Noise performance comparison of

ICCD with CCD and EMCCD cameras
Paul Hoess, David Dussault
Stanford Computer Optics / Paul Hoess KG, Nunich, GERNANY
The International Symposium on
Optical Science and Technology
2
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Topics
„ Introduction - 3 LLL sensing concepts
„ CCD
„ ICCD
„ ENCCD
„ Noise sources
„ Shot noise
„ Dark current noise
„ Readout noise
„ Signal-to-noise ratio
„ Single frame operation
„ Long integration time versus frame adding
„ Discussion of the simulation results
„ Conclusions
3
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
CCD (Charge-Coupled Device)
„ CCD = array of photodiodes
(light-sensitive pixels).
„ Generation (high O.E. η, 1e
-
per
photon) and storage of electrons
when exposed to light.
„ Read-out of the charge by changing
the electrical bias of an adjacent
pixel.
„ Charge to voltage conversion,
digitization to numerical value by
external circuitry.
+
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
ICCD (Intensified CCD)
„ Photocathode: Generation (low O.E. η,
1e
-
per hν) of photoelectrons.
„ Nicrochannel plate (NCP):
multiplication (G
NCP
) of electrons.
„ Phosphor screen: conversion (G
screen
)
of electrons back into highly increased
(x10
+
-10
6
) number of photons.
„ High numerical aperture lens-coupling
for superior distortion free image
quality.
„ CCD: conversion of the very high
number of photons to charge, readout
and digitization.
S
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
ENCCD (Electron Nultiplying CCD)
„ Generation and storage of electrons
(high O.E. η, 1e
-
per photon),
equivalent to CCD.
„ Amplification by impact ionization in
the gain register.
„ Charge to voltage conversion,
digitization equivalent to CCD.
6
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Noise sources |1|
„ Shot noise N
shot
|e
-
/pixel|
W KI
S VKRW
) * 1 u u
G: multiplication gain
F: noise factor of gain
η: quantum efficiency
φ
S
: mean incident photon flux per pixel
τ: integration time [s]
All signals and noises are calculated in equivalent number of electrons at
system output.
/
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Noise sources |2|
„ Dark current and its noise N
dc
|e
-
/pixel|
N
dc0
: dark current at room temperature |nA/cm²|
d
pix
: pixel size |cm|
7: operating temperature [K]
(
J
: bandgap energy in ev
N: Boltzmann's constant
(8.62· 10
-S
ev/K)

»
»
¼
º
«
«
¬
ª
˜ ˜
¸
¸
¹
·
¨
¨
©
§

N7
(
SL[ GF GF
J
H 7 G 1 1 W
8
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Noise sources |3|
„ Read-out noise N
r
:
„ generated through charge transfers across the CCD.
readout amplifier reset, "any other¨ electronic noises
„ Strongly pixel clock (frame rate) and slightly temperature dependent.
„ independent of integration time.
„ for ENCCDs:
where N
ct
is the charge transfer noise that is multiplied in the gain register
and N
r0
is all other non-multiplied readout noises.
> @

FW U U
1 * 1 1 u
9
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Noise sources
„ Total noise N
tot
:



U GF VKRW WRW
1 1 1 1
10
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Signal-to-noise ratio |1|
„ Single frame operation
„ Shot-noise-limited operation if N
r
and N
dc
<< N
shot
:
„ high -
p
,
„ high G,
„ or N
r
and N
dc
extremely small.


U GF VKRW
S
XQLW
1 1 1
*
615

W KI
11
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Signal-to-noise ratio |2|
„ Long time integration (traditional approach):
where n
l
is the factor by which the integration time τ is increased.
> @ > @





O U GF VKRW
S
O
U GF VKRW O
S O
ORQJ
Q 1 1 1
*
Q
1 1 1 Q
* Q
615

W KI W KI
12
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Signal-to-noise ratio |3|
„ Frame adding (alternative approach):
where n
a
is the number of unit frames that are added together.
> @




U GF VKRW
S
D
U GF VKRW D
S D
DGG
1 1 1
*
Q
1 1 1 Q
* Q
615

W KI W KI
13
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Parameters of the simulation
„ CCD:
„ Æ=S0¾, front-illuminated
„ G=F=1
„ N
r
=2Se
-
(SNHz) or Se
-
(1NHz)
„ ICCD:
„ Æ=S0¾
„ F=1.6
„ G=S00
„ N
r
=2Se
-
„ EMCCD:
„ Æ=S0¾ (FI) or 90¾ (BI)
„ F=1.+
„ G=S00
„ N
r0
=2Se
-
„ N
ct
=2.2e
-
(31kHz) or S.+e
-
(1NHz)
„ τ=20 ms
„ N
dc0
=0.1 or 3nA/cm² @ 300K
1+
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Simulation of single short frame mode
high to medium -
p
, low camera noise
1E-01
1E+00
1E+01
1E+02
1E+03
1E+00 1E+01 1E+02 1E+03 1E+04 1E+05
Photons per pixeI
S
N
R
'perfect' camera
ICCD (T=300K)
EMCCD (T=200K), BI
EMCCD (T=250K), BI
EMCCD (T=250K), FI
EMCCD (T=300K), BI
CCD (T=250K), Nr=25e-
CCD (T=300K), Nr=5e-
CCD (T=250K), Nr=5e-
„ CCD:
„ Strong impact of readout noise,
„ very slight improvement with
cooling.
„ EMCCD:
„ Clear influence of cooling,
„ limitation by charge transfer noise.
„ ICCD:
„ Shot-noise-limited operation,
„ cooling not required.
Parameters:
„ τ=20ms
„ N
dc0
=0.1nA/cm²
„ N
ct
=2.2e
-
1S
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
(
(
(
(
(
( ( ( ( ( (
Mean incident photon fIux
(photons/second/pixeI)
O
b
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n

t
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
)
'perfect' camera
CCD frame adding (300K), Nr=25e-
CCD long frame (300K), Nr=25e-
CCD long frame (250K), Nr=25e-
lCCD frame adding (300K)
lCCD long frame (300K)
EMCCD long frame (250K), Bl
EMCCD long frame (200K), Bl
EMCCD frame adding (200K), Bl
Simulation of extended integration time
low to very low -
p
, low camera noise
„ CCD:
„ Better SNR with long frame.
„ EMCCD:
„ Clear influence of cooling in low
light conditions,
„ frame adding not as effective as for
ICCD.
„ ICCD:
„ Same results with frame adding or
long frame,
„ cooling not required.
Parameters:
„ τ=20ms
„ N
dc0
=0.1nA/cm²
„ N
ct
=2.2e
-
16
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
1E-O1
1E+OO
1E+O1
1E+O2
1E+O3
1E+OO 1E+O1 1E+O2 1E+O3 1E+O4 1E+O5
3KRWRQVSHUSL[HO
6
1
5
'perfect' camera
lCCD (T=3OOK)
EMCCD (T=2OOK), Bl
EMCCD (T=25OK), Bl
EMCCD (T=25OK), Fl
EMCCD (T=3OOK), Bl
CCD (T=3OOK), Nr=25e-
CCD (T=25OK), Nr=25e-
„ CCD:
„ Negligible temperature influence at
SNHz readout rate.
„ EMCCD:
„ Still a decrease of the SNR in LLL,
„ Slightly superior to CCD at room
temperature,
„ SNR improvement for lower
temperatures,
„ BI: high OE, slight temperature
dependence, readout dominated.
„ ICCD:
„ Still in shot-noise-limited operation,
unchanged.
Simulation of single short frame mode
high to medium -
p
, high camera noise, realistic operating conditions
Parameters:
„ τ=20ms
„ N
dc0
=3nA/cm²
„ N
ct
=S.+e
-
1/
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
1E-O2
1E-O1
1E+OO
1E+O1
1E+O2
1E-O1 1E+OO 1E+O1 1E+O2 1E+O3 1E+O4
Mean incident phctcn fIux
(phctcns/seccnd/pixeI)
C
b
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
c
n

t
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
c
n
d
s
)
'perfect' camera
CCD frame adding (300K), Nr=25e
CCD long frame (300K), Nr=25e-
CCD long frame (250K), Nr=25e-
lCCD frame adding (300K)
lCCD long frame (300K)
EMCCD long frame (250K), Bl
EMCCD long frame (200K), Bl
EMCCD frame adding (200K), Bl
„ CCD:
„ Long frame better than frame adding,
„ Frame adding: significant sensitivity
increase without additional hardware.
„ ICCD:
„ No influence of noises, better than
ENCCD over a wide range.
„ EMCCD:
„ Better than ICCD only at extremely
low light levels (int. time 2 1min.)
Parameters:
„ τ=20ms
„ N
dc0
=3nA/cm²
„ N
ct
=S.+e
-
Simulation of extended integration time
low to very low -
p
, high camera noise, realistic operating conditions
18
0S.08.200+ Noise performance comparison of ICCD with CCD and ENCCD cameras
Conclusions
„ Best SNR provided by CCD at high light levels, operating range extended to low light
levels through slow scan and cooling.
„ Need for strong cooling of ENCCD sensors to eliminate dark current.
„ Need for very low frame rates operation for ENCCDs in order to minimize charge transfer
noise.
„ No cooling, no slow scan required for the CCD sensor of an
ICCD system.