Performance comparison of different readouts for position-sensitive solid-state photomultiplier arrays

Junwei Du, Jeffrey P. Schmall, Kun Di, Yongfeng Yang, Purushottam A. Dokhale, Kanai S. Shah, Simon R Cherry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

A thorough comparison of five different readouts for reading out a 2 × 2 array of 5 mm × 5 mm position-sensitive solid-state photomultipliers (PS-SSPM) was undertaken. The five readouts include reading out the 20 signals (16 position and 4 timing) individually, two signal multiplexing readouts, and two position decoding readouts. Flood histogram quality, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and energy resolution were compared at different bias voltage (27.0-32.0 V, at 0.5 V intervals) and at a fixed temperature of 0°C by coupling a 6 × 6 array of 1.3 mm × 1.3 mm × 20 mm polished LSO crystals to the center of the PS-SSPM array. The timing resolution was measured at a bias voltage of 31.0 V (optimal bias voltage in terms of flood histogram quality). The best flood histogram quality value and signal-to-noise were 7.3 ± 1.6 and 33.5 ± 3.1, respectively, and were obtained by shaping and digitizing the 16 position signals individually. The capacitive charge-division readout is the simplest readout among the five evaluated but still resulted in good performance with a flood histogram quality valueof3.3 ± 0.4 and a SNR of 18.3 ± 1.3. The average energy resolution and the average timing resolution were 15.2 ± 1.2% and 8.4 ± 1.6 ns for individual signal readout and 15.9 ± 1.2% and 8.8 ± 1.3 ns by using the capacitive charge-division readout method. These studies show that for an ultra-high spatial resolution applications using the 2 × 2 PS-SSPM array, reading out the 20 signals individually is necessary, whilst the capacitive charge-division readout is a cost-effective readout for less demanding applications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number045019
JournalBiomedical Physics and Engineering Express
Volume3
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 19 2017

Fingerprint

Reading
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Noise
Costs and Cost Analysis
Temperature
lutetium orthosilicate

Keywords

  • Charge division readout
  • PET
  • Position-sensitive solid-state photomultipiers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Performance comparison of different readouts for position-sensitive solid-state photomultiplier arrays. / Du, Junwei; Schmall, Jeffrey P.; Di, Kun; Yang, Yongfeng; Dokhale, Purushottam A.; Shah, Kanai S.; Cherry, Simon R.

In: Biomedical Physics and Engineering Express, Vol. 3, No. 4, 045019, 19.07.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Du, Junwei ; Schmall, Jeffrey P. ; Di, Kun ; Yang, Yongfeng ; Dokhale, Purushottam A. ; Shah, Kanai S. ; Cherry, Simon R. / Performance comparison of different readouts for position-sensitive solid-state photomultiplier arrays. In: Biomedical Physics and Engineering Express. 2017 ; Vol. 3, No. 4.
@article{90f8abe895654d49a19e797721648a0b,
title = "Performance comparison of different readouts for position-sensitive solid-state photomultiplier arrays",
abstract = "A thorough comparison of five different readouts for reading out a 2 × 2 array of 5 mm × 5 mm position-sensitive solid-state photomultipliers (PS-SSPM) was undertaken. The five readouts include reading out the 20 signals (16 position and 4 timing) individually, two signal multiplexing readouts, and two position decoding readouts. Flood histogram quality, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and energy resolution were compared at different bias voltage (27.0-32.0 V, at 0.5 V intervals) and at a fixed temperature of 0°C by coupling a 6 × 6 array of 1.3 mm × 1.3 mm × 20 mm polished LSO crystals to the center of the PS-SSPM array. The timing resolution was measured at a bias voltage of 31.0 V (optimal bias voltage in terms of flood histogram quality). The best flood histogram quality value and signal-to-noise were 7.3 ± 1.6 and 33.5 ± 3.1, respectively, and were obtained by shaping and digitizing the 16 position signals individually. The capacitive charge-division readout is the simplest readout among the five evaluated but still resulted in good performance with a flood histogram quality valueof3.3 ± 0.4 and a SNR of 18.3 ± 1.3. The average energy resolution and the average timing resolution were 15.2 ± 1.2{\%} and 8.4 ± 1.6 ns for individual signal readout and 15.9 ± 1.2{\%} and 8.8 ± 1.3 ns by using the capacitive charge-division readout method. These studies show that for an ultra-high spatial resolution applications using the 2 × 2 PS-SSPM array, reading out the 20 signals individually is necessary, whilst the capacitive charge-division readout is a cost-effective readout for less demanding applications.",
keywords = "Charge division readout, PET, Position-sensitive solid-state photomultipiers",
author = "Junwei Du and Schmall, {Jeffrey P.} and Kun Di and Yongfeng Yang and Dokhale, {Purushottam A.} and Shah, {Kanai S.} and Cherry, {Simon R}",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1088/2057-1976/aa7c6a",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
journal = "Biomedical Physics and Engineering Express",
issn = "2057-1976",
publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance comparison of different readouts for position-sensitive solid-state photomultiplier arrays

AU - Du, Junwei

AU - Schmall, Jeffrey P.

AU - Di, Kun

AU - Yang, Yongfeng

AU - Dokhale, Purushottam A.

AU - Shah, Kanai S.

AU - Cherry, Simon R

PY - 2017/7/19

Y1 - 2017/7/19

N2 - A thorough comparison of five different readouts for reading out a 2 × 2 array of 5 mm × 5 mm position-sensitive solid-state photomultipliers (PS-SSPM) was undertaken. The five readouts include reading out the 20 signals (16 position and 4 timing) individually, two signal multiplexing readouts, and two position decoding readouts. Flood histogram quality, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and energy resolution were compared at different bias voltage (27.0-32.0 V, at 0.5 V intervals) and at a fixed temperature of 0°C by coupling a 6 × 6 array of 1.3 mm × 1.3 mm × 20 mm polished LSO crystals to the center of the PS-SSPM array. The timing resolution was measured at a bias voltage of 31.0 V (optimal bias voltage in terms of flood histogram quality). The best flood histogram quality value and signal-to-noise were 7.3 ± 1.6 and 33.5 ± 3.1, respectively, and were obtained by shaping and digitizing the 16 position signals individually. The capacitive charge-division readout is the simplest readout among the five evaluated but still resulted in good performance with a flood histogram quality valueof3.3 ± 0.4 and a SNR of 18.3 ± 1.3. The average energy resolution and the average timing resolution were 15.2 ± 1.2% and 8.4 ± 1.6 ns for individual signal readout and 15.9 ± 1.2% and 8.8 ± 1.3 ns by using the capacitive charge-division readout method. These studies show that for an ultra-high spatial resolution applications using the 2 × 2 PS-SSPM array, reading out the 20 signals individually is necessary, whilst the capacitive charge-division readout is a cost-effective readout for less demanding applications.

AB - A thorough comparison of five different readouts for reading out a 2 × 2 array of 5 mm × 5 mm position-sensitive solid-state photomultipliers (PS-SSPM) was undertaken. The five readouts include reading out the 20 signals (16 position and 4 timing) individually, two signal multiplexing readouts, and two position decoding readouts. Flood histogram quality, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and energy resolution were compared at different bias voltage (27.0-32.0 V, at 0.5 V intervals) and at a fixed temperature of 0°C by coupling a 6 × 6 array of 1.3 mm × 1.3 mm × 20 mm polished LSO crystals to the center of the PS-SSPM array. The timing resolution was measured at a bias voltage of 31.0 V (optimal bias voltage in terms of flood histogram quality). The best flood histogram quality value and signal-to-noise were 7.3 ± 1.6 and 33.5 ± 3.1, respectively, and were obtained by shaping and digitizing the 16 position signals individually. The capacitive charge-division readout is the simplest readout among the five evaluated but still resulted in good performance with a flood histogram quality valueof3.3 ± 0.4 and a SNR of 18.3 ± 1.3. The average energy resolution and the average timing resolution were 15.2 ± 1.2% and 8.4 ± 1.6 ns for individual signal readout and 15.9 ± 1.2% and 8.8 ± 1.3 ns by using the capacitive charge-division readout method. These studies show that for an ultra-high spatial resolution applications using the 2 × 2 PS-SSPM array, reading out the 20 signals individually is necessary, whilst the capacitive charge-division readout is a cost-effective readout for less demanding applications.

KW - Charge division readout

KW - PET

KW - Position-sensitive solid-state photomultipiers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029480877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029480877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1088/2057-1976/aa7c6a

DO - 10.1088/2057-1976/aa7c6a

M3 - Article

VL - 3

JO - Biomedical Physics and Engineering Express

JF - Biomedical Physics and Engineering Express

SN - 2057-1976

IS - 4

M1 - 045019

ER -