ARTICLE IN PRESS

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339

Recent advances in compound semiconductor radiation

detectors
Paul J. Sellin*
Department of Physics, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK

Abstract

Recent developments in compound semiconductor detectors are reviewed, highlighting the latest spectroscopic
performance from devices fabricated from a range of wide bandgap materials. Cadmium zinc telluride and cadmium
telluride continue to dominate the field, with a range of prototype imaging detectors under development, principally for
nuclear medicine and X-ray astronomy applications. Improvements in material quality and supply plus metal–
semiconductor contact technologies are discussed, as is the continued development of single polarity charge sensing
electrode structures. Other material systems are also reviewed, covering the latest results from intermediate-Z materials
such as gallium arsenide and indium phosphide, and high-Z materials including mercuric iodide and thallium bromide.
The technological challenges of these materials are summarised and the prospects for future imaging array detectors
highlighted.
r 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PACS: 29.40.Wk

Keywords: Compound semiconductor; Radiation detector; Pixel detector; Imaging

1. Introduction activity is the development of high spatial resolu-

This paper is a review of recent advances in
compound semiconductor radiation detectors. The
last 2–3 years have seen continued effort in the
development of wide bandgap room temperature
compound semiconductor devices aimed princi-
pally at photon imaging—covering hard X-rays,
synchrotron photons, and low to medium energy
gamma rays. A significant area of commercial
activity has been in the development of prototype
imaging detectors for nuclear medicine imaging, at
energies up to 511 keV: A second major area of
*Tel.: +44-1483-686814; fax: +44-1483-686781.
E-mail address: p.sellin@surrey.ac.uk (P.J. Sellin).
tion compound semiconductor pixel detectors for
hard X-ray astronomy.
This review will concentrate on cadmium zinc
telluride (CZT) and cadmium telluride (CdTe)
material systems which continue to dominate
compound semiconductor radiation detectors. A
range of other materials which continue to
improve in quality will be discussed, including
gallium arsenide (GaAs), indium phosphide (InP),
mercuric iodide ðHgI2 Þ and thallium bromide
(TlBr). A further group of low Z radiation-hard
materials such as diamond and silicon carbide
(SiC), which are of interest for use in future high
luminosity particle physics experiments, are out-
side the scope of this review.

0168-9002/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nima.2003.08.058
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339 333

2. CZT and CdTe

2.1. Material supply

The supply of large-area monocrystalline spec-

trometer grade CZT continues to be limited to a
small number of companies. The lack of whole-
wafer monocrystalline CZT significantly limits the
further commercial development of large-area
CZT imaging devices. In addition to CZT grown
by eV Products using high pressure Bridgman
(HPB), a number of other suppliers offer CZT
grown both by HPB and low pressure Bridgman
(LPB) methods, including Bicron (US), Yinnel
Tech (US), Imarad (Israel) and several groups in
Russia and the Ukraine. Supply of CdTe is also
offered by a number of companies, including
Imarad, Eurorad (France), Acrorad and Acrotec
(Japan).
For CZT, LPB material is only recently becom-
ing available and appears to offer good uniformity
and comparable electronic properties to HPB
CZT. Comparisons of LPB CZT from eV Products
and Imarad [1] using photoluminescence mapping
showed good macroscopic uniformity; however,
the detector performance did not match that of
good HPB material. Recent results from LPB CZT
grown by Yinnel Tech show promise, with ingot
sizes of up to 3 in: becoming available [2] and
energy resolutions comparable to conventional
HPB material [3].
2.2. CdTe Schottky detectors
In contrast to CZT, CdTe material tends to have
better monocrystalline uniformity, although with
reduced resistivity and greater sensitivity to charge
polarisation effects. Good spectroscopic perfor-
mance has been demonstrated from CdTe Schott-
ky diode detectors (Fig. 1) fabricated using an
indium Schottky contact on p-type CdTe pro-
duced by ACROTEC [4]. The single crystal
material is grown by the Travelling Heater
Method (THM) with careful selection of the
crystal orientation during growth [5]. Reported
mobility-lifetime (mu-tau) products for this Cl-
compensated material are 1–2  103 cm2 =V for
electrons and 1  104 cm2 =V for holes, with
Fig. 1. Pulse height spectrum obtained from a Schottky diode
CdTe detector irradiated with 57 Co [4].
resistivity of B1  109 O cm: The ACROTEC
Schottky In/CdTe/Pt detectors show strong
diode-like behaviour with a suppressed reverse-
biased leakage current, in contrast to the ohmic
behaviour of the Pt/CdTe/Pt devices.
Energy spectra produced from thin 2  2 
0:5 mm CdTe Schottky detectors show an energy
resolution of 0:83 keV at 59:5 keV: In this case the
detector was operated at 1400 V and cooled to
40 C: Long-term stability of the peak position is
sometimes an issue with these devices, requiring
operation at a high bias voltage and low
temperature.
A stack of CdTe detectors has been demon-
strated in order to improve the detection efficiency
of thin devices [4,6]. In this case a stack of 12 CdTe
detectors each 5  5  0:3 mm was operated at
5 C; with each detector connected separately to a
charge sensitive preamplifier. The use of a stack of
separate thin detectors minimises any spectral
degradation due to charge trapping, at the expense
of an increase in complexity of the overall system.
2.3. Single polarity sensing configurations
Single polarity charge sensing is a technique that
has been widely applied to CZT detectors to
overcome poor hole transport. Typically a special
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
334 P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
Fig. 2. A CZT coplanar grid single polarity sensing electrode
detector (upper); the weighting field for the three electrodes
(lower). The subtracted signal from electrodes 2 and 3 is due
predominantly to electron drift close to the coplanar anodes [7].
electrode configuration is used that modifies the
weighting field in the device, making the detector
predominantly sensitive only to electron transport.
The original application of single polarity elec-
trode structures to CZT was the coplanar grid
electrode (Fig. 2) first proposed by Luke et al. [7].
A recent review by He [8] of the application of the
Shockley-Ramo approach to single polarity sen-
sing electrode structures discusses these devices in
some detail and summarises a number of alter-
native proposed electrode configurations. Here we
briefly summarise the most important recent
designs.
One variation on the dual-signal coplanar grid
structure uses a geometrical arrangement of non-
collecting bias strips to produce the desired
weighting field. Amman et al. [9] investigated a
structure that produced the desired weighting field
from sets of collecting and non-collecting anodes
that had a carefully defined spacing. However, the
exact spacing of the electrodes is dependent on the
particular mu-tau products of the CZT material,
and does not correct for other factors such as
leakage current.
McGregor et al. developed a trapezoidal detec-
tor shape with a single non-collecting bias strip
which acted as single polarity device [10]. This
design combines the use of a weighting field from
the bias electrodes with the trapezoidal geometry.
Characterisation of trapezoidal detectors fabri-
cated from ‘counter grade’ CZT with a collimated
59:5 keV 241 Am source have produced well-re-
solved spectra [11].
In a coplanar grid detector the induced signal on
the cathode increases approximately linearly with
interaction distance from the anodes, whereas the
signal on each coplanar anode is mainly depth
independent. Using these data the interaction
depth can be estimated from the ratio of the two
signals and used to correct for electron trapping in
the device [12]. This technique has been elegantly
demonstrated in pixel detectors by experiment and
Monte Carlo simulation by Shor et al. [13]. This is
shown in Fig. 3, which contains three strong locii
plus a Compton continuum produced from three
lines in 133 Ba:
This form of coplanar grid depth sensing can
achieve good depth resolution, which is energy
dependent. For example, measurements with a
1 cm3 CZT detector produced depth resolution
Fig. 3. Plot of experimentally measured signal amplitudes in a
CZT pixel detector irradiated with 133 Ba: The plot shows the
common cathode signal (proportional to interaction depth from
the pixel) vs. the anode pixel signal [13].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
varying from B1 mm at 59 keV to B0:1 mm at
662 keV: When used in combination with a 2D
pixel array, the depth sensing technique can
produce a 3D position sensitive detector [14].
2.4. Imaging detectors
2.4.1. Strip detectors
A variety of single-sided strip detectors have
been developed in CZT and CdTe, based closely
on designs developed for silicon devices. The
performance of these devices tends to be limited,
particularly in CZT, by hole trapping effects. Two-
dimensional double-sided CZT strip detectors
using orthogonally crossed cathode and anode
strips have been developed by NASA for astron-
omy applications [15].
A more complex strip detector design is the CZT
drift-strip detector which has been developed as a
potential large area detector for astronomical
imaging [16]. In this device multiple drift strip
electrodes are positioned adjacent to a collecting
anode strip. The other side of the detector contains
a planar cathode. The potential on the drift strip
electrodes is adjusted to minimise the sensitivity of
the device to hole transport, acting as another
variant of the single carrier charge sensing
detector. This device is also capable of depth
information, derived from the ratio of the cathode
to anode signal [17].
2.4.2. Pixel detectors
Various results from two-dimensional pixel
array detectors have been published recently, with
applications concentrated mainly in nuclear med-
icine imaging and hard X-ray astronomy. Barrett
et al. [18] first showed that the effects of hole
trapping can be significantly reduced in CZT pixel
array detectors due to the ‘small pixel effect’. This
phenomenon allows the pixel array to function as
a predominantly electron sensing device, with the
weighting field geometrically produced due to the
ratio of the pixel pitch to material thickness.
In comparison with silicon pixel detectors, flip-
chip bonding technologies are less mature for CZT
with indium-based processes being generally used.
Some commercial indium bonding processes have
already been proven for use with mercuric
335
cadmium telluride infra-red arrays and are now
being transferred to CZT. An alternative low
temperature process bonding that has recently
been applied to a CZT pixel detector is polymer
flip-chip bonding [19].
Good results have been obtained from an 8  8
CZT pixel array detector developed by Caltec for
hard X-ray imaging from a balloon experiment
[20]. The 8  7  2 mm3 single crystal CZT pixel
array has a pixel pitch of 650  680 mm: Indium
flip chip bonding was used to connect the array to
a low-noise ASIC, with indium bumps of 30 mm
diameter. The photon counting ASIC outputs the
analogue pulse height and pixel address of each
interaction, and has achieved a typical single pixel
energy resolution of B2:2 keV FWHM at 60 keV
at room temperature. A resolution of 670 eV
FWHM was achieved with the detector cooled to
10 C [21].
A number of CZT and CdTe pixel array
detectors have been developed within NASA,
summarised in Ref. [22]. These include the
INFOCmS CZT pixel detector which is indium
bonded to an ASIC developed at the University of
Arizona. Smaller scale pixel arrays are also under
development as prototype astronomical X-ray
imaging detectors. A 4  4 pixel CZT pixel
detector developed by the Arizona group [23] has
achieved 1:2 keV FWHM at 60 keV; with wire-
bonded connections from the pixel electrodes to
discrete readout electronics.
Within medical applications, the Arizona group
have an advanced programme to develop a high-
resolution CZT pixel array detector for small
animal imaging, reported most recently in Refs.
[24,25]. This device has a pixel size of 330 mm and
an inter-pixel separation of 50 mm: A pixellated
composite tungsten collimator is used to achieve
high-resolution tomographic imaging of small
animals with a 1–2 mm spatial resolution.
A number of relatively coarse pitch (1–5 mm)
CZT and CdTe pixel array detectors are currently
under commercial development, mainly aimed at
the nuclear medicine market. These devices gen-
erally consist of a pixel detector module with
integrated readout chip which is tiled onto a
motherboard to produce a larger area sensor.
The ability to fabricate CZT pixel arrays up to
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
336 P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
the edge of the material without the use of a guard
ring is an advantage for this type of tiled
arrangement. Suppliers include IMARAD (CZT,
2:5 mm pixel pitch) [26,27], LETI/BICRON
(CZT 4:5 mm pixel pitch) [28], eV Products/Soreq
(CZT 2:1 mm pixel pitch) [29], and Eurorad
(CdTe, pixel pitch 2:8 mm) [30].
The continuing development of CZT/CdTe pixel
array detectors needs to address a number of
material-related issues, including charge loss in the
relatively large inter-pixel gap, and the nature of
charge sharing between close-pitch pixels.
2.4.3. Two-dimensional coplanar grid detectors
More complex strip detector designs have been
suggested, the so-called two-dimensional coplanar
grid detectors (Fig. 4), which combine the weight-
ing field approach of non-collecting anodes with a
strip detector geometry. In this device [31,32] an
array of small anode pixels are surrounded by non-
collecting anode electrodes in a strip formation.
The rear surface of the device is a planar contact.
The pixel anodes are interconnected in a direction
orthogonal to the non-collecting strips. This
design provides N 2 ‘pixels’ whilst only requiring
2N contact strips on the anode side of the device.
A first prototype of this type of coplanar grid pixel
detector has recently been demonstrated [19].
Fig. 4. Two-dimensional coplanar grid pixel detector [31].
Additionally, the two-dimensional coplanar grid
device can be operated as a 3D imaging array with
the depth of each interaction determined from the
transient signal induced on the non-collecting
strips [33,34]. However, the performance of these
relatively complex strip detector designs has still to
be proven.
An interesting application of the 3D position
sensitive CZT array detector as a Compton scatter
camera has been investigated [35]. In this study a
pair of 1 cm3 CZT pixel detectors were used, each
containing 11  11 conventional anode pixels and
achieving a 3D spatial resolution of approximately
1 mm: The measured energy resolution at 662 keV
was 1.7% FWHM. This design has considerable
potential as a medical Compton scatter camera for
PET studies, with a performance comparable to
that of HPGe detectors yet more compact and
easily portable.
3. Other compound semiconductor materials
Other wide bandgap compound semiconductor
materials continue to be of interest for ionising
radiation detection. Intermediate-Z materials such
as GaAs and InP are being developed principally
for X-ray imaging applications, whilst high-Z
materials such as TlBr and HgI2 are of particular
interest for hard X-ray and nuclear medicine
imaging.
Some of the most impressive recent results from
GaAs, InP, TlBr and HgI2 have come from the
ESA-funded detector programme at ESTEC,
reviewed in [36]. Here we summarise the ESTEC
data, plus other significant advances in these
materials. Outside the scope of this brief review
are a number of other materials which are still
some way from detector applications, for example
GaN, PbI2 ; and GaSe.
3.1. GaAs and InP
GaAs and InP offer photon attenuation coeffi-
cients between that of Si and CZT/CdTe. GaAs in
particular has relatively mature contact
technologies and has the potential for devices
with integrated microelectronics. GaAs has been
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
studied extensively for detector applications, both
in its bulk semi-insulating (SI) form and as
epitaxial material. Studies of SI GaAs for use as
radiation imaging devices have not progressed
beyond prototype demonstrators due principally
to the inhomogeneous nature of the materials and
the high concentration of the charge trapping EL2
defect. SI material grown by a range of methods
and treatments (LEC, VGF, zone refined) have
been studied and all show high concentrations of
EL2 and poor mu-tau products (typically not
greater than 104 cm2 =V). Non-uniformity of EL2
distributions tends to produce areas of low
resistivity and high dark current. A variety of
groups have recently reported results of SI GaAs
pixel detectors bonded to both current integrating
ASICs [37,38] and to the MEDIPIX photon
counting ASIC [39].
The highest resolution X-ray spectra obtained
with single GaAs pad detectors has been reported
by ESTEC [40,41] (Fig. 5). In this work epitaxial
GaAs has been grown by Chemical Vapour
Phase Epitaxy (CPVE) with detectors up to
400 mm thick achieving an energy resolution of
650 eV FWHM at 59:5 keV: A p–i–n structure was
used to produce a rectifying contact, with the
depletion thickness of the intrinsic layer limited to
approximately 100 mm by the residual impurities
in the material [42].
An alternative CVPE growth method for
producing thick epitaxial GaAs layers has been
Fig. 5. X-ray spectrum obtained from an epitaxial GaAs
detector fabricated from material grown by chemical vapour
phase epitaxy [40].
337
developed by Bourgoin et al. [43] in which
high-pressure, high-temperature growth of
GaAs is achieved using a water-based transport
reaction with growth rates up to 10 mm=min:
This technique offers a low-cost fabrication
technique for large wafer growth of thick epitaxial
GaAs.
The performance of InP detectors also continues
to improve, concentrating on SI Fe-doped materi-
al grown by liquid encapsulated Czochralski
(LEC). The lack of a rectifying contact on SI InP
produces high leakage currents in these devices,
which must be reduced by cooling. The ESTEC
group have characterised a 180 mm thick InP at
60 C achieving 8:5 keV FWHM at 59:5 keV [44].
Results from Pelfer et al. [45] using 250 mm thick
SI InP achieved a resolution of 11 keV FWHM at
122 keV when cooled to 60 C: Future improve-
ments in InP detector performance is dependent on
less heavily compensated material to improve
charge transport. The development of a rectifying
contact will reduce the need to operate these
devices at such reduced temperature.
3.2. TlBr and HgI2
TlBr and HgI2 potentially offer excellent detec-
tion efficiency at higher photon energies, with Z
combinations of 81:35 and 80:53, respectively.
TlBr in particular has a high density ð7:56 g=cm3 Þ
and hence a short mean free path for high-energy
photons (B1:0 cm at 511 keV). Currently the
supply of large volume TlBr crystals is very
limited; these are grown by either the travelling
molten zone (TMZ) or Bridegman–Stockbarger
(BS) methods. Devices typically use evaporated
gold contacts, relying on the material’s high
resistivity to limit leakage current. TlBr is highly
toxic and must be handled with care.
Good spectroscopic performance has been
reported from 3:8 mm thick TlBr devices produced
from TMZ material [46]. Extremely slow pulse
risetimes are observed from these devices due to
multiple trapping and detrapping of carriers, and
to achieve good performance operation with short
shaping times is required. Results from TlBr
arrays have also been reported by the ESTEC
group, produced from 1 mm thick BS material
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
338 P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
fabricated into a 3  3 pixel array [36]. Each pixel
was 350  350 mm2 and the device achieved a
resolution of 29 keV FWHM at 662 keV when
operated at 30 C:
HgI2 is a soft material that undergoes a phase
transition at 130 C: The material is normally
grown in the vapour phase, with devices typically
fabricated using palladium contacts and with a
surface passivation layer to prevent surface de-
gradation due to evaporation. Results have been
reported from HgI2 devices produced by Con-
stellation Technology which have achieved resolu-
tions of 380 eV at 5:9 keV (1:2 mm thick) and
20 keV at 662 keV (2:9 mm thick) [47]. Similar
results from 0:5 mm thick HgI2 grown by Eurorad
have been reported by ESTEC [48].
An alternative use of HgI2 is as a polycrystalline
thick film deposited directly onto a large-area
amorphous silicon imaging detector [49]. Both
screen printing and direct evaporation of poly-
crystalline HgI2 have been used to coat a-Si
detectors, with the evaporated films achieving the
highest sensitivity and best film quality.
4. Conclusion
The most significant recent advances in com-
pound semiconductor radiation detectors have
been reviewed, covering both intermediate and
high Z materials. Imaging detector development
using compound semiconductors, currently fo-
cussed on medical imaging and astronomical X-
ray imaging, continues to be dominated by CZT-
and CdTe-based devices. There continues to be
improvements in material quality with a number
of new smaller suppliers entering the market.
However, the lack of whole-wafer monocrystal-
lined CZT remains a serious limitation to the
development of commercial devices.
Other compound semiconductor materials, no-
tably GaAs, InP, TlB and HgI2 continue to
develop as material quality improves. However,
the best spectroscopic results are limited to very
small numbers of research devices. The develop-
ment of direct deposition methods for polycrystal-
line materials offers a promising route to large-
area imaging devices in the future.
References
[1] C.M. Greaves, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001)
96.
[2] L. Li, et al., in: Development of a Large Single-Crystal (3-
inch ingot) CdZnTe for Large-Volume Nuclear Radiation
Detectors, Seattle, WA, 2002 (SPIE), pp. 76–83.
[3] M.S. Amman, J.S. Lee, P.N. Luke, in: Alpha Particle
Response Characterization of CdZnTe, SPIE, San Diego,
CA, 2001, pp. 1–11.
[4] T. Takahashi, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 436 (1999)
111.
[5] M. Funaki, T. Ozaki, K. Satoh, R. Ohno, Nucl. Instr. and
Meth. A 436 (1999) 120.
[6] T. Takahashi, S. Watanabe, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-48
(2001) 950.
[7] P.N. Luke, in: Selected Papers from the 1994 Nuclear
Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference
(NSS/MIC), Vol. 42, No. 4//Pt1, IEEE Institute of
Electrical and Electronics, 1995, p. 207.
[8] Z. He, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 463 (2001) 250.
[9] M. Amman, P.N. Luke, in: R.B. Hoover, F.P. Doty (Eds.),
Hard X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detector Physics, Optics,
and Applications, Issue 3115 (SPIE International Society
for Optical Engineering, 1997) pp. 205–213.
[10] D.S. McGregor, R.A. Rojeski, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-
46 (1999) 250.
[11] D.S. McGregor, Y.R. Nishanth, D.K. Wehe, Nucl. Instr.
and Meth. A 457 (2001) 230.
[12] Z. He, G.F. Knoll, D.K. Wehe, J. Miyamoto, Nucl. Instr.
and Meth. A 388 (1997) 180.
[13] A. Shor, Y. Eisen, I. Mardor, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458
(2001) 47.
[14] Z. He, et al., in: Radiation Measurements and Applica-
tions, Vol. 422, No. 1/3, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1999,
pp. 173–178.
[15] P. Kurczynski, et al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-44 (1997)
1011.
[16] M.A.J. Van Pamelen, C. Budtz-Joergensen, Nucl. Instr.
and Meth. A 411 (1998) 197.
[17] C. Budtz-Jorgensen, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458
(2001) 132.
[18] H.H. Barrett, J.D. Eskin, H.B. Barber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75
(1995) 156.
[19] V.T. Jordanov, J.R. Macri, J.E. Clayton, K.A. Larson,
Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001) 511.
[20] A.E. Bolotnikov, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458
(2001) 585.
[21] W.R. Cook, S.E. Boggs, A.E. Bolotnikov, J.A. Burnham,
in: First Test Results from a High-Resolution CdZnTe
Pixel Detector with VLSI Readout [3769-35], SPIE,
Denver, CO, 1999, pp. 92–97.
[22] C.M. Stahle, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 436 (1999)
138.
[23] B. Ramsey, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001) 55.
[24] G.A. Kastis, et al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-47 (2000)
1923.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.J. Sellin / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 513 (2003) 332–339
[25] G.A. Kastis, et al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-49 (2002)
172.
[26] Y. Nemirovsky, G. Asa, J. Gorelik, A. Peyser, Nucl. Instr.
and Meth. A 458 (2001) 325.
[27] W. Li, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001) 518.
[28] C. Mestais, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001) 62.
[29] Y. Eisen, et al., in: Proceedings of IEEE Medical Imaging
Conference, IEEE, San Diego, 2001, p. MR-5.
[30] J. Chambron, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 448 (2000)
537.
[31] L.A. Hamel, in: Proceedings of MRS, Vol. 487, 1998,
p. 211.
[32] V.T. Jordanov, J.R. Macri, M.L. Mayer, IEEE Trans.
Nucl. Sci. NS-45 (1998) 787.
[33] M.L. McConnell, et al., in: Three-dimensional Imaging
and Detection Efficiency Performance of Orthogonal
Coplanar CZT Strip Detectors [4141-19], SPIE, San Diego,
CA, 2000, pp. 157–167.
339
[34] P.N. Luke, M. Amman, J.S. Lee, H. Yaver, Nucl. Instr.
and Meth. A 439 (2000) 611.
[35] Y.F. Du, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 457 (2001) 203.
[36] A. Owens, et al., in: SPIE Proceedings, Vol. 4784, 2002.
[37] R. Irsigler, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 460 (2001) 67.
[38] P.J. Sellin, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 460 (2001) 207.
[39] C. Schwarz, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 466 (2001) 87.
[40] A. Owens, et al., J. Appl. Phys. 85 (1999) 7522.
[41] C. Erd, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 487 (2002) 78.
[42] C. Erd, et al., ESA Report 2002/045/ST, 2002.
[43] H. Samic, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 487 (2002) 107.
[44] A. Owens, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 487 (2002) 435.
[45] P.G. Pelfer, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458 (2001) 400.
[46] K. Hitomi, et al., J. Cryst. Growth 225 (2001) 129.
[47] L. van den Berg, R.D. Vigil, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 458
(2001) 148.
[48] A. Owens, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 479 (2002) 535.
[49] M. Schieber, et al., J. Cryst. Growth 225 (2001) 118.