiency implies a detector efficiency exceeding $0.90$. The overall noise-equivalent temperature of the 90 GHz focal plane improved from 19 $\mu$K$\sqrt{s}$ to 9.7 $\mu$K$\sqrt{s}$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12705 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Photograph of the upgraded 90 GHz focal plane, taken at the CLASS site. The four new modules are outlined in blue and numbered with the convention used throughout the paper. Thirty-seven copper feedhorns per module couple detectors to the incoming radiation. (b) Within each module is an indium-bonded stack of silicon wafers into which is built an integrated array of thirty-seven dual-polarization detector pixels… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The terminated vialess crossover with the original (a) and updated (b) termination design together with the magic tee (c) with the updated design. In the original design, the superconducting Nb line is overlaid with a wider gold line for adiabatic absorption and impedance matching. The new termination was realized as a stepped impedance transformer from Nb to PdAu. (The light sections of the termination line are Nb … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The 90 GHz TES Bolometer. (Main Image) The TES was revised to include (1) an Nb-PdAu stepped￾impedance termination, (2) an single Pd film for thermal mass, (3) a direct normal-metal contact between the MoAu TES and the Pd, and (4) a revised bias-lead filter circuit implementation extending RF chokes onto the bias-lead legs. This image was reproduced from N23. (Top-Right Inset) The original TES used a left-right symm… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Distributions of TES electrothermal parameters relative to their per-wafer median value: thermal conductance (G), prefactor (κ), saturation power for Tbath = 50 mK (Psat), normal resistance (RN ), critical temperature (Tc), thermal time constant (τ ), optical time cons…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The optical time constants of the upgraded detec￾tors as a function of optical loading Pγ. Increasing optical loading results in a decrease in bias power and therefore elec￾trothermal feedback. The drop in feedback is consistent with the marginal trend of slowing of th…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Bandpass FTS measurement and simulation. On the left in logarithmic scale and on the right in linear scale. The measured bandpass edges agree well with the simulation. In the text, we present arguments that the decrement in transmission on the high-frequency half of th…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Telescope optical efficiencies for the 353 detectors in the upgraded array with optical efficiencies above 5%. The upgraded detectors provide higher optical efficiency compared to their original counterparts in the upgraded array. (The originals, not included here, tha…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Optical efficiency comparison between paired detectors within a pixel for the original and upgraded focal planes. The optical efficiencies for the +45° and −45° detectors, as labeled in Fig. 1c, are denoted η+ and η−. Each subplot represents a wafer on the focal plane.…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Detector NEP versus optical loading. The dark green (light blue) data points and left axis give the measured NEP as a function of loading for the updated (original) de￾tectors. The original detectors comprise only the three best modules saved for the upgraded array (Fi…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: I–V curves (a) for the upgraded detectors on module 2 show a broad range of bias voltages (shaded region 100–250 nV) for which nearly all detectors are on the hyperbola-shaped superconducting transition region. The coloring of the curves is only for visual discriminat…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The mapping of several electrothermal parameters from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Measurement of the Largest-Scale CMB E-mode Polarization with CLASS

    astro-ph.CO 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CLASS 90 GHz data cross-correlated with Planck give tau = 0.053 (+0.018, -0.019), the first ground-based reionization optical depth measurement, with reionization detected at 99.4% confidence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    The CLASS 150/220 GHz Polarimeter Array: Design, Assembly, and Characterization

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Addamo , G., Ade , P. A. R., Baccigalupi , C., et al. 2021, , 2021, 008, 10.1088/1475-7516/2021/08/008

    doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/08/008 2021

  5. [5]

    M., Essinger-Hileman , T., Marriage , T., et al

    Ali , A. M., Essinger-Hileman , T., Marriage , T., et al. 2022, Review of Scientific Instruments, 93, 024503, 10.1063/5.0049526

    doi:10.1063/5.0049526 2022

  6. [6]

    W., Ali , A., Amiri , M., et al

    Appel , J. W., Ali , A., Amiri , M., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9153, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, 91531J, 10.1117/12.2056530

    doi:10.1117/12.2056530 2014

  7. [7]

    W., Xu , Z., Padilla , I

    Appel , J. W., Xu , Z., Padilla , I. L., et al. 2019, , 876, 126, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1652

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab1652 2019

  8. [8]

    W., Bennett , C

    Appel , J. W., Bennett , C. L., Brewer , M. K., et al. 2022, , 262, 52, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac8cf2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac8cf2 2022

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    Arnold , K., Ade , P. A. R., Anthony , A. E., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8452, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VI, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas ,...

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    S., Amiri , M., Burger , B., et al

    Battistelli , E. S., Amiri , M., Burger , B., et al. 2008, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 151, 908, 10.1007/s10909-008-9772-z

    2008 doi

  3. [11]

    L., Larson , D., Weiland , J

    Bennett , C. L., Larson , D., Weiland , J. L., et al. 2013, , 208, 20, 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/20

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    BICEP/Keck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Ahmed , Z., et al. 2021, , 127, 151301, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    S., & Rodgers , K

    Boyle , W. S., & Rodgers , K. F., J. 1959, Journal of the Optical Society of America (1917-1983), 49, 66

    1959

  6. [14]

    T., Ali , A., Amiri , M., et al

    Chuss , D. T., Ali , A., Amiri , M., et al. 2016, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 184, 759, 10.1007/s10909-015-1368-9

    2016 doi

  7. [15]

    2023, PhD thesis, Johns Hopkins University

    Cleary , J. 2023, PhD thesis, Johns Hopkins University

    2023

  8. [16]

    E., et al

    CMB-S4 Collaboration , Abazajian , K., Addison , G. E., et al. 2022, , 926, 54, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1596

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    J., Bennett , C

    Crowe , E. J., Bennett , C. L., Chuss , D. T., et al. 2013, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, 23, 2500505, 10.1109/TASC.2012.2237211

    2013

  10. [18]

    W., et al

    Dahal , S., Ali , A., Appel , J. W., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10708, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 107081Y, 10.1117/12.2311812

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    W., et al

    Dahal , S., Amiri , M., Appel , J. W., et al. 2020, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 199, 289, 10.1007/s10909-019-02317-0

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    W., Datta , R., et al

    Dahal , S., Appel , J. W., Datta , R., et al. 2022, , 926, 33, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac397c

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    K., Couto , J

    Datta , R., Brewer , M. K., Couto , J. D., et al. 2024, , 273, 26, 10.3847/1538-4365/ad50a0

    2024 doi

  14. [22]

    2021, Physical Review Applied, 16, 044059, 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.16.044059

    de Wit , M., Gottardi , L., Taralli , E., et al. 2021, Physical Review Applied, 16, 044059, 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.16.044059

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    L., Cao , N

    Denis , K. L., Cao , N. T., Chuss , D. T., et al. 2009, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 1185, The Thirteenth International Workshop on Low Temperature Detectors - LTD13, ed. B. Young , B. Cabrera , & A. Miller , 371--374, 10.1063/1.3292355

    2009 doi

  16. [24]

    B., Morgan , K

    Doriese , W. B., Morgan , K. M., Bennett , D. A., et al. 2016, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 184, 389, 10.1007/s10909-015-1373-z

    2016 doi

  17. [25]

    R., Bennett , C

    Eimer , J. R., Bennett , C. L., Chuss , D. T., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8452, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VI, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas ...

    2012 doi

  18. [26]

    2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Essinger-Hileman , T., Ali , A., Amiri , M., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9153, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas ,...

    2014 doi

  19. [27]

    2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Harrington , K., Marriage , T., Ali , A., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9914, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas , 9...

    2016 doi

  20. [28]

    T., et al

    Harrington , K., Eimer , J., Chuss , D. T., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10708, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 107082M, 10.1117/12.2313614

    2018 doi

  21. [29]

    2013, , 208, 19, 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    Hinshaw , G., Larson , D., Komatsu , E., et al. 2013, , 208, 19, 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/19

    2013 doi

  22. [30]

    Hui , H., Ade , P. A. R., Ahmed , Z., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9914, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas , 99140...

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    D., & Hilton , G

    Irwin , K. D., & Hilton , G. C. 2005, in Cryogenic Particle Detection, ed. C. Enss , Vol. 99, 63, 10.1007/10933596\_3

    2005 doi

  24. [32]

    2020, PhD thesis, Johns Hopkins University

    Iuliano , J. 2020, PhD thesis, Johns Hopkins University

    2020

  25. [33]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Iuliano , J., Eimer , J., Parker , L., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10708, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 1070828, 10.1117/12.2312954

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    1996, Introduction to Solid State Physics, 7th edn

    Kittel, C. 1996, Introduction to Solid State Physics, 7th edn. (New York: John Wiley & Sons)

    1996

  27. [35]

    L., Bock , J

    Kuo , C. L., Bock , J. J., Bonetti , J. A., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7020, Millimeter and Submillimeter Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, ed. W. D. Duncan , W. S. Holland , S. Withington , &...

    2008 doi

  28. [36]

    Lazear , J., Ade , P. A. R., Benford , D., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9153, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas , 9...

    2014 doi

  29. [37]

    T., et al

    Lee , K., Choi , J., G \'e nova-Santos , R. T., et al. 2020, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 200, 384, 10.1007/s10909-020-02511-5

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2202.02773, 10.48550/arXiv.2202.02773

    LiteBIRD Collaboration , Allys , E., Arnold , K., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2202.02773, 10.48550/arXiv.2202.02773

    2022 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    L., Adler, A

    May, J. L., Adler, A. E., Austermann, J. E., et al. 2024, in Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes X, ed. H. K. Marshall, J. Spyromilio, & T. Usuda, Vol. 13094, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE), 1309432, 10.1117/12.3019051

    2024 doi

  32. [40]

    A., & Pan, S.-K

    Morgan, M. A., & Pan, S.-K. 2013, IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 3, 72, 10.1109/TTHZ.2012.2235910

    2013

  33. [41]

    C., Sadleir , J

    Nagler , P. C., Sadleir , J. E., & Wollack , E. J. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2012.06543. 2012.06543

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    D., Zhao , Y., Wollack , E., et al

    Niemack , M. D., Zhao , Y., Wollack , E., et al. 2008, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 151, 690, 10.1007/s10909-008-9729-2

    2008 doi

  35. [43]

    W., Bruno , S

    N \'u \ n ez , C., Appel , J. W., Bruno , S. M., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12190, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy XI, ed. J. Zmuidzinas & J.-R. Gao ,...

    2022 doi

  36. [44]

    W., Brewer , M

    N \'u \ n ez , C., Appel , J. W., Brewer , M. K., et al. 2023, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, 33, 3262497, 10.1109/TASC.2023.3262497

    2023

  37. [45]

    2019, , 58, 6257, 10.1364/AO.58.006257

    Pan , Z., Liu , M., Basu Thakur , R., et al. 2019, , 58, 6257, 10.1364/AO.58.006257

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Aghanim , N., et al. 2016, , 594, A5, 10.1051/0004-6361/201526632

    2016 doi

  39. [47]

    2020, , 641, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910

    Planck Collaboration , Aghanim , N., Akrami , Y., et al. 2020, , 641, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910

    2020 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Ade , P

    Posada , C. M., Ade , P. A. R., Anderson , A. J., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9914, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidz...

    2016 doi

  41. [49]

    D., Beyer , J., Nam , S

    Reintsema , C. D., Beyer , J., Nam , S. W., et al. 2003, Review of Scientific Instruments, 74, 4500, 10.1063/1.1605259

    2003 doi

  42. [50]

    L., Chuss , D

    Rostem , K., Bennett , C. L., Chuss , D. T., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8452, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VI, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas , ...

    2012 doi

  43. [51]

    T., Colazo , F

    Rostem , K., Chuss , D. T., Colazo , F. A., et al. 2014, Journal of Applied Physics, 115, 124508, 10.1063/1.4869737

    2014 doi

  44. [52]

    W., et al

    Rostem , K., Ali , A., Appel , J. W., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9914, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy VIII, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuidzinas , 99140...

    2016 doi

  45. [53]

    A., Guidi , F., G \'e nova-Santos , R

    Rubi \ n o-Mart \' n , J. A., Guidi , F., G \'e nova-Santos , R. T., et al. 2023, , 519, 3383, 10.1093/mnras/stac3439

    2023 doi

  46. [54]

    E., Smith , S

    Sadleir , J. E., Smith , S. J., Bandler , S. R., Chervenak , J. A., & Clem , J. R. 2010, , 104, 047003, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.047003

    2010 doi

  47. [55]

    A., Bleem, L

    Shirokoff, E., Benson, B. A., Bleem, L. E., et al. 2009, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, 19, 517, 10.1109/TASC.2009.2018229

    2009

  48. [56]

    2019, , 2019, 056, 10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056

    Simons Observatory Collaboration , Ade , P., Aguirre , J., et al. 2019, , 2019, 056, 10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056

    2019 doi

  49. [57]

    G., Benford , D

    Staguhn , J. G., Benford , D. J., Chervenak , J. A., et al. 2004, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 5498, Z-Spec: a broadband millimeter-wave grating spectrometer: design, construction, and first cryogenic measurements, ed. C....

    2004 doi

  50. [58]

    2012, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 167, 852, 10.1007/s10909-012-0602-y

    Suzuki , A., Arnold , K., Edwards , J., et al. 2012, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 167, 852, 10.1007/s10909-012-0602-y

    2012 doi

  51. [59]

    U-yen, K., & Wollack, E. J. 2008, in 2008 38th European Microwave Conference, 642--645, 10.1109/EUMC.2008.4751534

    2008

  52. [60]

    J., Moseley, S

    U-yen, K., Wollack, E. J., Moseley, S. H., et al. 2009, in 2009 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest, 1029--1032, 10.1109/MWSYM.2009.5165875

    2009

  53. [61]

    J., Papapolymerou , J., & Laskar , J

    U-Yen , K., Wollack , E. J., Papapolymerou , J., & Laskar , J. 2008, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory Techniques, 56, 172, 10.1109/TMTT.2007.912213

    2008

  54. [62]

    N., Doriese , W

    Ullom , J. N., Doriese , W. B., Hilton , G. C., et al. 2004, Applied Physics Letters, 84, 4206, 10.1063/1.1753058

    2004 doi

  55. [63]

    J., Larson , D., Marriage , T

    Watts , D. J., Larson , D., Marriage , T. A., et al. 2015, , 814, 103, 10.1088/0004-637X/814/2/103

    2015 doi

  56. [64]

    J., Wang , B., Ali , A., et al

    Watts , D. J., Wang , B., Ali , A., et al. 2018, , 863, 121, 10.3847/1538-4357/aad283

    2018 doi

  57. [65]

    2012, Bachelor's thesis, Johns Hopkins University, Maryland

    Wei , T. 2012, Bachelor's thesis, Johns Hopkins University, Maryland

    2012

  58. [66]

    L., Chuss , D

    Zeng , L., Bennett , C. L., Chuss , D. T., & Wollack , E. J. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7741, Millimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy V, ed. W. S. Holland & J. Zmuid...

    2010 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.