4.5 Article

Reflections on the Spatial Performance of Atom Probe Tomography in the Analysis of Atomic Neighborhoods

期刊

MICROSCOPY AND MICROANALYSIS
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 1116-1126

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1431927621012952

关键词

compositionally complex alloys; field evaporation; image simulations; nearest neighbors

资金

  1. Max Planck research network on big-data-driven materials science (BiGmax)
  2. International Max Planck Research School for Interface Controlled Materials for Energy Conversion (IMPRS-SurMat)
  3. EMC3 Labex BREAKINGAP
  4. EQUIPEX [ANR-11-EQPX-0020]
  5. University of Rouen through a CRCT funding
  6. [ERC-CoG-SHINE-771602]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

APT is a powerful technique for atomic-scale mapping of material composition, but its spatial resolution can impose limitations on the interpretation of atomic neighborhoods. Directional neighborhood analysis restricted to depth could provide more robust results.
Atom probe tomography (APT) is often introduced as providing atomic-scale mapping of the composition of materials and as such is often exploited to analyze atomic neighborhoods within a material. Yet quantifying the actual spatial performance of the technique in a general case remains challenging, as it depends on the material system being investigated as well as on the specimen's geometry. Here, by using comparisons with field-ion microscopy experiments, field-ion imaging and field evaporation simulations, we provide the basis for a critical reflection on the spatial performance of APT in the analysis of pure metals, low alloyed systems and concentrated solid solutions (i.e., akin to high-entropy alloys). The spatial resolution imposes strong limitations on the possible interpretation of measured atomic neighborhoods, and directional neighborhood analyses restricted to the depth are expected to be more robust. We hope this work gets the community to reflect on its practices, in the same way, it got us to reflect on our work.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据