Hi Peng:
It might be helpful to understanding some of Matt's points regarding S02
transferability, Ei and energy resolution by looking at this paper.
Comparison of EXAFS foil spectra from around the world
DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/190/1/012032
Kind regards,
Shelly
-----Original Message-----
From: Ifeffit <ifeffit-boun...@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> On Behalf Of Matthew
Marcus
Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2021 9:04 AM
To: ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] S02 selection from reviewer
Since S02 is a parameter in the description of EXAFS and not of the experiment,
it's independent of technique. Overabsorption (misnamed
'self-absorption') can reduce the *measured* amplitude, an effect which can be
fudged in analysis by reducing S02. If the sample is truly homogeneous (on the
scale of the absorption length), then you can calculate the amount of
overabsorption to see if it's significant.
However, many kinds of samples, such as concentrated powders mixed with a
diluent such as BN, this condition is not met. If the particles are large
enough for each to have significant absorption edge jumps, then diluting them
in BN doesn't fix the problem.
mam
On 10/2/2021 12:49 AM, Peng Liu wrote:
> Dear IFEFFIT members,
>
> I am sorry to bother you again. I asked about S02 selection for the
> first major revision. I just received the second revision. The
> reviewer is not satisfied with one S02 value for all our samples.
> "
>
> 1. I am still not satisfied with selected SO2 value (it is set to 0.85).
> SO2 is not transferable between different samples and detection methods.
> It is not possible to use a value obtained from different compound
> using transmission measurement mode to completely different other
> compound measured using fluorescence mode. One method to fix SO2 value
> is to measure diluted solution (to avoid self-absorption) of reference
> material in fluorescence mode. Other is to use multiple spectra
> fitting for all samples of interest (e.g. with Sb(V)) measured using
> fluorescence mode where SO2 parameter is the same for all samples.
>
> At the same time I am confident that CN values 5.6, 7.1 and 6.9
> correspond to CN(Sb-O)=6. I suggest reconsidering the SO2 value for
> measurements in fluorescence mode.
>
> "
>
> We do get the S02 from a similar reference material measured in
> transmission mode, and our samples were all measured in fluorescence
> mode. It is not possible to measure the diluted reference material in
> fluorescence mode in one or two months. If you could give me some
> suggestions, that would be great.
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Peng Liu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ifeffit mailing list
> Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
> http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
> Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
>
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
