Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:41:54.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Data Analysis at the Jena 14C Laboratory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

Axel Steinhof
Axel Steinhof*
Affiliation:
Max-Planck Institute für Biogeochemie, Hans-Knöll-Str. 10, 07745 Jena, Germany. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Jena Analysis Code (JAC) was developed at the Jena radiocarbon laboratory for the analysis of all 14C accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) data measured there. The fundamental principles and algorithms of JAC are presented here, along with the equally important checking procedures. JAC places emphasis on the uncertainty due to background subtraction and other contributions to the statistical uncertainty of 14C events.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 55 , Issue 2: Proceedings of the 21st International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 2) , 2013 , pp. 282 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

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

Bevington, PR. 1992. Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Brand, WA. 1996. High precision isotope ratio monitoring techniques in mass spectrometry. Journal of Mass Spectrometry 31(3):225–35.Google Scholar
Brown, TA, Southon, JR. 1997. Corrections for contamination background in AMS 14C measurements. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 123(1–4):208–13.Google Scholar
Burr, GS, Donahue, DJ, Tang, Y, Beck, JW, McHargue, L, Biddulph, D, Cruz, R, Jull, AJT. 2007. Error analysis at the NSF-Arizona AMS facility. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259(1):149–53.Google Scholar
Donahue, DJ, Jull, AJT, Linick, TW, Hatheway, A, Toolin, LJ, Gore, B, Damon, PE. 1987. Some results from the Arizona TAMS Facility – AMS ages of athletic, artistic, and animal artifacts. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 29(1–2):169–72.Google Scholar
Donahue, DJ, Linick, TW, Jull, AJT. 1990a. Isotope-ratio and background corrections for accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon measurements. Radiocarbon 32(2):135–42.Google Scholar
Donahue, DJ, Jull, AJT, Toolin, LJ. 1990b. Radiocarbon measurements at the University of Arizona AMS facility. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 52(3–4):224–8.Google Scholar
Le Clercq, M, van der Plicht, J, Gröning, M. 1998. New 14C reference materials with activities of 15 and 50 pMC. Radiocarbon 40(1):295–7.Google Scholar
McNichol, AP, Jull, AJT, Burr, GS. 2001. Converting AMS data to radiocarbon values: considerations and conventions. Radiocarbon 43(2A):313–20.Google Scholar
Mook, WG, van der Plicht, J. 1999. Reporting 14C activities and isotope ratios. Radiocarbon 41(3):227–39.Google Scholar
Nadeau, M-J, Grootes, PM, Schleicher, M, Hasselberg, P, Rieck, A, Bitterling, M. 1998. Sample throughput and data quality at the Leibniz-Labor AMS facility. Radiocarbon 40(1):239–45.Google Scholar
Palonen, V. 2008. Accelerator mass spectrometry and Bayesian data analysis [PhD dissertation]. HU-P-D148. University of Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Palonen, V, Tikkanen, P. 2007. A shot at a Bayesian model for data analysis in AMS measurements. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259(1):154–7.Google Scholar
Press, WH, Teukolsky, SA. 1986. Numerical Recipes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reimer, PJ, Brown, TA, Reimer, RW. 2004. Discussion: reporting and calibration of post-bomb 14C data. Radiocarbon 46(3):1299–304.Google Scholar
Rom, W, Golser, R, Kutschera, W, Priller, A, Steier, P, Wild, E. 1998. Systematic investigations of 14C measurements at the Vienna Environmental Research Accelerator. Radiocarbon 40(1):255–63.Google Scholar
Schmidt, KH, Sahm, CC, Pielenz, K, Clerc, HG. 1984. Some remarks on the error analysis in the case of poor statistics. Zeitschrift Fur Physik A-Hadrons and Nuclei 316(1):19–26.Google Scholar
Seguin, FH, Schneider, RJ, Jones, GA, von Reden, KF. 1994. Optimized data analysis for AMS radiocarbon dating. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 92(1–4):176–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhof, A, Baatzsch, A, Hejja, I, Wagner, T. 2011. Ion source improvements at the Jena 14C-AMS facility. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 269(24):3196–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuiver, M, Polach, HA. 1977. Discussion: reporting of 14C data. Radiocarbon 19(3):355–63.Google Scholar
Tumey, SJ, Grabowski, KS, Knies, DL, Mignerey, AC. 2004. Radiocarbon data collection, filtering and analysis at the NRL TEAMS facility. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 223–224:216–20.Google Scholar
Wacker, L, Christi, M, Synal, H-A. 2010. Bats: a new tool for AMS data reduction. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 268(7–8):976–9.Google Scholar
Xu, XM, Khosh, MS, Druffel-Rodriguez, KC, Trumbore, SE, Southon, JR. 2010. Is the consensus value of ANU sucrose (IAEA C-6) too high? Radiocarbon 52(3):866–74.Google Scholar
Zoppi, U. 2010. Radiocarbon AMS data analysis: from measured isotopic ratios to 14C isotope ratios. Radiocarbon 52(1):165–70.Google Scholar