Scintillation and Timing Performance of a 3at% Yttrium-Doped Barium Fluoride Crystal

Jiawei Xu; Jing Zhang; Jinhui Chen; Junfeng Chen; Mingkuan Yuan; Shiming Zou; Shiqing Xie; Xiaolong Wang; Xiyang Wang; Zeyu Huang

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 30 references

Scintillation and Timing Performance of a 3at% Yttrium-Doped Barium Fluoride Crystal

T0 review · 3 major / 7 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 Yttrium-doped BaF2 crystal achieves 82 ps time resolution in a cosmic-ray test.

desk verdict Useful large-crystal BaF2:Y timing characterization, but the headline cosmic-ray 82 ps number is only validated for the central 100 mm and should be presented as such. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09388 v2 pith:J42OONMC submitted 2025-01-16 physics.ins-det hep-exnucl-ex

Zeyu Huang , Jing Zhang , Shiming Zou , Mingkuan Yuan , Jiawei Xu , Xiyang Wang , Shiqing Xie , Jinhui Chen

show 2 more authors

Junfeng Chen Xiaolong Wang

This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.ins-dethep-exnucl-ex

keywords bariumfluorideyttriumdopingscintillationtimingsiliconphotomultipliersslowcomponentsuppressioncross-luminescencecosmicraytestelectromagneticcalorimeter

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

The paper reports a new large barium fluoride crystal doped with 3 at% yttrium, measuring 200 mm × 20 mm × 20 mm. The doping suppresses the slow scintillation component to roughly 20% of its intensity in pure BaF2 while preserving most of the fast, sub-nanosecond cross-luminescence component. When coupled to silicon photomultipliers, the assembled detector achieves a time resolution of (82.2 ± 2.6) ps in a cosmic-ray test and (140.1 ± 3.8) ps in a 1.35 GeV electron beam test. These results indicate that large BaF2:Y detectors are viable for the ~100 ps timing requirements of future particle and nuclear physics experiments.

What carries the argument

The central object is BaF2's two-component scintillation: an ultrafast cross-luminescence channel at ~220 nm with ~0.6 ns decay, and a slow self-trapped exciton channel at ~300 nm with ~0.6 µs decay. Yttrium substitution for barium quenches the slow channel, and the paper uses X-ray excited luminescence to quantify the suppression. Timing readout relies on four VUV-sensitive SiPMs wired in series, a high-speed preamplifier, and waveform fitting with constant fraction discrimination (or a fixed low threshold when signals saturate).

What would settle it

Measure the cosmic-ray time resolution with trigger scintillators spanning the full 200 mm crystal, or split the crystal into multiple readout segments to map timing vs. position; if the fitted time-difference distribution becomes non-Gaussian or the extracted resolution shifts by more than a few picoseconds, the quadrature subtraction is invalid. An independent cross-check with a picosecond laser or a separate high-precision timing reference would remove the dependence on the trigger subtraction entirely.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors grew a 200 mm-long BaF2 crystal with yttrium doping and demonstrated that yttrium selectively suppresses the slow self-trapped exciton emission around 300 nm while leaving the fast core-valence luminescence near 220 nm nearly unchanged. They further measured a light response uniformity of $\delta = (-2.74 \pm 1.15)\%$ when the crystal is read from the tail end, an average light output near 1525 photons/MeV, and sub-100 ps timing with SiPM readout in cosmic rays. The paper presents this as the first application-oriented study of a large-size BaF2:Y detector for high-energy physics.

Load-bearing premise

The reported 82.2 ps cosmic-ray resolution subtracts trigger jitter in quadrature. This subtraction assumes the trigger jitter is Gaussian, independent of the BaF2 detector, and the same for all trajectories, even though the trigger bars cover only part of the crystal length.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Future time-of-flight systems can use large BaF2:Y bars with SiPM readout while retaining sub-100 ps timing.
Electromagnetic calorimeters with ~100 ps per-channel timing become feasible, as the crystal's 80% transmittance at 200 nm and ~90% visible transmittance support sufficient light collection.
Suppression of the slow component reduces pile-up and rate limitations, making the material suitable for high-intensity beam environments.
Coupling readout at the tail end, where the light response uniformity is best, should be the default geometry for long crystals.

Reading between the lines

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

If the yttrium segregation gradient ($K_{\mathrm{eff}} = 0.75$) can be flattened further, light response uniformity could improve beyond the already-low measured $\delta$.
The 140 ps beam-test result may reflect the trigger's ~110 ps jitter and the fixed-threshold method rather than an intrinsic crystal limit; a higher dynamic-range preamplifier is a concrete next step.
A position-scanned cosmic-ray test with trigger bars covering the full 200 mm length would test whether the Gaussian quadrature subtraction is valid, directly probing the paper's weakest assumption.
If confirmed, the same crystal geometry could be evaluated for time-of-flight PET, where ~100 ps coincidence timing directly affects image quality.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

This paper reports the first timing measurements of a 200 mm long, 3at% yttrium-doped BaF2 crystal read out with SiPMs. The slow-component suppression by Y doping is established in earlier work by the same group; the new piece here is the large-crystal growth, the XEL and light-response characterization, and the two timing tests. The cosmic-ray number of 82 ps and the beam-test 140 ps are internally consistent, the fits are clean, and the error propagation is straightforward. The crystal growth at this size is a real step, and the authors are honest about the preamplifier saturation in the beam test.

The main soft spot is the cosmic-ray trigger geometry. The two trigger bars are 100 mm long, the crystal is 200 mm long, and a trigger requires hits in both bars, so only the central ~100 mm is probed. The crystal is read out at one end, so the end regions contribute different light collection and propagation delays. The quoted 82.2 ps is thus a central-region, position-convolved number, not a validated full-length detector resolution. There is also a subtlety in the trigger subtraction: they derive sigma(T0) from sigma(DeltaT_trg)/2, which cancels any common position-correlated delay in the two bars. That common delay is present in T0, so it is not subtracted away and ends up folded into the extracted crystal resolution. The effect may be modest, but it should be quantified or eliminated with a full-length trigger.

A minor concern: the abstract highlights the favorable LRU delta of -2.74% (tail-end readout) without mentioning the -44.2% for seed-end readout. That is not fatal—the timing setup presumably uses the tail end—but a sentence stating the readout end in the timing section would avoid any impression of cherry-picking.

This is a straightforward experimental characterization, not a derivation, and there are no circular fitting issues. The self-citations to the group's prior doping and preamplifier work are appropriate. The paper is written clearly and the limitations are mostly acknowledged.

For a HEP/nuclear-instrumentation audience, this is a useful data point. It deserves a serious referee, with the main requested revision being an explicit statement of the trigger fiducial coverage and a quantitative discussion of position-correlated trigger jitter. With that, the central-region sub-100 ps claim is solid; the full-length claim still needs work.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the growth and characterization of a 200 mm × 20 mm × 20 mm BaF2 crystal doped with 3 at% yttrium. It presents ICP-AES measurements of the yttrium distribution, transmittance spectra, X-ray excited luminescence showing suppression of the slow component, light response uniformity from a 137Cs scan, and timing measurements with SiPM readout. The authors claim a cosmic-ray time resolution of 82.2 ± 2.6 ps using CFD and a 1.35 GeV electron-beam time resolution of 140.1 ± 3.8 ps using a low fixed threshold. The central claim is that this doping and detector geometry are suitable for future high-energy physics timing applications.

Significance. If the timing results were fully validated, the work would be a useful demonstration that a 200-mm-long BaF2:Y crystal coupled to SiPMs can approach the 100 ps timing goal. The XEL, transmittance, and light-response measurements are carefully presented and provide reference data for this material. However, the cosmic-ray timing analysis has a geometric coverage issue and an incomplete subtraction of position-dependent delays, so the headline 82.2 ps figure is not established as the full-length detector resolution. The beam-test result is clearly limited by preamplifier saturation. With appropriate revisions, the paper could become a valuable characterization study.

major comments (3)

[3.1 (Figs. 4 and 5)] The two trigger scintillators are 100 mm long while the BaF2:Y crystal is 200 mm long, so a cosmic-ray event that satisfies the coincidence must pass through the central ~100 mm overlap region only. The end regions of the crystal are never sampled, and since the crystal is read out from one end, the propagation delay and light collection differ along its length. The quoted 82.2 ± 2.6 ps time resolution is therefore not validated for the full-length detector. Please either extend the trigger coverage to the full length, or explicitly restrict the claim to the central region and estimate the expected full-length performance.
[3.1 (trigger-resolution subtraction)] The trigger resolution is derived as sigma(T0) = sigma(DeltaT_trg)/2, which assumes T1 and T2 have equal, independent jitter. For two bars read out at one end, both times contain a common position-dependent propagation delay s(x) that cancels in DeltaT_trg = T1 - T2 but is present in T0 = (T1 + T2)/2. Thus sigma(T0) as estimated does not include the variance of s(x). Subtracting this estimate in quadrature from the measured DeltaT = T0 - Tcrys distribution leaves a position-dependent term of the form s(x) - c(x) in the extracted sigma(Tcrys) = 82.2 ps. The result is therefore a position-convolved resolution, not the intrinsic timing resolution of the detector. A position-resolved correction using the trigger-bar time difference, or an alternative measurement with full geometric coverage, is needed to support the headline claim.
[3.2 (beam test)] The beam test uses a low fixed threshold because the preamplifier saturates at the high deposited energies. Low-threshold timing is sensitive to amplitude walk, and the trigger and crystal signals are all affected; this is acknowledged in the text. The quoted 140.1 ± 3.8 ps should be presented as a beam-test system performance with the current electronics, not as the intrinsic timing resolution of the BaF2:Y detector, unless an amplitude-walk correction is applied. In addition, the same common-mode position issue as in the cosmic-ray test may affect the trigger subtraction if the beam spot is not point-like along the trigger bars.

minor comments (7)

[Abstract and Introduction] The abstract and introduction contain the phrase 'new developed'; it should be 'newly developed'.
[Figs. 5 and 7] The axes in Figs. 5 and 7 are labeled as '1500− 1000− 500− 0 500 1000', which is a formatting error; the negative signs and spacing should be corrected.
[Figs. 5 and 7] The reported reduced chi-squared values in Figs. 5 and 7 are far below 1 (e.g., 11.5/202 in Fig. 5a). Please clarify how the histogram bin uncertainties are assigned; if they are Poisson errors, such low values suggest the uncertainties are overestimated.
[Eq. (2.1)] In Eq. (2.1), the definitions of Co and Cs appear reversed relative to the standard normal-freezing equation. Please verify that the text correctly states which concentration is the solid and which is the initial melt concentration.
[3.1] The statement that 'the energy level broadening of the two peaks was minimal' is unclear, as no two peaks are identified; please rephrase.
[2] The light output values of 1523 and 1528 ph/MeV are measured with a 3 microsecond gate; please state explicitly whether these values include residual slow-component light, so they can be compared with fast-component-only yields.
[2] Section 2 states that 3 at% yttrium is the optimized concentration, but no concentration scan is presented; please either cite the earlier study that established this or soften the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the headline values are direct measurements, and self-citations are context, not load-bearing.

full rationale

This paper is an experimental characterization rather than a derivation. The central claims—slow-scintillation suppression, transmittance, light-response uniformity, and time resolution—are obtained from direct measurements: X-ray excited luminescence spectra, spectrophotometry, collimated-source LRU scans, and Gaussian fits to time-difference distributions. The reported timing resolution is not a model prediction or the output of a fitted parameter; sigma(T_crys) is obtained by standard quadrature subtraction of the measured trigger jitter from the measured crystal-plus-trigger width. The self-citations (refs. 10, 19, and 22 on BaF2:Y growth and doping, and ref. 29 on the preamplifier) provide prior context and a component specification; they are not used to infer the new measured values, and their content is not assumed in place of the measurements reported here. The paper's own Sec. 3.2 limitation—preamplifier saturation making the CFD method inapplicable and forcing low-threshold timing—degrades the beam-test result but does not make it circular. The trigger-coverage geometry noted in the skeptic view is a scope/validity concern rather than a circularity. No step can be quoted in which a prediction reduces to its own input by definition or by fitted construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental characterization paper; the central claim is a measured timing performance. Only fitted parameters used in auxiliary characterizations are listed.

free parameters (2)

Keff = 0.75 ± 0.03
Effective segregation coefficient of Y in BaF2, fitted to ICP-AES concentration profile (Eq. 2.1). Used to claim doping uniformity.
emission-weighted quantum efficiency = 21.6%
Emission-weighted QE of the R2059 PMT for BaF2:Y, calculated from emission spectrum and PMT QE, used in absolute light output (Eq. 2.2).

assumptions (3)

standard math Gaussian statistics and quadrature subtraction of independent time jitters
Used to derive crystal time resolution from measured widths (Sections 3.1, 3.2).
domain assumption Trigger system time resolution is position-independent
Section 3.1: trigger bars do not cover the full BaF2 crystal length; the analysis assumes their time resolution is the same for all trajectories that pass through the crystal.
domain assumption XEL intensity reflects scintillation light output relevant to timing
Section 2: XEL spectra used to infer slow-component suppression and fast-component preservation, but the relation between XEL and particle-excited scintillation is assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scintillation and Timing Performance of a 3at% Yttrium-Doped Barium Fluoride Crystal." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J42OONMC

@misc{pith2026250109388,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scintillation and Timing Performance of a 3at% Yttrium-Doped Barium Fluoride Crystal},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J42OONMC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09388}
}

read the original abstract

We report the scintillation and timing performance of a new developed 200 * 20 mm * 20 mm large size barium fluoride crystal doped with 3at% yttrium (BaF2:Y) to enhance the application for high time resolution. This doping effectively suppresses the slow scintillation component while maintaining most of the fast component, as confirmed by X-ray excited luminescence measurements. The BaF2:Y crystal demonstrated a transmittance of near 90% in the visible spectrum and a light response uniformity parameter of delta = (-2.74 +- 1.15)% when coupled with the tail end. The actual yttrium content varied from 2.1at% near the seed end to 3.7at% at the tail end. The assembled large BaF2:Y detector with silicon photomultipliers exhibited a time resolution of (82.2 +- 2.6) ps using constant fraction discrimination method in a cosmic ray test and (140.1 +- 3.8) ps using a low fixed threshold method in a beam test at Shanghai Synchrotron Radiation Facility with an 1.35 GeV electron beam. These results indicate the significant potential of BaF2:Y crystal for various applications, such as detectors for particle physics and nuclear physics.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

[1]

J. H. Chen et al.,Properties of the QCDmatter: reviewof selectedresults from the relativisticheavy ion collider beamenergyscan(RHIC BES) program, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35(2024) 214. – 9 –

work page 2024
[2]

The CEPC Study Group,CEPCConceptual Design Report: Volume2 -Physics& Detector, arXiv:1811.10545v1

arXiv
[3]

The CEPC Study Group,CEPCTechnicalDesign Report – Accelerator, arxiv:2312.14363

arXiv
[4]

Achasov et al.,STCFconceptual design report (Volume1): Physics& detector, Front

M. Achasov et al.,STCFconceptual design report (Volume1): Physics& detector, Front. Phys.19 (2022) 17401

work page 2022
[5]

Aihara et al.,The Belle IIDetector UpgradesFrameworkConceptualDesign Report, arXiv:2406.19421

H. Aihara et al.,The Belle IIDetector UpgradesFrameworkConceptualDesign Report, arXiv:2406.19421

arXiv
[6]

N. S. Huang et al.,Featuresand futures of X-rayfree-electron lasers, Innovation2 (2021) 2

work page 2021
[7]

T. A. White et al.,Recentdevelopmentsin CrystFEL, J. Appl. Crystallogr49(2016) 2

work page 2016
[8]

R. Y. Zhu,CrystalCalorimeters in the NextDecade, Phys. Procedia37(2012) 372

work page 2012

Show all 30 references

[9]

Miscetti,Design andstatusof the Mu2eexperiment, EPJ Web of Conference118(2016) 01021

S. Miscetti,Design andstatusof the Mu2eexperiment, EPJ Web of Conference118(2016) 01021

2016
[10]

Hu et al.,Ultrafastinorganicscintillator-basedfront imagerforGigahertz Hard X-rayimaging, Nucl

C. Hu et al.,Ultrafastinorganicscintillator-basedfront imagerforGigahertz Hard X-rayimaging, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A940 (2019) 223-229

2019
[11]

Gundacker et al.,Vacuumultravioletsilicon photomultipliers applied toBaF2 cross-luminescence detection forhigh-rateultrafasttiming applications, Phys

S. Gundacker et al.,Vacuumultravioletsilicon photomultipliers applied toBaF2 cross-luminescence detection forhigh-rateultrafasttiming applications, Phys. Med. Biol.66 (2021) 11

2021
[12]

Y. D. Sheng et al.,Thelarge-scalemodular BGO detectionarray(LAMBDA)design and test, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35(2024) 207

2024
[13]

Atanov et al.,Development,construction and testsof the Mu2eelectromagnetic calorimeter mechanicalstructures, JINST17(2022) C01007

N. Atanov et al.,Development,construction and testsof the Mu2eelectromagnetic calorimeter mechanicalstructures, JINST17(2022) C01007

2022
[14]

Daniele del Re for the CMS Collaboration,Precision Timingwiththe CMS MTD Barrel Timing LayerforHL-LHC, The Compact Muon Solenoid Experiment Conference Report (2021)

2021
[15]

Schotanus et al.,Photoelectron production inBaF2-TMAEdetectors, Nucl

P. Schotanus et al.,Photoelectron production inBaF2-TMAEdetectors, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 259 (1987) 3

1987
[16]

M. R. Farukhi and C. F. Swinehart,Barium Fluorides as AGamma-rayandChargedParticle Detector, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.18(1971) 1

1971
[17]

C. L. Woody, P. W. Levy, and J. A. Kierstead,Slowcomponent suppressionand radiation damagein doped BaF2 crystals, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.36 (1989) 1

1989
[18]

Visvikis et al.,PerformancecharacterisationoflargeareaBaF2-TMAEdetectorsforuseinawhole body clinical PETcamera, Nucl

D. Visvikis et al.,PerformancecharacterisationoflargeareaBaF2-TMAEdetectorsforuseinawhole body clinical PETcamera, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A392(1997) 1

1997
[19]

J. F. Chen et al.,SlowScintillation Suppression in Yttrium Doped BaF2 Crystals, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 65(2018) 8

2018
[20]

Yang et al.,La- and La-/Ce-Doped BaF2 CrystalsforFutureHEPExperiments at the Energyand Intensity Frontiers Part I, IEEE Trans

F. Yang et al.,La- and La-/Ce-Doped BaF2 CrystalsforFutureHEPExperiments at the Energyand Intensity Frontiers Part I, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.66(2019) 1

2019
[21]

D. A. Ma, and R. Y. Zhu,Light attenuationlength ofbarium fluoride 509 crystals, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A333(1993) 2

1993
[22]

C.Huetal., DevelopmentofYttrium-Doped BaF2 CrystalsforFutureHEPExperiments, IEEETrans. Nucl. Sci.66 (2019) 7

2019
[23]

L. Y. Yuan et al.,High Light ResponseUniformityinIndustrial Growthof600-mm-Long BGO CrystalsforDArkMatter Particle Explorer, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.65(2018) 7

2018
[24]

M. H. Jiang et al.,Shanghai SynchrotronRadiation Facility, Chin. Sci. Bull.54 (2009) 22. – 10 –

2009
[25]

W. Y. Cheng, K. Deng, and Y. S. Zeng,Developmentof anenhanced onlinetritium monitoring systemusingplasticscintillationfiberarray, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35(2024) 10

2024
[26]

K. J. Chen et al.,Simulation andtestofthe SLEGS TOFspectrometerat SSRF, Nucl. Sci. Tech.34 (2023) 47

2023
[27]

Pershing et al.,Performanceof Hamamatsu VUV4 SiPMs fordetecting liquidargonscintillation, JINST 17(2022) 4

T. Pershing et al.,Performanceof Hamamatsu VUV4 SiPMs fordetecting liquidargonscintillation, JINST 17(2022) 4

2022
[28]

Vachon et al.,Measuring count ratesfree from correlated noise indigital silicon photomultipliers, Meas

F. Vachon et al.,Measuring count ratesfree from correlated noise indigital silicon photomultipliers, Meas. Sci. Technol.32(2021) 2

2021
[29]

X. Y. Wang et al.,Design and performanceof ahigh-speed and low-noisepreamplifier forSiPM, Nucl. Sci. Tech.34(2023) 169

2023
[30]

H. Y. Zhang et al.,Design andtestforthe CEPCmuon subdetectorbased onextrudedscintillator and SiPM, JINST19 (2024) 6. – 11 –

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

J. H. Chen et al.,Properties of the QCDmatter: reviewof selectedresults from the relativisticheavy ion collider beamenergyscan(RHIC BES) program, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35(2024) 214. – 9 –

work page 2024

[2] [2]

The CEPC Study Group,CEPCConceptual Design Report: Volume2 -Physics& Detector, arXiv:1811.10545v1

arXiv

[3] [3]

The CEPC Study Group,CEPCTechnicalDesign Report – Accelerator, arxiv:2312.14363

arXiv

[4] [4]

Achasov et al.,STCFconceptual design report (Volume1): Physics& detector, Front

M. Achasov et al.,STCFconceptual design report (Volume1): Physics& detector, Front. Phys.19 (2022) 17401

work page 2022

[5] [5]

Aihara et al.,The Belle IIDetector UpgradesFrameworkConceptualDesign Report, arXiv:2406.19421

H. Aihara et al.,The Belle IIDetector UpgradesFrameworkConceptualDesign Report, arXiv:2406.19421

arXiv

[6] [6]

N. S. Huang et al.,Featuresand futures of X-rayfree-electron lasers, Innovation2 (2021) 2

work page 2021

[7] [7]

T. A. White et al.,Recentdevelopmentsin CrystFEL, J. Appl. Crystallogr49(2016) 2

work page 2016

[8] [8]

R. Y. Zhu,CrystalCalorimeters in the NextDecade, Phys. Procedia37(2012) 372

work page 2012