Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 20 references

High-speed, low-noise, multi-megapixel CCDs for next generation X-ray observatories

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-30 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Full-scale 16-channel multi-megapixel X-ray CCDs hit the speed and noise targets needed for next-generation observatories.

desk verdict Solid full-format lab demo of 16-channel CCID-100 + dual MCRC at ~6.7 fps; many channels hit AXIS-like noise/FWHM, but “mission-ready” overreaches the incomplete yield and unexplained low-T noise. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27047 v1 pith:U4MDZ6EF submitted 2026-07-29 astro-ph.IM

Haley R. Stueber , Tanmoy Chattopadhyay , Peter Orel , Steven W. Allen , Marshall W. Bautz , Michael Cooper , Kevan Donlon , Catherine E. Grant
show 12 more authors
Sven Herrmann Jill Juneau Beverly J. LaMarr Christopher Leitz Eric D. Miller R. Glenn Morris Declan O'Neill Abigail Y. Pan Tonya L. Peshel Artem Poliszczuk Gregory Y. Prigozhin Keith Warner
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IM
keywords X-rayCCDslownoisefastreadoutmulti-channeldetectorsASICAXISimagingspectrometersenergyresolution
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

Next-generation wide-field X-ray telescopes need detectors that are both fast enough to avoid pile-up on bright sources and quiet enough to measure faint diffuse emission with good energy resolution. Ordinary CCDs have the right pixels and noise floor but have been too slow; this paper shows that a full-scale 1440 imes1440, 16-channel device (the CCID-100) plus a dual multi-channel readout ASIC can close that gap. Two front-illuminated prototypes, read out at 2 Mpixel/s per channel (~6.7 frames/s), produce clean Fe-55 spectra on every channel. Many channels already sit under the ~3-electron noise and <150 eV FWHM@5.9 keV baselines that mission concepts such as AXIS require. An automated bias scan finds workable operating points even when noise versus temperature is non-monotonic, and built-in diagnostic paths simplify integration. The result is a concrete demonstration that multi-megapixel, multi-channel X-ray CCDs can now meet the combined speed-and-noise specification that future strategic missions demand.

What carries the argument

The dual MCRC V1 ASIC readout plus automated multi-parameter bias optimization (RGH/RGL/RD/OG) that finds a low-noise operating point for each of the 16 parallel CCD output channels at multi-Mpixel/s rates.

What would settle it

Operate the same devices (or flight-like back-illuminated versions) at the claimed frame rate in a radiation and thermal environment that mimics orbit and check whether the fraction of channels still under 3 e− noise and 150 eV FWHM@5.9 keV remains mission-acceptable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The CCID-100 devices are the first multi-megapixel, 16-channel imaging CCDs to demonstrate speed and noise performance at the levels required of next-generation wide-field, high-resolution X-ray imaging observatories. On two front-illuminated prototypes read out with dual MCRC V1 ASICs at ~6.7 frames/s, every channel is operational and many already meet the <3 e− read-noise and <150 eV FWHM@5.9 keV baselines.

Load-bearing premise

Lab bias points and channel noise measured at a chosen temperature under radioactive-source illumination are taken as representative enough to call the system mission-ready, even though low-temperature resonant noise forced warmer operation on one device and not every channel meets the strictest cuts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Multi-megapixel X-ray cameras can now be baselined for Probe- and flagship-class missions without sacrificing either frame rate or spectroscopic performance.
  • Parallel ASIC readout becomes a practical path to low-power, low-noise multi-channel CCD systems rather than a research prototype.
  • Automated bias scanning can be treated as standard procedure for commissioning large multi-output detectors whose noise surfaces are non-uniform.
  • The same architecture supplies a concrete stepping-stone camera for future strategic X-ray observatories beyond the original AXIS concept.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the unexplained low-T resonant noise can be engineered out or reliably avoided, the same devices could be run colder, potentially tightening the energy-resolution distribution across all channels.
  • Yield statistics from only two wafers already show a usable fraction of channels; modest process or screening improvements would make full-array compliance routine rather than partial.
  • The diagnostic network built into the ASIC board is transferable to other multi-channel focal-plane architectures that need in-situ troubleshooting without breaking vacuum or thermal equilibrium.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports laboratory characterization of two full-scale (1440×1440), 16-channel front-illuminated MIT-LL CCID-100 X-ray CCDs read out at 2 MPixel/s (~6.7 frames/s) with dual Stanford MCRC V1 ASICs. The authors describe a new Stanford beamline test setup, ASIC debugging features, and an automated multi-parameter bias scan (RGH, RGL, RD, OG) that minimizes average read noise. Noise-versus-temperature curves reveal a low-temperature resonant noise peak that forces W6 operation at −40 °C while W16 is optimized at −100 °C. Fe-55 single-pixel spectra are shown for all 16 channels of both devices; tallies indicate that many channels meet AXIS-like cuts (<3 e− read noise and <150 eV FWHM at 5.9 keV). The paper concludes that these systems demonstrate the speed and noise performance required of next-generation strategic X-ray missions and are essentially mission-ready.

Significance. If the reported lab performance holds under flight-relevant conditions, the work closes an important technology gap: multi-megapixel X-ray CCDs that combine small pixels, low noise, and multi-MHz parallel readout. The dual-ASIC architecture, automated bias optimization (~1300 combinations in <3 h), and integrated diagnostic network are practical contributions that other groups can reuse. Concrete per-channel Fe-55 spectra and explicit channel counts against published AXIS-like thresholds make the result falsifiable and useful as a benchmark. The paper is a solid instrumentation advance for AXIS-class and related Probe/MIDEX concepts, even if full flight qualification is outside its scope.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §1; §5; §6] Abstract and §6 state that the demonstrated performance “confirms that these systems can meet the speed and noise requirements of future strategic X-ray missions” and call the devices “mission-ready.” §5 tallies show incomplete simultaneous compliance: W6 (forced to −40 °C) reaches 11/16 channels <3.0 e− and 12/16 <150 eV FWHM; W16 at −100 °C reaches only 4/16 <3.0 e− (10/16 <3.5 e−) though 14/16 meet FWHM. Optimal biases also differ substantially between devices (Table 1). The data support “many good channels at ~6.7 fps under lab illumination,” but not a single operating point at which a full 16-channel device simultaneously satisfies the AXIS-like cuts invoked by the readiness language. Please revise Abstract/§1/§6 to match the measured yield (e.g., “many channels meet…,” “path toward mission readiness”) and briefly state what remains for flight qualification.
  2. [§4; Figs. 7–8; Table 1] §4 and Figs. 7–8 document a resonant low-temperature noise peak that is strong enough to force W6 operation at −40 °C rather than the −100 °C used for W16. The text attributes this to trap-induced 1/f noise by analogy with CCID-93 but states the exact cause is unknown. Because flight focal-plane temperatures are typically near −100 °C and the peak is device- and channel-dependent, the paper should (i) quantify how many channels remain below the <3 e− cut at the colder temperature for each device, and (ii) discuss whether bias re-optimization, process changes, or warmer set-points are the intended mitigation path. Without that, the representativeness of the §5 spectra for a flight thermal environment is unclear.
  3. [§5; Fig. 11] §5 reports only binary tallies against <3 e− and <150 eV cuts. For a characterization paper whose central claim is quantitative noise/energy-resolution performance, a compact table (or annotated Fig. 11) giving measured read noise (e−) and FWHM (eV) per channel for both devices at the stated operating points is load-bearing. Without the actual numbers, readers cannot assess margin to the cuts, channel-to-channel scatter, or consistency with the ADU noise curves in Figs. 7–8. Please add these values and the conversion gain used to go from ADU to electrons.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1] Fig. 1 caption says imaging area 1450×1455 pixels while the abstract and body consistently use 1440×1440; reconcile the dimensions.
  2. [§4–§5] ADU is defined as 4/2^16 V ≈ 61 µV (§4), but the electron noise values in §5 require an explicit system gain (e−/ADU or µV/e−). State the gain used for each device/temperature.
  3. [§5] Parallel transfer speed is given as “approximately 130 kHz” with frame rate ~6.7 fps; a one-line breakdown of serial vs. parallel timing budget would help readers reproduce the frame-rate claim.
  4. [§1; §3; Fig. 10] Typos/clarity: “fluorescane” → “fluorescence” (Fig. 10 caption); “ST ANFORD” spacing artifacts in several subsection headings; “flaglets” in §1 is nonstandard—consider “SmallSats/Explorer-class” or similar.
  5. [§1] Related CCID-100 results are deferred to companion papers [6] and [7] (noise/CTE and X-ray characterization). A short sentence clarifying what is unique to this manuscript versus those works would help the reader.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: empirical CCD characterization; noise/FWHM are measured, not forced by definition or fit-as-prediction.

full rationale

This is an instrumentation paper reporting lab measurements of two front-illuminated CCID-100 devices read out with dual MCRC V1 ASICs. The load-bearing results—channel read noise, Fe-55 single-pixel spectra, FWHM at 5.9 keV, and frame rate (~6.7 fps at 2 MPixel/s)—are direct experimental observables under stated temperatures and biases (Figs. 7–8, 11; Table 1; §5). Bias optimization (§4) scans RD/OG/RGH/RGL and selects the combination that minimizes measured average read noise; that is ordinary instrument tuning, not a fitted parameter renamed as an independent prediction. Self-citations to prior CCID-93/MCRC work supply architecture background and methods, not the numerical spectra or channel tallies claimed here. There is no self-definitional identity, no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors, no ansatz smuggled in as derivation, and no renaming of a known empirical law. Any weakness in the “mission-ready” language is a representativeness/correctness issue (incomplete channel yield, device-dependent temperature workarounds), not circularity of the derivation chain. Score 0; steps empty.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Load-bearing content is empirical device performance under stated lab conditions. The claim rests on standard CCD/ASIC engineering assumptions, the AXIS-derived numerical thresholds used as success criteria, and the premise that beamline single-pixel Fe-55 metrics plus bias-optimized read noise predict mission suitability. No new physical entities are postulated. Free parameters are the per-device output-stage biases and chosen operating temperatures found by scan, not cosmological fit parameters.

free parameters (3)
  • RGH, RGL, RD, OG bias set (per device) = W6@−40°C: RGH=6.5 V, RGL=1.5 V, RD=8.1 V, OG=1.9 V; W16@−100°C: RGH=6.0 V, RGL=1.0 V, RD=7.2 V, OG=2.2 V
    Four output-stage biases are scanned (~1300 combinations) and chosen to minimize average read noise; optimal values differ between W6 and W16 (Table 1). Headline noise/FWHM depend on these fitted operating points.
  • Operating temperature choice = W6: −40 °C; W16: −100 °C
    W6 is run at −40 °C rather than the colder design point because of a resonant noise peak at low T; W16 at −100 °C. Performance claims are conditional on these chosen temperatures.
  • Preamplifier gain and serial rate = 2 MPixel/s serial; ~6.7 frames/s; parallel ~130 kHz
    User-selectable MCRC gains (8 or 16 V/V) and 2 MPixel/s serial rate set the noise and frame-rate operating point used for all spectra.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption AXIS-like success thresholds of <3 electron read noise and <150 eV FWHM on the Fe-55 5.9 keV line are the correct performance bar for “next generation / mission-ready” claims.
    Used in §5–§6 to count passing channels and to conclude mission suitability; thresholds come from the AXIS concept rather than being re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Single-pixel event spectra under Fe-55 (and Ti fluorescence imaging) in a lab beamline adequately represent the spectroscopic performance relevant to flight X-ray observations.
    All headline spectra and the reconstructed image in §4–§5 use radioactive/fluorescence sources; no on-sky or continuum-background demonstration.
  • domain assumption Source-follower MCRC input path plus Archon 100 MSPS DPP chain contributes negligibly enough that reported noise is dominated by the CCD output stage as characterized.
    §3.2 states ASIC contributes <1 e− at 2 MPixel/s; channel noise is interpreted as detector performance.
  • domain assumption Standard buried-channel CCD charge transfer and two-stage pJFET+nMOSFET output physics apply; resonant low-T noise is attributed to trap-related 1/f behavior as in cited JFET/CCD literature.
    §2 and §4 invoke prior CCID-93 behavior and Kandiah/Janesick-type trap noise explanations without a new microscopic model.
  • ad hoc to paper Averaging read noise across 16 channels and minimizing that average is a valid figure of merit for multi-parameter bias optimization.
    §4 bias scan optimizes mean noise over channels; per-channel optima may differ, which matters given incomplete channel yield.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-speed, low-noise, multi-megapixel CCDs for next generation X-ray observatories." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4MDZ6EF

@misc{pith2026260727047,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-speed, low-noise, multi-megapixel CCDs for next generation X-ray observatories},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4MDZ6EF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27047}
}
read the original abstract

Next generation X-ray observatories require fast, low-noise, low-power, multi-megapixel imaging spectrometers. To meet these demands, the X-ray Astronomy and Observational Cosmology (XOC) Group at Stanford, in partnership with the MIT Kavli Institute and MIT Lincoln Laboratory (MIT-LL), is developing multi-channel X-ray charge-coupled devices (CCDs) and fast readout architectures. We report the energy resolution and noise performance achieved with a full-scale (1440x1440-pixel), 16-channel, front-illuminated MIT-LL CCD detector developed for the Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite (AXIS) concept, the CCID-100, read out using two Multi-Channel Readout Chip (MCRC) V1 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) chips in the new Stanford CCID-100 test setup. We describe an automated method for bias optimization on each CCD channel, and integrated debugging features of the front-end ASIC and readout system. The demonstrated performance confirms that these systems can meet the speed and noise requirements of future strategic X-ray missions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27047 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Schematic of the CCID-100 layout, depicting an imaging area of 1450 × 1455 24 × 24 µm pixels, and a frame store consisting of 1440 × 1440 21 × 13.5 µm pixels. Right: Fabricated, front-illuminated CCID-100 chips on a wafer. The CCID-100 features a two-stage output consisting of a fast, high-conversion gain source-follower p-channel junction field effect transistor (pJFET) followed by a large-bandwidth n-channel… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. CCID-100 two-stage output schematic diagram. The first stage consists of a pJFET while the second stage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. XOC Gen 1.0 X-ray beamline. For details on the test setup, see [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: CAD model of the CCID-100 test assembly. Components include the Archon controller plus custom interface board, which contains a Raspberry Pi computer module, flex cable, MCRC ASIC and readout electronics, CCID￾100 detector package and socket connector, cooling ma…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left: Microscope image of an MCRC V1 ASIC readout chip. Dimensions are 4160 µm × 2900 µm. Right: Dual MCRC V1 CCID-100 readout board, with a nickel for scale. 3.3 MCRC ASIC DEBUGGING FEATURES For the CCID-100 test system specifically, we designed the Archon interconnec…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Archon interconnect board for monitoring of CCD clock pulses with dedicated test points and for MCRC test [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Read noise in ADU of each channel of the W6 CCID-100 as a function of temperature, taken as the detector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Read noise in ADU of each channel of the W16 CCID-100 as a function of temperature, taken as the detector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Triangle plots summarizing the minimum read noise achieved for all bias parameter RD, OG, RGH, and RGL [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left: Detector mounted in the Gen 1.0 XOC X-ray beamline with “XOC” cutout aluminum cover secured over top of the imaging area. Right: Reconstructed CCID-100 image of single pixel events produced by Titanium (4.5 keV) fluorescane photons [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Left: All 16 channel spectra obtained from the standard-threshold, subchannel (W6) CCID-100 detector, operated at 2 MPixel/s serial readout speed at −40 ◦C. Right: All 16 channel spectra obtained from the low-threshold, subchannel (W16) CCID-100 detector, operated at …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Teledyne Imaging Sensors: Silicon CMOS imaging technologies for x-ray, UV, visible, and near infrared,

    Bai, Y., Bajaj, J., Beletic, J. W., Farris, M. C., Joshi, A., Lauxtermann, S., Petersen, A., and Williams, G., “Teledyne Imaging Sensors: Silicon CMOS imaging technologies for x-ray, UV, visible, and near infrared,” in [High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy III], Dorn, D. A. and Holland, A. D., eds., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumen...

    2008

  2. [2]

    Recent X-ray hybrid CMOS detector developments and measurements,

    Hull, S. V., Falcone, A. D., Burrows, D. N., Wages, M., Chattopadhyay, T., McQuaide, M., Bray, E., and Kern, M., “Recent X-ray hybrid CMOS detector developments and measurements,” in [UV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Space Instrumentation for Astronomy XX], Siegmund, O. H., ed.,10397, 1039704, Interna- tional Society for Optics and Photonics, SPIE (2017)

    2017

  3. [3]

    X-ray hybrid cmos detectors: Recent development and characterization progress,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Falcone, A. D., Burrows, D. N., Hull, S., Bray, E., Wages, M., McQuaide, M., Bun- tic, L., Crum, R., O’Dell, J., and Anderson, T., “X-ray hybrid cmos detectors: Recent development and characterization progress,” in [Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray], Proc.SPIE10709(2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Monolithic CMOS detectors for use as x-ray imaging spectrometers,

    Kenter, A., Kraft, R., and Gauron, T., “Monolithic CMOS detectors for use as x-ray imaging spectrometers,” in [Hard X-Ray, Gamma-Ray, and Neutron Detector Physics XX], Payne, S. A., James, R. B., Burger, A., and Fiederle, M., eds.,Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series10762, 1076209 (Sept. 2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    The Wide Field Imager instrument for Athena,

    Meidinger, N., Barbera, M., Emberger, V., F¨ urmetz, M., Manhart, M., M¨ uller-Seidlitz, J., Nandra, K., Plattner, M., Rau, A., and Treberspurg, W., “The Wide Field Imager instrument for Athena,” in [Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series], Siegmund, O. H., ed.,Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) ...

    2017

  6. [6]

    Noise and charge transfer characteristics of Fast, Low-noise CCD Sensors for AXIS,

    Prigozhin, G., Bautz, M., LaMarr, B., Donlon, K., Leitz, C., Miller, E., Gabuttia, M., Juneau, J., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Chattopadhyay, T., Cooper, M., Pestan, N., Yang, D., Prigozhin, I., Pan, A. Y., Stueber, H. R., O’Neil, D., Morris, R. G., and Allen, S. W., “Noise and charge transfer characteristics of Fast, Low-noise CCD Sensors for AXIS,” in [X-Ra...

    2026

  7. [7]

    X-ray characterization of large-format, 16-channel CCD Sensors for future strategic X-ray missions,

    LaMarr, B. J., Bautz, M. W., Miller, E. D., Prigozhin, G. Y., Juneau, J., Gabutti, M., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., O’Neill, D., Chattopadhyay, T., Stueber, H. R., Pan, A. Y., Morris, R. G., Allen, S. W., Leitz, C., Cooper, M., Donlon, K., Pestana, N., Prigozhin, I., Volfson, D., Warner, K., Young, D. J., and Grant, C. E., “X-ray characterization of large-form...

    2026

  8. [8]

    Overview of the advanced x-ray imaging satellite (AXIS),

    Reynolds, C. S., Kara, E. A., Mushotzky, R. F., Ptak, A., Koss, M. J., Williams, B. J., Allen, S. W., Bauer, F. E., Bautz, M., Bogadhee, A., Burdge, K. B., Cappelluti, N., Cenko, B., Chartas, G., Chan, K.-W., Corrales, L., Daylan, T., Falcone, A. D., Foord, A., Grant, C. E., Habouzit, M., Haggard, D., Herrmann, S., Hodges-Kluck, E., Kargaltsev, O., King, ...

    2023

Show all 20 references
  1. [9]

    The high-speed x-ray camera on AXIS,

    Miller, E. D., Bautz, M. W., Grant, C. E., Foster, R., LaMarr, B., Malonis, A., Prigozhin, G., Schneider, B., Leitz, C., Herrmann, S., Allen, S. W., Chattopadhyay, T., Orel, P., Morris, G. R., Stueber, H., Falcone, A. D., Ptak, A., and Reynolds, C., “The high-speed x-ray camer...

    2023

  2. [10]

    Development and characterization of a fast and low noise readout for the next generation x-ray charge-coupled devices,

    Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S., Orel, P., Morris, R. G., Prigozhin, G., Malonis, A., Foster, R., Craig, D., Burke, B. E., Allen, S. W., and Bautz, M. W., “Development and characterization of a fast and low noise readout for the next generation x-ray charge-coupled devices,”Jo...

    2022

  3. [11]

    Fast, low noise CCD systems for future strategic x-ray missions,

    Stueber, H. R., Pan, A. Y., Chattopadhyay, T., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Donlon, K., Grant, C. E., Herrmann, S., LaMarr, B. J., Malonis, A., Miller, E. D., Morris, R. G., Orel, P., Poliszczuk, A., Prigozhin, G. Y., and Wilkins, D. R., “Fast, low noise CCD systems for future ...

    2025

  4. [12]

    Development of CCDs for the AXIS astrophysics probe concept,

    Leitz, C., Donlon, K., Cooper, M., Prigozhin, I., Young, D., Jensen, M., Lambert, R., Miller, E., Grant, C., LaMarr, B., Malonis, A., Prigozhin, G., Bautz, M., Herrmann, S., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, G., Pan, A. Y., Stueber, H. R., and Allen, S. W., “Development of CCDs for t...

    2025

  5. [13]

    MCRC V1: development of integrated readout electronics for next generation x-ray CCD detectors for future satellite observatories,

    Herrmann, S., Wong, J., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, R. G., Burke, B., Prigozhin, G., Cooper, M., Craig, D., Donlon, K., Foster, R., Malonis, A., Bautz, M., and Allen, S., “MCRC V1: development of integrated readout electronics for next generation x-ray CCD detectors for future ...

    2020

  6. [14]

    X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: a low noise CCD readout ASIC enabling readout speeds of 5 Mpixel/s/channel,

    Orel, P., Herrmann, S., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, G. R., Allen, S. W., Prigozhin, G. Y., Foster, R., Malonis, A., Bautz, M. W., Cooper, M. J., and Donlon, K., “X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: a low noise CCD readout ASIC enabling readout speeds of 5 Mpixel/s/channel,” in [...

    2022

  7. [15]

    X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: prototype success and next generation upgrades,

    Orel, P., Herrmann, S., Chattopadhyay, T., Morris, G. R., Stueber, H., Pan, A., Allen, S. W., Wilkins, D., Prigozhin, G. Y., LaMarr, B., Foster, R., Malonis, A., Bautz, M. W., Cooper, M. J., and Donlon, K., “X-ray speed reading with the MCRC: prototype success and next generat...

    2024

  8. [16]

    The XOC x-ray beamline: probing colder, quieter, and softer,

    Stueber, H. R., Chattopadhyay, T., Herrmann, S. C., Orel, P., Gebre, T., Joshi, A., Allen, S. W., Morris, G., and Poliszczuk, A., “The XOC x-ray beamline: probing colder, quieter, and softer,” in [X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy XI], Holland, A. D. and Min...

    2024

  9. [17]

    Fast, low-noise CCD systems for future strategic X-ray missions,

    Stueber, H. R., Chattopadhyay, T., Peshel, T., Pan, A. Y., Allen, S. W., Bautz, M. W., Donlon, K., Grant, C. E., Herrmann, S., LaMarr, B. J., Malonis, A., Miller, E. D., Morris, R. G., Orel, P., Poliszczuk, A., and Prigozhin, G. Y., “Fast, low-noise CCD systems for future stra...

    2026

  10. [18]

    Random telegraph signal currents and low-frequency noise in junction field effect transistors,

    Kandiah, K., “Random telegraph signal currents and low-frequency noise in junction field effect transistors,” IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices41(11), 2006–2015 (1994)

    2006

  11. [19]

    Nonideal behaviour of buried channel ccds caused by oxide and bulk sili- con traps,

    Kandiah, K. and Whiting, F., “Nonideal behaviour of buried channel ccds caused by oxide and bulk sili- con traps,”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment305(3), 600–607 (1991)

    1991

  12. [20]

    R., [Scientific Charge-Coupled Devices], SPIE Press, Bellingham, Washington (2001)

    Janesick, J. R., [Scientific Charge-Coupled Devices], SPIE Press, Bellingham, Washington (2001)

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed July 30, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.