Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:16:13.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Quantitative Analysis of Particle Distributions by Comparison with Simulations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2010

Sascha Vongehr
Affiliation:
National Laboratory of Solid State Microstructures, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China
Shaochun Tang
Affiliation:
National Laboratory of Solid State Microstructures, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China
Xiangkang Meng*
Affiliation:
National Laboratory of Solid State Microstructures, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In characterization of metal nanoparticle doped spherical composites, the two-dimensional nature of transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images leads to ambiguities about the true location of the nanoparticles. Walking-in of simulated projections in comparison with actual TEM images leads to quantitative results such as location-dependent particle sizes and particle number density. This method takes advantage of the strength of fuzzy neural network computations via the human hunter-gatherer's visual system's evolved superiority while still allowing quantitative results by use of exact numerical simulations.

Type
TEM and STEM Materials Applications
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2011

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

REFERENCES

Koster, A.J., Braunfeld, B., Fung, J.C., Abbey, C.K., Han, K.F., Liu, W., Chen, H., Sedat, J.W. & Agard, D.A. (1993). Towards automatic three dimensional imaging. MSA Bull 23, 176188.Google Scholar
Koster, A.J., Grimm, R., Typke, D., Hegerl, R., Stoschek, A., Walz, J. & Baumeister, W. (1997). Perspectives of molecular and cellular electron tomography. J Struct Biol 120, 276308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Müller, S.A., Aebi, U. & Engel, A. (2008). What transmission electron microscopes can visualize now and in the future. J Struct Biol 163, 235245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russel, D.A., Hanson, J.D. & Ott, E. (1980). Dimensions of strange attractors. Phys Rev Lett 45, 11751178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, S.C., Tang, Y.F., Vongehr, S., Zhao, X.N. & Meng, X.K. (2009). Nanoporous carbon spheres and their application in dispersing silver nanoparticles. Appl Surf Sci 255, 60116016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, S.C., Vongehr, S. & Meng, X.K. (2010a). Carbon spheres with controllable silver nanoparticle doping. J Phys Chem C 114, 977982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, S.C., Vongehr, S. & Meng, X.K. (2010b). Controllable incorporation of Ag and Ag-Au nanoparticles in carbon spheres for tunable optical and catalytic properties. J Mater Chem 20, 54365445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, N., Wu, J. & Daniel, S. (2005). A novel vertical grid transferring technique to prepare 3D TEM sample from lift-out sample. Microsc Microanal 11, 21002101 (CD-ROM).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S.Z. & Xin, H.W. (2000). Fractal and dendritic growth of metallic Ag. J Phys Chem B 104, 56815685.Google Scholar
Wang, Z.L. (2000). Transmission electron microscopy of shape-controlled nanocrystals and their assemblies. J Phys Chem B 104, 11531175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weyland, M., Yates, T.J.V., Dunin-Borkowski, R.E., Laffonta, L. & Midgleya, P.A. (2006). Nanoscale analysis of three-dimensional structures by electron tomography. Scripta Mater 55, 2933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar