The field of photodetectors is flourishing. Emerging materials, including perovskites, quantum dots, and organic semiconductors are creating new possibilities for device architectures and applications across many domains and spectral ranges. While these developments signal a dynamic field, they also come with the challenge of inconsistent reporting practices for device performance.

This issue of Nature Photonics features a Consensus Statement that addresses inconsistencies and technical flaws in the characterization and reporting of photodetector performance metrics. Authored by a large set of contributors from both academia and industry, the article clarifies common misunderstandings and mistakes that can result in erroneous performance claims and offers an extensive set of guidelines for accurate and consistent device characterization.

The corresponding author, Vincenzo Pecunia, associate professor from Simon Fraser University, explains why this intervention is timely and necessary: “Device metrics in the literature are sometimes defined or characterized differently from conventional standards, or optimization sometimes focuses narrowly on parameters or directions that don’t reflect the full diversity of potential applications. We felt a Consensus Statement was needed to address the urgent needs for clarity and harmonization in the field, enabling the community to accurately assess performance and support these technologies in reaching their full potential, ultimately catalysing further innovation and their development toward real-world deployment.” This urge is also echoed by Hooman Mohseni, a professor of electrical and computer engineering from Northwestern University, who notes: “One of the most valuable aspects of this Consensus Statement is its ability to unify the community around a shared understanding of key performance metrics and evaluation standards. It provides clarity in areas that have long been plagued by interpretation, misconceptions, and mistakes.”

Organized into clear sections for each key metric, the piece serves as a practical guide to the measurement and analysis of the parameters that define photodetector performance. These include dark current, responsivity and external quantum efficiency, photoconductive gain, linear dynamic range, noise, noise equivalent power and detectivity, speed of response and stability. The authors also advocate for the fair reporting of measurement conditions and experimental repeats. Detailed guidelines are provided in 13 tables, listing recommendations for standardized measurements and reporting protocols, as well as for improving transparency in fabrication, testing and storage conditions. The Consensus Statement is not just a didactic list of definitions, but a resource to understand assumptions underlying each parameter and clarify common misunderstandings. For instance, the widespread use of detectivity (D*) to claim high performance can be problematic, as it can be calculated in ways that inflate results if proper dependence on the device area and noise bandwidth are not established.

We believe this rigor is essential for building trust in published data and helping assess advances in the field. As Mohseni comments: “This Consensus Statement goes beyond technical definitions; it sets a foundation for collaboration and comparability across disciplines. As photodetectors continue to play a central role in emerging technologies, having a common language and trustworthy measurement procedures will accelerate innovation and ensure that progress is both meaningful and measurable.” The need for common, trusted analysis is crucial to bridge academic research and industrial applications. Since different applications may require vastly different combinations of performance metrics, narrowly pursuing the maximization of a single metric is often inappropriate. Studies should thus clearly identify their application context from the outset, so that reported advances in device metrics can be assessed against realistic application needs. As Pecunia continues: “Standardized performance characterization and reporting make it easier to identify candidates suitable for real-world applications. Many technologies are already entering industry or are close to doing so, where consistent performance evaluation is critical for adoption and further development. Performance metrics should be interpreted and benchmarked in the context of relevant applications, rather than optimized and reported narrowly in ways that may not reflect application needs.”

We hope this Consensus Statement will serve as a valuable resource across communities, including authors, peer reviewers and editors. For experienced researchers, it aims to settle debates and offer a trusted reference. For those new to the field or working with emerging materials, it provides a foundation to avoid common misunderstanding and adopt best practices from the outset. “By providing clear guidelines for characterizing, reporting, and benchmarking emerging photodetector technologies, this Consensus Statement helps researchers more reliably assess and compare device performance, identify meaningful advances, and reduce confusion from inconsistent characterization and reporting,” noted Pecunia. For journal editors and reviewers, it offers a benchmark to assess the quality and rigor of manuscripts. As Mohseni further commented: “these guidelines will make the peer review process more consistent and constructive. Reviewers will be better equipped to assess the rigor and relevance of submitted work, and authors will have a clearer roadmap for performing the measurements and presenting their findings in a way that aligns with community standards.”

Ultimately, the success of this Consensus Statement will be determined by its adoption. We strongly encourage researchers to use these guidelines in their own work, to reference them in their publications, and to recommend them to colleagues. Only by setting standards can we eliminate confusion and focus efforts on solving key scientific and engineering challenges. Standardized and transparent protocols make studies more rigorous and easier to compare, facilitating the identification of genuine advances. We hope that agreeing on how to measure and report performance will help propel emerging photodetector technologies from the lab toward their full potential, benefiting the entire field.