Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 29 references

Automated analysis of the visual properties of superconducting detectors

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that optical microscope images of superconducting detector chips, processed by a design-template computer-vision pipeline, can flag low-yield wafers before cryogenic testing, though the paper's own two-chip cryogenic…

desk verdict Useful metrology and a reproducible pipeline, but the wafer-screening claim outruns the evidence: the only real-chip yield check contradicts it, and the 98.6% simulation accuracy is partly circular. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.02357 v3 pith:7NEJFCQ6 submitted 2025-01-04 astro-ph.IM hep-exphysics.ins-det

K. R. Ferguson , A. N. Bender , N. Whitehorn , P. S. Barry , T. W. Cecil , K. R. Dibert , E. S. Martsen This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMhep-exphysics.ins-det
keywords superconductingdetectorsmicrowavekineticinductanceMKIDcomputervisiondefectdetectionopticalmicroscopycryogenictestingwaferyieldprediction
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 tries to establish that optical microscope images of superconducting detector chips can be analyzed automatically at room temperature to flag wafers likely to underperform, before the expensive multi-week cryogenic testing begins. The authors build a computer-vision pipeline that stitches microscope tiles, locates each detector from a design-file template, flood-fills the conducting lines to find breaks and bridges, and measures line widths. Simulations with inserted defects report 98.6% detection accuracy. On two prototype chips of microwave kinetic inductance detectors for a planned cosmic microwave background camera, the pipeline predicts a 100% yield for the visually clean chip and 38.3%–45.1% for the chip with deposited material; cryogenic tests later measured 88.3% and 90.1%. The authors position the pipeline as a pre-screen meant to separate clearly problematic wafers from potentially viable ones, not to replace cryogenic testing.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the flood-fill 'paint bucket' count along a skeletonized path: the design file provides the exact centerline of each inductor and capacitor leg, the binarized image is seeded at known locations, and the fraction of the centerline path that fills determines whether a line is broken or a capacitor is bridged. Supporting machinery includes Scharr edge detection, a probabilistic Hough transform, template matching with a refined angle search to fix detector position and orientation, Otsu binarization, and a line-width estimate formed by the ratio of filled pixels in measurement boxes to the same boxes in the template. This design-file-anchored approach is what lets the pipeline detect known defect types in very large stitched images without deep learning.

What would settle it

Run the pipeline on a batch of wafers, then individually measure every detector's resonance in a cryostat rather than counting chip-level transmission dips; if detectors flagged as inoperable still resonate at their design frequencies, or visually clean detectors fail, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a geometry-aware image-analysis pipeline can serve as a room-temperature proxy for cryogenic detector testing. Using the known layout of the detector from the fabrication design file, the pipeline aligns each stitched optical image, then applies a flood-fill algorithm seeded on each inductor and capacitor leg; a leg that fails to fill to 99% of its design path is flagged as a broken line, and a capacitor leg that fills more than 5% when the other leg is seeded is flagged as a bridge shorting the capacitor. The same alignment is used to measure fractional line-width deviations, which the paper connects to resonant-frequency shifts. In simulation, the pipeline identifies inserted defects with 98.6% accuracy, and on two real prototype chips it found one defect on the first chip and 131 on the second, predicting yields of 100% and 38.3–45.1% respectively. The paper also reports that cryogenic measurements gave yields of 88.3% and 90.1%, and explains the discrepancy through small resonances, overlapping frequencies, defects outside the searched regions, and non-conductive deposited material.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that optical appearance maps to electrical operability—a detector with no visible break or bridge will work, and one with a visible defect will not—and the paper's own cryogenic measurements contradict both halves.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Wafers with low predicted yield can be discarded before a multi-week cryogenic cooldown, saving the dominant cost of detector testing.
  • High-yield chips can be prioritized for cryogenic testing, so the pipeline acts as a triage stage rather than a replacement for electrical measurement.
  • The measured line-width maps give fabrication feedback: radial trends and pixel-level correlations between inductors and capacitors reveal process biases, including a directionality bias on the second chip.
  • Because the pipeline uses design-file templates rather than learned features, the same process can be adapted to other lithographic detector geometries.
  • Connecting measured line widths to resonant-frequency models should let fabricators predict and reduce frequency scatter in large arrays.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: if the two-chip comparison is representative, predicted yield is not a reliable estimate of actual yield; chip two would have been discarded on a 38–45% prediction despite operating at 90.1%, so the pipeline's main value may be catching gross fabrication problems rather than forecasting operability.
  • Editorial extension: the 98.6% simulation accuracy is for synthetic circular defects; real defects such as iridescent residue trigger flags while leaving detectors electrically functional, so practical screening accuracy on real wafers is likely lower than the simulated number suggests.
  • Editorial extension: a stronger test would map each visual flag to the resonance of that specific detector rather than comparing chip-level counts, allowing the visual-to-electrical link to be calibrated per defect type.
  • Editorial extension: extending the search to the connecting lines between inductors and capacitors, and to the chip feedlines, is the paper's own stated next step and is likely where the remaining prediction gap lives.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an automated optical-microscopy analysis pipeline for SPT-3G+ microwave kinetic inductance detectors. The pipeline locates and orients each MKID pixel, flood-fills the inductor and capacitor legs to flag line breaks and capacitor bridges, measures fractional line-width shifts, and is validated on a suite of 704 images with simulated defects, yielding a reported detection accuracy of 98.6%. Running the pipeline on two prototype chips flags one defect on chip one and 131 defects on chip two, leading to predicted yields of 100% and 38.3–45.1%, respectively; cryogenic testing subsequently measured yields of 88.3% and 90.1%. The paper also reports radial line-width trends and within-pixel correlations, which provide fabrication feedback.

Significance. If the screening claim were established, the technique would be valuable for large MKID arrays by saving cryogenic testing time. The paper is also useful for its detailed description of the imaging, stitching, and computer-vision pipeline, and the open-source implementation is a concrete reproducibility asset. The line-width measurements already offer a demonstrable fabrication insight, namely the directionality bias inferred from the two chips. However, the central claim that optical images can flag under-performing wafers before cryogenic testing is not supported by the only real-chip comparison presented, and the headline simulation accuracy is inflated by a post hoc reclassification of the truth definition. These are load-bearing issues rather than presentation problems.

major comments (4)
  1. [5.1.1] The real-chip comparison does not support the abstract's screening claim. The pipeline predicts 100% yield for chip one and 38.3–45.1% for chip two, but the measured cryogenic yields are 88.3% and 90.1%. Since the two chips have comparable measured yields while the pipeline flags 131 detectors on chip two and only one on chip one, the visual defect flags are not demonstrated to be discriminative of cryogenic operability. A per-detector or per-wafer calibration against cryogenic data is needed before the claim that the pipeline flags under-performing wafers can be accepted.
  2. [4.2] The 98.6% simulation accuracy is partly circular. The authors derive a 4.12-pixel line-thinness cutoff from the pipeline's own false-positive distribution (Section 4.2, Fig. 10) and then use that same cutoff to reclassify 46 false positives as true defects, changing the accuracy from 648/704 = 92.0% to 694/704 = 98.6%. This makes the reported metric measure agreement with a post hoc truth criterion rather than with an a priori definition of detector damage. The revised truth definition should be validated on an independent set of simulated or real defects, and the pre-reclassification accuracy should be reported alongside the 98.6% figure.
  3. [5.1.1] The argument that chip two 'would likely be passed over anyways' because of possible effects on optical performance is not a measured outcome and makes the screening claim unfalsifiable in this sample. No optical-performance or other independent end-of-line measurement is presented, so the pipeline's ability to identify wafers that should be discarded before cryogenic testing remains an assertion rather than a demonstrated result.
  4. [3.2, 5.1] The operability model underlying the flag counts mixes categories with different predicted consequences: capacitor line breaks are said not to affect operability, overflow events on chip one are interpreted as weak-edge capacitor breaks, and the iridescent deposits on chip two are expected not to break conducting lines. The reported yield range of 38.3–45.1% depends on interpretive choices about which flagged detectors are inoperable, but no validation is provided that these choices map to electrical behavior. The paper should either separate the defect classes in the yield calculation or calibrate each class against per-detector cryogenic data.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 6] The caption contains a typo: "MIKD pixel" should be "MKID pixel."
  2. [4.1, 4.2] The clean input images used for simulations are verified by visual inspection and by the pipeline itself; this is reasonable, but the statement that 'defects found in simulated images are interpreted correctly' should be softened to reflect that the truth determination is itself algorithmic and can fail in edge cases, as the paper acknowledges for 22 of the 97 flagged images.
  3. [References] Reference [19] is a GitHub fork; for reproducibility, a version tag, commit hash, or release DOI should be cited.
  4. [3.2] The sentence "We set one such seed location for each inductor on an MKID pixel" should read "We set one seed location for each inductor" or similar, since more than one seed is set and the current phrasing is grammatically awkward.
  5. [6] The statement that the process is 'general and can be applied to other geometries' is plausible but currently supported only by a single detector geometry; noting this limitation explicitly would be more precise.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The headline 98.6% simulated detection accuracy is partly produced by redefining the defect ground truth with a threshold taken from the pipeline's own false positives; the real-chip yield predictions are empirically contradicted, but that is a correctness issue rather than circularity.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.2 (Simulation results), reclassification paragraph following Fig. 10]
    "We then return to our defect truth determination, and reclassify any subtraction-type defect that is one broken contour away from being a true defect as a true defect as long as the unbroken contour is less than 4.12 pixels away from the defect edge. Once this is done, the number of false positives in our original simulation set changes from 51 to 5 (and the number of true positives from 455 to 501), giving an overall defect-finding accuracy of 694/704 = 98.6%."

    The 4.12-pixel cutoff is the maximum line thinness among the pipeline's false positives ('The largest line thinness for which a false positive was still found is 4.12 pixels'). Reclassifying false positives with thinness below this cutoff as true defects converts 46 of the 51 original false positives into true positives by construction. The reported 98.6% accuracy (694/704) is the arithmetic consequence of this relabeling, not an independent measurement against a fixed ground truth: the validation truth has been calibrated to the pipeline's own detection boundary. The simulated-image inputs are also vetted partly by the pipeline itself, so its blind spots are not independently probed.

full rationale

The only constructional circularity is in the simulation-based accuracy claim. The 4.12-pixel line-thinness threshold is taken from the pipeline's own false-positive distribution, and the ground-truth definition is then amended so that defects at or below that thinness count as true defects; the jump from 51 false positives to 5 is a relabeling, not an independent performance measurement. This makes the headline 'detection accuracy of 98.6%' a fitted quantity rather than an external benchmark. A secondary related concern is that the 'clean' input images for the simulations are verified with the same pipeline, although visual inspection provides some independent check. No load-bearing self-citation chain appears: references to the authors' prior work ([15], [22], [23], [24]) supply detector design context and fabrication-bias evidence but are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the source of the main claim. The real-chip comparison in Section 5.1.1 shows the yield predictions (100%, 38.3-45.1%) disagree with measured yields (88.3%, 90.1%); that is empirical disconfirmation of the screening assumption, not circularity, so it does not by itself raise the circularity score, though it reinforces that the central screening claim is not established. Overall, the paper's core defect-search and line-width measurements have independent content, but the headline validation number is partially circular, warranting a score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on many hand-set thresholds and on the assumption that visible defects map to electrical operability. The most consequential free parameter is the 4.12-pixel reclassification threshold, which is fit to the pipeline's own false positives and is largely responsible for the 98.6% accuracy figure. The yield predictions additionally depend on an unvalidated mapping from visual breaks to cryogenic failure, and the simulation truth criteria are defined internally rather than against external measurements.

free parameters (9)
  • Inductor fill-fraction threshold = 99%
    A detector is flagged as having a broken inductor when less than 99% of the skeleton path is flood-filled (Section 3.2). Hand-set and directly controls inoperability flags.
  • Capacitor leg fill-fraction threshold = 99.9%
    A capacitor leg is flagged as broken when less than 99.9% filled (Section 3.2). Hand-set and controls capacitor defect flags.
  • Unseeded capacitor leg bridge threshold = 5%
    An unseeded capacitor leg filled above 5% triggers an inoperability flag for a bridge (Section 3.2). The authors note actual bridges are near 100%, so sensitivity to the exact value is low, but it still affects flags.
  • Overflow circle threshold = 5%
    Pipeline results are marked questionable if any pre-chosen overflow circle has more than 5% filled pixels (Section 3.4). Hand-set.
  • Scharr edge binarization threshold = 25% of maximum
    Edges above 25% of the maximum Scharr response are binarized to 1 (Section 3.1). This threshold determines which edges survive and affects skeletonization and defect detection.
  • Isolated object removal size = 10 pixels
    Connected components smaller than 10 pixels are removed from the skeleton to reduce dust (Section 3.1). Hand-set.
  • Capacitor arc radius adjustments = 1.48 um (long), 1.04 um (short)
    Template capacitor arcs are enlarged by these amounts to improve alignment with the binarized image (Section 3.2). These values are fitted to the images and improve flood-fill accounting.
  • Simulation truth reclassification distance = 4.12 pixels (0.94 um)
    After seeing the false-positive distribution, defects with an unbroken contour closer than 4.12 pixels to the defect edge are reclassified as true defects (Section 4.2). Fitted to the false positives; this produces the headline 98.6% accuracy.
  • Orientation refinement grid = 100 angles over +-1 degree
    Orientation is refined by testing 100 angles spanning +-1 degree around the initial estimate (Section 3.1). Hand-chosen grid.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Optical microscope images at 20x magnification resolve all performance-relevant defects on MKID pixels.
    The 20x setting was chosen as the lowest magnification that resolves the smallest features under study (Section 2), but Section 5.1.1 admits that defects on the lines connecting inductors and capacitors are not visible to the pipeline.
  • domain assumption A detector with unbroken inductor lines and unbridged capacitor legs will be operable; a detected break or bridge makes it inoperable.
    This mapping is assumed in Section 3.2 and drives the yield estimates in Section 5.1. The cryogenic comparison in Section 5.1.1 shows the mapping fails on both chips.
  • ad hoc to paper The contour-breaking rules in Section 4.1 define which simulated defects are true and should be flagged.
    The truth definition is based on the expected behavior of the pipeline's own edge and flood-fill logic, and it is later modified with the 4.12-pixel reclassification threshold (Section 4.2). It is not an externally validated ground truth.
  • domain assumption The design-file template is a correct reference, so any significant deviation from it in the binarized image is a fabrication defect.
    The pipeline builds templates from the detector design file and treats differences as defects (Section 3.2). Sub-pixel misalignment and line-width variation are handled ad hoc, but the template remains the ground reference.
  • domain assumption Cryogenic yield measured by counting distinct transmission dips is a valid benchmark, modulo small or overlapping resonances.
    Section 5.1.1 uses dip counting as the true yield (88.3% and 90.1%) while listing reasons why it can underestimate functional detector counts.
  • domain assumption A 10% line width shift induces approximately a 4% inductance shift and a 2% resonant frequency shift, per the cited model.
    Section 3.3 uses this preliminary model to argue line-width measurements matter, but the paper does not derive or validate the relationship.
  • standard math Standard image-processing primitives such as Scharr edges, probabilistic Hough, Otsu thresholding, skeletonization, and flood fill behave as documented in the cited packages.
    The pipeline relies on these algorithms as building blocks in Sections 3.1 and 3.2; their correctness is assumed from the literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Automated analysis of the visual properties of superconducting detectors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7NEJFCQ6

@misc{pith2026250102357,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Automated analysis of the visual properties of superconducting detectors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7NEJFCQ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.02357}
}
read the original abstract

The testing and quality assurance of cryogenic superconducting detectors is a time- and labor-intensive process. As experiments deploy increasingly larger arrays of detectors, new methods are needed for performing this testing quickly. Here, we propose a process for flagging under-performing detector wafers before they are ever tested cryogenically. Detectors are imaged under an optical microscope, and computer vision techniques are used to analyze the images, searching for visual defects and other predictors of poor performance. Pipeline performance is verified via a suite of images with simulated defects, yielding a detection accuracy of 98.6%. Lastly, results from running the pipeline on prototype microwave kinetic inductance detectors from the planned SPT-3G+ experiment are presented.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J., & Rosenberg, D

    Nam, S., Miller, A. J., & Rosenberg, D. Low-temperature optical photon detectors for quantum information applications. 2004, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 520, 523, doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2003.11.304

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2003.11.304 2004

  2. [2]

    2020, Cryogenic Detectors, ed

    Pretzl, K. 2020, Cryogenic Detectors, ed. C. W. Fabjan & H. Schopper (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 871–912, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-35318-6_19

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-35318-6_19 2020

  3. [3]

    20 years of cryogenic particle detectors: past, present and future

    Previtali, E. 20 years of cryogenic particle detectors: past, present and future. 2006, Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements, 150, 3, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2005.04.060

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2005.04.060 2006

  4. [4]

    Cryogenic Media in Biomedical Applications: Current Advances, Challenges, and Future Perspectives

    MOKBEL, K., KODRESKO, A., GHAZAL, H., MOKBEL, R., TREMBLEY, J., & JOUHARA, H. Cryogenic Media in Biomedical Applications: Current Advances, Challenges, and Future Perspectives. 2024, In Vivo, 38, 1, doi:10.21873/invivo.13407 – 23 –

    work page doi:10.21873/invivo.13407 2024

  5. [5]

    Brink, P. L. Review of Dark Matter Direct Detection Using Cryogenic Detectors. 2012, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 167, 1048, doi:10.1007/s10909-012-0517-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s10909-012-0517-7 2012

  6. [6]

    Space science applications of cryogenic detectors

    Rando, N., Lumb, D., Bavdaz, M., Martin, D., & Peacock, T. Space science applications of cryogenic detectors. 2004, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, 522, 62, doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2004.01.019

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2004.01.019 2004

  7. [7]

    Deep Industrial Image Anomaly Detection: A Survey

    Liu, J., Xie, G., Wang, J., Li, S., Wang, C., Zheng, F., & Jin, Y. Deep Industrial Image Anomaly Detection: A Survey. 2024, Machine Intelligence Research, 21, 104, doi: 10.1007/s11633-023-1459-z

    doi:10.1007/s11633-023-1459-z 2024

  8. [8]

    A High-Efficiency Fully Convolutional Networks for Pixel-Wise Surface Defect Detection

    Qiu, L., Wu, X., & Yu, Z. A High-Efficiency Fully Convolutional Networks for Pixel-Wise Surface Defect Detection. 2019, IEEE Access, 7, 15884, doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2894420

    work page arXiv 2019

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    Supervised Anomaly Detection for Complex Industrial Images

    Baitieva, A., Hurych, D., Besnier, V., & Bernard, O. Supervised Anomaly Detection for Complex Industrial Images. 2024, in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 17754–17762

    2024

  2. [10]

    Lee, S., Lee, S., & Song, B. C. CFA: Coupled-Hypersphere-Based Feature Adaptation for Target-Oriented Anomaly Localization. 2022, IEEE Access, 10, 78446, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193699

    2022

  3. [11]

    EfficientAD: Accurate Visual Anomaly Detection at Millisecond-Level Latencies

    Batzner, K., Heckler, L., & König, R. EfficientAD: Accurate Visual Anomaly Detection at Millisecond-Level Latencies. 2024, in 2024 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 127–137, doi:10.1109/WACV57701.2024.00020

    2024

  4. [12]

    The MVTec Anomaly Detection Dataset: A Comprehensive Real-World Dataset for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection

    Bergmann, P., Batzner, K., Fauser, M., Sattlegger, D., & Steger, C. The MVTec Anomaly Detection Dataset: A Comprehensive Real-World Dataset for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection. 2021, International Journal of Computer Vision, 129, 1038, doi:10.1007/s11263-020-01400-4

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    J., Barry, P., Bender, A

    Anderson, A. J., Barry, P., Bender, A. N., et al. SPT-3G+: mapping the high-frequency cosmic microwave background using kinetic inductance detectors. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12190, Millimeter, Submillimeter, an...

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    K., LeDuc, H

    Day, P. K., LeDuc, H. G., Mazin, B. A., Vayonakis, A., & Zmuidzinas, J. A broadband superconducting detector suitable for use in large arrays. 2003,Nature, 425, 817, doi: 10.1038/nature02037

    2003 doi

  7. [15]

    R., Barry, P

    Dibert, K. R., Barry, P. S., Anderson, A. J., Benson, B. A., Cecil, T., Chang, C. L., Fichman, K. N., Karkare, K., Li, J., Natoli, T., Pan, Z., Rouble, M., Shirokoff, E., & Young, M. Characterization of MKIDs for CMB Observation at 220 GHz With the South Pole Telescope. 2023, ...

    2023

  8. [16]

    MIST: Accurate and Scalable Microscopy Image Stitching Tool with Stage Modeling and Error Minimization

    Chalfoun, J., Majurski, M., Blattner, T., Bhadriraju, K., Keyrouz, W., Bajcsy, P., & Brady, M. MIST: Accurate and Scalable Microscopy Image Stitching Tool with Stage Modeling and Error Minimization. 2017, Scientific Reports, 7, 4988, doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04567-y

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    The Phase Correlation Image Alignement Method

    Kuglin, C., & Hines, D. The Phase Correlation Image Alignement Method. 1975, in Proceedings of the 1975 International Conference on Cybernetics and Society (IEEE), 163–165

    1975

  10. [18]

    2019, Algorithms (Jeff Erickson)

    Erickson, J. 2019, Algorithms (Jeff Erickson). https://books.google.com/books?id=K1uIxwEACAAJ

    2019

  11. [19]

    R., & Fukai, Y

    Ferguson, K. R., & Fukai, Y. T. 2024, Fork of them2stitch Python package. https://github.com/kferguson42/m2stitch_fork – 24 –

    2024

  12. [20]

    2000, PhD thesis, Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg, Germany

    Scharr, H. 2000, PhD thesis, Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg, Germany

    2000

  13. [21]

    A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms

    Otsu, N. A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms. 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 9, 62, doi:10.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076

    1979

  14. [22]

    S., Pan, Z., Albert, C., Cecil, T., Chang, C

    Li, J., Barry, P. S., Pan, Z., Albert, C., Cecil, T., Chang, C. L., Dibert, K., Lisovenko, M., & Yefremenko, V. Reducing Frequency Scatter in Large Arrays of Superconducting Resonators with Inductor Line Width Control. 2022, Journal of Low Temperature Physics, 209, 1196, doi: ...

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    S., Barry, P

    Martsen, E. S., Barry, P. S., Benson, B. A., Dibert, K. R., Fichman, K. N., Natoli, T., Rouble, M., & Yu, C. Development of an MKID frequency-to-pixel LED mapper for SPT-3G+. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.17878, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2411.17878

    2024 doi arXiv

  16. [24]

    R., Bender, A

    Ferguson, K. R., Bender, A. N., Whitehorn, N., & Cecil, T. W. Correlating visual characteristics and cryogenic performance of superconducting detectors. 2022, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12190, Millimeter, Submillimeter,...

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    R., et al

    Harris, C. R., et al. Array programming with NumPy. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi:10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  19. [27]

    SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python

    Virtanen, P., et al. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    scikit-image: image processing in Python

    van der Walt, S., et al. scikit-image: image processing in Python. 2014, PeerJ, 2, e453, doi: 10.7717/peerj.453

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python

    Pedregosa, F., et al. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825 – 25 –

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.