2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2016.02.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Mg 2+ ions co-doping on timing performance and radiation tolerance of Cerium doped Gd 3 Al 2 Ga 3 O 12 crystals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

7
87
1
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 96 publications
(97 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
7
87
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, as recently demonstrated in [20] and references therein, the rise time of GAGG:Ce might be substantially decreased by co-doping by magnesium. .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…However, as recently demonstrated in [20] and references therein, the rise time of GAGG:Ce might be substantially decreased by co-doping by magnesium. .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Recently, we demonstrated that the luminescence build up after short‐pulse excitation becomes significantly faster, when GAGG:Ce crystal is codoped by Mg . This observation of the shortening of the luminescence rise time is in line with the previous results on the coincidence time resolution, where substantial improvement of the response time in Mg‐codoped GAGG:Ce crystals is observed at certain decrease of the light yield . At a small energy release, using 511 keV gamma‐rays from 22 Na source, the Coincidence Resolving Time (CTR) with full width at half maximum (FWHM) of 540 and 233 ps was measured in GAGG:Ce without and with Mg codoping, respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In previous articles, a reduction in the rise time to tens of picoseconds with the increasing Mg content was demonstrated . However, this could not be observed using our setup because the minimum width of the excitation e‐beam pulse was 50 ns.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…This problem can be solved by co‐doping the garnet with Mg 2+ . This leads to additional afterglow reduction in LuGAGG:Ce, and especially in Lu 3 Al 5 O 12 :Ce (LuAG:Ce) systems, to both rise and decay time reduction, but also, unluckily, to LY reduction at higher Mg co‐doping. The afterglow suppression was explained by the Ce 4+ center stabilization, competing better with electronic traps for charge capture, which resulted in practical inactivation of shallow traps.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%