Ranking TEM cameras by their response to electron shot noise

Ultramicroscopy

Volumn 133, Issue , 2013, Pages 1-7

  Grob, Patricia ^a   Bean, Derek ^a   Typke, Dieter ^a   Li, Xueming ^b   Nogales, Eva ^a   Glaeser, Robert M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Camera performance; Modulation transfer function; Noise

Indexed keywords

KRONECKER DELTA FUNCTIONS; LINE SPREAD FUNCTIONS; LORENTZIAN FUNCTIONS; NOISE; NUMBER OF ELECTRONS; RANDOMLY DISTRIBUTED; RELATIVE PERFORMANCE; STOCHASTIC VARIATION;

DELTA FUNCTIONS; FOURIER TRANSFORMS; OPTICAL TRANSFER FUNCTION; PIXELS; SHOT NOISE;

CAMERAS;

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; CAMERA; ELECTRON SHOT NOISE; FOURIER TRANSFORMATION; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IONIZATION; LORENTZIAN FUNCTION; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; QUANTUM YIELD; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STATISTICS; TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY;

CAMERA PERFORMANCE; MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION; NOISE;

ELECTRON MICROSCOPE TOMOGRAPHY; ELECTRONS; FOURIER ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; NOISE;

EID: 84878931825     PISSN: 03043991     EISSN: 18792723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.01.003     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Meyer R.R., Kirkland A.I. Characterisation of the signal and noise transfer of CCD cameras for electron detection. Microscopy Research and Technique 2000, 49:269-280.
2. Meyer R.R., Kirkland A.I., Dunin-Borkowski R.E., Hutchison J.L. Experimental characterisation of CCD cameras for HREM at 300kV. Ultramicroscopy 2000, 85:9-13.
3. Meyer R.R., Kirkland A. The effects of electron and photon scattering on signal and noise transfer properties of scintillators in CCD cameras used for electron detection. Ultramicroscopy 1998, 75:23-33.
4. McMullan G., Chen S., Henderson R., Faruqi A.R. Detective quantum efficiency of electron area detectors in electron microscopy. Ultramicroscopy 2009, 109:1126-1143.
5. Van den Broek W., Van Aert S., Van Dyck D. Fully automated measurement of the modulation transfer function of charge-coupled devices above the nyquist frequency. Microscopy and Microanalysis 2012, 18:336-342.
6. de Ruijter W.J. Imaging properties and applications of slow-scan charge-coupled-device cameras suitable for electron microscopy. Micron 1995, 26:247-275.
7. Downing K.H., Grano D.A. Analysis of photographic emulsions for electron microscopy of two-dimensional crystalline specimens. Ultramicroscopy 1982, 7:381-403.
8. Zeitler E. The photographic emulsion as analog recorder for electrons. Ultramicroscopy 1992, 46:405-416.
9. Frank J., Radermacher M., Penczek P., Zhu J., Li Y.H., Ladjadj M., Leith A., SPIDER W.E.B. Processing and visualization of images in 3D electron microscopy and related fields. Journal of Structural Biology 1996, 116:190-199.
10. Herrmann K.H., Krahl D. Electronic image recording in conventional electron microscopy. Advances in Optical and Electron Microscopy 1984, 1-64. Academic Press, London. R. Barer, V.E. Cosslett (Eds.).
11. Fano U. Ionization yield of radiations 2. The fluctuations of the number of ions. Physical Review 1947, 72:26-29.
12. Battaglia M., Contarato D., Denes P., Giubilato P. Cluster imaging with a direct detection CMOS pixel sensor in transmission electron microscopy. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section a-Accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated Equipment 2009, 608:363-365.
13. McMullan G., Clark A.T., Turchetta R., Faruqi A.R. Enhanced imaging in low dose electron microscopy using electron counting. Ultramicroscopy 2009, 109:1411-1416.