|
|
“Depth sectioning combined with atom-counting in HAADF STEM to retrieve the 3D atomic structure”. Alania M, Altantzis T, De Backer A, Lobato I, Bals S, Van Aert S, Ultramicroscopy 177, 36 (2016). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.002
Abstract: Aberration correction in scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) has greatly improved the lateral and depth resolution. When using depth sectioning, a technique during which a series of images is recorded at different defocus values, single impurity atoms can be visualised in three dimensions. In this paper, we investigate new possibilities emerging when combining depth sectioning and precise atom-counting in order to reconstruct nanosized particles in three dimensions. Although the depth resolution does not allow one to precisely locate each atom within an atomic column, it will be shown that the depth location of an atomic column as a whole can be measured precisely. In this manner, the morphology of a nanoparticle can be reconstructed in three dimensions. This will be demonstrated using simulations and experimental data of a gold nanorod.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.843
Times cited: 13
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.002
|
|
|
|
“Evaluation of different rectangular scan strategies for STEM imaging”. Velazco A, Nord M, Béché, A, Verbeeck J, Ultramicroscopy , 113021 (2020). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2020.113021
Abstract: STEM imaging is typically performed by raster scanning a focused electron probe over a sample. Here we investigate and compare three different scan patterns, making use of a programmable scan engine that allows to arbitrarily set the sequence of probe positions that are consecutively visited on the sample. We compare the typical raster scan with a so-called ‘snake’ pattern where the scan direction is reversed after each row and a novel Hilbert scan pattern that changes scan direction rapidly and provides an homogeneous treatment of both scan directions. We experimentally evaluate the imaging performance on a single crystal test sample by varying dwell time and evaluating behaviour with respect to sample drift. We demonstrate the ability of the Hilbert scan pattern to more faithfully represent the high frequency content of the image in the presence of sample drift. It is also shown that Hilbert scanning provides reduced bias when measuring lattice parameters from the obtained scanned images while maintaining similar precision in both scan directions which is especially important when e.g. performing strain analysis. Compared to raster scanning with flyback correction, both snake and Hilbert scanning benefit from dose reduction as only small probe movement steps occur.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.2
Times cited: 13
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2020.113021
|
|
|
|
“Modelling ADF STEM images using elliptical Gaussian peaks and its effects on the quantification of structure parameters in the presence of sample tilt”. De wael A, De Backer A, Lobato I, Van Aert S, Ultramicroscopy , 113391 (2021). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113391
Abstract: A small sample tilt away from a main zone axis orientation results in an elongation of the atomic columns in ADF STEM images. An often posed research question is therefore whether the ADF STEM image intensities of tilted nanomaterials should be quantified using a parametric imaging model consisting of elliptical rather than the currently used symmetrical peaks. To this purpose, simulated ADF STEM images corresponding to different amounts of sample tilt are studied using a parametric imaging model that consists of superimposed 2D elliptical Gaussian peaks on the one hand and symmetrical Gaussian peaks on the other hand. We investigate the quantification of structural parameters such as atomic column positions and scattering cross sections using both parametric imaging models. In this manner, we quantitatively study what can be gained from this elliptical model for quantitative ADF STEM, despite the increased parameter space and computational effort. Although a qualitative improvement can be achieved, no significant quantitative improvement in the estimated structure parameters is achieved by the elliptical model as compared to the symmetrical model. The decrease in scattering cross sections with increasing sample tilt is even identical for both types of parametric imaging models. This impedes direct comparison with zone axis image simulations. Nonetheless, we demonstrate how reliable atom-counting can still be achieved in the presence of small sample tilt.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.843
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113391
|
|
|
|
“Reducing electron beam damage through alternative STEM scanning strategies, Part II: Attempt towards an empirical model describing the damage process”. Jannis D, Velazco A, Béché, A, Verbeeck J, Ultramicroscopy , 113568 (2022). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2022.113568
Abstract: In this second part of a series we attempt to construct an empirical model that can mimick all experimental observations made regarding the role of an alternative interleaved scan pattern in STEM imaging on the beam damage in a specific zeolite sample. We make use of a 2D diffusion model that describes the dissipation of the deposited beam energy in the sequence of probe positions that are visited during the scan pattern. The diffusion process allows for the concept of trying to ‘outrun’ the beam damage by carefully tuning the dwell time and distance between consecutively visited probe positions. We add a non linear function to include a threshold effect and evaluate the accumulated damage in each part of the image as a function of scan pattern details. Together, these ingredients are able to describe qualitatively all aspects of the experimental data and provide us with a model that could guide a further optimisation towards even lower beam damage without lowering the applied electron dose. We deliberately remain vague on what is diffusing here which avoids introducing too many sample specific details. This provides hope that the model can be applied also in sample classes that were not yet studied in such great detail by adjusting higher level parameters: a sample dependent diffusion constant and damage threshold.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Engineering sciences. Technology; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.2
Times cited: 4
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2022.113568
|
|
|
|
“Phase offset method of ptychographic contrast reversal correction”. Hofer C, Gao C, Chennit T, Yuan B, Pennycook TJ, Ultramicroscopy , 113922 (2024). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2024.113922
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.2
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2024.113922
|
|
|
|
“A decade of atom-counting in STEM: From the first results toward reliable 3D atomic models from a single projection”. De Backer A, Bals S, Van Aert S, Ultramicroscopy , 113702 (2023). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2023.113702
Abstract: Quantitative structure determination is needed in order to study and understand nanomaterials at the atomic scale. Materials characterisation resulting in precise structural information is a crucial point to understand the structure–property relation of materials. Counting the number of atoms and retrieving the 3D atomic structure of nanoparticles plays an important role here. In this paper, an overview will be given of the atom-counting methodology and its applications over the past decade. The procedure to count the number of atoms will be discussed in detail and it will be shown how the performance of the method can be further improved. Furthermore, advances toward mixed element nanostructures, 3D atomic modelling based on the atom-counting results, and quantifying the nanoparticle dynamics will be highlighted.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Electron microscopy for materials research (EMAT)
Impact Factor: 2.2
Times cited: 3
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2023.113702
|
|
