Simple statistically based alternatives to MAF for ToF-SIMS spectral image analysis

被引:8
作者
Keenan, Michael R. [1 ]
Smentkowski, Vincent S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Gen Elect Global Res Ctr, Niskayuna, NY 12309 USA
关键词
MAF; maximum autocorrelation factors; ToF-SIMS; multivariate statistical analysis; noise; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; MULTIVARIATE-ANALYSIS; MASS-SPECTROMETRY; NOISE; TRANSFORM; PCA;
D O I
10.1002/sia.3757
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
The maximum autocorrelation factors technique (MAF) is becoming increasingly popular for the multivariate analysis of spectral images acquired with time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) instruments. In this article, we review the conditions under which the underlying chemical information can be separated from the large-scale, non-uniform noise characteristic of ToF-SIMS data. Central to this pursuit is the ability to assess the covariance structure of the noise. Given a set of replicate images, the noise covariance matrix can be estimated in a straightforward way using standard statistical tools. Acquiring replicate images, however, is not always possible, and MAF solves a subtly different problem, namely, how to approximate the noise covariance matrix from a single image when replicates are not available. This distinction is important; the MAF approximation is not an unbiased statistical estimate of the noise covariance matrix, and it differs in a highly significant way from a true estimate for ToF-SIMS data. Here, we draw attention to the fact that replicate measurements are made during the normal course of acquiring a ToF-SIMS spectral image, rendering the MAF procedure unnecessary. Furthermore, in the common case that detector dead-time effects permit no more than one ion of any specific species to be detected on a single primary ion shot, the noise covariance matrix can be estimated in a particularly simple way, which will be reported. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1616 / 1626
页数:11
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Digital image processing
[2]   NUMERICAL METHODS FOR COMPUTING ANGLES BETWEEN LINEAR SUBSPACES [J].
BJORCK, A ;
GOLUB, GH .
MATHEMATICS OF COMPUTATION, 1973, 27 (123) :579-594
[3]  
Brown CD, 1999, J CHEMOMETR, V13, P133, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-128X(199903/04)13:2<133::AID-CEM533>3.3.CO
[4]  
2-3
[5]  
Golub G. H., 1996, MATRIX COMPUTATIONS
[6]   A TRANSFORMATION FOR ORDERING MULTISPECTRAL DATA IN TERMS OF IMAGE QUALITY WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR NOISE REMOVAL [J].
GREEN, AA ;
BERMAN, M ;
SWITZER, P ;
CRAIG, MD .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, 1988, 26 (01) :65-74
[7]   A comparison of PCA and MAF for ToF-SIMS image interpretation [J].
Henderson, Alex ;
Fletcher, John S. ;
Vickerman, John C. .
SURFACE AND INTERFACE ANALYSIS, 2009, 41 (08) :666-674
[8]  
Jollife Ian T, 2002, Principal Component Analysis
[9]  
Keenan M.R., 2007, Proceedings of Techniques and Applications of Hyperspectral Image Analysis, P89
[10]  
Keenan M.R., 2010, MICROSC MICROANAL, V16, P270