Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Radiation Measurements
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/radmeas

A LaBr3(Ce) detector system with a simple spectral shift correction method

for applications in harsh environments
Yire Choi a, *, Kyeong Ja Kim a, Kilsoon Park b, Yongkwon Kim b
a
Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
b
Nucare Medical, Cheongju, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: A prototype LaBr3 detector system with an integrated electronics unit was developed to perform accurate gamma
LaBr3 detector system ray spectroscopy in harsh environments. A simple spectral shift methodology was employed in a LaBr3 detector
Spectral shift methodology system, which is capable of restoring gamma spectra measured under various temperature conditions within the
Temperature variations
range of − 20 to +50 ◦ C, in real-time. The methodology was tested at various temperatures. The long term
Spectra stabilization
stability of measurements using a LaBr3 detector system was also successfully verified.

1. Introduction
To be useful in various fields of gamma ray spectroscopy, a scintil­
lator should have high light output, fast response, and excellent line­
arity. The LaBr3(Ce) scintillator, which has a high photoelectron yield
(of ~65,000 photons/MeV), energy resolution (3–4% FWHM at 662
keV), decay time (typically ~ 20 ns), excellent thermal stability of light
yield within the temperature range − 20 to +60 ◦ C and higher detection
efficiencies compared to NaI(Tl), has proven to be an outstanding
candidate for high energy gamma ray spectroscopy (Cazzaniga et al.,
2015; Camp et al., 2016; Hou et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2009; van Loef
et al., 2002; Menge et al., 2007; Moszyński et al., 1998, 2006; Rozsa
et al., 2007; Quarati et al., 2007, 2011, 2012; Saint-Gobain data sheet).
Its features have led to the widespread use of LaBr3(Ce) scintillators in a
variety of fields, including nuclear spectroscopy, environmental moni­
toring, geological applications, astronomy and space applications
(Bizarri et al., 2006; Favalli et al., 2008; Iltis et al., 2006; Quarati et al.,
2012; Zeng et al., 2017).
When measuring gamma-rays, temperature variations and other
electronic factors can cause both peak shifts and spectral distortions
leading to the misidentification of some isotopes (Casanovas et al., 2012;
Mitra et al., 2016; Moszyński et al., 2006; Zeng et al., 2017). To accu­
rately analyze gamma-ray spectral information, it is important to iden­
tify the characteristics of the in-situ gamma-ray detector system,
particularly when it is being operated in harsh environments with severe
temperature changes that can lead to errors (ICRU 53, 1994).
In this study, a prototype LaBr3 detector system with an electronics
unit was developed for use in harsh environments, such as those asso­
ciated with nuclear spectroscopy, geological applications, astronomy
and space applications. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a LaBr3
detector system by evaluating the change in energy scale of differential
pulse height spectra recorded at different temperatures from − 20 to
+50 ◦ C, and by applying a simple methodology to restore the shifted
spectrum. The photo-peak efficiency and energy resolution of the system
were also experimentally evaluated at a specific temperature, to confirm
that the performance of a LaBr3 detector system remained constant.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Experimental
The characterization of a LaBr3 detector system was performed using
a compact electronics unit that employs digital signal processing to
simplify the system. This system consisted of a ∅76.2 × 76.2mm cylin­
drical LaBr3(Ce) scintillator (B380, Saint Gobain) connected to a 76 mm
diameter end-on photomultiplier tube (R6233-01 MOD3, Hamamatsu)
using a fused silica optical window that was specifically developed. The
LaBr3 detector includes a voltage divider and charge sensitive pream­
plifier assembly, encapsulated using a 0.5 mm aluminum housing, to
make it compact and rugged and to shield against electromagnetic ra­
diation. Solid white reflective material surrounding crystal with shock
absorbing silicone rubber support pads was used to avoid the risk of
fracture of the crystal. The electronics unit made by KIGAM (Korea
institute of Geoscience and mineral resources) is made with military-

* Corresponding author. 124, Gwahak-ro, Yuseon-gu, Daejeon, 34132, Republic of Korea.

E-mail addresses: ir_1254@kigam.re.kr, dlfp85@gmail.com (Y. Choi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2021.106567
Received 8 December 2020; Received in revised form 7 March 2021; Accepted 10 March 2021
Available online 16 March 2021
1350-4487/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Fig. 1. Block Diagram of the in-situ LaBr3 detector system based on digital signal processing.

Fig. 2. (a) Block diagram of the programmable logic and processing system (b) Control system configured to enable data acquisition and system control.

grade parts and has three main components: (1) High Voltage/Low
Voltage Power Supply Board (2) Data Acquisition Board (3) Data
acquisition software. When the signal output from the LaBr3 is input to
the electronics unit, it is configured to be input into an ADC that converts
analog signals into digital signals through a 2nd amplifier and differ­
ential amplifier, through an electronic circuit for impedance matching.
The electronics unit is compactly constructed and weighs ~1.35 kg
including the aluminum housing, and can be used externally as a
portable device. Fig. 1 shows a schematic representation of the LaBr3
detector system and how the system operates for measuring gamma
rays. The software-based control system consists of two parts: a control
part that can check and control the system health and operation, and a
part that can check in real time the gamma ray spectrum information
collected every 10 s (Fig. 2).
Two dynamic ranges of signals are accessible. Two separate pre­
amplifiers are employed for energy ranges up to 3 MeV and 10 MeV for
high gain (Anode) output and low gain (Dynode 7) output, respectively.
The analog signal is converted to a digital signal using an analog-to-
digital converter (ADC) to generate the spectrum. The ADC used in the
system is composed of 2 channels, has 14-bit resolution, and is capable

2
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Table 1 spectral data is generated by obtaining a representative value for each

Information about the multi-nuclide standard source (Eckert & Ziegler). signal through the trapezoidal filter, which is a digital filter applied to
Energy(keV) Nuclide Activity(μCi) Total Uncert. the system for detector pulse signal processing. The digitized data is
109
processed by several steps within the FPGA, including data filtering,
88 Cd 0.44 3.1%
57 baseline adjust, pileup rejection. Spectrum data is collected every 10 s
122.1 Co 0.0137 3.1%
159 123m
Te 0.010 3.1% and saved in a text (.txt) file format. Those data are processed using the
391.7 113
Sn 0.033 3.1% data acquisition software with a batch file processing unit. The program
514 85
Sr 0.017 3.0% stores data and analyzes the spectral information (Fig. 2). Since this
137
661.7 Cs 0.093 3.1% system is configured to enable energy-channel calibration through LaBr3
88
898, 1836 Y 0.061 3.0%
1173, 1332 60
Co 0.103 3.1%
intrinsic background information, information of peaks measured in real
time can be roughly confirmed using peak library information included
in the system.
Within a laboratory environment, the gamma source was placed 100
mm from the front of the detector inside a thermal chamber. A multi-
nuclide standard point source that contained radioactivity of 0.772
μCi (Eckert & Ziegler) was utilized to minimize dead time and the pileup
effect (Table 1). The uncertainty of the source activities was 3% as
specified by the manufacturer. The spectra acquisition time was set to
have ~104 counts or more for the main photo-peak, to minimize sta­
tistical error in the peak area. To accurately calculate the absolute
photo-peak efficiency, it is necessary to subtract the background, and for
this, a background spectrum was collected without a standard source for
the same duration of time. The thermal chamber was installed in SaTReC
(Satellite Technology Research Lab), KAIST (Korea Advanced Institute
of Science and Technology) and set at temperatures ranging from − 20 ◦ C
to +50 ◦ C to check and verify the system’s performance under repre­
sentative environmental conditions over the entire energy range below
3 MeV (Fig. 3). Thermometer sensors were placed to monitor the tem­
perature of the chamber and the temperatures of five spots around the
detector system. After stabilization within ±1 ◦ C for at least 2 h, gamma-
Fig. 3. A prototype LaBr3 detector system with an integrated electronics unit in
ray spectra were collected at intervals of 5 ◦ C within the temperature
a thermal chamber.
range of − 20 to +50 ◦ C.

2.2. Method

The correction method adopted to assess energy scale shifts was

based on the technique proposed by Tsankov and Mitev (2007). Mitra
et al. (2016) also employed the above method to successfully evaluate
the energy scale shift for NaI(Tl) recorded gamma spectra. The estima­
tion methodology applied to a prototype LaBr3 detector system is briefly
described below.
We suppose that there are two successive spectra measured under
different temperature conditions:

∫xi+1 ∫ξi+1
Fi = f (x)dx, Φi = ϕ(ξ)dξ; i = 0, 1, …, n − 1 (1)
xi ξi

where f and ϕ are continuous functions by which quantization within

one channel width gives fi and ϕi in the ADC (Analog-to-Digital Con­
verter) of the MCA (multi-channel analyzer). The total number of
channels of the MCA is n. Assuming that f and ϕ are essentially identical,
but for an unknown X-scale transformation (drift) which has occurred
between the records {f} and {Φ}. This transformation, ξ = ​ Ξ(x), can
be assumed to be defined inversely.
x = X(ξ) (2)
Fig. 4. Calibration lines for Reference temperature and measurement
temperature. We can then transform the data {Φ} back to scale x and then process
it together with {F}. A certain parameterization is useful to find X(ξ),
of sampling at rates of 100 MSPS or higher. The ADC operates in free and the easiest way is to apply the polynomial form.
running mode, so that the ACD is constantly sampling and updating the
∑
r− 1
ADC data registers. It transmits the measured value in real time when X(ξ) = ak ξk (3)
the radiation measurement signal is obtained. A trapezoidal digital filter k=0

is employed to process the detector pulses. After the digital data input is
processed through the ADC, and the basic baseline value subtracted, the where the coefficients {ak } are to be determined.
Expression is further simplified if the data set is discretized into finite

3
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Fig. 5. The ratio of channel displacement relative to the reference temperature of +25 ◦ C as a function of the ambient temperature of the detector.

Table 2
Previous studies on the characteristic changes of scintillators according to temperature.
Ref. detector Size(mm) Temp.(◦ C) Applications Key Point
137
Pausch et al. (2005) NaI(Tl) 30 × 38 − 20 to Cs Exploiting the temperature dependence of the Light Pulse
60 ◦ C Decay Time
137
Saucke et al. (2005) NaI(Tl) 30 × 38 − 20 to Cs Exploiting the temperature dependence of LEDs as reference
60 ◦ C light sources
137
Moszyński et al. LaBr3(Ce), 25 × 25 − 30 to Cs Study the temperature dependent behaviors of crystals
(2006) LaCl3(Ce) 60 ◦ C
NaI(Tl) 25 × 30
152
Casanovas et al. LaBr3(Ce) 50.8 × 0–50 ◦ C Eu,241Am,137Cs,60Co, Requires measurements at controlled temperature conditions
(2012) 50.8 Intrinsic Background for LaBr3 as reference
NaI(Tl) 50.8 ×
50.8
137
Mitra et al., (2016), NaI(Tl) 76.2 × 27–60 ◦ C Cs,60Co Evaluate the change in energy scale of differential pulse height
76.2 spectra
Zeng et al. (2017) LaBr3(Ce) 50.8 × 41.1 to 56.9 Intrinsic Background for LaBr3 Requires measurements at controlled temperature conditions
50.8 as reference
76.2 ×
76.2
Present study LaBr3(Ce) 76.2 × − 30 to Table 1, Intrinsic Background for Evaluate the change in energy scale of differential pulse height
76.2 60 ◦ C LaBr3 spectra

Fig. 6. Energy curves as a function of channel for both the Anode and Dynode 7 output signals at various ambient temperatures from − 20 to +50 ◦ C.

channels, which is the usual case with spectrometry. Also, since all Simplifying to a first-order approximation and assuming a linear trans­
channel widths are the same, it can be expressed as follows. formation, is as follows:
∑n− 1 k ∑n− 1 k
x i Fi ξi Φi X(i) = a0 + a1 i (5)
∑i=0
n− 1
= ∑i=0
n− 1
, k = 1, 2 (4)
i=0 iF i=0 Φi Substituting the linear transformation in Eq. (5),
These equations can be used to find the transformation Eq. (3).
Assuming equidistant measurements, simply denote the abscissa ξi by i.

4
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Fig. 7. Spectra data before and after application of spectral shift methodology at the Dynode 7 with temperature variations (− 20, +25 and + 50 ◦ C).

∑n− 1 k ∑n− 1 k which the spectrum is recorded.

i=0 (a0 + a1 i) Fi i Φi
∑n− 1 = ∑i=0
n− 1
, k = 1, 2 (6) Fig. 4 helps explain the correction method needed to evaluate the
i=0 Fi i=0 Φi
change in energy position according to temperature change. We
Let us adapt to the following notations: assumed that the detector system was energy-corrected at a reference
∑
n− 1 ∑
n− 1 temperature (such as +25 ◦ C), and the equation of calibration, defined
mk = i k F i , μk = ik Φi (7) as a straight line, has slope (m1 ) and intercept (c1 ) on the horizontal x-
i=0 i=0 axis. If the calibration line obtained at the changed temperature (from
Solving for C0 and C1 from Eq. (6) for k = 1, k = 2 − 20 ◦ C to +50 ◦ C) has slope (m2 ) and intercept (c2 ) on the horizontal x-
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ axis, the following equation can be obtained.
√ μ2 μ21
μ1 m1
√ − 2
√ μ0 μ0 a0 = c2 − c1 , a1 = m1 /m2 (9)
a0 = − a1 , a1 = +√ m2
(8)
μ0 m0 m2
− m12 In this equation, a0 is the correction for the spectra shift of the zero-
m0 0
energy channel, and a1 is the information for the gain change according
In the present LaBr3 detector system, an algorithm is applied that to the temperature variations, based on the argument presented by
calculates a0 and a1 to obtain transformation Eq. (5) and then inversely Loska (1995). The calculation of a0 and a1 does not require energy
transform the X-scale of the shifted spectrum to that of the reference correction of the system at the reference and measured temperatures.
spectrum as the temperature changes. In order to determine a0 and a1 , This method can be easily applied to the system in real-time. The
this algorithm opens spectrum files (such as Reference and measure­ spectral shift methodology applied here to LaB3 was originally devel­
ment) and calculates their moments mk ’s and μk ’s (k = 0, 1, 2). The oped by Loska (1995), Tsankov and Mitev (2007) and Mitra et al.
algorithm calculates by judging whether the shifted spectrum is on the (2016).
left (a1 > 1) or right (a1 < 1) of the reference spectrum. Some channel System performance was evaluated using the absolute photo-peak
numbers are omitted when a1 > 1 and are repeated twice when a1 < 1, efficiency. The absolute photo-peak efficiency is given by Kumar et al.
so to maintain data continuity, it is considered to be the average of (2009).
adjacent neighbors (repeated channel numbers) for a1 > 1 (a1 < 1).
Unlike the method proposed by Casanova et al. (2012), the currently εpeak =
NPeak
CD (10)
applied method does not require prior information on the temperature at A*P*T

5
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

Fig. 8. Spectra data before and after application of spectral shift methodology at the Anode with temperature variations (− 20, +25 and + 50 ◦ C).

Fig. 9. The photo-peak efficiency distribution for each temperature from − 20 to +50 ◦ C in the energy range from 88 to 1836 keV.

where Npeak denotes the number of net counts in the photo-peak. A is the
activity of the radionuclide source, T is the measuring time, P is the
photon emission probability and CD is the correction factor due to dead
time. The dead time did not exceed 2%, so the correction factor, CD , was
obtained using the ADC live time. The uncertainties related to the εpeak
were calculated using the method given in Longoria and Benitez (1996).
3. Results and discussions
3.1. Validation of the spectral shift methodology
The spectral shift correction method was implemented in a prototype
LaBr3 detector system for the entire energy range below 3 MeV without
adjusting the system gain. Spectra data were obtained from the Dynode

6
Y. Choi et al.
Fig. 10. Count rate, energy resolution, and photo-peak efficiency of the 662 and 1332 keV energy peaks measured through the (a) Dynode 7 and (b) Anode
output signals.
7 and Anode output signals of the system as the ambient temperature of
the detector was changed from − 20 to +50 ◦ C. The results are shown in
Fig. 5, as graphs of the relative peak position as a function of
temperature.
The relative peak position for an individual gamma energy is a
calculated ratio based on the center channel of the peak at +25 ◦ C, and
shows how the peak shift occurs in relation to its energy and the tem­
perature changes. As the ambient temperature changes with respect to
the reference point of +25 ◦ C, it can be seen that the gamma ray peaks
below 3 MeV have shifted by a constant ratio, and the larger the energy
of the peak, the larger the shift in the peak position. The change in gain is
fed into the system uniformly for all energies. Accordingly, this suggests
that the peak shift occurs consistently with these temperature variations.
The relative channel displacements in the system are nearly identical for
all channels in the differential pulse height spectrum. The method
applied to this system does not depend on the temperature behavior of
7
Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567
the relative peak positions. This trend of the LaBr3 scintillator is in
agreement with those published in the literature, and can be compared
with other scintillation detector systems (Table 2).
The relative energy calibration curves for the individual energy and
channel of the Dynode 7 and Anode output signals at various tempera­
tures from − 20 to +50 ◦ C were obtained using the calibration sources.
As shown in Fig. 6, a change in the peak shift pattern (the change in the
energy-channel slope) according to the change in temperature was
observed. We confirmed that the shifted calibration line was on the left
(a1 > 1) or right (a1 < 1) of the reference temperature (+25 ◦ C). This
implies that when the temperature decreases from the reference tem­
perature of +25 ◦ C, the gain settings of the Dynode 7 and Anode need to
be decreased, and as the temperature increases, the gain settings need to
be increased.
By applying Eq. (5) to each temperature, the relative deviations in
the corrected positions were determined to be less than 3% difference in
Y. Choi et al.
Fig. 11. Temperature effect and correction in the background of LaBr3 (Anode). (a) Intrinsic background of a LaBr3 detector system (b) Relative peak position (c)
Measurement spectra (d) Correction spectra.
absolute value for the Dynode 7, and less than 0.5% at the Anode, for
temperature changes from − 20 to +50 ◦ C. As can be seen in Figs. 7 and
8, the application of the spectral shift algorithm to this LaBr3 system
ensures stable spectrum acquisition within the temperature range of
− 20 to +50 ◦ C. Comparing the restored spectra with the reference and
measurement data, no distortions in the peak occurred, and all had
nearly the same shape and position in channels below 3 MeV.
In environmental applications, radionuclide identification is more
important than accurately determining activity (Casanovas et al., 2012;
Mitra et al., 2016), so these small variations are not a problem as they do
not affect the operation and peak identification of this system. However,
if new radionuclides are present in the spectrum, the similarity between
the spectra is lost, and this methodology assuming that the spectrum has
the same statistical distribution as the reference cannot be applied.
This LaBr3 system performance was verified using energy resolution
and photo-peak efficiencies for the spectrum obtained at each temper­
ature, after applying the spectral shift correction method. By applying
Eq. (10) to each temperature, it was determined that the photo-peak
efficiencies in the energy range from 88 to 1836 keV changed less
than ± 3% in the temperature range of − 20 ◦ C to + 50 ◦ C (Fig. 9). The
photo-peak efficiencies of the anode and dynode 7 output fluctuated
slightly as the temperature of the system changed, but they were
negligible variations.
The physical characteristics of the gamma-ray energy regions of 662
and 1332 keV were as follows (Fig. 10). Energy resolution was deter­
mined by fitting a Gaussian function to the peak of the spectrum
measured at each temperature. Comparing the energy resolution of
137
Cs at 662 keV and 60Co at 1332 keV at various temperature settings
from − 20 to +50 ◦ C, the energy resolution, count rate and photo-peak
efficiency of the dynode 7 and anode output signal showed a pattern
with an insignificant difference with temperature variations. However,
they can be considered to have remained constant, because the change
was within ±4% based on the measured value at +25 ◦ C. These small
8
Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567
variations of less than ±4% in energy resolution, count rate and photo-
peak efficiency should not be a concern, because such subtle changes
don’t cause a distortion in peak shape. This study confirmed that the
spectral shift correction method applied to a LaBr3 detector system could
be operated stably, even over a temperature change from − 20 to +50 ◦ C
in an energy region of less than 3 MeV.
The LaBr3 (Ce) scintillator has an intrinsic background that mainly
comes from 138La (0.09% naturally abundant) and 227Ac (actinium is a
chemical analogue to lanthanum), as shown in Fig. 11. It has several
peaks associated with different radiation types that can be distinguished,
including X, γ-ray, and α particle, so it can be employed to correct the
peak shift caused by temperature variations (Casanovas et al., 2012;
Vargas et al., 2018; Zeng et al., 2017), eliminate the temperature effect,
and improve the long-term stability (Moszyński et al., 2006). Four peaks
with enough counts to be distinguishable on the spectrum within the
entire energy range of 0–3 MeV, are selectively available (Fig. 11):
1) The 32 keV peak: the K-shell cascade radiation from 138Ba;
2) β continuum between 789 and ~1044 keV: β-decay to the excited
level of 138Ba with consequent γ-ray (789 keV);
3) The 1461, 1468 keV peak: 4 K, 138La (the sum peak of 1436 keV γ-ray
and 32 keV X-ray from 138La);
4) The ~2655 keV peak: the α peak from 215Po.
By applying Eq. (5) to each temperature through a0 and a1 obtained
from Intrinsic background peak, the relative deviations in the corrected
positions were determined to be less than 0.5% at the Anode, for tem­
perature changes from − 20 to +50 ◦ C. This study confirmed that the
peak shift can be effectively corrected for various temperatures using its
intrinsic background peak. An intrinsic background of LaBr3, which is
treated as the usual disadvantage, can be beneficially used for spectral
stabilization of this system. Since this approach covers an energy range
from 32 keV to 3 MeV or less, this Spectral shift correction method
Y. Choi et al.
removes the need for calibrating the system with a reference energy. The
measurement temperature can be accurately and effectively employed
to correct the peak position change in real-time during actual long-term
measurements (Fig. 11).
4. Conclusions
A prototype LaBr3 detector system with electronics unit was specif­
ically developed for use in harsh environment applications. A simple
spectral shift correction method that has the advantage of not requiring
a-priori information about the temperatures when the spectrum is
measured was applied to the detector system for the whole energy re­
gion from 0 to 3 MeV, in the temperature range of − 20 to +50 ◦ C. It
confirmed that spectra data collected at different temperatures can be
processed together. The peak shift was effectively corrected within a
relative deviation of 3% (Dynode 7) and 0.5% (Anode) relative to a
reference spectrum (+25 ◦ C). When the temperature of the detector
system changed, the photo-peak efficiencies over an energy range from
88 to 1836 keV changed less than ±3%. The count ratio, energy reso­
lution, and photo-peak efficiency of the 662 keV and 1332 keV peaks
showed small variations within ±4%, based on the reference at +25 ◦ C.
An intrinsic background of LaBr3 also can be successfully used for
spectral stabilization of this system. This study confirmed that those
results did not affect the detection and analysis of peak information in
the energy region below 3 MeV, within the temperature range of − 20 to
+50 ◦ C.
Effectively dealing with constantly varying temperature is difficult
but important. Since this system collects data every 10 s, spectral shift
adjustments for temperature changes are possible in real-time. This
means that in a constantly changing temperature environment, the
spectral data of this system can be effectively modified by applying the
spectral shift correction method, which can be usefully applied in
environmental gamma spectrometry. The long-term measurement sta­
bility of this system can also be guaranteed in the energy region of 0–3
MeV. The simple methodology applied to this system can also be applied
to evaluate the X-scale change between two statistically identical dis­
tributions or spectra in other fields besides gamma spectrometry.
This LaBr3 detector system employs a spectral shift correction
method that can be effectively used for applications when the spectra are
statistically identical, which could include nuclear spectroscopy,
geological applications, astronomy and space applications. However,
since this system has been tested under internal chamber temperature
conditions, it may not reflect actual outdoor environmental conditions.
Additional environmental testing such as outdoor measurements, vi­
bration, thermal vacuum, radiation, shock, and electromagnetic inter­
ference and compatibility will be performed to validate a prototype
LaBr3 detector system for harsh environmental applications. In addition,
the results of this study will be applied to the study of the Korea Path­
finder Lunar Orbiter (KPLO) payload, being developed using a LaBr3
detector system.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This project was supported by the Lunar Exploration and Develop­
ment Project [NRF-2016M1A3A9913307] funded by the Ministry of
Science and ICT, South Korea.
9
Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567
References
Bizarri, G., de Haas, J.T.M., Dorenbos, P., van Eijk, C.W.E., 2006. First time measurement
of gamma-ray excited LaBr3:5% Ce3+ and LaCl3:10% Ce3+ temperature dependent
properties. Phys. Status Solidi 203, R41. https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.200622081.
Camp, A., Vargas, A., Fernández-Varea, J.M., 2016. Determination of LaBr3(Ce) internal
background using a HPGe detector and Monte Carlo simulations. Nucl. Instrum.
Methods Phys. Res. A. 109, 512–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apradiso.2015.11.093.
Casanovas, R., Morant, J.J., Salvadó, M., 2012. Temperature peak-shift correction
methods for NaI(Tl) and LaBr3(Ce) gamma-ray spectrum stabilisation. Radiat. Meas.
47 (8), 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2012.06.001.
Cazzaniga, C., Nocente, M., Tardocchi, M., Rebai, M., Pillon, M., Camera, F., Giaz, A.,
Pellegri, L., Gorini, G., 2015. Response of LaBr3(Ce) scintillators to 14 MeV fusion
neutrons. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A. 778, 20–25. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.nima.2015.01.002.
Favalli, A., Mehner, H.C., Simonelli, F., 2008. Wide energy range efficiency calibration
for a lanthanum bromide scintillation detector. Radiat. Meas. 43, 506–509. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2007.11.062.
Hou, Y., Liu, S., Yuan, H., Gui, Q., Zhang, C., Fang, Z., Zhang, M., 2019. Study on high-
temperature performance of LaBr3(Ce) scintillators. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.
678, 012084. http://doi:10.1088/1757-899X/678/1/012084.
ICRU 53, 1994. Gamma-ray spectrometry in the environment. Int. Comm. Radiat. Units
Measur. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicru/os27.2.Report53. Bethesda, Maryland,
Report 53.
Iltis, A., Mayhugh, M.R., Menge, P., Rozsa, C.M., Selles, O., Solovyev, V., 2006.
Lanthanum halide scintillators: properties and applications. Nucl. Instrum. Methods
A. 563, 359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2006.02.192.
Kumar, G.A., Mazumdar, I., Gothe, D.A., 2009. Efficiency calibration and simulation of a
LaBr3(Ce) detector in close-geometry. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A. 609, 183–186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2009.08.045.
Longoria, L.C., Benitez, J.S., 1996. Full energy peak efficiency of a Ge detector as a
function of energy and distance. Appl. Radiat. lsot. 47 (3), 339. https://doi.org/
10.1016/0969-8043(95)00292-8, 34.
Loska, L., 1995. A computer method for γ-ray spectra stabilization. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 46
(9), 949–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/0969-8043(95)00189-K.
Menge, P.R., Gautier, G., Iltis, A., Rozsa, C., Solovyev, V., 2007. Performance of large
lanthanum bromide scintillators. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A. 579, 6–10.
http://10.1016/j.nima.2007.04.002.
Mitra, P., Roy, A.S., Verma, A.K., Pant, A.D., Prakasha, M.S., Anilkumar, S., Kumar, A.V.,
2016. Application of spectrum shifting methodology to restore NaI(Tl)-recorded
gamma spectra, shifted due to temperature variations in the environment. Appl.
Radiat. Isot. 107, 133–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.10.002.
Moszyński, M., Kapusta, M., Wolski, D., Szawlowski, M., Klamra, W., 1998. Energy
resolution of scintillation detectors readout with large area avalanche photodiodes
and photomultipliers. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS- 45, 472. https://ieeexplore.ieee.
org/document/682429.
Moszyński, M., Nassalski, A., Syntfeld-Każuch, A., Szczęśniak, T., Czarnacki, W.,
Wolski, D., Pausch, G., Stein, J., 2006. Temperature dependences of LaBr3(Ce),
LaCl3(Ce) and NaI(Tl) scintillators. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A. 568 (2),
739–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2006.06.039.
Pausch, G., Stein, J., Teofilov, N., 2005. Stabilizing scintillation detector systems by
exploiting the temperature dependence of the light pulse decay time. IEEE Trans.
Nucl. Sci. 52 (5), 1849–1855. https://10.1109/NSSMIC.2004.1462340.
Quarati, F.G.A., Bos, A.J.J., Brandenburg, S., Dathy, C., Dorenbos, P., Kraft, S.,
Ostendorf, R.W., Ouspenski, V., Owens, A., 2007. X-ray and gamma-ray response of a
2′′ ×2′′ LaBr3:Ce scintillation detector. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A. 574,
115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2007.01.161.
Quarati, F.G.A., Owens, Alan, Dorenbos, P., de Haas, J.T.M., Benzoni, G., Blasi, N.,
Boiano, C., Brambilla, S., Camera, F., Alba, R., Bellia, G., Maiolino, C.,
Santonocito, D., Ahmed, M., Brown, N., Stave, S., Weller, H.R., Wu, Y.K., 2011. High
energy gamma-ray spectroscopy with LaBr3 scintillation detectors. Nucl. Instrum.
Methods Phys. Res. A. 629 (1), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
nima.2010.11.035.
Quarati, F.G.A., Khodyuk, I.V., van Eijk, C.W.E., Quarati, P., Dorenbos, P., 2012. Study of
La-138 radioactive decays using LaBr3 scintillators. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys.
Res. A 683, 46. http://10.1016/j.nima.2012.04.066.
Rozsa, C.M., Menge, P.R., Mayhugh, M.R., 2007. Performance Summary: BrilLancCe®
Scintillators LaCl3:Ce and LaBr3:Ce. Saint Gobain Crystals. http://www.detectors.
saint-gobain.com.
Saint-Gobain data sheet. BriLance 380. https://www.gammadata.se/assets/Uploads/
LaBr3-BrilLanCe-380-Data-Sheet.pdf.
Saucke, K., Pausch, G., Stein, J., Ortlepp, H., Schotanus, P., 2005. Stabilizing scintillation
detector systems with pulsed LEDs: a method to derive the LED temperature from
pulse height spectra. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 52 (6), 3160–3165. https://10.110
9/TNS.2005.862929.
Tsankov, L.T., Mitev, M.G., 2007. A simple method for stabilization of arbitrary spectra.
In: Proceedings of the 16th International Scientific and Applied Science Conference
ET. Sozopol, Book3, pp. 3–8 (ISSN1313-1842).
van Loef, E.V., Dorenbos, P., van Ejik, C.W.E., Krämer, K., Güdel, H.U., 2002.
Scintillation properties of LaBr3:Ce3+ crystals: fast, efficient and high-energy-
Y. Choi et al. Radiation Measurements 142 (2021) 106567

resolution scintillators. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A. 486, 254. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0168-9002(02)00712-X.
Vargas, A., Cornejo, N., Camp, A., 2018. Comparison of methods for H*(10) calculation
from measured LaBr3(Ce) detector spectra. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 137, 241–249. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2018.03.026.
Zeng, Z., Pan, X., Ma, H., He, J., Cang, J., Zeng, M., Mi, Y., Cheng, J., 2017. Optimization
of an underwater in-situ LaBr3:Ce spectrometer with energy self-calibration and
efficiency calibration. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 121, 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apradiso.2016.12.016.

10