Conduction band energy and deltae0
Dear all, For a reliable comparison of two EXAFS data sets (lets say before and after Cu-doping), which parameters should be kept consant in the first model? I understand that sigma^2 values should be the same in two fittings, and I would see a change in coordination numbers and deltaE0 and deltar after Cu doping. Is that a good approach? Does the new deltaE0 indicate a change in the conduction band energy? Thanks in advance. Best regards, Melike N?r du har kontakt med oss p? Uppsala universitet med e-post s? inneb?r det att vi behandlar dina personuppgifter. F?r att l?sa mer om hur vi g?r det kan du l?sa h?r: http://www.uu.se/om-uu/dataskydd-personuppgifter/ E-mailing Uppsala University means that we will process your personal data. For more information on how this is performed, please read here: http://www.uu.se/en/about-uu/data-protection-policy
Hi Melike, If the 'before doping' system is a known material - i.e. a bulk standard - I would fix N's, let R's, sig^2's, dEo, and So^2 be variables to fit. While sig^2 may be similar between doped and undoped, I would not assume that no disorder has been introduced on doping. I would consider transferring So^2 from undoped standard to doped (assuming you are fitting the same edge in both cases. You will have correlation between N and sig^2 as well as between R and dEo. dEo represents an offset correction to the Fermi level (model calculation vs actual) but also corrects for where Eo is chosen when extracting the EXAFS. A change in dEo could be due to a change in model validity (i.e. model being used is less accurate for doped than for standard undoped). Uncertainty in the fit value of dEo will likely be a substantial fraction of dEo, so small changes may not be statistically significant. For comparing the two data sets, start with the visual...XANES, chi(k) (maybe k^2*chi(k) or another k-weighting) and the FT(k^2*chi(k)). That can help guide your interpretation of fit results - if you see differences in low k but not high k for example, or if your first shell looks broader but lower in amplitude in the doped vs undoped potentially indicating some splitting of nn distances (but then this may manifest as an increase in sig^2 if you don't have data to high enough k to resolve a small splitting). Rather generic advice...hope it helps... cheers, -R. On 2022-03-10 4:04 a.m., Melike Babucci wrote:
Dear all,
For a reliable comparison of two EXAFS data sets (lets say before and after Cu-doping), which parameters should be kept consant in the first model?
I understand that sigma^2 values should be the same in two fittings, and I would see a change in coordination numbers and deltaE0 and deltar after Cu doping. Is that a good approach?
Does the new deltaE0 indicate a change in the conduction band energy?
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Melike
Page Title
När du har kontakt med oss på Uppsala universitet med e-post så innebär det att vi behandlar dina personuppgifter. För att läsa mer om hur vi gör det kan du läsa här: http://www.uu.se/om-uu/dataskydd-personuppgifter/
E-mailing Uppsala University means that we will process your personal data. For more information on how this is performed, please read here: http://www.uu.se/en/about-uu/data-protection-policy
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (2)
-
Melike Babucci
-
Robert Gordon