Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 33 references

A CubeSat Electronics System for Dual-Satellite Coordinated Soft X-Ray Polarimetry

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A CubeSat electronics stack for dual-satellite soft X-ray polarimetry can run autonomously under 6 W with built-in HV protection and track compression.

desk verdict Solid CubeSat electronics upgrade with measured noise, HV protection, and redundancy; dual-sat autonomy is only protocol-validated on ground and deferred to flight. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04844 v1 pith:D5VPDX32 submitted 2026-07-06 physics.ins-det

Lirong Xie , Shiqiang Zhou , Kai Chen , Zuke Feng , Difan Yi , Ran Chen , Ruinan Fan , Cheng Lian
show 7 more authors
Ziyi Zhang Siying Liu Dong Wang Xiangming Sun Enwei Liang Huanbo Feng Hongbang Liu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.ins-det PACS 07.87.+v95.55.Ka07.05.Hd
keywords CubeSatsoftX-raypolarimetryGasMicrochannelPixelDetectorTopmetal-Ldual-satellitecoordinationhigh-voltageprotectiontrackcompressionGRBtrigger
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 designs and ground-validates a compact payload electronics system for two CubeSats that will observe soft X-ray polarization of gamma-ray bursts together. The stack uses a gas microchannel pixel detector and a Topmetal-L sensor to deliver a 90°×90° field of view, 3.69 cm² sensitive area and less than 6 W power while covering 2–10 keV. Autonomous high-voltage ramping, dual protection against discharges and count-rate spikes, single-event-upset recovery and redundant CAN/Ethernet links let either satellite trigger a coordinated slew by the other. Region-of-interest readout plus morphological track compression keep data volume manageable for limited downlink. Ground tests report 22.35 e− equivalent noise, HV linearity better than ±0.5 % to −5 kV, CAN switch times under 100 ms, and no degradation after five thermal-vacuum cycles between −5 °C and 40 °C. The result is a practical path from single-satellite pathfinders toward multi-unit polarimetry constellations.

What carries the argument

The dual-protection HV manager (count-rate threshold plus discharge counting with configurable SafeVol and ProtectThr) together with the FPGA-based GRB SNR trigger and warm-standby CAN redundancy that together enable either payload to initiate a coordinated observation.

What would settle it

After launch, if one satellite issues a GRB flag and the companion fails to complete a valid attitude slew and joint data downlink within the expected ~1 min window under realistic orbital conditions, the dual-satellite coordination claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under CubeSat volume, mass and power limits the authors realize a fully autonomous dual-satellite soft X-ray polarimetry electronics system that integrates a GMPD with a Topmetal-L sensor, supplies closed-loop HV safety management, real-time GRB triggering and onboard track compression, and meets all stated performance and environmental requirements in ground tests.

Load-bearing premise

That the ground-tested GRB trigger flag and laser-link protocol will produce reliable autonomous dual-satellite slews once the satellites are actually on orbit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A validated CubeSat payload path exists for multi-satellite soft X-ray polarimetry of transient sources.
  • In-orbit firmware updates and SEU recovery become standard tools for refining coordination algorithms after launch.
  • Track compression plus ROI readout free enough downlink bandwidth for continuous wide-field monitoring.
  • The same HV safety and autonomy architecture can be reused for larger constellations or space-station instruments.
  • Measured noise, linearity and thermal-vacuum stability set quantitative baselines for future GMPD-based polarimeters.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the dual-satellite link works, three-or-more-unit constellations become the natural next step to raise minimum detectable polarization.
  • The same closed-loop HV and count-rate logic could protect other gas detectors flying through the SAA.
  • Morphological opening may generalize to any sparse photoelectron-track imager that must live inside CubeSat data budgets.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the design, implementation, and ground verification of the CXPD-Duo CubeSat payload electronics for dual-satellite coordinated soft X-ray polarimetry (2–10 keV). Built around a Gas Microchannel Pixel Detector (GMPD) and Topmetal-L sensor, the system targets FOV 90°×90°, sensitive area 3.69 cm², and power <6 W. It implements autonomous HV ramp-up/ramp-down with dual protection (discharge events and count-rate veto), SEU mitigation (TMR + SEM), redundant CAN/Ethernet interfaces (measured CAN switch <100 ms), region-of-interest readout, and morphological track compression. Ground tests report ENC 22.35 e−, HV monitoring INL better than ±0.5% to −5 kV, inrush 1.7 A/260 µs, and no degradation after five thermal-vacuum cycles (−5 °C to 40 °C). Dual-satellite coordination is realized via an onboard SNR GRB trigger (Eqs. 2–3) that issues a collaboration flag over the satellite laser link for companion AOCS slew.

Significance. If the reported hardware performance holds, the work supplies a concrete, resource-constrained engineering path for wide-FOV soft X-ray polarimetry of GRBs on CubeSats and a prototype for multi-satellite cooperative observation. Strengths that should be credited include the closed-loop HV safety architecture (controlled slew rates, dual discharge/count-rate protection, SAA/Sun exclusion via SIA broadcast), quantitative ground characterization of noise, HV linearity, interface redundancy, and thermal-vacuum survival, and the practical onboard data-reduction chain (ROI + morphological opening). These elements are directly useful to the instrumentation community and to pathfinder missions such as POLAR-2/LPD. The dual-satellite coordination claim is more provisional: the paper itself states that full cooperative mode will be confirmed on-orbit, so the present contribution is best read as a validated electronics platform plus a protocol foundation rather than a flight-proven coordination system.

major comments (2)
  1. Section 4.3 and the abstract claim “intelligent coordination” and “capability for … intelligent coordination.” The text explicitly states that ground testing verified only GRB-flag generation and communication protocols, and that “the cooperative mode will be confirmed on-orbit via the laser link after launch and refined through in-orbit debugging.” No closed-loop hardware-in-the-loop result (trigger → laser latency/dropouts → status check → AOCS feasibility → dual track collection) is reported, nor are false-positive rates under realistic SAA/solar-particle backgrounds quantified beyond the simple X-ray-generator test of Fig. 19. The central claim of autonomous dual-satellite coordinated polarimetry therefore rests on an untested end-to-end chain. Either (a) present additional ground closed-loop evidence or (b) rephrase the abstract, introduction, and conclusion to state clearly that th
  2. Eqs. (2)–(3) and the associated free parameters (GRB_Thr = 2, sustained >5 s, count-rate veto threshold) are presented without a quantitative false-alarm or efficiency analysis under orbital background models. Section 5.3 shows only a laboratory X-ray-generator ramp. Because the dual-protection HV logic and the coordination flag both depend on these thresholds, a short Monte-Carlo or background-rate study (or at least an explicit statement of expected false-trigger rate in SAA/quiet orbit) is needed to support the claim that the system can safely and usefully trigger coordinated slews.
minor comments (6)
  1. Fig. 9 caption and body: absolute values of negative HV are plotted; state this once in the figure caption and keep the sign convention consistent with the text (negative voltages).
  2. Eq. (1): define all symbols (especially A_S, R_S, R_A) at first appearance; the subsequent reduction to a fixed-point linear map is clear but the intermediate symbols are not.
  3. Table 1 lists energy resolution ≤25 % @ 5.9 keV and modulation factor ≥40 % @ 5.9 keV, yet Section 5 reports only electronics noise and HV linearity. Either cite the prior CXPD-01/GMPD papers that establish these detector-level figures or note that they are design goals not re-measured here.
  4. Typographical inconsistencies: “Tragger” in Fig. 1, “Boardcost” in Fig. 8, “AOD” unexplained, and mixed “CXPD-Duo” / “CXPD Duo” spelling. Standardize.
  5. Section 5.4: the morphological opening is illustrated for a 5.9 keV track, but no quantitative compression ratio or residual track-reconstruction fidelity metric is given. A single sentence with measured size reduction and a note that polarization analysis remains possible would strengthen the claim.
  6. References: several arXiv preprints are cited for closely related CXPD/POLAR-2 work; ensure final DOIs or journal citations are updated if available before publication.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: instrumentation paper reports direct hardware measurements and standard algorithms; no derivation reduces to its own inputs by construction.

full rationale

This is a CubeSat electronics design-and-test paper (physics.ins-det). Its load-bearing claims are measured performance numbers (ENC 22.35 e− from noise/gain data in Figs. 13–14, HV linearity <±0.5% in Fig. 15, CAN switch times <100 ms in Fig. 12, thermal-vacuum stability after five cycles) obtained with external instruments (oscilloscope, X-ray generator, thermal-vacuum chamber). The GRB SNR trigger (Eqs. 2–3) is a conventional rate-excess statistic with an adjustable threshold (GRB_Thr=2); it is not fitted to data and then re-predicted. Dual-satellite coordination is presented as a designed protocol whose full closed-loop validation is explicitly deferred to post-launch (Sec. 4.3); that is a validation gap, not a circular derivation. Self-citations to prior CXPD/POLAR-2 work supply detector heritage and background context but do not force any new measured result or uniqueness claim. No self-definitional equations, fitted-input-as-prediction, load-bearing self-citation uniqueness theorems, or renamed known results appear. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard space-electronics practices, the physical operation of the GMPD/Topmetal-L detector (established in prior work), and a set of engineering thresholds chosen for safety and trigger sensitivity. No new physical entities are postulated; free parameters are the adjustable protection and trigger thresholds that the firmware exposes for in-orbit tuning.

free parameters (4)
  • GRB_Thr (SNR trigger threshold) = 2
    Set to 2 (in-orbit adjustable) based on quiescent rate ~2 counts/s and soft X-ray GRB simulations; directly controls when a coordination flag is raised.
  • DischargeThr / ProtectThr = 3 (test value)
    Command-configurable counters (0–255) that decide when normal discharges escalate to SafeVol reduction or full HV shutdown; chosen for ground tests as 3.
  • SafeVol = 2000 V (test)
    Safe intermediate voltage (0–3500 V, ~1.22 V steps) to which HV is reduced after excess discharges; test value 2000 V.
  • Count-rate veto threshold = 400 counts/s (test)
    HV anomaly protection threshold (0–65535 counts/s); test value 400 counts/s used to force shutdown under high X-ray flux.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption GMPD photoelectron track morphology encodes soft X-ray polarization (modulation factor ≥40 % @ 5.9 keV).
    Taken from prior Gas Pixel Detector literature and the authors’ own GMPD characterization papers; required for the scientific purpose of the electronics.
  • domain assumption Sun-synchronous LEO radiation environment (SAA, SEUs) can be mitigated by TMR + SEM IP + autonomous HV shutdown using SIA broadcast ephemeris.
    Standard space-electronics practice invoked in Sections 4.1–4.2; the paper does not re-derive the radiation models.
  • ad hoc to paper Inter-satellite laser link latency and reliability are sufficient for <5 s flag exchange and subsequent AOCS slew within the GRB window.
    Assumed feasible by reference to the Space Computing Constellation; full end-to-end validation is deferred to post-launch (Section 4.3).
  • domain assumption Morphological opening (3×3 erosion+dilation after threshold) preserves polarization-relevant track shape while discarding background pixels.
    Standard image-processing claim used for onboard compression; illustrated on a 5.9 keV track but not quantitatively validated against polarization reconstruction fidelity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A CubeSat Electronics System for Dual-Satellite Coordinated Soft X-Ray Polarimetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D5VPDX32

@misc{pith2026260704844,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A CubeSat Electronics System for Dual-Satellite Coordinated Soft X-Ray Polarimetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D5VPDX32}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04844}
}
abstract

Addressing the unique requirements for a wide field of view and rapid response in soft X-ray polarization measurements of transient sources such as gamma-ray bursts, this paper proposes the design of a high-reliability CubeSat payload electronics system for dual-satellite cooperative observation. The system employs a Gas Microchannel Pixel Detector (GMPD) and a Topmetal-L sensor as its core components, forming a highly integrated, low-noise payload hardware platform. It achieves a field of view of 90$^\circ$ $\times$ 90$^\circ$, a sensitive area of 3.69 cm$^{2}$, and a power consumption of less than 6 W, operating within an energy range of 2--10 keV. The system incorporates autonomous high-voltage (HV) ramp-up/ramp-down control and a dual-protection mechanism based on count rate and discharge events, enabling in-orbit responses to risks such as the South Atlantic Anomaly and solar particle events. It also supports single-event upset detection and recovery, as well as in-orbit firmware upgrades. The communication interface adopts a redundant primary/backup Controller Area Network (CAN) bus design, with measured channel switching times of less than 100 ms, meeting the demands for real-time command interaction in dual-satellite coordination. By utilizing a large-array pixel sensor with region-of-interest readout and integrating an in-orbit track compression algorithm, the system significantly reduces data storage and downlink transmission resource burdens. Ground tests demonstrate an equivalent noise charge of 22.35 e$^{-}$, HV monitoring linearity better than $\pm$0.5\%, and an output range extending to -5 kV. Thermal vacuum cycling tests show no performance degradation after five cycles between -5 $^\circ$C and 40 $^\circ$C. This work demonstrates the system's capability for autonomous observation, intelligent coordination, and reliable operation in complex space environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04844 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Dual-satellite cooperative signal flow. CXPD-03 and CXPD-04 are mounted on Satellite [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The mechanical structure of CXPD-Duo. 2 System Requirements for CXPD-Duo To validate the multi-satellite cooperative observation paradigm, the CXPD-Duo payload configu￾ration establishes an in-orbit verification system. As illustrated by the signal flows in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Integrated physical view of the CubeSat payload electronics system with the GMPD. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (19 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic of functional modules and external interfaces for each electronics board. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Schematic of GMPD operating principle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Column Selection R o w S ele c tio n Mux 0 1 2 509 510 511 355 354 353 2 1 0 Readout Configuration Analog Signal Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (a) (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Topmetal-L pixel sensor. (a) Schematic diagram of the sensor architecture; (b) Photo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Schematic of the HV divider network, monitoring circuit, and GMCP bottom electrode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Block diagram of FPGA firmware functional modules. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Typical discharge waveforms between HV electrodes. (a)–(e) Abnormal discharge events. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Schematic diagram of autonomous dual-satellite coordinated observation control. Upon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Inrush current measurement setup and results. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Communication interface redundancy switching test results. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Background noise distribution of the Topmetal-L readout channels. A total of 182,272 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Topmetal-L channel input-output dynamic range and linearity of the readout channels. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: HV module output linearity test results. (a) Relationship curve between the system [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Ground simulation test of on-orbit autonomous HV management. The test simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Operation of the HV discharge protection mechanism. The test illustrates controlled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: X-ray test system for the GMPD. The X-ray generator’s current is adjustable to control [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: System behavior test under different count rates, showing the delayed response of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Real-time compression workflow and results of GMPD photoelectron tracks. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Schematic diagram of the thermal vacuum circulation system. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Temperature variations at various monitoring points during normal operation of CXPD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_22.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A precision measurement of the X-ray polarization of the Crab Nebula without pulsar contamination,

    M. C. Weisskopf, E. H. Silver, H. L. Kestenbaum, K. S. Long, and R. Novick, “A precision measurement of the X-ray polarization of the Crab Nebula without pulsar contamination,” Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 220, pp. L117–L121, Mar. 1978. doi:10.1086/182648

    doi:10.1086/182648 1978

  2. [2]

    Ultrafast soft X-ray two-dimensional plasma imaging system based on gas electron multiplier detector with pixel readout,

    D. Pacella, G. Pizzicaroli, L. Gabellieri, M. Leigheb, R. Bellazzini, A. Brez, G. Gariano, L. Latronico, N. Lumb, G. Spandre, and M. M. Massai, “Ultrafast soft X-ray two-dimensional plasma imaging system based on gas electron multiplier detector with pixel readout,”Rev. Sci. Instrum., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 1372–1378, Feb. 2001. doi:10.1063/1.1340026

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1340026 2001

  3. [3]

    Gas pixel detectors for X-ray polarimetry applications,

    R. Bellazzini, F. Angelini, L. Baldini, F. Bitti, A. Brez, F. Cavalca, M. Del Prete, M. Kuss, L. Latronico, N. Omodei, et al., “Gas pixel detectors for X-ray polarimetry applications,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip., vol. 560, no. 2, pp. 425–434, Jun. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.01.046

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.01.046 2006

  4. [4]

    Re-detection and a possible time variation of soft X-ray polarization from the Crab,

    H. Feng, H. Li, X. Long, R. Bellazzini, E. Costa, Q. Wu, J. Huang, W. Jiang, M. Minuti, W. Wang, et al., “Re-detection and a possible time variation of soft X-ray polarization from the Crab,”Nat. Astron., vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 511–516, May 2020. doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1088-1

    doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1088-1 2020

  5. [5]

    Imaging X-ray polarimetry ex- plorer: prelaunch,

    M. C. Weisskopf, P. Soffitta, L. Baldini, B. D. Ramsey, S. L. O’Dell, R. W. Romani, G. Matt, W. D. Deininger, W. H. Baumgartner, R. Bellazzini, et al., “Imaging X-ray polarimetry ex- plorer: prelaunch,”J. Astron. Telesc. Instrum. Syst., vol. 8, no. 2, p. 026002, Apr. 2022. doi:10.1117/1.JATIS.8.2.026002

    doi:10.1117/1.jatis.8.2.026002 2022

  6. [6]

    eXTP: Enhanced X-ray Timing and Polarization mission,

    S.-N. Zhang, M. Feroci, A. Santangelo, et al., “eXTP: Enhanced X-ray Timing and Polarization mission,” inProc. SPIE, vol. 9905, pp. 505–520, Jul. 2016. doi:doi:10.1117/12.2232034

    doi:10.1117/12.2232034 2016

  7. [7]

    Gamma-ray astrophysics,

    A. De Angelis and M. Mallamaci, “Gamma-ray astrophysics,”Eur. Phys. J. Plus, vol. 133, no. 8, p. 324, Aug. 2018. doi:10.1140/epjp/i2018-12181-0

    work page doi:10.1140/epjp/i2018-12181-0 2018

  8. [8]

    Polar- ization degree of magnetic field structure changes caused by random magnetic field in Gamma- ray Burst,

    J.-C. Tuo, H.-B. Liu, Q.-N. Mai, Q. Zhong, Z.-K. Feng, K.-F. Cheng, and E.-W. Liang, “Polar- ization degree of magnetic field structure changes caused by random magnetic field in Gamma- ray Burst,”Astrophys. J., vol. 973, no. 2, p. 113, Jan. 2024. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6a52

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad6a52 2024

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Polarization Evolution of Gamma-Ray Burst Prompt Emission with Bulk Acceleration,

    Q. Zhong, H.-B. Liu, K. Cheng, Z.-K. Feng, J.-C. Tuo, Q.-N. Mai, J. Mao, and E.-W. Liang, “Polarization Evolution of Gamma-Ray Burst Prompt Emission with Bulk Acceleration,”As- trophys. J., vol. 986, no. 1, p. 32, Jan. 2025. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add0ac. 22

    2025 doi

  2. [10]

    Time-integrated Polarization of Structured Jets in Gamma-Ray Burst Prompt Emission,

    Q. Mai, H. Liu, J. Tuo, Z. Feng, Q. Zhong, K. Cheng, J. Mao, and E. Liang, “Time-integrated Polarization of Structured Jets in Gamma-Ray Burst Prompt Emission,”Astrophys. J., vol. 988, no. 2, p. 202, Jan. 2025. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade4c4

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    Neutrino heating near hyper-accreting black holes,

    I. Zalamea and A. M. Beloborodov, “Neutrino heating near hyper-accreting black holes,”Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., vol. 410, no. 4, pp. 2302–2308, Feb. 2011. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966. 2010.17600.x

    2011 doi

  4. [12]

    Polarization Reconstruction Study of Wide Field-of-view Photoelectric Polarimeter for POLAR-2/LPD,

    Z.-K. Feng, H.-B. Liu, D.-F. Yi, L.-R. Xie, C. Dai, H.-B. Feng, J.-C. Sun, J. He, Y.-H. Wang, R.-T. Ma, and B.-L. Wang, “Polarization Reconstruction Study of Wide Field-of-view Photoelectric Polarimeter for POLAR-2/LPD,”Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser., vol. 276, no. 1, p. 30, Jan. ...

    2025 doi

  5. [13]

    Multidisciplinary design and optimization of intelligent Distributed Satellite Systems for EARTH observation,

    K. Thangavel, R. P. Perumal, K. F. Hussain, A. Gardi, and R. Sabatini, “Multidisciplinary design and optimization of intelligent Distributed Satellite Systems for EARTH observation,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 216, pp. 411–427, Mar. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2023.12.055

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    The SpIRIT Payload Management System: A paradigm for smallsats multi payload integration,

    M. Ortiz del Castillo, J. McRobbie, A. Woods, R. Mearns, J. Morgan, M. Trenti, S. Barr- aclough, Y. Tao, C. Therakam, E. Schoof, A. Chapman, F. Fiore, Y. Evangelista, A. Guz- man, and P. Hedderman, “The SpIRIT Payload Management System: A paradigm for smallsats multi payload i...

    2025 doi

  7. [15]

    Multiple Scattering Analysis Within Swarms of Cube- Sats Devoted to GNSS Reflectometry,

    L. Paucot, J. Cavillot, and C. Craeye, “Multiple Scattering Analysis Within Swarms of Cube- Sats Devoted to GNSS Reflectometry,” inProc. IEEE Conf. Antenna Meas. Appl. (CAMA), Da Nang, Vietnam, 2024, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1109/CAMA62287.2024.10986039

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    Electronics system for the cosmic x-ray polarization detector,

    H. Wang, D. Wang, R. Chen, Y.-W. Kui, H.-B. Liu, Z.-W. Fan, H.-B. Feng, J. Li, J. Liu, Q. Liu, et al., “Electronics system for the cosmic x-ray polarization detector,”Nucl. Sci. Tech., vol. 34, no. 5, p. 64, May 2023. doi:10.1007/s41365-023-01221-3

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Development and science perspectives of the POLAR-2 instru- ment: a large scale GRB polarimeter,

    N. De Angelis, J. Burgess, F. Cadoux, J. Greiner, J. Hulsman, M. Kole, H. Li, S. Mianowski, A. Pollo, N. Produit, et al., “Development and science perspectives of the POLAR-2 instru- ment: a large scale GRB polarimeter,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.02978, Sep. 2021. [Online]. Ava...

    2021 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Star-XP: A simulation framework for POLAR-2/Low energy X-ray Polarization Detector,

    D.-F. Yi, Q. Liu, R.-T. Ma, B.-L. Wang, H.-B. Liu, F. Xie, H.-B. Feng, Z.-K. Feng, and Y.- H. Zheng, “Star-XP: A simulation framework for POLAR-2/Low energy X-ray Polarization Detector,”SoftwareX, vol. 25, p. 101626, Jan. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.softx.2023.101626

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    In-orbit background and sky survey simulation study of POLAR-2/LPD,

    Z.-K. Feng, H.-B. Liu, F. Xie, H.-B. Feng, Q.-N. Mai, J.-C. Tuo, Q. Zhong, J.-C. Sun, J. He, Y.-H. Wang, et al., “In-orbit background and sky survey simulation study of POLAR-2/LPD,” Astrophys. J., vol. 960, no. 1, p. 87, Dec. 2023. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfc43

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Wide-Field X-ray Polarimetry for High Energy Astro- nomical Transients: First results of the pathfinder CXPD Cubesat Mission,

    H. B. Liu, Z. K. Feng, H. B. Feng, D. F. Yi, L. R. Xie, Y. J. Xie, Z. W. Fan, J. Zhang, W. J. Xie, X. F. Huang, and W. Deng, “Wide-Field X-ray Polarimetry for High Energy Astro- nomical Transients: First results of the pathfinder CXPD Cubesat Mission,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511...

    2025

  13. [21]

    Gas microchannel plate-pixel detector for x-ray polarimetry,

    H.-B. Feng, H.-B. Liu, D. Wang, Z.-L. Li, S.-L. Liu, Q. Liu, H.-Z. Li, B.-L. Wang, Y.-J. Xie, Z.-W. Fan, et al., “Gas microchannel plate-pixel detector for x-ray polarimetry,”Nucl. Sci. Tech., vol. 35, no. 5, p. 39, May 2024. doi:10.1007/s41365-024-01407-3. 23

    2024 doi

  14. [22]

    In-Orbit GRB Identification Using LLM-based model for the CXPD CubeSat,

    C. Wang, Z. Feng, D. Yi, Y. Li, L. Xie, H. Feng, Y. Liu, Q. Liu, Y. Huang, H. Liu, and X. Qi, “In-Orbit GRB Identification Using LLM-based model for the CXPD CubeSat,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.07957, Nov. 2025. [Online]. Available:https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.07957

    2025

  15. [23]

    Spectral and polarimetric characterization of the gas microchannel plate pixel detector,

    H.-B. Feng, H.-B. Liu, Y.-J. Xie, Z.-W. Fan, D. Wang, S.-L. Liu, Q. Liu, H.-Z. Li, F. Xie, and E.-W. Liang, “Spectral and polarimetric characterization of the gas microchannel plate pixel detector,”J. Instrum., vol. 18, no. 8, p. P08012, Aug. 2023. doi:10.1088/1748-0221/18/08/ P08012

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Simulation and photoelectron track reconstruction of soft x-ray polarime- ter,

    X.-F. Huang, H.-B. Liu, J. Zhang, B. Huang, W.-J. Xie, H.-B. Feng, X.-C. Cai, X.-W. Liu, Z.-L. Li, J.-Y. Gu, et al., “Simulation and photoelectron track reconstruction of soft x-ray polarime- ter,”Nucl. Sci. Tech., vol. 32, no. 7, p. 67, Jul. 2021. doi:10.1007/s41365-021-00903-0

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    Topmetal-L: A Low Noise Charge-Sensitive Pixel Sen- sor for POLAR2/LPD,

    L.-R. Xie, S.-Q. Zhou, D.-F. Yi, H.-B. Feng, Z.-K. Feng, D. Wang, C.-S. Gao, E.-W. Liang, X.-M. Sun, and H.-B. Liu, “Topmetal-L: A Low Noise Charge-Sensitive Pixel Sen- sor for POLAR2/LPD,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.09863, Nov. 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2...

    2025

  18. [26]

    A novel pixel-chip-based region-of-interest readout circuit design,

    S.-Q. Zhou, L.-R. Xie, D. Wang, C. Lian, S.-Y. Liu, Z.-Y. Zhang, X.-M. Sun, H.-B. Liu, C.-S. Gao, J. Liu, H.-B. Feng, and D.-F. Yi, “A novel pixel-chip-based region-of-interest readout circuit design,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.15130, Nov. 2025. [Online]. Available:https:// arx...

    2025

  19. [27]

    Preliminary test of Topmetal-II− sensor for x-ray polarization measurements,

    Z. Li, H. Feng, X. Huang, J. Zhang, J. Su, X. Cai, Z. Feng, Q. Liu, H. Liu, C. Gao, et al., “Preliminary test of Topmetal-II− sensor for x-ray polarization measurements,”Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip., vol. 1008, p. 165430, Aug. 202...

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    Front-end electronics of CXPD for measuring transient x-ray sources,

    Z. Fan, H. Liu, H. Feng, Y. Xie, H. Wang, R. Chen, Z. Feng, X. Xie, and E. Liang, “Front-end electronics of CXPD for measuring transient x-ray sources,”IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 1507–1513, Jul. 2023. doi:10.1109/TNS.2023.3269091

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    Estimating the Downlink Data-Rate of a CCSDS File Delivery Protocol IP Core,

    G. Meoni, A. Valverde, G. Magistrati, and L. Fanucci, “Estimating the Downlink Data-Rate of a CCSDS File Delivery Protocol IP Core,” inApplications in Electronics Pervading Industry, Environment and Society, S. Saponara and A. De Gloria, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2020,...

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    Analyzing Measured Evidence for Inducing Factors of SEU From In-Flight Data of NSSC-SPRECMI on OPUS CZ-4C,

    J. Wang et al., “Analyzing Measured Evidence for Inducing Factors of SEU From In-Flight Data of NSSC-SPRECMI on OPUS CZ-4C,”IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 101– 109, Feb. 2025. doi:10.1109/TNS.2024.3522366

    2025 doi

  23. [31]

    Fault-tolerant technology based on FPGA: A Research of LogiCORETM IP Soft Error Mitigation Controller,

    J. Wu, X. Meng, and N. Zhang, “Fault-tolerant technology based on FPGA: A Research of LogiCORETM IP Soft Error Mitigation Controller,”J. Phys., Conf. Ser., vol. 1486, no. 5, p. 052030, Dec. 2019. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1486/5/052030

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    Onboard GRB trigger algorithms of SVOM-GRM,

    D.-H. Zhao, B.-B. Wu, L.-M. Song, Y.-W. Dong, S. Schanne, B. Cordier, and J.-T. Liu, “Onboard GRB trigger algorithms of SVOM-GRM,”Res. Astron. Astrophys., vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 1381–1392, Nov. 2013. doi:10.1088/1674-4527/13/11/008

    2013 doi

  25. [33]

    Space Computing Constellation: System Architecture, Implementations and Challenges,

    H. Wang, K.-L. Yao, L.-Q. Gong, Y.-C. Jin, P. Zhang, Y. Liu, Y. Yuan, J.-X. Xue, Z.-G. Wan, Y.-T. Liu, X. Li, C. Li, and Z.-F. Zhao, “Space Computing Constellation: System Architecture, Implementations and Challenges,”IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 11469–11492, M...

    2026 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.