Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g5fl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T17:18:04.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Light Atom Sensitivity of Quantitative HREM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

G. Möbus
G. Möbus*
Affiliation:
Department of Materials, Oxford University, Oxford, 0X1 3PH, UK
Get access

Abstract

Introduction: Modern TEM/STEM instruments with field emission gun and various analytical equipment allow the measurement of interfacial properties by a range of modes and techniques without exchanging the specimen. It is therefore useful to think of a criterion to assess the sensitivity of each technique, e.g. for the location of light atoms, by a commonly applicable formula.

Sensitivity measures: A “quantitative” TEM experiment is defined here as consisting of a digital comparison (e.g. via data difference or cross correlation) between experimental (E) and simulated (S) microscopy signal. The matching quality R = f(E,S) is to be optimised (minimum for data difference, maximum for cross correlation). The target quantity of the Q-TEM experiment is assumed to be the location or occupancy of a light atomic column in projection surrounded by heavier atoms in the core of an interface making use of dynamical enhancement effects.

Type
Quantitative Transmission Electron Microscopy of Interfaces (Organized by M. Rüehle, Y. Zhu and U. Dahmen)
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 7 , Issue S2: Proceedings: Microscopy & Microanalysis 2001, Microscopy Society of America 59th Annual Meeting, Microbeam Analysis Society 35th Annual Meeting, Long Beach, California August 5-9, 2001 , August 2001 , pp. 274 - 275
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Barry, J.C., J. microscopy 190, 267 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Möbus, G. et al., J. microscopy 190, 109 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Kienzle, O. et al., J. microscopy 190, 144 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. den Dekker, A.J. et al., J. microscopy 194, 95 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Nellist, P.D. and Pennycook, S.J., J. microscopy 190, 159 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Kirkland, E.J., Advanced Computing in Microscopy, Plenum, N.Y., USA (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Möbus, G, Proceed. EUREM 12, Frank, L., Ciampor, F eds, Brno, Vol I, 385 (2000)Google Scholar

8. Möbus, G. and Kienzle, O., Ultramicroscopy 85 (2000), 183–198 & 199-213CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. Funding by EPSRC by grant GR/M81786 and an Advanced Fellowship is gratefully acknowledged.Google Scholar