pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.09207 · v1 · pith:H64F6FK6new · submitted 2019-06-21 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM

Hybrid CMOS detectors for the Lynx x-ray surveyor high definition x-ray imager

Samuel V. Hull , Abraham D. Falcone , Evan Bray , Mitchell Wages , Maria McQuaide , David N. Burrows This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 18:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM
keywords hybrid CMOS detectorsx-ray imagingLynx missionHDXIread noiseenergy resolutionprototype detectorscorrelated double sampling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Prototype hybrid CMOS detectors reach 5.4 e- read noise and 148 eV energy resolution at 5.9 keV for Lynx HDXI.

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

This paper reports lab measurements on 12.5-micron pitch x-ray hybrid CMOS detector prototypes that incorporate in-pixel correlated double sampling and crosstalk-eliminating capacitive transimpedance amplifiers. These devices reach read noise as low as 5.4 electrons with energy resolution of 148 eV at 5.9 keV and 78 eV at 0.53 keV while covering 0.2 to 10 keV. A sympathetic reader would care because the combination of low noise, fine pixels, fast readout, and radiation hardness addresses the requirements for high angular resolution and large field-of-view imaging on the Lynx mission concept. The work positions these sensors as a candidate technology for the high-definition x-ray imager instrument.

Core claim

Prototype small-pixel x-ray hybrid CMOS detectors with in-pixel correlated double sampling and capacitive transimpedance amplifiers achieve read noise as low as 5.4 e- and best energy resolution of 148 eV (2.5 percent) at 5.9 keV and 78 eV (14.9 percent) at 0.53 keV, supporting their use in the HDXI instrument on Lynx.

What carries the argument

In-pixel correlated double sampling combined with crosstalk-eliminating capacitive transimpedance amplifiers, which suppress noise and improve spectral performance in small-pixel devices.

If this is right

  • The detectors provide fast readout, low power consumption, and radiation hardness while maintaining high detection efficiency from 0.2 to 10 keV.
  • Small pixel sizes allow the devices to match high-resolution x-ray optics without sacrificing field of view.
  • Recent noise and resolution improvements make hybrid CMOS sensors competitive for large-format focal planes in future missions.
  • The architecture supports the high throughput and fine angular resolution needed by the Lynx high-definition x-ray imager.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Successful scaling would allow hybrid CMOS arrays to replace or complement other detector types in missions that need both spectral resolution and timing capability.
  • The same pixel-level circuitry could be adapted for other energy bands if the sensor material is changed.
  • Radiation hardness data from these prototypes could inform design margins for other space instruments using similar CMOS processes.

Load-bearing premise

Performance measured on small prototype devices in laboratory conditions will translate without significant degradation to the large-format detector arrays required for the HDXI instrument when operated in the space radiation and thermal environment.

What would settle it

Full-size detector arrays fabricated with the same process, exposed to representative space radiation doses and thermal cycling, then re-measured for read noise and energy resolution at 5.9 keV.

read the original abstract

X-ray hybrid CMOS detectors (HCDs) are a promising candidate for future x-ray missions requiring high throughput and fine angular resolution along with large field-of-view, such as the high-definition x-ray imager (HDXI) instrument on the Lynx x-ray surveyor mission concept. These devices offer fast readout capability, low power consumption, and radiation hardness while maintaining high detection efficiency from 0.2 to 10 keV. In addition, x-ray hybrid CMOS sensors may be fabricated with small pixel sizes to accommodate high-resolution optics and have shown great improvements in recent years in noise and spectral resolution performance. In particular, 12.5-{\mu}m pitch prototype devices that include in-pixel correlated double sampling capability and crosstalk eliminating capacitive transimpedance amplifiers, have been fabricated and tested. These detectors have achieved read noise as low as 5.4 e-, and we measure the best energy resolution to be 148 eV (2.5%) at 5.9 keV and 78 eV (14.9%) at 0.53 keV. We will describe the characterization of these prototype small-pixel x-ray HCDs, and we will discuss their applicability to the HDXI instrument on Lynx.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports fabrication and laboratory testing of 12.5-μm pitch prototype X-ray hybrid CMOS detectors that incorporate in-pixel correlated double sampling and capacitive transimpedance amplifiers. It states measured performance of read noise as low as 5.4 e− together with energy resolutions of 148 eV (2.5 %) at 5.9 keV and 78 eV (14.9 %) at 0.53 keV, and discusses the relevance of these devices to the High-Definition X-ray Imager (HDXI) on the Lynx mission concept.

Significance. Direct experimental measurements on functioning small-pixel HCD prototypes constitute a concrete data point in the development of fast, low-power, radiation-tolerant X-ray sensors. If the reported metrics prove reproducible on large-format arrays under flight-like conditions, the technology would address key requirements for high-angular-resolution, wide-field X-ray imaging on Lynx-class missions.

major comments (2)
  1. [applicability discussion] The applicability discussion for Lynx HDXI rests on the assumption that laboratory performance of small prototypes will translate to large-format arrays in the space radiation and thermal environment, yet no data on array-scale uniformity, yield, or in-situ radiation testing are supplied to support that extrapolation.
  2. [prototype characterization] The abstract and prototype-characterization sections state concrete performance numbers (5.4 e− read noise, 148 eV and 78 eV resolutions) but supply no information on the number of devices tested, test procedures, calibration methods, statistics, or uncertainties, preventing evaluation of the data support for the central performance claims.
minor comments (1)
  1. [abstract] Notation for energy resolution (eV and percentage) is used without explicit definition of the percentage basis (FWHM or otherwise) in the abstract.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and constructive comments on our manuscript describing prototype 12.5 μm pitch X-ray hybrid CMOS detectors. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The applicability discussion for Lynx HDXI rests on the assumption that laboratory performance of small prototypes will translate to large-format arrays in the space radiation and thermal environment, yet no data on array-scale uniformity, yield, or in-situ radiation testing are supplied to support that extrapolation.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript reports results exclusively from small prototype devices and contains no measurements of large-format array uniformity, yield, or radiation testing under flight-like conditions. The applicability discussion is framed as a forward-looking assessment of the technology's potential for Lynx HDXI based on the prototype metrics achieved. In a revised manuscript we will explicitly qualify this discussion to emphasize the prototype nature of the results and the additional development steps (including uniformity, yield, and radiation testing) required before flight applicability can be claimed. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The abstract and prototype-characterization sections state concrete performance numbers (5.4 e− read noise, 148 eV and 78 eV resolutions) but supply no information on the number of devices tested, test procedures, calibration methods, statistics, or uncertainties, preventing evaluation of the data support for the central performance claims.

    Authors: The reported performance figures (5.4 e− read noise, 148 eV at 5.9 keV, 78 eV at 0.53 keV) were obtained from laboratory measurements on the fabricated prototype devices. We will expand the prototype-characterization section (and update the abstract if needed) to include the number of devices tested, detailed test procedures, calibration methods, and any available statistics or uncertainties. This additional information will strengthen the evidential basis for the central claims. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Data on array-scale uniformity, yield, or in-situ radiation testing of large-format devices under space radiation and thermal conditions

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental measurements of prototypes

full rationale

The paper reports laboratory measurements of read noise and energy resolution on fabricated 12.5-μm pitch prototype hybrid CMOS detectors. No derivations, model equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains are present; the central claims are empirical results from direct testing. The discussion of applicability to Lynx HDXI is qualitative extrapolation, not a load-bearing derivation that reduces to the paper's own inputs by construction. This is a self-contained experimental report against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental characterization paper reporting laboratory measurements on fabricated prototype detectors. No free parameters are fitted, no axioms are invoked, and no new physical entities are postulated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5770 in / 1241 out tokens · 43175 ms · 2026-05-25T18:28:41.935719+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]

    The Lynx X-ray Observatory: concept study over- view and status,

    J. A. Gaskin et al., “The Lynx X-ray Observatory: concept study over- view and status, ” Proc. SPIE 10699, 106990N (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Lynx X-ray Observatory: an overview,

    J. A. Gaskin et al., “Lynx X-ray Observatory: an overview, ” J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 5(2) (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    The high definition x-ray imager (HDXI) instrument on the Lynx X-ray surveyor,

    A. D. Falcone et al., “The high definition x-ray imager (HDXI) instrument on the Lynx X-ray surveyor, ” Proc. SPIE 10699, 1069912 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Overview of the high definition X-ray imager (HDXI) on the Lynx X-ray surveyor,

    A. D. Falcone et al., “Overview of the high definition X-ray imager (HDXI) on the Lynx X-ray surveyor, ” J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 5(2) (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Simulations and mitigation of pile-up in XMM CCD instruments,

    D. H. Lumb, “Simulations and mitigation of pile-up in XMM CCD instruments,” Exp. Astron. 10, 439 –456 (2000)

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    Large-area visible arrays: performance of hybrid and monolithic alternatives,

    L. J. Kozlowski et al., “Large-area visible arrays: performance of hybrid and monolithic alternatives, ” Proc. SPIE 4836, 247 –259 (2002)

    work page 2002

  7. [7]

    Proton radiation damage experiment on a hybrid CMOS detector,

    E. Bray et al., “Proton radiation damage experiment on a hybrid CMOS detector,” Proc. SPIE 10709, 107090L (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Hybrid CMOS x-ray detectors: the next generation for focused x-ray telescopes,

    A. D. Falcone et al., “Hybrid CMOS x-ray detectors: the next generation for focused x-ray telescopes, ” Proc. SPIE 6686, 668602 (2007)

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    Teledyne imaging sensors: silicon CMOS imaging tech- nologies for x-ray, UV , visible, and near infrared,

    Y . Bai et al., “Teledyne imaging sensors: silicon CMOS imaging tech- nologies for x-ray, UV , visible, and near infrared, ” Proc. SPIE 7021, 702102 (2008)

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    Teledyne imaging sensors: infrared imaging tech- nologies for astronomy and civil space,

    J. W. Beletic et al., “Teledyne imaging sensors: infrared imaging tech- nologies for astronomy and civil space, ” Proc. SPIE 7021, 70210H (2008)

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    The wide-field infrared survey explorer (WISE): Mission description and initial on-orbit performance,

    E. L. Wright et al., “The wide-field infrared survey explorer (WISE): Mission description and initial on-orbit performance, ” Astron. J. 140(6), 1868 –1881 (2010)

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    OCO-2 (Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2) mission operations planning and initial opera- tions experiences,

    R. R. Basilio, H. R. Pollock, and S. L. Hunyadi-Lay, “OCO-2 (Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2) mission operations planning and initial opera- tions experiences,” Proc. SPIE 9241, 924105 (2014)

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    New and better detectors for the JWST near-infra- red spectrograph,

    B. J. Rauscher et al., “New and better detectors for the JWST near-infra- red spectrograph,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 126(942), 739 (2014)

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    Characterization of Si hybrid CMOS detectors for use in the soft x-ray band,

    Z. R. Prieskorn et al., “Characterization of Si hybrid CMOS detectors for use in the soft x-ray band,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 717, 83–93 (2013)

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    Measuring the x-ray quantum efficiency of a hybrid CMOS detector with 55Fe,

    S. D. Bongiorno et al., “Measuring the x-ray quantum efficiency of a hybrid CMOS detector with 55Fe, ” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A 785,8 7 –92 (2015)

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Soft x-ray quantum efficiency of silicon hybrid CMOS detectors,

    Z. R. Prieskorn et al., “Soft x-ray quantum efficiency of silicon hybrid CMOS detectors,” Proc. SPIE 9154, 915410 (2014)

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    Interpixel capacitance in large format CMOS hybrid arrays,

    G. Finger et al., “Interpixel capacitance in large format CMOS hybrid arrays,” Proc. SPIE 6276, 62760F (2006)

    work page 2006

  18. [18]

    Measurements of Si hybrid CMOS x-ray detec- tor characteristics,

    S. D. Bongiorno et al., “Measurements of Si hybrid CMOS x-ray detec- tor characteristics,” Proc. SPIE 7435, 74350E (2009)

    work page 2009

  19. [19]

    Characterization of an x-ray hybrid CMOS detector with low interpixel capacitive crosstalk,

    C. V . Griffith et al., “Characterization of an x-ray hybrid CMOS detector with low interpixel capacitive crosstalk, ” Proc. SPIE 8453, 84530F (2012)

    work page 2012

  20. [20]

    X-ray hybrid CMOS detectors: recent devel- opment and characterization progress,

    T. Chattopadhyay et al., “X-ray hybrid CMOS detectors: recent devel- opment and characterization progress, ” Proc. SPIE 10699, 106992E (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Recent x-ray hybrid CMOS detector developments and measurements,

    S. V . Hull et al., “Recent x-ray hybrid CMOS detector developments and measurements,” Proc. SPIE 10397, 1039704 (2017)

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    An introduction to the water recovery x-ray rocket,

    D. M. Miles et al., “An introduction to the water recovery x-ray rocket, ” Proc. SPIE 10397, 103970R (2017)

    work page 2017

  23. [23]

    Flight camera package design, calibration, and per- formance for the WRX Rocket mission,

    M. Wages et al., “Flight camera package design, calibration, and per- formance for the WRX Rocket mission, ” Proc. SPIE , in prep (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Small pixel hybrid CMOS x-ray detectors,

    S. V . Hull et al., “Small pixel hybrid CMOS x-ray detectors,” Proc. SPIE 10709, 107090E (2018)

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    Speedster-EXD: a new event-driven hybrid CMOS x-ray detector,

    C. V . Griffith et al., “Speedster-EXD: a new event-driven hybrid CMOS x-ray detector,” J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 2, 016001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    The Swift X-ray Telescope,

    D. N. Burrows et al., “The Swift X-ray Telescope, ” Space Sci. Rev. 120(3), 165 –195 (2005)

    work page 2005

  27. [27]

    Pair creation energy and Fano factor of silicon measured at 185 K using Fe55 x-rays,

    I. V . Kotov, H. Neal, and P . O ’Connor, “Pair creation energy and Fano factor of silicon measured at 185 K using Fe55 x-rays, ” Proc. SPIE 10709, 107091E (2018)

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Characterizing subpixel spatial resolution of a hybrid CMOS detector,

    E. Bray et al., “Characterizing subpixel spatial resolution of a hybrid CMOS detector,” J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst. 4(3), 038002 (2018)

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    Energy dependent charge spread function in a dedicated synchrotron beam pnCCD detector,

    H. Y ousef, “Energy dependent charge spread function in a dedicated synchrotron beam pnCCD detector, ” PhD Thesis, University of Siegen (2011)

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    Electron and hole drift velocity measurements in sil- icon and their empirical relation to electric field and temperature,

    C. Canali et al., “Electron and hole drift velocity measurements in sil- icon and their empirical relation to electric field and temperature, ” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 22, 1045 –1047 (1975)

    work page 1975

  31. [31]

    A review of some charge transport properties of silicon,

    C. Jacoboni et al., “A review of some charge transport properties of silicon,” Solid-State Electron. 20(2), 77 –89 (1977)

    work page 1977

  32. [32]

    Electron and hole mobil- ities in silicon as a function of concentration and temperature,

    N. D. Arora, J. R. Hauser, and D. J. Roulston, “Electron and hole mobil- ities in silicon as a function of concentration and temperature, ” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 29, 292 –295 (1982). Samuel V. Hull is a graduate student at The Pennsylvania State University, currently working toward a PhD in astronomy and astro- physics. He received his BA degree in...

    work page 1982