Xiao Yang received the BE degree in the physics from the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) in 2018, and currently working toward the PhD degree in experimental particle physics in the USTC. His research interests include development and characterization of radiation hard silicon sensors used for the high energy particle detection in physics experiment in LHC including TCAD simulation and fabrication process and the standard model Higgs properties study in the ATLAS experiment including Higgs associated production with a vector boson and decay into a pair of W bosons
Yanwen Liu is currently a Full Professor at the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC). He received the PhD from the University of Geneva in 2004 (with the CDF experiment), and worked at Universite Catholique de Louvain in Belgium in 2005 as a postdoc (with the CMS experiment) before he joined the USTC. Since then, he worked on physics analyses at Dzero and ATLAS experiments (H->gamma gamma, bb, electroweak measurements, and search for new physics beyond the SM). His current research activities include development of Low Gain Avalanche Detector for High Granularity Timing Detector, a phase-II upgrade project for ATLAS as well as physics studies with the ATLAS data
The high granularity timing detector (HGTD) is a crucial component of the ATLAS phase II upgrade to cope with the extremely high pile-up (the average number of interactions per bunch crossing can be as high as 200). With the precise timing information (σt~30 ps) of the tracks, the track-to-vertex association can be performed in the “4-D” space. The Low Gain Avalanche Detector (LGAD) technology is chosen for the sensors, which can provide the required timing resolution and good signal-to-noise ratio. Hamamatsu Photonics K.K. (HPK) has produced the LGAD with thicknesses of 35 μm and 50 μm. The University of Science and Technology of China(USTC) has also developed and produced 50 μm LGADs prototypes with the Institute of Microelectronics (IME) of Chinese Academy of Sciences. To evaluate the irradiation hardness, the sensors are irradiated with the neutron at the JSI reactor facility and tested at USTC. The irradiation effects on both the gain layer and the bulk are characterized by I-V and C-V measurements at room temperature (20 ℃) or −30 ℃. The breakdown voltages and depletion voltages are extracted and presented as a function of the fluences. The final fitting of the acceptor removal model yielded the c-factor of 3.06×10−16 cm−2, 3.89×10−16 cm−2 and 4.12×10−16 cm−2 for the HPK-1.2, HPK-3.2 and USTC-1.1-W8, respectively, showing that the HPK-1.2 sensors have the most irradiation resistant gain layer. A novel analysis method is used to further exploit the data to get the relationship between the c-factor and initial doping density.
Graphical Abstract
The basic principle and structure of the LGAD technology (left) and the acceptor removal effect (right) for the boron-doped gain layer. The BiOi complexes are generated after neutron/proton irradiation, leading to the reduction of the effective doping concentration and detector’s gain.
Abstract
The high granularity timing detector (HGTD) is a crucial component of the ATLAS phase II upgrade to cope with the extremely high pile-up (the average number of interactions per bunch crossing can be as high as 200). With the precise timing information (σt~30 ps) of the tracks, the track-to-vertex association can be performed in the “4-D” space. The Low Gain Avalanche Detector (LGAD) technology is chosen for the sensors, which can provide the required timing resolution and good signal-to-noise ratio. Hamamatsu Photonics K.K. (HPK) has produced the LGAD with thicknesses of 35 μm and 50 μm. The University of Science and Technology of China(USTC) has also developed and produced 50 μm LGADs prototypes with the Institute of Microelectronics (IME) of Chinese Academy of Sciences. To evaluate the irradiation hardness, the sensors are irradiated with the neutron at the JSI reactor facility and tested at USTC. The irradiation effects on both the gain layer and the bulk are characterized by I-V and C-V measurements at room temperature (20 ℃) or −30 ℃. The breakdown voltages and depletion voltages are extracted and presented as a function of the fluences. The final fitting of the acceptor removal model yielded the c-factor of 3.06×10−16 cm−2, 3.89×10−16 cm−2 and 4.12×10−16 cm−2 for the HPK-1.2, HPK-3.2 and USTC-1.1-W8, respectively, showing that the HPK-1.2 sensors have the most irradiation resistant gain layer. A novel analysis method is used to further exploit the data to get the relationship between the c-factor and initial doping density.
Public Summary
The irradiation effects on both the gain layer and the bulk for prototype LGADs are characterized by I-V and C-V measurements at room temperature (20 ℃) or −30 ℃.
The HPK-1.2 prototype are prove to have the smallest c-factor 3.06×10−16 cm−2 and HPK-3.2, USTC-1.1-W8 have larger c-factor 3.89 ×10−16 cm−2 , 4.12 ×10−16 cm−2.
A novel analysis method is proposed to further exploit the data to get the relation between the c-factor and initial doping density.
In graph theory, Dirac’s famous theorem[1] states that if a graph G on n vertices has a minimum degree of at least n2, then G contains a Hamiltonian cycle. Moreover, if G is not a completely balanced bipartite graph Kn2,n2, then the result can be strengthened such that G is pancyclic; i.e., G contains cycles of all lengths from 3 to n.
The study of random structures is a thriving field in the graph theory. This implies that we can generate a graph according to a certain distribution, and the probability that the graph satisfies some property is considered. A well-known model is the Erdös-Rényi random graph Gn,p, which is a graph of n vertices whose edges appear individually independent with probability p. It was shown in Ref. [2] that if p⩾(1+ε)lognn, then Gn,p is asymptotically almost surely (a.a.s.) Hamiltonian.
In 2003, Bohman et al.[3] introduced an random perturbed graph model. This is a combination of extremal problems and the study of random structures. In this model, we consider a graph H, whose minimum degree is bounded by δ(H)⩾αn, and a random graph G according to a certain distribution. The goal is to determine whether H∪G a.a.s satisfies certain properties. Bohman et al.[3] examined the problem of Hamiltonicity and proved that for any constant α>0 and a graph H with δ(H)⩾αn, there exists a constant C depending on α such that for any p⩾Cn, H∪Gn,p is a.a.s. Hamiltonian. Krivelevich et al.[4] generalized Hamiltonicity to pancyclicity, and Hahn-Klimroth et al.[5] showed that the constant α can be a function that tends to 0, where n tends to infinity. Hamiltonicity has also been studied in randomly perturbed digraphs[3, 4], hypergraphs[4, 6, 7, 8], and subgraphs of the hypercube[9]. Many other properties of this model have also been studied. For example, the existence of powers of Hamiltonian cycles[10, 11], F-factor[12, 13], and general bounded degree spanning graphs[11]. In all these cases, the results significantly improved the bounds provided by the traditional random graph model. Recently, Espuny Díaz and Girão[14] considered Hamiltonicity in graphs perturbed by a random regular graph.
In this study, we consider a randomly perturbed digraph model, i.e., the Hamiltonicity and pancyclicity of H∪D, where H is a digraph on n vertices with δ(H)⩾αn, and D is a random d-regular digraph for some d∈N. Cooper et al.[15] proved that for all d⩾3, the random d-regular digraph is a.a.s. Hamiltonian. Hence, we only consider the case when d∈{1,2}. Furthermore, the main result is as follows:
Theorem 1.1. Let α=ω((lognn)14) and d∈{1,2} and let H be a graph of n vertices with δ(H)⩾αn. Then, a.a.s. H∪D is pancyclic, where D is a random d-regular digraph on n vertices.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, some notation and lemmas are presented. Proof of Theorem 1.1 is presented in Section 3. Finally, in Section 4, we present an open problem.
2.
Preliminaries
2.1
Notation
For m,n∈N, we denote [m,n]:={m,m+1,⋯,n} and [n]=[1,n]. For the asymptotic notations, we use the standard O notation and assume that the functions are nonnegative.
Throughout this paper, the term digraph denotes to a simple directed graph. For any digraph D of n vertices, we implicitly assume that V(D)=[n].
Given a digraph D=(V,E) and any vertex v∈V, we let N+D(v):={w∈V∣(v,w)∈E} be the out-neighbor set of v, and N−D(v):={w∈V∣(w,v)∈E} be the in-neighbor set of v. Additionally, we denote its out-degree in D by d+D(v):=|N+D(v)| and its in-degree by d−D(v):=|N−D(v)|. The maximum out-degree of D is defined as Δ+(D):=maxv∈Vd+D(v) and maximum in-degree of D is defined as Δ−(D):=maxv∈Vd−D(v). Similarly, we can define the minimum out-degree δ+(D) and minimum in-degree δ−(D). The maximum degree of D is Δ(D)=max{Δ+(D),Δ−(D)}, and similarly, we can define the minimum degree of a digraph D by δ(D)=min{δ+(D),δ−(D)}. We can state that digraph D is d-regular if Δ(D)=δ(D)=d.
Given a digraph D=(V,E) and vertex subset V∗⊂V, let E(V∗)={(x,y)∈E∣x,y∈V∗}. The induced subgraph of V∗ is defined as D[V∗]=(V∗,E(V∗)). We write D∖V∗=D[V∖V∗]. Given another digraph D′, D∪D′=(V(D)∪V(D′),E(D)∪E(D′)) and D′⊂D if V(D′)⊂V(D) and E(D′)⊂E(D′). Let E′⊂V×V be a set of edges, and let D∖E′=(V,E∖E′) and D∪E′=(V,E∪E′).
A directed path P=v1v2⋯vℓ is the digraph P=({vi∣i∈[ℓ]},{(vi,vi+1)∣i∈[ℓ−1]}), where all vertices {vi∣i∈[ℓ]} are distinct. Furthermore, degenerated cases can exist in which P is an isolated vertex. We can state that P⊂D is the maximal directed path if N−D(v1),N+D(vℓ)⊂V(P). A directed cycle C=v1v2⋯vℓv1 is the digraph C=({vi∣i∈[ℓ]},{(vi,vi+1)∣i∈[ℓ−1]}∪{(vℓ,v1)}), where all vertices {vi∣i∈[ℓ]} are distinct.
2.2
Configuration model
The configuration model is the most useful tool to examine random regular graphs or digraphs, and it was introduced by Bollobás[16].The configuration model provides a process that uniformly generates a random regular graph. We used the model to generate a random 1-regular digraph. The process is as follows. For any i∈[n], we consider a set of two vertices, xi and yi. Then, we select a uniformly random perfect matching M covering set {xi∣i∈[n]}∪{yi∣i∈[n]} using only (undirected) edges of the form xiyj for some i,j∈[n]. Now, we generate a 1-regular digraph D=(V,E), where, for each edge xiyj∈M, a directed edge (i,j) is added to E.
Whenever we produce a random 1-regular digraph D following the process above, we use Cn,1 to denote the distribution of D, and C∗n,1 to denote the distribution of the corresponding perfect matching M. We state that perfect matching M that generates D is a configuration. We observe that for any 1-regular digraph D, exactly one configuration M exists that generates D.
Suppose we have two configurations M1 and M2. We state M1∼M2 if there exist two edges xiyj and xkyl in M1 such that M2=(M1∖{xiyj,xkyl})∪{xiyl,xkyj}. The following lemma bounds the probability that certain variable in the configurations deviate from their expectation.
Lemma 2.1. Let c>0 and let X be a random variable on C∗n,1 such that for every pair of configurations M1∼M2, we always have |X(M1)−X(M2)|⩽c. Then, for all t∈N, we have
P(|X−E(X)|⩾t)⩽2exp{−t24nc2}.
Proof. It should be noted that if we ignore the orientation, the graph generated by configuration M∈C∗n,1 is a 2-regular undirected graph. Díaz and Girão[14, Lemma 2.1] proved that
P(|X−E(X)|⩾t)⩽2exp{−t24nc2},
under the same conditions provided in this lemma. The proof is complete, and this lemma can be considered as a directed version of Lemma 2.1 in Ref. [14].
When we sample a random 1-regular digraph following the process above, we observed that the obtained digraph contains loops. However, by conditioning the event that D is a 1-regular digraph without a loop, this type of a graph is a uniformly random 1-regular simple digraph. The configuration of a loopless 1-regular simple digraph can be viewed as a derangement of [n]. Therefore, by considering the derangement problem, we have
Lemma 2.2. Let D be a random 1-regular digraph of n vertices generated by the process above. If n⩾3, then P(D contains no loops )⩾13>0.
Proof. There are n! potential configurations for generating a 1-regular graph on n vertices. A configuration can be viewed as a permutation σ on [n], i.e., xiyj∈M⇔σ(i)=j. In this manner, D contains no loop, indicating that σ is a derangement of [n]. Hence, we have n!n∑i=0(−1)ii! possible choices for σ. Therefore, the probability
P(Dcontainsnoloop)=n∑i=0(−1)ii!⩾13>0.
2.3
Properties of random 1-regular digraph
Let D be a 1-regular digraph of n vertices. Thus, the underlying graph G of D is 2-regular. It should be noted that the strongly connected component of D is a directed cycle, which is also a component of G. Díaz and Girão showed that G has a maximum of log2n components[14, Lemma 3.1(i)]. Thus, we have the following property for D.
Lemma 2.3. Let D be a random 1-regular digraph on n vertices generated according to thedistribution Cn,1, then a.a.s. D has at most log2n strongly connected components.
The next property is a key lemma of the edge distribution, which is frequently used during the proof. We use it to connect different components of the digraph. Furthermore, it is a directed version of Lemma 3.3 in Ref. [14], and their proofs are analogous. We provide a proof for completeness.
Lemma 2.4. Let ϵ>0 and k=k(n)⩽n3. For each i∈[k], let αi=αi(n) and βi=βi(n) such that αiβi=ω((lognn)12), and let Ui,Vi⊂[n] be two arbitrary sets of vertices with |Ui|⩾αin and |Vi|⩾βin. Let D be a random 1-regular digraph on n vertices generated according to the distribution Cn,1. Then, for every i∈[k], Ui contains at least (1−ϵ)αiβin vertices v such that N+D(v)∩Vi≠∅.
Proof. Let P be the probability that the statement holds for D. First, we set i∈[k]. Let Z={v∈Ui∣N+D(v)∩Vi≠∅}, and X=|Z|. Using the configuration model, for each sufficiently large v∈Ui and n, we have
P(v∈Z)⩾|Vi|−1n−1⩾(1−ϵ2)βi.
Hence, E(X)⩾(1−ϵ2)αiβin.
We know that X can also be viewed as a random variable in C∗n,1. Given any pair of configurations M1∼M2, they differ in two edges at four vertices; thus, |X(M1)−X(M2)|⩽4. Hence, from Lemma 2.1, we have P(X<(1−ϵ)αiβin)⩽exp{−Ω(α2iβ2in)}.
Finally, by the union bound, we have
P⩾1−∑i∈[k]exp{−Ω(α2iβ2in)}=1−o(1).
3.
Proof of Theorem 1.1
It has been known that every d-regular digraph can be decomposed into the union of 1-regular digraphs[17]. Therefore, to prove Theorem 1.1, we should only consider the case where d=1.
We always assume that n is sufficiently large throughout the proof. Recall that α=ω((lognn)14) and H is a digraph of n vertices with δ(H)⩾αn. Let D be a random 1-regular digraph with vertex set V(D)=V(H)=[n] generated according to the distribution Cn,1. For a positive number β, by applying Lemma 2.4 to the pair of sets X,Y∈V(H) with ϵ=12 and |X|,|Y|⩾βn, we have the following claim:
Claim. For any X,Y∈V(H) (not necessarily distinct) with |X|,|Y|⩾βn, X contains at least β2n2 vertices z such that N+D(z)∩Y≠∅.
We used the absorbing method to construct cycles of all lengths. First we select an arbitrary vertex subset U⊂V(H) with |U| sufficiently small when compared to n. Then, we construct a path P to ‘absorb’ vertices in U. Next, we show that there exists an almost spanning cycle C with P⊂C such that C avoids U. Finally, we use C and U to determine cycles of all lengths.
For each pair of vertex subsets (X,Y) (not necessarily distinct), we consider set Z(X,Y):={(z,w)∈E(D)∣z∈X,w∈Y}. This is the set of all ‘available’ edges for (X,Y). Based on Claim 1, for all pairs of vertex subsets (X,Y) with |X|,|Y|⩾βn for some β>0, we have
|Z(X,Y)|⩾β2n2
(1)
As we consider available edges from D, the digraph ZXY=(V(H),Z(X,Y)) has a maximum degree of 1 as follows:
Δ(ZXY)=1
(2)
Consider an arbitrary set U⊂V(H) of size m=α2n10000 and label it as U={u1,⋯,um}. This is the set of vertices we want to ‘absorb’. For each j∈[m], we iteratively choose an edge ej=(zj,z∗j)∈Z(N−H(uj),N+H(uj)), such that {zj,z∗j}∩(U∪{zt,z∗t∣t∈[j−1]})=∅. Hence, we consider m vertex-disjoint edges in D such that they all avoid the vertex set U. We note that δ(H)⩾αn. Thus, the existence of such m edges is guaranteed by (1) and (2). Let W={zt,z∗t∣t∈[m]}. We now choose β=α/5. For each pair of vertex subsets (X,Y) with |X|,|Y|⩾βn, we update the set of available edges by letting
Z1(X,Y):={(z,w)∈E(D)∣z∈X∖(U∪W),w∈Y∖(U∪W)}.
By (1) and (2), we can estimate the number of available edges:
|Z1(X,Y)|⩾β2n2−3m⩾2β2n5
(3)
Now, for each j∈[m−1], we iteratively choose e1j=(wj,w∗j)∈Z1(N+H(z∗j),N−H(zj+1)) such that these edges are vertex disjoint. Similarly, (3) and (2) guarantee the existence of such edges. Therefore, we obtain a directed path P=z1z∗1w1w∗1z2z∗2⋯wm−1w∗m−1zmz∗m in H∪D, which is used to absorb set U.
Let W′=V(P)∖{z1,z∗m} and D0=(D∖(W′∪U))∪P, i.e., D0 is the union of the graph D∖(W′∪U) and path P. Thus, D0 is a subgraph of H∪D with Δ(D0)⩽1. From Lemma 2.3, D0 contains at most log2n directed cycles. Given that we removed at most (1+o(1))α2n2000 vertices from D and every vertex produces at most one directed path, D0 contains at most (1+o(1))α2n2000 directed paths. We iteratively use the edges of H to combine these directed cycles and paths into a directed cycle C in (H∪D)∖U of length n−m with P⊂C. Let V=V(H)∖U. For each X,Y⊂V with |X|,|Y|⩾βn, we updated the set of available edges by setting
Z0(X,Y):={(z,w)∈E(D)∣z∈X∖(V(P)∪U),w∈Y∖(V(P)∪U)}.
Using (1) and (2), we can estimate the number of available edges.
|Z0(X,Y)|⩾β2n2−5m⩾2β2n5
(4)
In the iteration process, for any i∈N, we assume that we have already defined Di−1 in the ith step. The ith step adjusts the graph by letting Di=(Di−1∖Ea)∪Eb, where Ea and Eb are sets of edges of H∪D with the property that Δ(Di)⩽1 for every step i∈N. Subsequently, we update the available edges by setting Zi(X,Y):=Zi−1(X,Y)∖Ea. We assume the following in each step for each X,Y⊂V with |X|,|Y|⩾βn.
|Zi(X,Y)|⩾β2n10
(5)
We prove this later by showing that the number of steps performed and number of removed edges are small at each step.
For the ith step, we have graph Di−1, and we consider the following possible cases: We refer to the component isomorphic to a directed path (resp. a direct cycle) as a path component (resp. a cycle component).
Case 1. At least two path components exist in Di−1. We select one of them, such as P′=v1v2⋯vℓ, and any edge (u,v)∈Zi−1(N−H(v1),N+H(vℓ)). We wet Di=(Di−1∖{(u,v)})∪{(u,v1),(vℓ,v)}. If (u,v)∈E(P′), then recall that P′=v1⋯uv⋯vℓ. Therefore, P′ is decomposed into two directed cycles v1⋯uv1 and v⋯vℓv after the operation. If (u,v) belongs to another directed path component P″ or a directed cycle component C' , then P' and P'' (or C' ) are combined into a single directed path (or a longer directed cycle) in D_i . The operation deduces the number of path components by 1. The operations of Case 1 stop after we obtain D_i with exactly one path component.
Case 2. There is exactly one path component in D_{i-1} , i.e., P'=v_1v_2\cdots v_\ell . We adjust the graph to extend P' into a longer path while reducing the number of components if possible; otherwise, we construct a graph that is a union of vertex-disjoint cycles. We consider the following cases.
Subcase 2.1 (v_\ell, v_1)\in E(H) . Set D_i=D_{i-1}\cup\{(v_\ell,v_1)\} . This operation converts the path component P' into a directed cycle.
Subcase 2.2 There exists a certain v\in N_H^-(v_1)\setminus(U\cup V(P)\cup V(P')). Then, we choose vertex v'\in N_{D_{i-1}}^+(v) and let D_i= (D_{i-1}\setminus\{(v,v')\})\cup\{(v,v_1)\}. This operation extends P' into a longer directed path in D_i ( P' and the cycle containing (v, v') is adjusted to a longer directed path) and reduces the number of components by one. We can do similar operation if there exists some v\in N_H^+(v_\ell)\setminus(U\cup V(P)\cup V(P')) .
Subcase 2.3. (N_H^-(v_1)\cup N_H^+(v_\ell))\setminus(U\cup V(P))\subseteq V(P') . We first introduce some notations used here. For v_i\in V(P') , let v_i^+=v_{i+1} for i\in[\ell-1] and v_i^-=v_{i-1} for i\in[2,\ell] . With respect to U\subset V(P') , let U^+=\{v^+\mid v\in U\} and U^-=\{v^-\mid v\in U\} . Given two vertex subsets U,V\subset V(P') , let U^*=\{i\in [\ell]\mid v_i\in U\} and V^*=\{i\in [\ell]\mid v_i\in V\} . We can state that U<V if \max U^*< \min V^* . It should be noted that \delta(H)\geqslant 5\beta n and |U\cup V(P)|\leqslant 5m < \beta n. We can partition N_H^-(v_1)\cap V(P') into U_1 and U_2 such that U_1<U_2 with |U_1|\geqslant 3\beta n and |U_2|\geqslant \beta n . Similarly, we can partition N_H^+(v_\ell)\cap V(P') into W_1 and W_2 such that W_1<W_2 with |W_1|\geqslant \beta n and |W_2|\geqslant 3\beta n .
If W_1<U_2 , then |W_1^-|, |U_2^+|\geqslant \beta n . Based on (5), there is an edge (w_1^-, u_2^+)\in Z_{i-1}(W_1^-, U_2^+) . We wet D_i=(D_{i-1}\setminus\{(w_1^-,w_1), (u_2,u_2^+)\})\cup\{(w_1^-, u_2^+), (u_2,v_1),(v_\ell,w_1)\}. This operation converts P' into a directed cycle.
Otherwise, we have \max U_1^*<\min U_2^*<\max W_1^*<\min W_2^* , i.e., U_1<W_2 . Let U_{12} be the last \beta n vertices of U_1 , i.e., (U_1\setminus U_{12})<U_{12} . Clearly, |U_1\setminus U_{12}|\geqslant 2\beta n . Let U_{11}=\{v\in U_1\setminus U_{12}\mid N_D^+(v)\cap U_{12}^+\not=\emptyset\}; It is claimed that |U_{11}|\geqslant \beta n . If this is not true, then |U_1\setminus (U_{12}\cup U_{11})|\geqslant \beta n . Given that |U_{12}^+|=\beta n , Claim 1 guarantees that at least \dfrac{\beta^2n}2 edges are available from U_1\setminus (U_{12}\cup U_{11}) to U_{12}^+ . However, this contradicts the definition of U_{11} . Thus, |U_{11}|\geqslant\beta n . Similarly, let W_{21} be the first \beta n vertices of W_2 , and let W_{22}=\{v\in W_2\setminus W_{21} \mid N_D^-(v)\cap W_{21}^-\not=\emptyset\}. Hence, we can state |W_{22}|\geqslant\beta n . Based on (5), there exists an edge (w_{22}^-, u_{11}^+)\in Z_{i-1}(W_{22}^-,U_{11}^+) . Additionally, by definition, u _{12}\in\,U _{12} and w _{21}\in\,W _{21} exist such that (u_{11},u_{12}^+),\;(w_{21}^-,w_{22})\in E(D). Set
and D_i=(D_{i-1}\setminus E_a)\cup E_b. This operation turns the path component P' into a directed cycle.
Case 3. All the components of D_{i-1} are directed cycles. If D_{i-1} is a single directed cycle, then our proof is completed. Now, we assume that D_{i-1} contains at least two components. In this iteration process, we reduce the number of components by one while creating a path. Let C' be the longest directed cycle in D_{i-1} .
If |V(C')|\geqslant n-\alpha n or |V(C')|<\alpha n , then the other cycle components exhibit lengths that are less than \alpha n . Given that \delta(H)\geqslant\alpha n , there must be an edge e'=(u,v)\in E(H) joining C' and some other cycle component C'' in both cases. Now assume \alpha n\leqslant |V(C')| < n-\alpha n. Based on (5), there exists an available edge e'=(u,v)\in Z_i(V(C'), [n]\setminus V(C')) , i.e., e' joins C' and some other cycle component C'' . Suppose that (u,u')\in E(C') , and (v',v)\in E(C') . Set D_i=(D_{i-1}\setminus\{(u,u'), (v',v)\})\cup \{(u,v)\}. This operation converts C' and C'' into a directed path and reduces the number of components by one.
First, we claim that the aforementioned process stops after finite steps. The operations in Case 1 are iterated t-1 times, where t\leqslant (1+o(1))\dfrac{\alpha^2n}{2000} is the number of path components in D_0 . This is due to the fact that after the process of Case 1, the number of path components of D_i will never be more than one again. Next, if we perform the operation of Subcases 2.1 or 2.3, the next process must be Case 3, and each iteration of Case 3 decrease the number of components by one; otherwise, Subcase 2.2 is performed, and the number of components will also be reduced by one. Therefore, after finite iterations (at most 4 (t-1) +2 \log^2n), we obtain a graph D_i with only one cycle component C. Given that we do not destroy path P in each iteration, we have P\subset C . Thus, the total number of iterations is at most N\leqslant 5t+2\log^2n\leqslant (1+o(1))\dfrac{\alpha^2n}{400}, and in each iteration, we remove at most 4 edges such that at most (1+o(1))\dfrac{\alpha^2n}{100}=(1+o(1))\dfrac{\beta^2n}{4} edges are removed, which implies (5).
Remark 3.1. Specifically, for any subset U' of size at most m, we can use the above process to construct an almost Hamiltonian cycle in H\cup D which misses U' .
We now use the directed cycle C constructed above to construct directed cycles C_k of all possible lengths k\in[3,n] . It should be noted that C has a length of n-m . We consider the following cases.
Case 1.n-m\leqslant k\leqslant n. We use P\subset C to absorb some vertices of U to obtain a directed cycle of the desired length. We choose an arbitrary subset I\subset [m] with |I|=k+m-n . For each i\in I , replace the edge (z_i,z_i^*) with the directed path z_iu_iz_i^* , and the resulting directed cycle has length k as desired.
Case 2. 3\leqslant k<n-m . Fix a vertex u. It should be noted that \delta(H)\geqslant \alpha n , and there must be an available edge (v, w)\in Z(N_H^+(u), N_H^-(u)). Thus, uvwu is a directed cycle of length 3 in H\cup D . Now, we assume that 4\leqslant k<n-m . We choose U^-\subset N_H^-(u) and U^+\subset N_H^+(u) with |U^-|=|U^+|=\dfrac{m}{4}= \dfrac{\alpha^2 n}{40000}. From Lemma 2.4, an available edge (v, w) \in Z (U ^ +, U ^-) must exist. Let W^-=\{v\in V\mid N_D^+(v)\cap U^-=\emptyset\} and W^+=\{v\in V\mid N_D^- (v)\cap U^+=\emptyset\}. From Lemma 2.4, the size of W^- and W^+ must be o(n) . Therefore, we assume that |W^-|,\;|W^+| < \dfrac{m}{4}. Let U'= \{u\}\cup U^-\cup U^+\cup W^-\cup W^+. Then, |U'|<m . As stated in Remark A, we can construct a directed cycle C' of length n-m in H\cup D , missing U' . Therefore, we can select a directed path P'=y_1y_2\cdots y_{k-3} of length k-4 . According to the definitions of W^- and W^+ , a \in U ^ - and b \in U ^ + must exist such that (y_{k-3},a),\;(b,y_1)\in E(H). Thus, P'\cup y_{k-3}auby_1 is a directed cycle of desired length.
This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Remark 3.2. As this proof is constructive, by retracing the proof, one can find cycles of any given length in H\cup D in gradual steps. Given that each step can be performed in polynomial time (at most O(n^3) times) and there are O (\alpha n) steps at most, the proof provides a polynomial-time algorithm.
4.
Concluding remarks and discussions
In this study, we show that for a given digraph H on n vertices with a minimum degree of at least \alpha n (where \alpha=\omega\left( {\left( {\dfrac{\log n}{n}} \right)^{\tfrac{1}{4}}} \right)), we can a.a.s. obtain a pancyclic digraph by perturbing it with a random d-regular digraph when d=1 or 2. However, there is no evidence that the lower bound of the minimum degree of H is tight, and we believe that the bound is far from optimal. It would be interesting to obtain an optimal lower bound of \delta(H) .
A natural question is to extend the pancyclicity to vertex-pancyclicity, i.e., for any v\in V(H) and k\in [3,n] , there exists a directed cycle C of length k passing v, and we leave this as an open problem.
Problem 4.1. Let \alpha=\omega\left( {\left( {\dfrac{\log n}{n}} \right)^{\tfrac{1}{4}}} \right) and d\in\{1,2\} and let H be a graph of n vertices with \delta(H)\geqslant4\alpha n . Then, a.a.s. H\cup D is vertex-pancyclic, where D is a random d-regular digraph on n vertices.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (12071453) and the National Key R&D Program of China (2020YFA0713100).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The irradiation effects on both the gain layer and the bulk for prototype LGADs are characterized by I-V and C-V measurements at room temperature (20 ℃) or −30 ℃.
The HPK-1.2 prototype are prove to have the smallest c-factor 3.06×10−16 cm−2 and HPK-3.2, USTC-1.1-W8 have larger c-factor 3.89 ×10−16 cm−2 , 4.12 ×10−16 cm−2.
A novel analysis method is proposed to further exploit the data to get the relation between the c-factor and initial doping density.
Pellegrini G, Fernández-Martínez P, Baselga M, et al. Technology developments and first measurements of Low Gain Avalanche Detectors (LGAD) for high energy physics applications. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2014, 765: 12–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2014.06.008
Gurimskaya Y, de Almeida P D, Garcia M F, et al. Radiation damage in p-type EPI silicon pad diodes irradiated with protons and neutrons. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 958: 162221. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2019.05.062
[7]
Jin Y, Ren H, Christie S, et al. Experimental study of acceptor removal in UFSD. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 983: 164611. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164611
[8]
Yang X, Alderweireldt S, Atanov N, et al. Layout and performance of HPK prototype LGAD sensors for the High-Granularity Timing Detector. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 980: 164379. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164379
[9]
Shi X, Ayoub M K, Cui H, et al. Radiation campaign of HPK prototype LGAD sensors for the High-Granularity Timing Detector (HGTD). Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 979: 164382. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164382
Snoj L, Ambrožič K, Čufar A, et al. Radiation hardness studies and detector characterisation at the JSI TRIGA reactor. EPJ Web of Conferences,2020, 225: 04031. DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/202022504031
Wunstorf R. Systematic Studies on the Radiation Resistance of Silicon Detectors for the Application in High-Energy Physics Experiments. Hamburg, Germany: Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY), 1992. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:24030522
[14]
Moll M, Fretwurst E, Lindström G, et al. Leakage current of hadron irradiated silicon detectors-material dependence. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,1999, 426: 87–93. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-9002(98)01475-2
[15]
Ferrero M, Arcidiacono R, Barozzi M, et al. Radiation resistant LGAD design. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2019, 919: 16–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2018.11.121
Figure
1.
Photos of the HPK-1.2 (a) and USTC-1.1-W8 (b) single pad LGAD prototypes tested at USTC.
Figure
2.
I-V results of the HPK-1.2, HPK-3.2 and USTC-1.1-W8 LGADs at difference fluences. The measurements are preformed at T = 20 ℃(room temperature) for all samples and T = −30 ℃ for USTC sensors with guard rings grounded.
Figure
3.
The ΔI/V at different fluences calculated from Room T. I-V for HPK-1.2, HPK-3.2 and USTC-1.1-W8 sensors used to estimate the α-factor representing the damages generated in the bulk region.
Figure
4.
1/C2 -V of the HPK-1.2, HPK-3.2 and USTC-1.1-W8 LGADs at difference fluences. The measurements are preformed at T = 20 ℃, with guard rings grounded.
Figure
7.
Fraction of active acceptor dose changes with fluences measured from the room-temperature C-V. is shown as a function of fluences. The active acceptor density degrades significantly after 1E + 15.
Figure
5.
The doping profile before and after 8E+14, 1.5E+15 irradiation fluences of USTC-1.1-W8 LGAD samples. The doping density of each point is calculated by the average of the doping densities from the samples with the same fluence and average the results in each interval to suppress the fluctuation.
Figure
6.
VGL as a function of fluences of all prototypes tested.
Figure
8.
The c-factor as a function of initial doping density (ρ0) measured from USTC-1.1-W8 irradiated samples.
References
[1]
Pellegrini G, Fernández-Martínez P, Baselga M, et al. Technology developments and first measurements of Low Gain Avalanche Detectors (LGAD) for high energy physics applications. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2014, 765: 12–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2014.06.008
Gurimskaya Y, de Almeida P D, Garcia M F, et al. Radiation damage in p-type EPI silicon pad diodes irradiated with protons and neutrons. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 958: 162221. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2019.05.062
[7]
Jin Y, Ren H, Christie S, et al. Experimental study of acceptor removal in UFSD. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 983: 164611. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164611
[8]
Yang X, Alderweireldt S, Atanov N, et al. Layout and performance of HPK prototype LGAD sensors for the High-Granularity Timing Detector. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 980: 164379. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164379
[9]
Shi X, Ayoub M K, Cui H, et al. Radiation campaign of HPK prototype LGAD sensors for the High-Granularity Timing Detector (HGTD). Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2020, 979: 164382. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2020.164382
Snoj L, Ambrožič K, Čufar A, et al. Radiation hardness studies and detector characterisation at the JSI TRIGA reactor. EPJ Web of Conferences,2020, 225: 04031. DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/202022504031
Wunstorf R. Systematic Studies on the Radiation Resistance of Silicon Detectors for the Application in High-Energy Physics Experiments. Hamburg, Germany: Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY), 1992. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:24030522
[14]
Moll M, Fretwurst E, Lindström G, et al. Leakage current of hadron irradiated silicon detectors-material dependence. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,1999, 426: 87–93. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-9002(98)01475-2
[15]
Ferrero M, Arcidiacono R, Barozzi M, et al. Radiation resistant LGAD design. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A,2019, 919: 16–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2018.11.121