Paper detail

Unified benchmarking and characterization protocol for nanomaterial-based heterogeneous photodetector technologies

Over the last few years, there has been a rapid growth towards demonstrating highly sensitive, fast photodetectors using photoactive nano-materials. As with any other developing and highly inter-disciplinary field, the existing reports exhibit a large spread in the data due to less optimized materials and non-standardized characterization protocols. This calls for a streamlined performance benchmarking requirement to accelerate technological adoption of the promising candidates. The goal of this paper is four-fold: (i) to address the key challenges to perform such benchmarking exercise; (ii) to elucidate the right figures of merit to look for, and in particular, to demonstrate that noise-equivalent-power ($N\!E\!P$) is a more reliable sensitivity metric than other commonly used ones, such as responsivity ($R$) and specific detectivity ($D^*$); (iii) to propose $N\!E\!P$ versus frequency of operation ($f$) as a single, unified benchmarking chart that could be used for apple-to-apple comparison among heterogeneous detector technologies; and (iv) to propose a simple, yet streamlined characterization protocol that can be followed while reporting photodetector performance.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.