A decision framework reference for ISFET sensor-
based electronic systems design for agriculture
industry applications
George Archbold Taylor1,2, Carlos Parra1, Henry Carrillo3, Abdul Mouazen2
2020 IEEE 17th India Council International Conference (INDICON) | 978-1-7281-6916-3/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/INDICON49873.2020.9342231
1Department
of Electronics, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
2Department of Environment, Gent University, Gent 9000 Belgium
3Genius Sports, Medellín, Colombia
Email: george.archbold@ieee.org, carlos.parra@javeriana.edu.co, 3henry.carrillo@geniussports.com, 4abdul.mouazen@ugent.be
1 2
Abstract—A methodology for the integration of ISFET
sensors in precision agriculture and digital agriculture
applications is presented through this paper. The methodology,
which is the result of a research process, aims to establish a clear
procedure when designing electronic systems based on ISFET
sensors and that allow the direct or indirect evaluation of
nutrient status and pH in agricultural soils. The main objective
of this document is to offer engineers, integrators and designers,
and the scientific community in general a series of good
practices that range from the selection of the sensors, the design
of their electronic systems, calibration methods, and their
subsequent integration into IoT systems.
Keywords— ISFET, Soil pH, Soil Nutrients, Readout Circuit,
Instrumentation, Framework, architecture, Precision
Agriculture, Digital Farming, Agriculture 4.0
I. INTRODUCTION
The assessment of soil quality and fertility not only
supports experts to improve the productivity in crop processes
but also helps to prevent the contamination in agroecosystems.
Some chemical properties as nutrients and pH in soils are
useful to achieve this. Technology concepts such as Precision
Agriculture (PA), and Digital Agriculture (DA) can measure
these chemical properties using sensors. Suitable devices for
these applications are often spectroscopy-based sensors and
electrochemical ones [1], [2], and both devices are
fundamental for obtaining large volumes of information that
help experts (or intelligent systems) make decisions.
Electrochemical sensors are commonly used in PA and
DA. They allow an excellent performance to measure,
directly, available nutrients, and pH in soils [3]. However, the
implementation of this type of sensors, such as the Ion
Sensitive Field Effect Transistor (ISFET), requires the
analysis and implementation of a series of elements. To
mention a few of these, the electronic instrumentation, the
calibration routines, the soil solution measurement methods,
and the deployment of information display to the end-user. For
this reason, the use of these elements should be unified and
standardized in frameworks or architectures, to establish a
path of good practice when the design of electronic systems
based on ISFET sensors comes.
Frameworks or architectures in PA, DA, and even, on
Internet of Things (IoT) systems for agriculture, detail the role
and position of standard sensors, but commonly they do not
include definitions for electrochemical sensors
implementation. On the other hand, these architectures,
mostly made up of a series of layers, focus more on the
communication stages than on the physical sensing layer or
electronic instrumentation matters. For instance, [4] proposes
a 7-layer IoT architecture based on the OSI model, focused on
978-1-7281-6916-3/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
remote and ground sensing through WSNs (Wireless Sensor
Networks). In this work, the first physical sensing layer
describes the interaction between soil sensors constituted in
nodes, and remote sensors established in Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles (UAV’s).
On the other hand, the use of actuators for agriculture
automation [5] and information processing using machine
learning [6] is often the focus of other types of architectures.
Other approaches offer a data-user structure where, although
there are no WSN's, priority is given to the reading of the
electrochemical sensor and the georeferencing of the data
through a low-level system and using local storage and cloud
services [7].
Previous architectures or frameworks describe a work path
in which the sensor is placed within an agriculture application
to make measurements of individual variables. Then, there is
a long manner of information processing to deliver it to the
end-user. However, in the case of electrochemical sensors,
there is no clear workflow and framework to serve as a basis
for the establishment of electronic systems based on ISFET
sensors that allow it to use in smart farming applications or
industrial agriculture.
Therefore, this paper proposes an integration framework
that includes a decision flowchart to establish the pre-design
of electronic systems for ISFET sensors. Also, the framework
can be used for electrochemical sensors. After all, the work is
divided as follows: in section II, the critical factors within the
establishment of an electronic system using ISFET sensors for
agriculture applications will be analyzed; in section III, the
decision flowchart and the integration framework are
proposed; and finally, in section IV, the work carried out is
concluded.
II. CRITICAL FACTORS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN
ISFET-BASED ELECTRONIC SYSTEM
Several criteria are vital for the foundation of electronic
systems to use ISFET sensors in the evaluation of nutrients
and pH in agricultural soils. Fig. 1 shows these elements to be
analyzed. Among them, the way of measurement, the
environmental conditions, the physical integration of the
sensor, the electrical excitation, ISFET sensor type, and the
resources needed for the implementation of the system.
In Fig. 1 the criteria “RD Center/LAB” corresponds to the
development of the ISFET sensor and its electronic systems
by research centers. These institutions commonly have an
entire engineering or industrialized process for the
development of ISFET sensors and their integration into end-
user devices. In other words, they have the necessary

Fig. 1. Critical components in the constitution of an ISFET electronic
system for agriculture applications
resources to develop sensors in CMOS (Complementary
Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor) technology using large
production systems, and that is why it is considered a "fast
track" for the design of integrated electronic systems. For that
reason, this work fulfills its objective through ISFET sensors
that are acquired in a "semi-commercial" way. Here, sensors
are obtained through research centers that develop and
commercialize them for a specific price. In other words, this
is how a scientist, research group, or commercial company
acquires a raw ISFET sensor with its drain and source
terminals available to make experiments, validation, or
prototypes.
A. Measuring Method
ISFET devices are electrochemical sensors with the ability
to perform detections of ions in aqueous solutions [8]. Their
measurement process depends on a solution in which
suspended cations and anions can be quantified through an
electrochemical process that involves (at the macro level) a
polymer membrane and a reference electrode. Consequently,
two ways of carrying out the measurements are frequently
used. One of them from soil extracts preparation and the other
by introducing the sensor directly into the soil.
Planning and obtaining soil extracts is a process that
commonly takes place in certified soil testing laboratories [9],
but PA and DA have been doing it too. They perform soil
chemical assessment in the field (in-situ), including soil
extracts perform. Technologies such as On-The-Go platforms
from PA are capable to extract soil samples mechanically and
prepare them. Samples are converted into soil extracts which
are filtered and arranged for ion reading with ISFET sensors
[10], [11]. This process could be considered non-conservative
since the solution used to obtain soil extracts is usually 𝐻 𝑂
or deionized 𝐻 𝑂, which is against the industrial reagents and
standardized procedures used to obtain ions in available
forms.
Another less common method of measurement is the direct
insertion of the sensor into the soil. It is usually
unconventional because the membrane that covers the ISFET
is generally made of a polymer material that tends to
deteriorate over time (lifetime of about one year) and could be
compromised by constant friction with the soil. In other
words, On-The-Go applications requiring routines where the
sensor enters and exits the soil are not feasible given the high
probability of rapidly deteriorating the sensor lifetime or
immediately damaging it. However, some works have
demonstrated the ability to emerge the sensor directly into the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
soil to performs measurements for extended periods (about
nine months) [12], [13]. The problem here is that the
measurement could be biased with a single sampling point and
affected by dry soils since electrochemical sensors need
samples with suspended ions.
B. Environmental Conditions
Environmental conditions tolerated by ISFET devices
depend on the characteristics offered by each manufacturer
and correspond to the environmental parameters to which the
sensor is exposed. One of the most critical parameters is the
temperature, and this, for example, can be found between 0℃
and 80℃, being a determining parameter to know in which
periods of cultivation or soil preparation the sensor can be
used. Other parameters like humidity [14], [15], and pressure
[16] to which the sensor is submitted are usually not relevant
within agricultural applications, but they should be checked.
The light influence on the sensor membrane is a suitable
physical condition that affects the ISFET operation. [16]
shows exposures strongly influence that long-term sensor
stability to fluorescent light, and the drifts of ISFET are
accelerated under the light with an intensity of more than
1000 lux.
C. Sensor Physical Integration
A single ISFET device alone is not capable of performing
readings from multiple ions. If we think outside the CMOS
devices fabrication, an ISFET commercial unit device must
be acquired for each ion that needs to be measured. For this
reason, the design of plastic or metallic structures is necessary
to hold different ISFET sensors and couple it into On-The-
Go or in-situ-static platform measurement systems. Then, the
physical sensor integration requires human resources that
involve CAD designs, as well as other design tools.
Fig. 2. Typical readout circuits for ISFET excitation. (a) voltage-current
follower. (b) TIA analog front-end circuit
D. Electrical Excitation
One of the most critical factors is the Electrical excitation of
the sensor. It corresponds to the electronic instrumentation
stage that must be implemented to generate the necessary
signals for the ISFET biasing (currents and voltages) and the
acquisition of its output signals. Being ISFET an
electrochemical device, The "excitation” occurs through the
implementation of readout circuits categorized that can be
categorized into potentiometric and amperometric [17].
Potentiometric configurations are very convenient if the
idea is to operate the sensor in the linear zone. For instance,
setting constant values of 𝐼 , 𝑉 , and 𝑉 as operation
points allows the sensor behavior at some of its curves in the
triode region. The classical potentiometric readout circuit
Fig. 3. Flowchart for decision making in the establishment of an IN-SITU and ONLINE electronic system based on ISFET sensors.
corresponds to Constant Voltage, Constant Current circuit [8],
which is a voltage-current follower, as can be seen in Fig. 2A.
On the other hand, the sensor also follows the transconductor
MOSFET behavior as a voltage-controlled current source.
In this sense, this action opens the possibility for ISFET
amperometric topologies as the TIA analog front-end circuit
[17] (see Fig. 2B). Besides, signals in the current domain can
be directly filtered or employed in modulation schemes with
the inclusion of CMOS integrators. The problem here is that
ISFET amperometric circuit strategies tend to suffer from the
nonlinear I/V MOS device characteristics [17].
E. Sensor Type
Besides the ISFET, there are extensions according to the
application: the ISFET/Reference field-effect transistor
(REFET) [8], [18], [19], the Chemically-Sensitive Field-
Effect Transistor (ChemFET) and the Enzyme Field-Effect
Transistor (ENFET) (Dzyadevych et al., 2006). In addition to
the REFET, CHEMFET, and ENFET classes, there are
subcategories of these sensors such as unmodified CMOS
ISFETs, FET sensor Floating-Gate, Extended-Gate FET
sensor, and Dual-Gate FET sensor (Kaisti, 2017).
F. Financial Resources
The financial component has a direct impact on the
implementation of electronic systems based on ISFET. For
example, the cost of one device can cost between 50 USD and
200 USD for OEM devices, and more than 300 USD for
industrial-type encapsulated ISFET devices. Additionally, the
value of the reference electrode must be added, and it can cost
between 30 and 250 USD for OEM and more than this value
for the industrial type. Consequently, it will not be the same
designs for in-situ-static than on-the-go applications since
each one has different requirements. For example, in an on-
the-go application, we would have ISFET sensor arrays with
redundancy to optimize measurement times, while in in-situ-
static applications we could have dozens of ISFET sensors
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
performing measurements and grouped in sensor networks.
Therefore, a sensor network made up of ISFET’s may be more
expensive than the on-the-go application.
III. THE DECISION FRAMEWORK
A. Decision flowchart
The basis for the establishment of the integration
framework consisted of a decision module that allows
knowing the feasibility of the implementation of electronic
systems based on ISFET sensors. The decision flowchart (see
Fig. 3), based on critical factors from Section II, is composed
of a flowchart and has three segments, namely the segment of
soil conditions, the segment of extrinsic variable conditions,
and the segment of electronic excitation. Each of these
segments has logical conditions which, being true (1), given
the green light for the implementation of the system and, if
false (0), suggest rethinking the use of ISFET sensors for the
target application.
The initial segment corresponds to the soil conditions
segment and two conditions are evaluated here. First of them
refers to the type of variables to be measured and although
we know that the ISFET sensors can measure suspended ions,
it is essential to know if the target is to measure
available/extractable nutrients and ions such as NO , NH ,
K , H , H PO , Ca , Mg, or, if the target is to measure total
nutrients concentrations such as nitrogen, potassium or total
phosphorus. If total nutrients need to be measured, the design
of an ISFET system may not be feasible since it is not
possible to measure these variables directly unless an
investigation/study is being conducted where patterns,
correlations, etc. need to be analyzed to estimate total
nutrients. An example of this might be the estimation of total
nitrogen from the sum of concentrations between 𝑁𝑂 , 𝑁𝐻
and other forms of mineralized nitrogen.
Once the first condition is true, we move onto the second
one in which the type of measurement is validated: direct or
Fig. 4. The integration architecture
indirect. True results for this condition correspond to the
indirect measurement which enables the second segment. In
the indirect measurement, a soil extract is performed, which
is, take a soil sample, diluting it in some solution, and filter it
to obtain an aqueous solution in which the ISFET sensor can
be immersed to measure ions. The opposite case of this
condition corresponds to the direct measurement in the soil
which means directly introduce the sensor into the soil. As
mentioned before, the possibilities of failure, reducing the life
of the sensor, or inducing a bias in the measurement are quite
high. Therefore, there is low feasibility of implementing
indirect measurements.
Once the conditions of segment 1 have been fulfilled, we
move onto segment number 2 which corresponds to the
extrinsic variable conditions, i.e., those not dependent on the
sensor. The first decision to be fulfilled in this segment
corresponds to the environmental factors such as temperature
and tolerance to it will depend on the operating temperature
ranges established by the sensor manufacturer. That is, if the
operating temperature of the ISFET sensor corresponds to
0℃ 0℃ ≤ 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝 ≤ 80℃ , the temperature of the
agro-ecosystem where the sensor will be operating must be
verified to comply with the manufacturer's parameter. In this
sense, this should be done with the other variables indicated
by the manufacturer, such as humidity, pressure, and light
influence. The following condition in segment 2 corresponds
to the capacity of integrating the sensor in a metallic, plastic,
or any other material structure to hold the sensor to the
platform that is making the fieldwork (i.e., On-The-Go
platforms). Also, in segment 2, the condition of the financial
capacity to acquire ISFET sensors depends on the type of
application as we mentioned before.
Segment 3 refers to the electronic excitation of the sensor
and starts with a conclusive condition which corresponds to
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the human resources issue. This is relevant since the design of
readout circuits requires previous knowledge in
instrumentation and analog electronics. If the condition is
false, the readout circuit suggested by the manufacturer must
be followed to the letter, which is usually a potentiometric
method such as the voltage-current follower circuit. On the
other hand, If the condition is true, the designer will proceed
to choose between an amperometric or a potentiometric
method for the excitation of the ISFET sensors. This
conclusive condition leads to the feasibility of the ISFET
electronic systems design for the measurement of available
ions in agricultural soils.
B. The Decision Framework
With orange color, Fig. 4 shows different blocks that
conforms the decision framework. Initially, the user must
attend the decision module which corresponds to the
implementation of the flowchart described above and
visualized in Fig. 3. This implementation will result in the
feasibility of using the ISFET sensor and the type of readout
circuit that will be implemented to construct the electronic
system for the agriculture application. Having clear the
feasibility produced by the decision module, paths 1 and 2 can
be selected and their choice will depend on the engineer or
designer criteria.
Both paths, 1 and 2, contain sensors, reference electrodes,
and readout circuits, but there is a difference between them,
the optimization of the resources. Path 1 refers to the use of
multiple ISFET sensors in association with one or more
reference electrodes and a single readout circuit. The way to
excite the circuit and obtain the signals from the sensors is
done through bidirectional analog multiplexers or analog
switches, which change their acquisition channel from a
digital signal.
Path 1 is usually convenient for the implementation of
multiparametric probes that does not exceed 1 meter from the
readout circuit, and this should be done to avoid incurring
noise effects, although it could be solved with filtering and
amplification stages. Path 2 is more convenient with the
existence of sensor networks that could be based on
multiparametric probes or individual sensors and have long
distances (>20 meters) to the post-instrumentation stage. In
this path, there is a readout circuit for each sensing element
that is interconnected (by cable or wireless) to a hub or bypass
that concentrates the signals from the sensing elements to later
send the information to the post-instrumentation stage.
On the other hand, there are two additional blocks within
the framework: the calibration module and the ISFET sensor
support module. In the calibration module, the user must
specify two things: (1) the procedure to elaborate the
calibration buffers and (2) the way to obtain a data adjustment
or correlation to produce the calibrations model. Regarding
buffers, to make solutions such as KNO , NaNO , or KCl,
different industrial reagents must be purchased. Then,
multiple solutions (buffers) with different concentrations can
be generated in conjunction with deionized water. Once these
buffers are in place, the sensors should be calibrated to obtain
a correlation between the concentration of the prepared buffer
and the output signal of the readout circuit (voltage, current,
etc.) This correlation commonly corresponds to a linear model
of the type y = ax + b, where y is the logarithm of the ion
concentration and x is the output signal of the readout circuit.
The decision framework shows how the calibration
module is interconnected to the ISFET sensors and to the stage
of pos-instrumentation which receives the calibration points
that allow establishing the calibration model. The model can
be performed using statistical or Machine Learning methods
computed in the microcontroller or central processor. For
instance, solving a problem of minimum squares or the
implementation of some library that solves a linear regression
adjustment.
The ISFET sensor support module corresponds to the use
of external sensors that are useful to perform measurements.
Sensors such as thermistors, thermocouples, or diodes are
necessary to compensate for the non-idealities from
temperature and to add labels of temperature in each soil
measurement. The operation of these sensors and the
acquisition of its signals are factors managed by an electronic
instrumentation stage. Regarding the GPS, it is important to
geo-position the measurements (if needed).
Once the signals from the ISFET sensor are obtained and
the calibration process is clear, the post-instrumentation
system will oversee directly receiving the signals, applying
analog filtering through low-pass filters, using an ADC to
digitalize the signal, and applying digital filters to improve the
quality of the information. Therefore, all these operations are
considered low level, and the variables that will come out are
converted into final units that quantify the variables in the soil,
such as, for example, PPM, mg/Kg - nutrient, pH, ℃, etc.
Finally, the low-level system will be producing signals in
a format such as digital signals (RS232, 485, I2C, etc.) and
analogical signals (PWM, 4-20mA, 0-5V, etc.). For instance,
these formats are very convenient if the idea is to acquire data
with a central computer (such as a CompactRIO® or a PLC)
to drive certain actuators (motors, valves, etc.) and execute
applications such as directed fertilization, automatic tillage, or
agrochemical irrigation. Signals could also be transmitted
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
wirelessly in the case of using sensor networks or to transmit
them to a connection layer as will be seen below.
C. Integration Architecture
Fig. 4 presents the integration architecture with two layers,
namely, "sensors layer" and "back-to-end layer". The sensors
layer contains all the sensing devices, including ISFET
sensors, which are involved in the decision framework as we
have seen above. Furthermore, the additional sensors block
refers to other Proximal Soil Sensors – PSS (e.g., Ground-
penetrating radars, spectrometers, etc.) that will require its
electronic instrumentation that perform filter, processing, and
standardization of information (digital or analog).
Once signals are produced from the sensors layer, they will
make their way through the back-to-end-layer. This layer is
composed by the concentrator (gateway) and the cloud
platform. The concentrator (gateway) has the work to receive
all the signals from the sensors layer. This unit can be an
embedded system (e.g., RaspberryPi) with GPIOS, local
database facilities, and additional communication modules
(e.g., LoRaWAN, Sigfox, etc.) to receive, send information,
and connecting to the internet. On the other hand, the cloud
platform is the place that receives the gateway information
over the Internet. In this platform the information is processed
and stored, statistics are generated, and applications are
created so that the user can access them remotely. Services
such as UBIDOTS, Microsoft Azure and AWS (Amazon Web
Services) offer platforms in the cloud.
IV. CONCLUSION
A methodology for the integration of ISFET sensors in
precision agriculture, digital agriculture or industry
agriculture applications was developed. The work showed an
integration architecture with two layers that includes a
decision flowchart to establish the pre-design of electronic
systems for ISFET sensors. This type of architectures can help
engineers and designers to know if it is feasible or not to
implement ISFET sensors within their systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the Doctorate in
Engineering program from Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
for sponsoring the participation in the INDICON 2020
conference.
REFERENCES
[1] B. Kuang, H. S. Mahmood, M. Z. Quraishi, W. B. Hoogmoed, and A.
M. Mouazen, Sensing Soil Properties in the Laboratory , In Situ , and
On-Line : A Review, 1st ed., vol. 114. Elsevier Inc., 2012.
[2] L. Burton, K. Jayachandran, and S. Bhansali, “Review—The ‘Real-
Time’ Revolution for In situ Soil Nutrient Sensing,” J. Electrochem.
Soc., vol. 167, no. 3, p. 037569, 2020, doi: 10.1149/1945-
7111/ab6f5d.
[3] M. A. Ali, L. Dong, J. Dhau, A. Khosla, and A. Kaushik,
“Perspective—Electrochemical Sensors for Soil Quality
Assessment,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 167, no. 3, p. 037550, 2020,
doi: 10.1149/1945-7111/ab69fe.
[4] A. Triantafyllou, P. Sarigiannidis, and S. Bibi, “Precision agriculture:
A remote sensing monitoring system architecture,” Inf., vol. 10, no.
11, 2019, doi: 10.3390/info10110348.
[5] R. K. Math and N. V. Dharwadkar, “A wireless sensor network based
low cost and energy efficient frame work for precision agriculture,”
2017 Int. Conf. Nascent Technol. Eng. ICNTE 2017 - Proc., 2017, doi:
10.1109/ICNTE.2017.7947883.
[6] Y. Mekonnen, S. Namuduri, L. Burton, A. Sarwat, and S. Bhansali,
“Review—Machine Learning Techniques in Wireless Sensor
Network Based Precision Agriculture,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 167,
no. 3, p. 037522, 2020, doi: 10.1149/2.0222003jes.
[7] G. Archbold Taylor et al., “PH Measurement IoT System for Precision
Agriculture Applications,” IEEE Lat. Am. Trans., vol. 17, no. 5, pp.
823–832, 2019, doi: 10.1109/TLA.2019.8891951.
[8] P. Bergveld, “Thirty years of ISFETOLOGY What happened in the
past 30 years and what may happen in the next 30 years,” Sensors
Actuators B. Chem., vol. 88, pp. 1–20, 2003.
[9] M. R. Carter and E. G. Gregorich, Soil Sampling and Methods of
Analysis, vol. 38, no. 1. Canadian Society of Soil Science, 2006.
[10] S. J. Birrell and J. W. Hummel, “Real-time multi ISFET/FIA soil
analysis system with automatic sample extraction,” Comput. Electron.
Agric., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 45–67, 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0168-
1699(01)00159-4.
[11] S. Hinck et al., “soil2data : Concept for a mobile field laboratory for
nutrient analysis,” no. 3, pp. 1–10, 2018.
[12] J. Artigas, A. Beltran, and C. Jime, “Application of ion sensitive field
effect transistor based sensors to soil analysis,” Comput. Electron.
Agric., vol. 31, pp. 281–293, 2001.
[13] C. Jimenez-Jorquera, J. Orozco, and A. Baldi, “ISFET based
microsensors for environmental monitoring,” Sensors, vol. 10, no. 1,
pp. 61–83, 2010, doi: 10.3390/s100100061.
[14] I. Gracia, C. Cane, M. Lozano, and J. Esteve, “Test structures for
ISFET chemical sensors,” ICMTS 92 Proc. 1992 Int. Conf.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa. Downloaded on April 18,2023 at 01:39:17 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Microelectron. Test Struct., vol. 5, no. March, pp. 156–159, 1992, doi:
10.1109/ICMTS.1992.185959.
[15] V. K. Khanna, “A plausible ISFET drift-like aging mechanism for
Al2O3 humidity sensor,” Sensors Actuators, B Chem., vol. 213, pp.
351–359, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2015.02.082.
[16] Y. Ito, “Stability of ISFET and its new measurement protocol,”
Sensors Actuators, B Chem., vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 53–55, 2000, doi:
10.1016/S0925-4005(99)00443-8.
[17] M. Dei, J. Aymerich, M. Piotto, P. Bruschi, F. del Campo, and F.
Serra-Graells, “CMOS Interfaces for Internet-of-Wearables
Electrochemical Sensors: Trends and Challenges,” Electronics, vol. 8,
no. 2, p. 150, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.3390/electronics8020150.
[18] V. K. Khanna, W. Oelßner, and U. Guth, “Interfacial and adhesional
aspects in polyurethane (PUR) membrane coating on Si3N4 surface
of ISFET gate for REFET fabrication,” Appl. Surf. Sci., vol. 255, no.
17, pp. 7798–7804, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2009.04.182.
[19] M. Zabrowski, D. Szmiguel, and P. Grabiec, “BSC ISFET as
Transcutaneous Blood Capnometry Sensor.,” HI Nation. Conf. Nano
a. Micromechanics., vol. 801, no. 11, pp. 142–146, 2014, doi:
10.12915/pe.2014.11.39.
[20] S. V. Dzyadevych, A. P. Soldatkin, A. V. El’skaya, C. Martelet, and
N. Jaffrezic-Renault, “Enzyme biosensors based on ion-selective
field-effect transistors,” Anal. Chim. Acta, vol. 568, no. 1–2, pp. 248–
258, 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2005.11.057.
[21] M. Kaisti, “Detection principles of biological and chemical FET
sensors,” Biosens. Bioelectron., vol. 98, no. June, pp. 437–448, 2017,
doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2017.07.010.