Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:27:56.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of STEM EELS Spectrum Imaging vs EFTEM Spectrum Imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

J.A. Hunt ,
G. Kothleitner  and
R. Harmon
J.A. Hunt
Affiliation:
Gatan Research & Development, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA94588, USA
G. Kothleitner
Affiliation:
Gatan Research & Development, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA94588, USA
R. Harmon
Affiliation:
Gatan Research & Development, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA94588, USA
Get access

Extract

Electron energy-loss spectroscopy (EELS) in the transmission electron microscope (TEM) analyzes the energy distribution of the probe electrons after they have lost energy within the sample. The resultant energy-losses are characteristic of elemental, chemical, and dielectric properties and are typically measured in one of two ways. Parallel-detection EELS spectrometers (PEELS) acquire large energy ranges of the energy-loss spectrum simultaneously for rapid acquisition of spectral data at a single area. In contrast, the energy filtering TEM (EFTEM) acquires only a single energy band at once, but does so for thousands or even millions of image pixels simultaneously.

Spectrum imaging (SI) involves acquisition of detailed spectroscopic data sufficient for rigorous analysis at each pixel in a digital image. (Fig. la) A STEM EELS spectrum image “data cube” can be acquired by stepping a focused electron probe to each pixel and filling the spectrum image one spectrum at a time.

Type
Compositional Imaging and Spectroscopy
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 5 , Issue S2: Proceedings: Microscopy & Microanalysis '99, Microscopy Society of America 57th Annual Meeting, Microbeam Analysis Society 33rd Annual Meeting, Portland, Oregon August 1-5, 1999 , August 1999 , pp. 616 - 617
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

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. Jeanguillaume, C, and Colliex, C. (1989), Ultramicroscopy 28, 252–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Hunt, J.A., and Williams, D.B. (1991), Ultramicroscopy 38, 47–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Botton, G., and L'Espérance, G. (1994), J. Microsc. 173, 9–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Lavergne, J.-L., Martin, J.-M., Belin, M. (1992), Microsc. Microanal. Microstruct. 3, 517–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Mayer, J.et.al (1997) Micron 28 :5, 361–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar