Towards 6D Tracking: A Study Of Using Fast-Timing For Measuring Track Position, Time, And Angles

Abhiraj Gupta; Angelo Dragone; Ariel Schwartzman; Christopher J. Kenney; Elena Villhauer; Julie Segal; Mark Horowitz; Michael Cardiff; Victor Turbiner

arxiv: 2605.24736 · v1 · pith:Q3YV5VX3new · submitted 2026-05-23 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det · hep-ex

Towards 6D Tracking: A Study Of Using Fast-Timing For Measuring Track Position, Time, And Angles

Victor Turbiner , Elena Villhauer , Abhiraj Gupta , Michael Cardiff , Julie Segal , Christopher J. Kenney , Mark Horowitz , Ariel Schwartzman

show 1 more author

Angelo Dragone

This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 11:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det hep-ex

keywords LGAD detectorsfast timingtrack angle reconstructionparticle trackingtiming resolutionangular resolutionLandau fluctuations6D tracking

0 comments

The pith

Timing differences between pixels enable single-layer reconstruction of particle track angles to a few degrees via a linear model.

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

The paper establishes that oblique tracks through fast-timing detectors produce systematic inter-pixel timing shifts of hundreds of picoseconds that follow a linear relation to the track angle. This relation is derived analytically from the geometry of charge collection and tested in TCAD simulations of LGAD sensors. If correct, the approach allows a single detector layer to supply position, time, and direction information, reducing the need for stacked layers in trackers. Stochastic fluctuations in energy deposition set a hard floor on how precisely angles can be recovered and on how often the reconstruction succeeds. Direct comparison shows the simple linear fit reaches nearly the same angular resolution as a neural network, indicating that the underlying charge-transport physics, not the choice of algorithm, determines performance.

Core claim

Oblique incidence induces predictable timing variations across pixels that are captured by an analytical linear model relating measured time differences to the incident track angles; this model yields few-degree angular resolution in simulation, with performance limited by Landau fluctuations in energy loss and shown to be near-optimal relative to neural-network reconstruction.

What carries the argument

The analytical linear model that maps inter-pixel timing differences directly to incident track angles.

If this is right

A single detector layer can supply three-dimensional track direction in addition to position and time.
Angular resolution is bounded by the size of stochastic energy-loss fluctuations rather than by timing jitter alone.
Reconstruction efficiency drops when fluctuations cause the timing pattern to deviate too far from the linear expectation.
Algorithmic complexity adds little once the charge-collection geometry is modeled.
Material budgets in future trackers could be lowered by replacing multiple thin layers with fewer timed layers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same timing-to-angle mapping could be tested in other fast-timing technologies such as silicon photomultipliers or diamond sensors.
Combining this single-layer angle measurement with a second timed layer might allow full 6D track fitting with reduced lever arm.
Landau fluctuations suggest that thicker sensors or higher-gain designs could improve angular precision at the cost of material.
Real-beam tests with angled particles would directly falsify or confirm the simulation-derived linear coefficients.

Load-bearing premise

The TCAD simulations correctly reproduce the hundreds-of-picoseconds timing shifts caused by oblique tracks and attribute them primarily to charge-collection geometry.

What would settle it

Measure arrival-time differences in a real LGAD sensor for particles at known angles between 0 and 30 degrees and check whether the observed differences follow the linear prediction within the spread expected from Landau fluctuations.

read the original abstract

Current and next-generation particle tracking detectors will incorporate precision timing capabilities with resolutions approaching tens of picoseconds. Using Technology Computer-Aided Design (TCAD) simulations of Low-Gain Avalanche Diode (LGAD) detectors, we demonstrate that oblique particle incidence induces systematic timing variations of hundreds of picoseconds across multiple pixels. We derive an analytical linear model relating inter-pixel timing differences to incident track angles, enabling single-layer angular reconstruction with few-degree precision. Stochastic energy loss fluctuations (Landau fluctuations) impose fundamental limits on both angular resolution and reconstruction efficiency. Comparison with neural network approaches demonstrates that the linear model achieves near-optimal angular resolution, indicating that the physics of charge collection geometry, rather than algorithmic sophistication, dominates the achievable performance.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper derives a linear model from TCAD-simulated timing shifts in LGADs to get few-degree track angles from one layer, and shows it is nearly optimal compared to a neural net, but the result stands or falls on whether those simulated shifts match real devices.

read the letter

The punchline is that a simple linear fit on inter-pixel timing differences can extract incident angle from a single LGAD layer at a few degrees, and that this model comes close to what a neural net achieves on the same simulated data. The authors also point out that Landau fluctuations set a hard floor on both resolution and efficiency.

What is actually new is the explicit derivation of that linear relation from the geometry of charge collection and the side-by-side comparison showing the linear version is already near-optimal. The work is clear on how the timing variation arises and on the stochastic limit, which is useful.

The soft spot is the complete reliance on TCAD. The hundreds-of-picosecond shifts that drive the whole story are produced by simulation, and the paper contains no beam-test data to check whether real LGADs show the same size and pattern of variation once weighting fields, doping, and readout electronics are included. If the actual timing differences are smaller or noisier, both the claimed precision and the claim that geometry dominates over algorithm choice lose their support. That is the load-bearing assumption, and it is not minor.

This is for people building timing layers who want to explore whether angle information can be pulled out without adding material. A reader who already works with LGAD simulations or who is planning 4D/6D tracker studies will get concrete numbers and a transparent model to play with. It is not yet a result that changes hardware design, but the analytical step is honest and the comparison to the neural net is straightforward.

I would send it to peer review. The math and the simulation setup are reproducible enough that referees can check the derivation and ask the right questions about validation. The paper does not overclaim what it has, so the review process would be productive rather than corrective.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper uses TCAD simulations of LGAD detectors to demonstrate that oblique particle incidence produces systematic inter-pixel timing variations of hundreds of picoseconds. From these, an analytical linear model is derived that relates timing differences to track angles, enabling single-layer angular reconstruction at few-degree precision. Stochastic Landau fluctuations are shown to set fundamental limits on resolution and efficiency. A neural-network baseline is used to argue that the linear model is near-optimal, implying that charge-collection geometry, rather than algorithmic complexity, dominates performance.

Significance. If the simulated timing shifts accurately reflect real LGAD behavior, the work offers a concrete path toward 6D tracking by extracting angular information from timing alone in a single layer. The explicit analytical model and its near-parity with a neural network constitute a genuine strength, as they provide an interpretable, low-parameter alternative whose performance is directly tied to detector physics rather than black-box fitting.

major comments (2)

[TCAD simulation results and model derivation] The central claim that the linear model achieves few-degree angular resolution rests on the premise that TCAD reproduces the hundreds-of-ps inter-pixel timing variations induced by oblique tracks. No beam-test data or other experimental benchmark is presented to confirm that the simulated Δt values match measured values at the 10–20 ps level required for the stated precision; without this, both the performance numbers and the conclusion that geometry dominates remain unsupported.
[Discussion of stochastic energy loss] The assertion that Landau fluctuations impose fundamental limits on angular resolution and reconstruction efficiency is load-bearing for the efficiency claims, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative propagation of the Landau width through the linear model (e.g., via Eq. for Δt or the angle estimator) to derive the reported resolution floor.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract states 'few-degree precision' without quoting the actual RMS or 68 % containment values obtained from the linear model; these numbers should appear explicitly.
[Throughout] Notation for the timing difference Δt and the angle estimator should be defined once in the text and used consistently; occasional redefinition of symbols between sections reduces clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of the work's potential and for the constructive major comments. We address each point below, noting that this is a simulation study whose primary goal is to derive and benchmark an analytical model from TCAD results. We will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript as described.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [TCAD simulation results and model derivation] The central claim that the linear model achieves few-degree angular resolution rests on the premise that TCAD reproduces the hundreds-of-ps inter-pixel timing variations induced by oblique tracks. No beam-test data or other experimental benchmark is presented to confirm that the simulated Δt values match measured values at the 10–20 ps level required for the stated precision; without this, both the performance numbers and the conclusion that geometry dominates remain unsupported.

Authors: We agree that experimental validation is ultimately required to confirm that the simulated timing shifts match real LGAD behavior at the 10-20 ps level. The present manuscript is a TCAD simulation study whose purpose is to demonstrate the existence of systematic inter-pixel timing variations, derive the linear model from first principles of charge-collection geometry, and show its near-optimality relative to a neural network within the simulation framework. The performance numbers and the conclusion that geometry dominates are therefore supported inside the simulated environment; they are not claimed to be directly transferable to hardware without further validation. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit section on TCAD model assumptions, the expected level of agreement with measurement, and the necessity of future beam-test confirmation. revision: yes
Referee: [Discussion of stochastic energy loss] The assertion that Landau fluctuations impose fundamental limits on angular resolution and reconstruction efficiency is load-bearing for the efficiency claims, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative propagation of the Landau width through the linear model (e.g., via Eq. for Δt or the angle estimator) to derive the reported resolution floor.

Authors: We acknowledge that an explicit propagation of the Landau width through the linear model would make the resolution-floor claim more rigorous. In the revised version we will add a quantitative analysis that folds the Landau fluctuation distribution into the Δt estimator and the angle-reconstruction formula, thereby deriving the reported resolution and efficiency limits directly from the model equations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained from simulation geometry

full rationale

The paper derives an analytical linear model directly from the geometry of charge collection in TCAD-simulated LGAD detectors, relating inter-pixel timing differences to incident angles. This is then benchmarked against a separate neural-network model trained on the same simulated data, showing comparable performance. No quoted step reduces the claimed angular resolution or optimality conclusion to a fitted parameter defined in terms of the target result, a self-citation chain, or an ansatz smuggled from prior work. The derivation chain remains independent of the reported performance metrics and is evaluated against the external simulation benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the accuracy of TCAD simulations for oblique-track timing and on the assumption that geometry-driven charge collection dominates the observed timing variations.

axioms (1)

domain assumption TCAD simulations of LGAD detectors accurately reproduce the timing variations induced by oblique particle incidence.
All quantitative results and the linear model derivation rest on these simulations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5682 in / 1300 out tokens · 40363 ms · 2026-06-30T11:42:07.449745+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

[1]

Pellegrini, P

G. Pellegrini, P. Fernández-Martínez, M. Baselga, C. Fleta, D. Flores, V. Greco et al.,Technology developments and first measurements of low gain avalanche detectors (lgad) for high energy physics applications,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment765(2014) 12

2014
[2]

File:coord system ca 0.svg

J. Stolfi, “File:coord system ca 0.svg.” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coord_system_CA_0.svg
[3]

File:3d spherical.svg

Andeggs, “File:3d spherical.svg.” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:3D_Spherical.svg
[4]

Kenney, S.I

C.J. Kenney, S.I. Parker, V.Z. Peterson, W.J. Snoeys, J.D. Plummer and Chye Huat Aw,A prototype monolithic pixel detector,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment342(1994) 59

1994
[5]

F. Wang, B. Nachman and M. Garcia-Sciveres,Ultimate position resolution of pixel clusters with binary readout for particle tracking,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A 899(2018) 10. [6]ATLAS Collaborationcollaboration,A measurement of secondary hard interactions in minimum bias events with the atlas detector,New Journal of Physic...

2018
[6]

Dickinson, B

J. Dickinson, B. Weiss, D. Berry, G.D. Guglielmo, F. Fahim et al.,On-chip probabilistic inference for charged-particle tracking at the sensor edge,arXiv:2504.17163. – 23 –

work page arXiv
[7]

Lipton,A double sided lgad-based detector providing timing, position, and track angle information, Tech

R.J. Lipton,A double sided lgad-based detector providing timing, position, and track angle information, Tech. Rep. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1841398, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL), Batavia, IL (United States) (01, 2022), DOI

work page arXiv 2022
[8]

Paternoster, G

G. Paternoster, G. Borghi, M. Boscardin, N. Cartiglia, M. Ferrero, F. Ficorella et al.,Trench-isolated low gain avalanche diodes (ti-lgads),IEEE Electron Device Letters41(2020) 884

2020
[9]

Berry et al.,4-Dimensional Trackers, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.13900]

D. Berry et al.,4-Dimensional Trackers, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.13900]

work page arXiv 2021
[10]

Sentaurus Device an advanced multidimensional (1d/2d/3d) device simulator

“Sentaurus Device an advanced multidimensional (1d/2d/3d) device simulator.”https://www. synopsys.com/manufacturing/tcad/device-simulation/sentaurus-device.html
[11]

Swartz,Cms pixel simulations,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment511(2003) 88

M. Swartz,Cms pixel simulations,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment511(2003) 88

2003
[12]

Cenna, N

F. Cenna, N. Cartiglia, M. Friedl, B. Kolbinger, H.-W. Sadrozinski, A. Seiden et al.,Weightfield2: A fast simulator for silicon and diamond solid state detector,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment796 (2015) 149

2015
[13]

Bichsel,Straggling in thin silicon detectors,Rev

H. Bichsel,Straggling in thin silicon detectors,Rev. Mod. Phys.60(1988) 663

1988
[14]

Landau fluctuations

D. Su, “Landau fluctuations.”https://indico.cern.ch/event/523323/
[15]

S. Xie, A. Apresyan, R. Heller, C. Madrid, I. Dutta, A. Hayrapetyan et al.,Design and performance of the fermilab constant fraction discriminator asic,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1056(2023) 168655. – 24 –

2023

[1] [1]

Pellegrini, P

G. Pellegrini, P. Fernández-Martínez, M. Baselga, C. Fleta, D. Flores, V. Greco et al.,Technology developments and first measurements of low gain avalanche detectors (lgad) for high energy physics applications,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment765(2014) 12

2014

[2] [2]

File:coord system ca 0.svg

J. Stolfi, “File:coord system ca 0.svg.” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coord_system_CA_0.svg

[3] [3]

File:3d spherical.svg

Andeggs, “File:3d spherical.svg.” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:3D_Spherical.svg

[4] [4]

Kenney, S.I

C.J. Kenney, S.I. Parker, V.Z. Peterson, W.J. Snoeys, J.D. Plummer and Chye Huat Aw,A prototype monolithic pixel detector,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment342(1994) 59

1994

[5] [5]

F. Wang, B. Nachman and M. Garcia-Sciveres,Ultimate position resolution of pixel clusters with binary readout for particle tracking,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A 899(2018) 10. [6]ATLAS Collaborationcollaboration,A measurement of secondary hard interactions in minimum bias events with the atlas detector,New Journal of Physic...

2018

[6] [6]

Dickinson, B

J. Dickinson, B. Weiss, D. Berry, G.D. Guglielmo, F. Fahim et al.,On-chip probabilistic inference for charged-particle tracking at the sensor edge,arXiv:2504.17163. – 23 –

work page arXiv

[7] [7]

Lipton,A double sided lgad-based detector providing timing, position, and track angle information, Tech

R.J. Lipton,A double sided lgad-based detector providing timing, position, and track angle information, Tech. Rep. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1841398, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL), Batavia, IL (United States) (01, 2022), DOI

work page arXiv 2022

[8] [8]

Paternoster, G

G. Paternoster, G. Borghi, M. Boscardin, N. Cartiglia, M. Ferrero, F. Ficorella et al.,Trench-isolated low gain avalanche diodes (ti-lgads),IEEE Electron Device Letters41(2020) 884

2020

[9] [9]

Berry et al.,4-Dimensional Trackers, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.13900]

D. Berry et al.,4-Dimensional Trackers, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.13900]

work page arXiv 2021

[10] [10]

Sentaurus Device an advanced multidimensional (1d/2d/3d) device simulator

“Sentaurus Device an advanced multidimensional (1d/2d/3d) device simulator.”https://www. synopsys.com/manufacturing/tcad/device-simulation/sentaurus-device.html

[11] [11]

Swartz,Cms pixel simulations,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment511(2003) 88

M. Swartz,Cms pixel simulations,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment511(2003) 88

2003

[12] [12]

Cenna, N

F. Cenna, N. Cartiglia, M. Friedl, B. Kolbinger, H.-W. Sadrozinski, A. Seiden et al.,Weightfield2: A fast simulator for silicon and diamond solid state detector,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment796 (2015) 149

2015

[13] [13]

Bichsel,Straggling in thin silicon detectors,Rev

H. Bichsel,Straggling in thin silicon detectors,Rev. Mod. Phys.60(1988) 663

1988

[14] [14]

Landau fluctuations

D. Su, “Landau fluctuations.”https://indico.cern.ch/event/523323/

[15] [15]

S. Xie, A. Apresyan, R. Heller, C. Madrid, I. Dutta, A. Hayrapetyan et al.,Design and performance of the fermilab constant fraction discriminator asic,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1056(2023) 168655. – 24 –

2023