You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither SPIE nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the SPIE website.
30 July 2010Fundamental performance differences between CMOS and CCD imagers, part IV
This paper is a continuation of past papers written on fundamental performance differences of scientific CMOS and
CCD imagers. New characterization results presented below include: 1). a new 1536 × 1536 × 8μm 5TPPD pixel CMOS
imager, 2). buried channel MOSFETs for random telegraph noise (RTN) and threshold reduction, 3) sub-electron noise
pixels, 4) 'MIM pixel' for pixel sensitivity (V/e-) control, 5) '5TPPD RING pixel' for large pixel, high-speed charge
transfer applications, 6) pixel-to-pixel blooming control, 7) buried channel photo gate pixels and CMOSCCDs, 8)
substrate bias for deep depletion CMOS imagers, 9) CMOS dark spikes and dark current issues and 10) high energy
radiation damage test data. Discussions are also given to a 1024 × 1024 × 16 um 5TPPD pixel imager currently in
fabrication and new stitched CMOS imagers that are in the design phase including 4k × 4k × 10 μm and 10k × 10k × 10
um imager formats.
The alert did not successfully save. Please try again later.
James Janesick, Jeff Pinter, Robert Potter, Tom Elliott, James Andrews, John Tower, Mark Grygon, Dave Keller, "Fundamental performance differences between CMOS and CCD imagers, part IV," Proc. SPIE 7742, High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy IV, 77420B (30 July 2010); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.862491