The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2607.06318 · v1 · pith:G7CAG7BN · submitted 2026-07-07 · astro-ph.IM

Long-term performance of SiPMs in space environment measured by GRBAlpha, GRBBeta, and VZLUSAT-2 CubeSats

Jakub Ripa , Filip Munz , Marianna Dafcikova , Andras Pal , Norbert Werner , Masanori Ohno , Laszlo Meszaros , Balazs Csak
show 41 more authors
Pavel Kosik Michaela Duriskova Lea Szakszonova Martin Kolar Tomas Vitek Nikola Husarikova Filip Hroch Michal Pazderka Yasushi Fukazawa Hiromitsu Takahashi Tsunefumi Mizuno Jean-Paul Breuer Masato Yokota Kazuhiro Nakazawa Hirokazu Odaka Yuto Ichinohe Tomas Urbanec Ales Povalac Miroslav Kasal Miroslav Smelko Peter Hanak Gabor Galgoczi Martin Topinka Hsiang-Kuang Chang Tsung-Che Liu Chih-Hsun Lin Chin-Ping Hu Che-Chih Tsao Kaustubha Sen Chih-En Wu Jakub Kapus Jan Hudec Marcel Frajt Maksim Rezenov Vladimir Daniel Petr Svoboda Juraj Dudas Martin Sabol Ivo Vertat Robert Laszlo Martin Koleda
This is my paper

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel 2026-07-08 09:58 UTCglm-5.2pith:G7CAG7BNrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification astro-ph.IM
keywords grbalphasipmscubesatsdetectorsenvironmentgrbbetaorbitvzlusat-2
0
0 comments X

The pith

SiPMs survive four years in orbit, opening CubeSat gamma-ray astronomy

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

Silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) are attractive for CubeSat gamma-ray detectors because they are compact, run on low voltage, and respond fast. Their known weakness is radiation damage: in low Earth orbit, trapped protons increase the dark count rate, which raises the detector's low-energy threshold. This paper reports multi-year in-orbit measurements from three CubeSats — GRBAlpha, VZLUSAT-2, and GRBBeta — all carrying identical CsI(Tl) scintillator detectors read out by Hamamatsu S13360-3050PE MPPCs shielded by 2.5 mm of PbSb alloy. GRBAlpha operated for over four years before de-orbiting. The authors track the evolution of dark count rate and low-energy threshold across all three satellites and compare the measured degradation to simulated total ionising dose and displacement damage derived from the satellites' actual orbital decay trajectories. The central claim is that these SiPMs, with modest shielding, remain functional for scientific gamma-ray detection missions in low Earth orbit lasting beyond four years.

Core claim

The Hamamatsu S13360-3050PE MPPC, shielded by 2.5 mm of PbSb alloy, can sustain scientific gamma-ray detection in low Earth orbit for missions exceeding four years. The paper documents the quantitative evolution of dark count rate and low-energy threshold across three CubeSats and correlates the degradation with simulated proton-induced ionising and non-ionising dose, finding that the detectors remain operational throughout the mission lifetime. The observed plateauing of the sensitivity threshold and dark count rate is attributed to decreasing proton flux as the satellites' orbits naturally decay to lower altitudes.

What carries the argument

Silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs, specifically Hamamatsu S13360-3050PE MPPCs) coupled to CsI(Tl) scintillators, shielded by 2.5 mm PbSb alloy, deployed on three CubeSats (GRBAlpha, VZLUSAT-2, GRBBeta) in low Earth orbit. The analytical method tracks the dark noise peak in background spectra to measure threshold evolution and uses activation lines for in-orbit gain calibration, with simulated radiation dose from Geant4/GRAS mass models providing the comparison baseline.

If this is right

  • Future CubeSat and small-satellite gamma-ray missions can adopt SiPM-based scintillator detectors with confidence that they will remain functional for multi-year LEO operations, provided comparable shielding is used.
  • The correlation between threshold degradation and accumulated displacement damage, combined with the plateauing effect from orbital decay, suggests that mission planners can trade altitude profiles against detector sensitivity lifetime — lower orbits reduce proton exposure but shorten mission duration.
  • The demonstrated four-year survivability lowers a key barrier for proposed constellations of CubeSat gamma-ray detectors, which rely on cheap, compact, low-power photosensors to achieve all-sky coverage of transient events.
  • The in-orbit gain calibration method using activation lines, validated on GRBAlpha, provides a template for future SiPM-based missions to correct for radiation-induced gain drift without dedicated calibration sources.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the plateauing of dark count rate at lower altitudes is driven by reduced proton flux as the paper suggests, then SiPM-based detectors at higher LEO altitudes or in higher-inclination orbits that spend more time in the Van Allen belts may face substantially shorter useful lifetimes than the four years demonstrated here, and the shielding thickness may need to scale with altitude.
  • The discrepancy between GRBAlpha's gain-calibrated threshold evolution and VZLUSAT-2's uncalibrated values suggests that radiation-induced gain drift is a significant fraction of the total apparent threshold change — meaning that without in-orbit calibration, raw threshold degradation measurements may overstate the true sensitivity loss by a meaningful margin.
  • The relationship between simulated TNID and measured threshold, if it holds across orbits and solar cycle phases, could yield a predictive model: given a planned orbit and shielding geometry, one could forecast the detector's sensitivity curve over the mission lifetime before launch.

Load-bearing premise

For two of the three satellites (VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta), the conversion from raw detector channel numbers to physical energy thresholds relies on pre-launch ground calibration or limited in-orbit activation-line measurements, because there were not enough activation-line observations to track long-term gain drift. If the actual in-orbit gain drift differs substantially from what was assumed, the reported absolute energy threshold values for those two satellites are system off

What would settle it

If a future mission using the same SiPM model and shielding in a comparable LEO orbit finds that the detectors become unusable for gamma-ray spectroscopy well before four years — or if the dark count rate rises far faster than the degradation curves reported here predict — the central claim of multi-year viability would be undermined.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06318 by Ales Povalac, Andras Pal, Balazs Csak, Che-Chih Tsao, Chih-En Wu, Chih-Hsun Lin, Chin-Ping Hu, Filip Hroch, Filip Munz, Gabor Galgoczi, Hirokazu Odaka, Hiromitsu Takahashi, Hsiang-Kuang Chang, Ivo Vertat, Jakub Kapus, Jakub Ripa, Jan Hudec, Jean-Paul Breuer, Juraj Dudas, Kaustubha Sen, Kazuhiro Nakazawa, Laszlo Meszaros, Lea Szakszonova, Maksim Rezenov, Marcel Frajt, Marianna Dafcikova, Martin Kolar, Martin Koleda, Martin Sabol, Martin Topinka, Masanori Ohno, Masato Yokota, Michaela Duriskova, Michal Pazderka, Miroslav Kasal, Miroslav Smelko, Nikola Husarikova, Norbert Werner, Pavel Kosik, Peter Hanak, Petr Svoboda, Robert Laszlo, Tomas Urbanec, Tomas Vitek, Tsunefumi Mizuno, Tsung-Che Liu, Vladimir Daniel, Yasushi Fukazawa, Yuto Ichinohe.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: presents the noise peak evolution observed in the background spectra of GRB detectors on board all three CubeSats over the first year in orbit. 35 40 45 50 55 60 1 10 100 1000 104 counts s−1 ch−1 Channel (ADU) GRBAlpha − ch0 2021/04/10 2021/04/28 2021/05/27 2021/07/31 2021/09/28 2022/01/04 2022/03/30 35 40 45 50 55 60 1 10 100 1000 104 counts s−1 ch−1 Channel (ADU) VZLUSAT−2 − det1, ch2 2020/08/10 2022/02/… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Top: Evolution of the low-energy threshold over time on orbit for the GRB detectors on the three CubeSats. Middle: Similar to the top panel, however here the threshold is plotted in terms of the directly measured spectral channel number (ADU). Bottom: Evolution of the dark count rate (DCR) integrated over the noise peak. The vertical solid, dashed, and dotted lines mark the launch dates of GRBAlpha, VZLUSA… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Example of the mass models of the CubeSats GRBBeta (left) and VZLUSAT-2 (right) used to simulate TID and TNID in SiPMs with GRAS tool. Detectors were simulated in detail, and the remaining mass of each CubeSat was approximated as a box with corresponding mass. Tracks of the incident and secondary radiation (particles and gamma￾rays) in the Geant4 simulation are visible, too. §www.celestrak.org/satcat/ ¶htt… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top panel: Simulated total ionising dose and total non-ionising dose in SiPMs of GRB detectors of the three CubeSats. TNID is expressed in 1 MeV neutron equivalent fluence. The AP-8 model of geomagnetically trapped protons was used in conjunction with actual satellite orbits and orbital attitude decay. Bottom panel: The progress of the semi￾major axis altitude for the three CubeSats [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figur… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Total ionising dose per day and total non-ionising dose in 1 MeV neutron equivalent fluence per day in Si simulated by the GRAS software using the AP-8 model of geomagnetically trapped protons and the actual orbital parameters of GRBAlpha (left), VZLUSAT-2 (middle), and GRBBeta (right). 0  0  00  0   ! 0 0 0 00 0 0 " !    0      0     " 0 00 0 0 … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dependence of the measured low-energy thresholds of SiPM-based gamma-ray detectors on GRBAlpha, VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta on the simulated TID (left) and TNID (right) derived from the mass model of the satel￾lites, models of geomagnetically trapped protons, and the altitude decay progress over time. by the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) of Taiwan under grants 113-2923-M-007-004-MY3. REFERENCES … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work, we report the successful application of silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) in gamma-ray burst (GRB) detectors used in CubeSats operating in the low Earth orbit (LEO) radiation environment. It is known that SiPMs are susceptible to radiation damage, leading to an increase in the dark count rate. This results in an increase in the low-energy threshold in detectors combining SiPMs and scintillators. Despite this drawback, they became popular in gamma-ray detectors on CubeSats due to their low operating voltage, small size and fast response. Therefore, it is important to characterise their long-term performance in the space environment. Here, we describe the changes in the dark count rate and low-energy threshold of S13360-3050PE multi-pixel photon counters (MPPCs) by Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., using measurements from the GRBAlpha, GRBBeta, and VZLUSAT-2 CubeSats. In the case of GRBAlpha, the measurement of SiPM performance in space lasted over 4 years. GRBAlpha was a 1U CubeSat launched on 2021/03/22 to a 550 km altitude polar orbit carrying a CsI(Tl) scintillator GRB detector employing eight MPPCs and sensitive in the range of ~30-900 keV. GRBAlpha de-orbited on 2025/06/09. VZLUSAT-2 was a 3U CubeSat launched on 2022/01/13 to a 535 km altitude polar orbit and de-orbited on 2025/11/30. GRBBeta was launched on 2024/07/09 to a 580 km altitude, 62{\deg} inclination orbit. Both VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta carry detectors similar to the one on GRBAlpha. We have flight-proven the Hamamatsu MPPCs S13360-3050 PE and demonstrated that SiPMs, shielded by 2.5 mm of PbSb alloy, can be used in a LEO environment on a scientific mission lasting beyond 4 years. This shows the potential for SiPMs to be employed in future satellites.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper reports on the long-term in-orbit performance of Hamamatsu S13360-3050PE SiPMs (MPPCs) used in gamma-ray detectors aboard three CubeSats: GRBAlpha (>4 years, 2021--2025), VZLUSAT-2 (~4 years, 2022--2025), and GRBBeta (<2 years, 2024--present). The SiPMs are shielded by 2--2.5 mm of PbSb alloy. The authors track the evolution of the dark count rate (DCR) and low-energy threshold over mission lifetime, compare these measurements to simulated total ionising dose (TID) and total non-ionising dose (TNID) using Geant4/GRAS with the AP-8 proton model and actual orbital decay data, and conclude that SiPMs with PbSb shielding can be used on scientific LEO missions lasting beyond 4 years. The central qualitative survival claim is well-supported by the GRBAlpha flight data. The quantitative threshold evolution for VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta carries larger uncertainties due to incomplete in-orbit gain calibration, which the authors acknowledge transparently.

Significance. The paper provides valuable flight heritage data for SiPMs in the LEO radiation environment over multi-year timescales, which is scarce in the literature. The use of three independent satellites with similar detector designs strengthens the generality of the findings. The dose simulations employ standard tools (Geant4, GRAS, AP-8) with actual TLE data and detailed mass models, providing a sound basis for comparison with measured degradation. The identification of threshold plateauing due to orbital decay and solar cycle effects is a useful and falsifiable observation. The paper serves as a practical reference for future CubeSat gamma-ray missions considering SiPM-based readout.

major comments (2)
  1. §5, bullet 1: The claim that 'CubeSats can be used on missions at LEO lasting > 4 years and routinely detect GRBs' is supported primarily by GRBAlpha alone. VZLUSAT-2 operated ~4 years (not beyond 4), and GRBBeta has operated <2 years at the time of writing. The abstract similarly states 'a scientific mission lasting beyond 4 years.' The authors should clarify that the >4-year benchmark is met by GRBAlpha specifically, with VZLUSAT-2 providing supporting data at ~4 years. As written, the phrasing implies all three satellites confirm the >4-year duration, which is not the case.
  2. §3 and Fig. 2 (top panel): The VZLUSAT-2 threshold evolution relies entirely on pre-launch ground calibration with no in-orbit gain correction, while GRBBeta's gain correction is described as preliminary due to limited activation-line measurements. The authors note this in the text and in the Fig. 2 caption, but the absolute energy threshold values for these two satellites (plotted in Fig. 2 top panel and Fig. 6) could be systematically offset. Since Fig. 6 directly compares thresholds across all three satellites against simulated TID/TNID, the inclusion of uncorrected data points in that comparison could lead to misinterpretation. The authors should either (a) add uncertainty bands or systematic-error estimates to the VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta data points in Figs. 2 and 6, or (b) more prominently distinguish the corrected (GRBAlpha) from uncorrected/preliminary (VZLUSAT-2, GRBBeta) data in图
minor comments (6)
  1. Abstract: The statement 'a scientific mission lasting beyond 4 years' should be qualified to note that this benchmark is demonstrated by GRBAlpha, with VZLUSAT-2 providing supporting data at ~4 years and GRBBeta at <2 years.
  2. Fig. 1 (middle panel): The VZLUSAT-2 spectrum labeled '2020/08/10' predates the satellite's launch (2022/01/13). This is presumably a ground calibration spectrum; the label should clarify this, as it does for GRBBeta.
  3. §4: The solar cycle phase transition date is given as 'Aug 2022' for solar minimum and 'Sep 2022' for solar maximum. A brief justification for this specific transition date and its sensitivity to the dose results would be helpful.
  4. Fig. 2 caption: The statement about plateauing due to lower proton flux at lower altitudes is important context. Consider expanding this explanation slightly in the main text (§3) rather than only in the caption.
  5. §2: The shield thickness is given as '2--2.5 mm' in the text but the abstract and conclusions state '2.5 mm.' This minor inconsistency should be reconciled.
  6. The paper would benefit from a brief table summarizing the key parameters of each mission (launch date, de-orbit date, altitude, inclination, detector channels, number of activation-line measurements available) to facilitate cross-comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. Both major comments are well-taken and will be addressed in the revised manuscript. We agree that the >4-year claim should be attributed specifically to GRBAlpha, and that the uncorrected/preliminary threshold data for VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta need to be more clearly distinguished from the fully calibrated GRBAlpha data in Figs. 2 and 6. No standing objections remain.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §5, bullet 1: The claim that 'CubeSats can be used on missions at LEO lasting > 4 years and routinely detect GRBs' is supported primarily by GRBAlpha alone. VZLUSAT-2 operated ~4 years (not beyond 4), and GRBBeta has operated <2 years at the time of writing. The abstract similarly states 'a scientific mission lasting beyond 4 years.' The authors should clarify that the >4-year benchmark is met by GRBAlpha specifically, with VZLUSAT-2 providing supporting data at ~4 years.

    Authors: The referee is correct. The >4-year benchmark is met by GRBAlpha specifically (operating from 2021/03 to 2025/06, i.e., over 4 years). VZLUSAT-2 operated for approximately 4 years (2022/01–2025/10), and GRBBeta has been operating for less than 2 years at the time of writing. We will revise both the abstract and the conclusions (§5, bullet 1) to state explicitly that the >4-year duration is demonstrated by GRBAlpha, with VZLUSAT-2 providing supporting data at approximately 4 years. The third bullet of §5, which concerns SiPM survival, will be similarly clarified. The overall conclusion—that SiPMs with PbSb shielding can survive beyond 4 years in LEO—remains valid, as it rests on the GRBAlpha flight data, but the phrasing will no longer imply that all three satellites independently confirm the >4-year duration. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §3 and Fig. 2 (top panel): The VZLUSAT-2 threshold evolution relies entirely on pre-launch ground calibration with no in-orbit gain correction, while GRBBeta's gain correction is described as preliminary due to limited activation-line measurements. The absolute energy threshold values for these two satellites could be systematically offset. Since Fig. 6 directly compares thresholds across all three satellites against simulated TID/TNID, the inclusion of uncorrected data points could lead to misinterpretation. The authors should either (a) add uncertainty bands or systematic-error estimates to the VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta data points in Figs. 2 and 6, or (b) more prominently distinguish the corrected (GRBAlpha) from uncorrected/preliminary (VZLUSAT-2, GRBBeta) data.

    Authors: We agree that the current presentation does not sufficiently distinguish the fully gain-corrected GRBAlpha data from the uncorrected (VZLUSAT-2) and preliminary (GRBBeta) data, particularly in Fig. 6 where all three satellites are compared against simulated TID/TNID. We will implement both suggested remedies. First, we will add representative systematic uncertainty estimates to the VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta data points in Figs. 2 and 6. For VZLUSAT-2, the uncertainty will reflect the expected magnitude of the gain drift based on the gain change measured on GRBAlpha (which used the same detector design and similar orbit). For GRBBeta, the uncertainty will reflect the limited statistics of activation-line measurements available so far. Second, we will more prominently distinguish the data sets visually—by using distinct marker styles (e.g., open symbols for uncorrected/preliminary data, filled symbols for fully corrected data)—and by adding an explicit note in the Fig. 6 caption directing the reader to the caveats discussed in §3. We believe these changes will prevent misinterpretation while preserving the value of including all three satellites in the comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: empirical measurement report with self-citation for methodology, not a derivation chain

full rationale

This paper is an empirical measurement report, not a derivation. The central claim—that SiPMs (Hamamatsu S13360-3050PE) shielded by 2.5 mm PbSb can survive >4 years in LEO—is directly supported by in-orbit data from three independent satellites (GRBAlpha, VZLUSAT-2, GRBBeta). No step in the paper's logic reduces to its inputs by construction. The threshold measurement method (Ref. 17, by overlapping authors) uses template spectra from early post-launch measurements to track noise peak evolution; this is a standard calibration technique, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The dose simulations use standard external tools (Geant4, GRAS, AP-8 model) with actual TLE orbital data, not fitted parameters. The paper cites Ref. 17 for the threshold determination method and Ref. 18 for detection statistics—both self-citations—but these are methodological references, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatz choices that would make the result circular. The VZLUSAT-2 reliance on ground calibration without in-orbit gain correction is a legitimate calibration limitation (correctly flagged by the authors themselves), not a circularity. No prediction is forced by a fit, no result is equivalent to its input by definition, and no self-citation chain makes the conclusion tautological. The paper presents independent empirical evidence from three separate spacecraft.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities, particles, forces, or dimensions. It uses standard radiation transport tools (Geant4, GRAS), standard trapped proton models (AP-8), and commercial off-the-shelf SiPMs. The PbSb shielding is a known material. The free parameters are design choices (shield thickness) and modeling decisions (solar cycle transition date), not fitted constants.

free parameters (2)
  • PbSb shield thickness (2–2.5 mm) = 2.5 mm
    Chosen as a design parameter for proton shielding; not fitted to the flight data but selected a priori based on prior radiation transport studies.
  • Solar cycle phase transition date (Aug 2022 / Sep 2022) = Aug 2022 minimum; Sep 2022 maximum
    The choice of when to switch from solar minimum to solar maximum in the AP-8 model affects the simulated proton flux. The transition date is set by the authors' judgment, not independently derived.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption AP-8 model adequately represents geomagnetically trapped proton fluxes at LEO altitudes (530–580 km) during 2021–2025.
    §4: The AP-8 model is used for all dose simulations. AP-8 is a standard model but is known to have uncertainties, especially during solar transitions and at LEO altitudes where the South Atlantic Anomaly dominates.
  • domain assumption The template background spectrum method (Ref. 17) correctly separates radiation-induced dark count changes from other instrumental effects (gain drift, temperature variations, electronic noise).
    §3: The low-energy threshold is determined using template spectra from early post-launch measurements. The method assumes that changes in the noise peak are dominated by SiPM dark count rate rather than other systematic effects.
  • domain assumption Activation lines in background spectra provide a reliable energy calibration reference across the full mission duration.
    §3: Gain calibration relies on shifts of activation lines seen during SAA passages. This assumes the activation line energies are stable and that the lines are correctly identified throughout the mission.
  • domain assumption The mass model used in Geant4/GRAS simulations adequately represents the actual satellite geometry and material composition for radiation transport purposes.
    §4: The remaining mass of each CubeSat is approximated as a box with corresponding mass. Simplifications in the mass model affect the accuracy of simulated shielding and dose deposition.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 15432 in / 3221 out tokens · 477439 ms · 2026-07-08T09:58:09.416748+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Characterization and simulation of the response of Multi-Pixel Photon Counters to low light levels,

    Vacheret, A., Barker, G. J., Dziewiecki, M., Guzowski, P., Haigh, M. D., and et al., “Characterization and simulation of the response of Multi-Pixel Photon Counters to low light levels,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 656, 69–83 (Nov. 2011)

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    Understanding and simulating SiPMs,

    Acerbi, F. and Gundacker, S., “Understanding and simulating SiPMs,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 926, 16–35 (May 2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Overview on the main parameters and technology of modern Silicon Photo- multipliers,

    Piemonte, C. and Gola, A., “Overview on the main parameters and technology of modern Silicon Photo- multipliers,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 926, 2–15 (May 2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Characterisation of SiPMs,

    Klanner, R., “Characterisation of SiPMs,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 926, 36–56 (May 2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Radiation damage in silicon detectors,

    Lindström, G., “Radiation damage in silicon detectors,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search A 512, 30–43 (Oct. 2003). 7

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    Radiation damage of SiPMs,

    Garutti, E. and Musienko, Y., “Radiation damage of SiPMs,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 926, 69–84 (May 2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Proton irradiation of SiPM arrays for POLAR-2,

    Mianowski, S., De Angelis, N., Hulsman, J., Kole, M., Kowalski, T., and et al., “Proton irradiation of SiPM arrays for POLAR-2,” Experimental Astronomy 55, 343–371 (Apr. 2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Radiation damage assessment of SensL SiPMs,

    Mitchell, L., Phlips, B., Johnson, W. N., Johnson-Rambert, M., Kansky, A. N., and Woolf, R., “Radiation damage assessment of SensL SiPMs,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 988, 164798 (Feb. 2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Estimation of the detected background by the future gamma ray transient mission CAMELOT,

    Řípa, J., Galgóczi, G., Werner, N., Pál, A., Ohno, M., and et al., “Estimation of the detected background by the future gamma ray transient mission CAMELOT,” Astronomische Nachrichten 340, 666–673 (Aug. 2019)

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Simulations of expected signal and background of gamma-ray sources by large field-of-view detectors aboard CubeSats,

    Galgóczi, G., Řípa, J., Campana, R., Werner, N., Pál, A., and et al., “Simulations of expected signal and background of gamma-ray sources by large field-of-view detectors aboard CubeSats,” Journal of Astronom- ical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 7, 028004 (Apr. 2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    A comparison of trapped particle models in low Earth orbit,

    Řípa, J., Dilillo, G., Campana, R., and Galgóczi, G., “A comparison of trapped particle models in low Earth orbit,” in [ Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series ], den Herder, J.- W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakazawa, K., eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series 11444, 114443P (Jan. 2021)

    work page 2021

  12. [12]

    In-orbit radiation damage characterization of SiPMs in the GRID-02 CubeSat detector,

    Zheng, X., Gao, H., Wen, J., Zeng, M., Pan, X., and et al., “In-orbit radiation damage characterization of SiPMs in the GRID-02 CubeSat detector,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 1044, 167510 (Dec. 2022)

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    The performance of SiPM-based gamma-ray detector (GRD) of GECAM-C,

    Zhang, D., Zheng, C., Liu, J., An, Z., Wang, C., Wen, X., Li, X., Sun, X., Gong, K., Liu, Y., Liu, X., Yang, S., Peng, W., Qiao, R., Guo, D., Feng, P., Zhang, Y., Xue, W., Tan, W., Cai, C., Xiao, S., Yi, Q., Xu, Y., Gao, M., Wang, J., Hou, D., Huang, Y., Zhao, X., Ma, X., Wang, P., Wang, J., Li, X., Zhang, P., Zhang, Z., Li, Y., Wang, H., Liang, X., Wang,...

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    First Results of SiPM Dark Current Long-term Evolution of GECAM,

    Liu, J.-C., Zheng, C., Zhang, J.-P., Xiong, S.-L., Zhang, D.-L., An, Z.-H., Guo, D.-Y., Li, X.-Q., Wen, X.-Y., Feng, P.-Y., Gao, M., Gong, K., Guo, H.-X., Huang, Y., Li, X.-B., Liu, X.-J., Liu, Y.-Q., Ma, X., Peng, W.-X., Qiao, R., Song, L.-M., Ren, Y.-Z., Sun, X.-L., Tan, W.-J., Wang, C.-W., Wang, J., Wang, J.-Z., Wang, P., Wang, Y., Xie, S.-L., Xu, Y.-B...

    work page 2026

  15. [15]

    Characterization of SiPM performance in a small satellite in low earth orbit using LabOSat-01,

    Finazzi, L., Izraelevitch, F., Barella, M., Gomez Marlasca, F., Sanca, G., and Golmar, F., “Characterization of SiPM performance in a small satellite in low earth orbit using LabOSat-01,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 1067, 169711 (Oct. 2024)

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Early results from GRBAlpha and VZLUSAT-2,

    Řípa, J., Pál, A., Ohno, M., Werner, N., Mészáros, L., Csák, B., Dafčíková, M., Dániel, V., Dudáš, J., Frajt, M., Hanák, P., Hudec, J., Junas, M., Kapuš, J., Kasal, M., Koleda, M., Laszlo, R., Lipovsky, P., Münz, F., Rezenov, M., Å melko, M., Svoboda, P., Takahashi, H., Topinka, M., Urbanec, T. ¡., Breuer, J.-P., Enoto, T., Frei, Z., Fukazawa, Y., Galgócz...

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Characterization of more than three years of in-orbit radiation damage of SiPMs on GRBAlpha and VZLUSAT-2 CubeSats,

    Řípa, J., Dafčíková, M., Kosík, P., Münz, F., Ohno, M., Galgóczi, G., Werner, N., Pál, A., Mészáros, L., Csák, B., Fukazawa, Y., Takahashi, H., Mizuno, T., Nakazawa, K., Odaka, H., Ichinohe, Y., Kapuš, J., Hudec, J., Frajt, M., Rezenov, M., Dániel, V., Svoboda, P., Dudáš, J., Sabol, M., László, R., Koleda, M., Ďuríšková, M., Szakszonová, L., Kolář, M., Hu...

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    GRBAlpha, VZLUSAT-2 and GRBBeta – GRB observations with CubeSats,

    Ripa, J., Dafcikova, M., Pal, A., Werner, N., Ohno, M., Meszaros, L., Munz, F., Csak, B., Galgoczi, G., Husarikova, N., Vitek, T., Kosik, P., Duriskova, M., Kolar, M., Szakszonova, L., Pazderka, M., Hroch, F., Topinka, M., Fukazawa, Y., Takahashi, H., Mizuno, T., Yokota, M., Breuer, J.-P., Nakazawa, K., Odaka, H., Ichinohe, Y., Hanak, P., smelko, M., Vert...

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    GRBAlpha: a 1U CubeSat mission for validating timing-based gamma-ray burst localization,

    Pál, A., Ohno, M., Mészáros, L., Werner, N., Ripa, J., and et al., “GRBAlpha: a 1U CubeSat mission for validating timing-based gamma-ray burst localization,” in [ Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2020: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray ], den Herder, J.-W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakazawa, K., eds., Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Confer...

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    GRBAlpha: The smallest astrophysical space observatory. I. Detector design, system description, and satellite operations,

    Pál, A., Ohno, M., Mészáros, L., Werner, N., Řípa, J., and et al., “GRBAlpha: The smallest astrophysical space observatory. I. Detector design, system description, and satellite operations,” Astronomy & Astro- physics 677, A40 (Sept. 2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    The peak flux of GRB 221009A measured with GRBAlpha,

    Řípa, J., Takahashi, H., Fukazawa, Y., Werner, N., Münz, F., Pál, A., Ohno, M., Dafčíková, M., Mészáros, L., Csák, B., Husáriková, N., Kolář, M., Galgóczi, G., Breuer, J.-P., Hroch, F., Hudec, J., Kapuš, J., Frajt, M., Rezenov, M., Laszlo, R., Koleda, M., Šmelko, M., Hanák, P., Lipovský, P., Urbanec, T., Kasal, M., Povalač, A., Uchida, Y., Poon, H., Matak...

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Towards the CAMELOT fleet of GRB detecting nano-satellites: the design concept of the 3U members based on the GRBAlpha and VZLUSAT-2 heritage,

    Mészáros, L., Pál, A., Werner, N., Rípa, J., Ohno, M., and et al., “Towards the CAMELOT fleet of GRB detecting nano-satellites: the design concept of the 3U members based on the GRBAlpha and VZLUSAT-2 heritage,” in [ Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2022: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray ], den Herder, J.-W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakazawa, K., eds., Society of ...

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    A Stratospheric Balloon Flight Platform and its Employment in Gravitational Wave Counterpart Observation Experiments,

    Mészáros, L., Pál, A., Werner, N., Ohno, M., Galgóczi, G., and et al., “A Stratospheric Balloon Flight Platform and its Employment in Gravitational Wave Counterpart Observation Experiments,” in [ Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series ], Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conference Series 53, 180–189 (Sept. 2021)

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    CAMELOT: Cubesats Applied for MEasur- ing and LOcalising Transients mission overview,

    Werner, N., Řípa, J., Pál, A., Ohno, M., Tarcai, N., and et al., “CAMELOT: Cubesats Applied for MEasur- ing and LOcalising Transients mission overview,” in [ Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray ], den Herder, J.-W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakazawa, K., eds., Society of Photo-Optical In- strumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference...

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    CAMELOT: design and performance verification of the detector concept and localization capability,

    Ohno, M., Werner, N., Pál, A., Řípa, J., Galgóczi, G., and et al., “CAMELOT: design and performance verification of the detector concept and localization capability,” in [ Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray ], den Herder, J.-W. A., Nikzad, S., and Nakazawa, K., eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE...

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Development of CubeSat with COTS camera enabling EO with high GSD,

    Dániel, V., Svoboda, P., Junas, M., Sabol, M., Cagáň, J., and et al., “Development of CubeSat with COTS camera enabling EO with high GSD,” in [ Sensors, Systems, and Next-Generation Satellites XXIV ], Neeck, S. P., Hélière, A., and Kimura, T., eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series 11530, 115300Z (Sept. 2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Directional-Sensitive X- ray/Gamma-ray Imager on Board the VZLUSAT-2 CubeSat for Wide Field-of-View Observation of GRBs in Low Earth Orbit,

    Granja, C., Hudec, R., Maršíková, V., Inneman, A., Pína, L., and et al., “Directional-Sensitive X- ray/Gamma-ray Imager on Board the VZLUSAT-2 CubeSat for Wide Field-of-View Observation of GRBs in Low Earth Orbit,” Universe 8, 241 (Apr. 2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    Low Altitude Trapped Radiation Model Using TIROS/NOAA Data,

    Huston, S. L., Kuck, G. A., and Pfitzer, K. A., “Low Altitude Trapped Radiation Model Using TIROS/NOAA Data,” Geophysical Monograph Series 97, 119 (Jan. 1996)

    work page 1996

  29. [29]

    GRAS: A General-Purpose 3-D Modular Simulation Tool for Space Environment Effects Analysis,

    Santin, G., Ivanchenko, V., Evans, H., Nieminen, P., and Daly, E., “GRAS: A General-Purpose 3-D Modular Simulation Tool for Space Environment Effects Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 52, 2294– 2299 (Dec. 2005). 9

    work page 2005

  30. [30]

    Recent developments in GEANT4,

    Allison, J., Amako, K., Apostolakis, J., Arce, P., Asai, M., Aso, T., Bagli, E., Bagulya, A., Banerjee, S., Barrand, G., Beck, B. R., Bogdanov, A. G., Brandt, D., Brown, J. M. C., Burkhardt, H., Canal, P., Cano-Ott, D., Chauvie, S., Cho, K., Cirrone, G. A. P., Cooperman, G., Cortés-Giraldo, M. A., Cosmo, G., Cuttone, G., Depaola, G., Desorgher, L., Dong, ...

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Geometry Description Markup Language for Physics Simulation and Analysis Applications,

    Chytracek, R., Mccormick, J., Pokorski, W., and Santin, G., “Geometry Description Markup Language for Physics Simulation and Analysis Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 53, 2892–2896 (Jan. 2006)

    work page 2006

  32. [32]

    NIEL for heavy ions: an analytical approach,

    Messenger, S. R., Burke, E. A., Xapsos, M. A., Summers, G. P., Walters, R. J., Jun, I., and Jordan, T., “NIEL for heavy ions: an analytical approach,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 50, 1919–1923 (Dec. 2003). 10

    work page 1919