Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T03:37:24.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Quantitative are Measurements in the Stem?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

John Silcox
John Silcox*
Affiliation:
School of Applied and Engineering Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850
Get access

Abstract

The typical electron micrograph is often rich in detail, sometimes too rich, and it can overwhelm the casual observer. The obvious interpretation may be quickly drawn and the next sample brought under study. Yet the electron interaction with the sample is rarely fully exploited. This may be the reason that electron microscopy may sometimes be dismissed as “just pretty pictures”. While in practice “pretty pictures” are not that easy to record or find, it is still true that the interaction of electrons with the sample is complex and therefore able to give the observer much more understanding than is normally found, provided only that the observer is able to unravel the observations. It is the rapid change in this situation that has been fascinating to watch unfurl during the past decades.

In the Scanning Transmission Electron Microscope (STEM) electrons are focused into a tiny spot that is scanned over a thin film specimen.

Type
Quantitative STEM: Imaging and EELS Analysis Honoring the Contributions of John Silcox (Organized by P. Batson, C. Chen and D. Muller)
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. 184 - 185
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 Crewe, A.V., Langmore, J.P. and Isaacson, M.S., “Physical Aspects of Electron Microscopy and Microbeam Analysis”; Wiley, New York (1975) 47.Google Scholar

2 Jesson, D.E., Pennycook, S.J. and Baribeau, J.M., Phys.Rev Lett. 66 (1991) 750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 See e.g.,Tanaka, N.,et al., ICEM 14 Electron Microscopy, Vol. 1 (1998) 615.Google Scholar

4 Krivanek, O.L.et al., EMAG 97 (1997) 35.Google Scholar

5 Kirklan, E.J.and Thomas, M.J., Ultramicroscopy, 62 (1996) 79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Kirkland, E.J., “Advanced Computing in Electron Microscopy” Plenum, New York (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Loane, R. F., Xu, P. and Silcox, J., Acta Cryst., A47, 267–278 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Muller, D.A., Edwards, B., Kirkland, E.J. and Silcox, J., Ultramicroscopy (2001) to appearGoogle Scholar

9 Hillyard, S. and Silcox, J., Ultramicroscopy, 52 (1993) 325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Vanfleet, R.R., et al., Microsc. and Microan., (1999) 614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Support from DoE, DoD, NSF, and the SRC is gratefully acknowledged.Google Scholar