Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Single-pass STEM-EMCD on a zone axis using a patterned aperture: progress in experimental and data treatment methods

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A mirror-symmetric patterned aperture in a scanning transmission electron microscope can extract candidate electron magnetic circular dichroism signals in a single pass on the [001] zone axis of bcc iron, with strength and sign that…

desk verdict A transparent, well-documented methods paper whose EMCD candidate signals are plausible but under-validated: the heavily parameterized extraction pipeline is never tested against a non-magnetic or synthetic null, so the central claim rests on an untested assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09132 v1 pith:VOWIILCK submitted 2019-08-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Thomas Thersleff , Linus Schönström , Cheuk-Wai Tai , Roman Adam , Daniel E. Bürgler , Claus M. Schneider , Shunsuke Muto , Ján Rusz This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords electronmagneticcirculardichroismEMCDpatternedaperturescanningtransmissionmicroscopyEELSzoneaxisbccironmomentmapping
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is a progress report toward measuring magnetic moments with atomic-column resolution in the electron microscope. It tries to establish that an eight-blade, mirror-symmetric patterned aperture, mounted in front of the EELS spectrometer, can extract electron magnetic circular dichroism (EMCD) candidate signals from a ferromagnetic sample in a single STEM pass on a zone-axis orientation. On a 10-nm bcc iron film at low spatial resolution, the authors recover difference spectra on the Fe L3 and L2 edges; the strongest L2 candidate has a signal-to-noise ratio of 2.2 dB, below the conventional Rose-criterion threshold of 5, so the paper labels them candidates rather than confirmed detections. The candidate signal depends on crystal orientation relative to the zone axis and on the momentum-transfer window selected by the aperture, which supports the paper's two design hypotheses. If validated further, the approach would remove the need for repeated scans with sub-atomic registration and would scale toward atomic-resolution magnetic mapping.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the patterned aperture itself: an eight-blade 'mirrored ventilator' design with a mirror symmetry plane, installed so that the mirror plane is parallel to the spectrometer's energy dispersion axis. It divides the diffraction plane into chiral plus and chiral minus collection regions, integrates over the $q_x$ dimension, and leaves the non-dispersive momentum transfer $q_y$ resolved in a two-dimensional $q$--$E$ spectrum. The argument is carried by combining this aperture with a 4D workflow: probe-position time stamps are assigned to every EELS frame, missing frames are interpolated, spectra are aligned along energy with a Taylor-coefficient shift correction, peak profiles are matched by subtracting a scaled second derivative, and a 17-parameter least-squares optimization extracts the difference signal as two pseudo-Voigt peaks with opposite signs.

What would settle it

Apply the exact extraction routine to 4D EELS data from a non-magnetic sample, or to synthetic spectra containing only Poisson noise plus the same background, and check whether signed Fe $L_3$/$L_2$ difference features at SNR near 2 dB still emerge; if they do, the candidate signal is a processing artifact. A separate check is to intentionally rotate the aperture or the diffraction pattern by a known small angle and verify that the predicted $q_y$ sign inversion of the Fe $L_3$ difference appears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the central discovery is that single-pass STEM-EMCD on a zone axis is experimentally accessible with a patterned aperture, and that the recovered difference signal is structured rather than arbitrary: its strength tracks the local crystal orientation, and its Fe $L_3$ sign can flip with the non-dispersive momentum transfer $q_y$. The most favorable extraction, using pixels closest to the Fe [001] zone axis and the outer $q_y$ window from 17.6 to 24.2 mrad, yields a candidate $L_2$ signal with SNR 2.2 dB together with the expected signs on $L_3$ and $L_2$. When pixels with larger zone-axis mistilt are included, the $L_2$ signal weakens while a feature remains on $L_3$; the authors interpret this as mixing of magnetic and non-magnetic contributions due to imperfect symmetry. They also observe a sign inversion of the $L_3$ difference at intermediate $q_y$ values, which they attribute to a slight rotation of the diffraction pattern relative to the aperture's mirror plane and to small aperture misalignments.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the difference spectra produced by the processing chain are genuine EMCD and not artifacts of that chain; the manuscript reports no null test on a non-magnetic sample or on synthetic noise to support this assumption.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single STEM pass can record both the chiral spectra and the local diffraction pattern from the same region, so repeated scans with sub-atomic registration are no longer required for this class of measurement.
  • Because the patterned aperture accepts a larger fraction of inelastically scattered electrons than point-like or slit geometries, it should improve the dose efficiency of EMCD, directly attacking the signal-to-noise bottleneck.
  • Quantitative zone-axis EMCD will demand near-perfect alignment of the crystal symmetry directions with the spectrometer dispersion axis and minimal beam tilt during scanning, since orientation drift measurably weakens the extracted signal.
  • Selecting the momentum-transfer window in the non-dispersive direction changes the strength and even the sign of the candidate signal; outer $q_y$ windows with fewer Bragg contributions gave the strongest $L_2$ candidates.
  • The processing chain developed here is transferable to other EMCD geometries and provides a template for the atomic-resolution version of the experiment.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A decisive next test would be a false-positive audit: run the same 17-parameter extraction on a non-magnetic specimen or on synthetic noise with matched count statistics and check whether signed $L_3$/$L_2$ difference features at SNR near 2 dB still appear.
  • The observed $q_y$ sign inversion, if reproducible, could be turned into a calibration tool: a deliberate small rotation of the aperture or diffraction pattern should shift the inversion position in a predictable way, allowing non-magnetic mixing to be estimated and subtracted.
  • If the orientation sensitivity persists at atomic scale, the usable field of view will be limited by beam-tilt-induced orientation drift, so descan or smaller scan areas may be prerequisites for atomic-column EMCD mapping.
  • The single-pass design implies all information for quantification is in one pass; comparing per-pixel candidate signals against a bulk or micromagnetic reference would test whether the extracted moment ratio is quantitatively meaningful.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports experimental progress toward single-pass STEM-EMCD on a bcc Fe [001] zone axis using an 8-blade patterned aperture with a mirror-symmetry plane. The authors describe a complete data acquisition workflow, including custom hardware, synced 4D EELS and 4D STEM-diffraction acquisition, and a signal extraction pipeline. The extraction pipeline uses a 17-parameter fmincon optimization that models pre-edge backgrounds, performs second-derivative profile matching between the chiral spectra (Eq. 7), applies a non-integer energy shift and an energy-dependent post-edge normalization slope/intercept (Eq. 8), and fits the difference signal as two pseudo-Voigt peaks with opposite-sign amplitudes (Table 1). The authors report candidate EMCD signals whose strongest Fe L2 SNR is 2.2 dB, explicitly below the Rose criterion of 5 (7 dB), and observe dependence of these candidates on orientation masks and on the qy integration range, including a sign inversion on Fe L3. Data and code are made available under open licenses.

Significance. If the candidate signals could be established as genuine EMCD, the paper would provide a useful methodological template for dose-efficient, single-pass zone-axis EMCD with patterned apertures, including a detailed treatment of data synchronization, spectral alignment, and artifact correction. The authors are commendably transparent about the limitations: they frame the results as 'candidate' signals, state that none meet the Rose criterion, and discuss possible artifact sources such as crystal/spectrometer misalignment. The open release of data and code is a strength. However, the central empirical claim that 'promising EMCD candidate signals can be extracted' is not yet supported because the pipeline that produces these candidates has not been shown not to manufacture apparent signals from processing artifacts alone. The significance of the paper therefore rests on the outcome of a null test that is currently absent.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods: EMCD signal extraction; Results: Candidate EMCD spectra (Figs. 5–8)] The central claim that candidate EMCD signals are extracted is not yet supported by a null test. The extraction pipeline optimizes 17 free parameters—including pre-edge amplitudes and slopes, the profile-matching scalar ks in Eq. (7), the chiral-minus energy shift, the post-edge normalization slope and intercept, and the EMCD peak amplitudes a1 and a2 whose signs are constrained to be opposite (Table 1)—and applies these steps to the same dataset from which the signal is extracted. With no non-magnetic specimen, no label-swapped chiral pair, and no synthetic noise-only dataset, one cannot exclude that the reported difference features arise from overfitting or from the parameterization itself. Since the authors themselves attribute the Fe L3 sign inversion to misalignment and mixing of magnetic and non-magnetic signals, a null experiment or a permutation test is essential to establish that the pipeline does not produce false positives in the absence of a magnetic signal. Please add such a control and report whether any 'candidate' survives it.
  2. [Results: Influence of qy; Fig. 9; Fig. 4c,d] The reported sensitivity to sample orientation and to momentum transfer is based on selections that are post hoc and qualitative. The qy range 17.6–24.2 mrad is motivated by the observation that it yields a 'more convincing' Fe L2 signal, and the orientation masks 'Orient 01' and 'Orient 02' are generated by an 'empirically-determined' qualitative VDF threshold. Unless the threshold choices and qy window are shown to be stable under variation or were fixed before inspecting the extracted signals, the claimed dependence of the candidate signal on orientation and qy could be a product of the selection procedure rather than of the underlying physics. Please quantify the sensitivity of the results to the mask threshold and qy range, or use a cross-validation or pre-registration scheme.
  3. [Methods: EMCD signal extraction; Figs. 5–8] The reported SNR values (e.g., 'SNR L2 = 2.22 dB' in Fig. 5) are not defined operationally. It is unclear whether the noise is estimated from the residual between the data and the pseudo-Voigt fit, from adjacent energy channels, from frame-to-frame variation, or from some other source. Because the SNR is the basis for the 'candidate' versus 'confirmed' distinction and for the comparison to the Rose criterion, the noise model must be specified explicitly. Without this, the SNR values cannot be independently interpreted or reproduced.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Methods: EMCD signal extraction, paragraph following Eq. (8)] The text states that the post-edge normalization line is 'fit to the post-edge ratios' with slope m and intercept d, but then lists m and d among the 17 parameters passed to fmincon. Please clarify whether the linear regression is performed inside the objective function at each iteration or whether m and d are free parameters; the current wording is contradictory.
  2. [Table 1 caption] The caption sentence 'Note that the EMCD amplitudes were not constrained to be positive and negative as above; rather, they were constrained to have opposite sign from each other' is confusing because the table already shows a1 ≥ 0 and a2 ≤ 0. Consider simplifying the caption to state that a1 and a2 are constrained to opposite signs.
  3. [Figs. 5–8] The quantity labeled 'mL/mS' in the cumulative-sum panels is not defined in the text or captions. Define mL and mS.
  4. [Results: Fig. 2b] The oxygen K edge at 532 eV and the Fe L2,3 edges at 709/723 eV are correctly identified, but the text says the oxygen signal is 'primarily dominant in the background regions'; the caption would be clearer if it noted that the oxygen edge appears because the summation includes frames without Fe.
  5. [Methods: 4D EELS pretreatment] In Eq. (4), the ratio bk,2/bk,1 equals ΔEk only if the Taylor expansion coefficients are defined consistently with the amplitude Ak; this is correct, but the step would benefit from a one-sentence note that the mean spectrum is normalized to avoid a scaling ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the claim is explicitly a candidate-signal extraction, not a prediction, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as an independent result.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is deliberately limited: it reports 'promising EMCD candidate signals' with SNRs below the Rose criterion, not confirmed EMCD. The extraction pipeline (Eqs. 6–9) uses fitted background, profile-matching, shift, normalization, and pseudo-Voigt parameters, and the authors state that the energy-dependent normalization and profile matching are 'crucial' for extraction. This raises a real risk of processing artifacts, and the absence of a null test weakens the empirical support. However, the manuscript does not present a first-principles derivation or a numerical prediction that reduces to its inputs: the candidate difference spectra are the direct output of a data-processing workflow, and the optimized parameters are not renamed as an external prediction. The self-citations (Thersleff et al. for SNR methodology, Negi et al. for the aperture design) are not load-bearing in a circular way: the former applies a standard threshold, and the latter is prior work being experimentally tested. The authors also explicitly flag the L3 sign inversion and imperfect crystal/spectrometer alignment as experimental shortcomings, and they state that they are 'not yet certain about how this correction affects the quantification of magnetic moments.' These are validity limitations, not circular reductions. Thus no equation is equivalent to the claimed result by construction, and no fitted value is presented as an independent prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a fitted extraction pipeline with many free parameters and on standard EMCD assumptions. No new physical entities are introduced, but the processing choices themselves are ad hoc to this dataset and could bias the candidate signals.

free parameters (10)
  • A_plus, A_minus (pre-edge background amplitudes) = optimized per extraction
    Inverse power law background amplitudes for chiral plus and minus spectra, fitted in the range 650-700 eV (Eq. 6).
  • r_plus, r_minus (pre-edge background slopes) = optimized per extraction
    Exponents of the inverse power law background, bounded between -5 and 0 in Table 1.
  • k_s (profile matching scalar) = optimized per extraction
    Scaled second derivative subtracted from the chiral minus spectrum to match peak widths (Eq. 7). Tuned on the same data that produces the signal.
  • delta_E (chiral minus energy shift) = optimized per extraction
    Sub-channel energy shift applied to chiral minus, bounded between -3 and 3 eV, to compensate residual misalignment.
  • m, d (post-edge normalization slope and intercept) = optimized per extraction
    Linear regression to the energy-dependent ratio D(E) in the post-edge region 730-760 eV (Eq. 8). This normalization directly shapes the difference signal.
  • a1, a2 (EMCD amplitudes L3 and L2) = optimized per extraction
    Amplitudes of the pseudo-Voigt model for the EMCD difference signal, constrained to opposite signs. These are the fitted 'detection' amplitudes.
  • b1a, b1b, b2a, b2b (peak broadening parameters) = optimized per extraction
    Width parameters for the L3 and L2 pseudo-Voigt peaks, bounded 0-5 eV.
  • c1, c2 (peak centers) = optimized per extraction
    Energy centers of the L3 and L2 peaks, constrained to 700-712 eV and 716-725 eV respectively.
  • eta (Lorentzian/Gaussian mixing parameter) = optimized per extraction
    Mixing parameter between Lorentzian and Gaussian profiles, bounded 0-1.
  • VDF threshold for orientation masks = empirically determined
    Threshold applied to the virtual dark field image to segment 'Orient 01' and 'Orient 02' regions (Fig. 4). This choice influences which spatial areas contribute to the candidate signals.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption EMCD theory: the difference between chiral plus and minus EELS spectra in a dynamical diffraction geometry isolates the magnetic contribution.
    The entire analysis assumes this standard EMCD framework (refs 6,7) to interpret the difference signal as magnetic.
  • domain assumption The sample is bcc Fe with a 10 nm thickness and negligible oxidation.
    Sample characterization via EELS is reported in Methods, but the interpretation of the L2/L3 signals depends on this stoichiometry.
  • ad hoc to paper Residual spectrometer aberrations can be modeled by peak shifts, peak broadenings, and a linear post-edge trend, correctable by the described processing steps.
    The processing pipeline is tailored to the observed aberrations; the paper states these steps are not yet standard in the EELS literature.
  • domain assumption The patterned aperture and spectrometer rotation are aligned to the [010] axis of the crystal, and this alignment is sufficiently stable.
    The experiment requires this alignment for the momentum transfer selection; the authors note it is critical and difficult to achieve.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Single-pass STEM-EMCD on a zone axis using a patterned aperture: progress in experimental and data treatment methods." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VOWIILCK

@misc{pith2026190809132,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Single-pass STEM-EMCD on a zone axis using a patterned aperture: progress in experimental and data treatment methods},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VOWIILCK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09132}
}
read the original abstract

Measuring magnetic moments in ferromagnetic materials with atomic column resolution is theoretically possible using the electron magnetic circular dichroism (EMCD) technique in a (scanning) transmission electron microscope ((S)TEM). However, experimental and data processing hurdles currently hamper the realization of this goal. Experimentally, the sample must be tilted to a zone-axis orientation, yielding a complex distribution of magnetic scattering intensity, and the same sample region must be scanned multiple times with sub-atomic spatial registration necessary at each pass. Furthermore, the weak nature of the EMCD signal requires advanced data processing techniques to reliably detect and quantify the result. In this manuscript, we detail our experimental and data processing progress towards achieving single-pass zone-axis EMCD using a patterned aperture. First, we provide a comprehensive data acquisition and analysis strategy for this and other EMCD experiments that should scale down to atomic resolution experiments. Second, we demonstrate that, at low spatial resolution, promising EMCD candidate signals can be extracted, and that these are sensitive to both crystallographic orientation and momentum transfer.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09132 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Design of the aperture holding arm suspending the aperture into the beam path. (b) The aperture plate. This design includes one slit (right) and one 8-blade mirror-symmetry patterned aperture (left). Switching between the two was accomplished by venting the chamber and adjusting the position. The large annular holes permit the use of the lower HAADF detector. (c) Placement of the aperture table into the TEM came… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Experimental diffraction pattern recorded on the GIF CCD showing the electron optical conditions. The probe was centered on the the grain of interest (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Virtual HAADF of the 4D STEM datacube over the grain of interest. The CBED patterns acquired at pixel position "A" and "B" are shown in (b) and (c), respectively. A gamma curve of 0.3 is applied to the grayscale mapping in these two images to enhance the visibility of the otherwise very weak Kikuchi lines, which are indexed and highlighted in cyan. The center of the 000 reflection is denoted with a red dot. The … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Real-space micrograph created by using a virtual bright field aperture. (b) ROI selection using a threshold for the full grain mask. (c) Real-space micrograph created by using the virtual dark field aperture presented in figure 3. (d) The two orientation masks, "Or…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Candidate EMCD signal taken from the outer-most qy range and the spatial mask restricted to the region oriented most close to the Fe [1 0 0] zone-axis. regions that are tilted further away from the zone-axis orientation. Importantly, this does not seem to come at the e…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Candidate EMCD signal taken from the outer-most qy range and the mask restricted to the region oriented furthest from the Fe [1 0 0] zone axis. The approach we have adopted to meet these challenges at this stage is the development of more robust data processing techniq…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Candidate EMCD signal taken from the full q−E range and the mask covering the entire zone-axis oriented grain. from the spectrum itself. The peak profiles are matched using the optimization routine detailed in the Methods section below, and the step is parameterized. T…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Candidate EMCD signal taken from the outer-most qy range and the mask covering the entire zone-axis oriented grain. The Fe films were post-annealed at 750◦C for 120 min. to increase the lateral Fe grain size to about 50 nm. The deposition of the Al cap layers was carri…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: qy EMCD maps for the three different ROI masks. scanned, neither of these detectors was used for spatial registration. Instead, a secondary electron detector mounted above the sample was turned on. This position makes the contrast invariant to changes in the projector …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D., Liddle, J

    Chao, W., Harteneck, B. D., Liddle, J. A., Anderson, E. H. & Attwood, D. T. Soft X-ray microscopy at a spatial resolution better than 15 nm. Nature 435, 1210–1213, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03719 (2005)

    work page doi:10.1038/nature03719 2005

  2. [2]

    Wiesendanger, R. et al. Topographic and Magnetic-Sensitive Scanning Tunneling Microscope Study of Magnetite. Science 255, 583–586, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.255.5044.583 (1992)

    work page doi:10.1126/science.255.5044.583 1992

  3. [3]

    Heinze, S. et al. Real-Space Imaging of Two-Dimensional Antiferromagnetism on the Atomic Scale. Science 288, 1805–1808, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.288.5472.1805 (2000)

    work page arXiv 2000

  4. [4]

    & Wiesendanger, R

    Kaiser, U., Schwarz, A. & Wiesendanger, R. Magnetic exchange force microscopy with atomic resolution. Nature 446, 522–525, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05617 (2007)

    doi:10.1038/nature05617 2007

  5. [5]

    Midgley, P. A. & Dunin-Borkowski, R. E. Electron tomography and holography in materials science. Nat. Mater. 8, 271–280, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat2406 (2009)

    doi:10.1038/nmat2406 2009

  6. [6]

    Schattschneider, P. et al. Detection of magnetic circular dichroism using a transmission electron microscope. Nature 441, 486–488, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04778 (2006)

    work page doi:10.1038/nature04778 2006

  7. [7]

    & Schattschneider, P

    Hébert, C. & Schattschneider, P. A proposal for dichroic experiments in the electron microscope. Ultramicroscopy 96, 463–468, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3991(03)00108-6 (2003)

    work page doi:10.1016/s0304-3991(03)00108-6 2003

  8. [8]

    Schattschneider, P. et al. Detection of magnetic circular dichroism on the two-nanometer scale. Phys. Rev. B 78, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.78.104413 (2008)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.78.104413 2008

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Salafranca, J. et al. Surfactant Organic Molecules Restore Magnetism in Metal-Oxide Nanoparticle Surfaces. Nano Lett. 12, 2499–2503, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/nl300665z (2012)

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    Thersleff, T. et al. Quantitative analysis of magnetic spin and orbital moments from an oxidized iron (1 1 0) surface using electron magnetic circular dichroism. Sci. Rep. 5, 13012, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13012 (2015)

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    & Verbeeck, J

    Schattschneider, P., Schaffer, B., Ennen, I. & Verbeeck, J. Mapping spin-polarized transitions with atomic resolution. Phys. Rev. B 85, 134422, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.134422 (2012)

    2012 doi

  4. [12]

    Thersleff, T. et al. Towards sub-nanometer real-space observation of spin and orbital magnetism at the Fe/MgO interface. Sci. Rep. 7, 44802, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44802 (2017)

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    & Leifer, K

    Thersleff, T., Rusz, J., Hjörvarsson, B. & Leifer, K. Detection of magnetic circular dichroism with subnanometer convergent electron beams. Phys. Rev. B 94, 134430, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.134430 (2016). 15/17

    2016 doi

  6. [14]

    Rusz, J. et al. Magnetic measurements with atomic-plane resolution. Nat. Commun. 7, 12672, DOI: https://doi.org/10. 1038/ncomms12672 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    & Zhu, J

    Song, D., Rusz, J., Cai, J. & Zhu, J. Detection of electron magnetic circular dichroism signals under zone axial diffraction geometry. Ultramicroscopy 169, 44–54, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.07.005 (2016)

    2016 doi

  8. [16]

    E., Zhu, J

    Spiegelberg, J., Song, D., Dunin-Borkowski, R. E., Zhu, J. & Rusz, J. Blind identification of magnetic signals in electron magnetic chiral dichroism using independent component analysis. Ultramicroscopy 195, 129–135, DOI: https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.08.021 (2018)

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    & Bhowmick, S

    Rusz, J., Idrobo, J.-C. & Bhowmick, S. Achieving Atomic Resolution Magnetic Dichroism by Controlling the Phase Symmetry of an Electron Probe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 145501, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.145501 (2014)

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Idrobo, J. C. et al. Detecting magnetic ordering with atomic size electron probes. Adv. Struct. Chem. Imaging 2, 5, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40679-016-0019-9 (2016)

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    Wang, Z. et al. Atomic scale imaging of magnetic circular dichroism by achromatic electron microscopy. Nat. Mater. 1, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-017-0010-4 (2018)

    2018 doi

  12. [20]

    Negi, D. et al. Proposal for Measuring Magnetism with Patterned Apertures in a Transmission Electron Microscope. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 037201, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.037201 (2019)

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    Schattschneider, P. et al. Magnetic circular dichroism in EELS: Towards 10nm resolution. Ultramicroscopy 108, 433–438, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2007.07.002 (2008)

    2008 doi

  14. [22]

    & Leifer, K

    Ali, H., Warnatz, T., Xie, L., Hjörvarsson, B. & Leifer, K. Quantitative EMCD by use of a double aperture for simultaneous acquisition of EELS. Ultramicroscopy DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.10.012 (2018)

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Thersleff, T. et al. Single-pass STEM-EMCD on a zone axis using apatterned aperture: Data and methodology, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3361582 (2019)

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    de la Peña, F. et al. hyperspy/hyperspy: HyperSpy 1.3.1, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1221347 (2018)

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    Johnstone, D. N. et al. pyxem/pyxem: pyXem 0.7.1, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2649351 (2019)

    2019 doi

  18. [26]

    Time Stamp Code (2018)

    Schönström, L. Time Stamp Code (2018). This code is available upon request

    2018

  19. [27]

    & Leifer, K

    Rusz, J., Oppeneer, P., Lidbaum, H., Rubino, S. & Leifer, K. Asymmetry of the two-beam geometry in EMCD experiments. J. Microsc. 237, 465–468, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2818.2009.03295.x (2010)

    2010

  20. [28]

    & Zhu, J

    Song, D., Wang, Z. & Zhu, J. Effect of the asymmetry of dynamical electron diffraction on intensity of acquired EMCD signals. Ultramicroscopy 148, 42–51, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2014.08.012 (2014)

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    Schneider, S. et al. Magnetic properties of single nanomagnets: Electron energy-loss magnetic chiral dichroism on FePt nanoparticles. Ultramicroscopy 171, 186–194, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.09.009 (2016)

    2016 doi

  22. [30]

    Muto, S. et al. Quantitative characterization of nanoscale polycrystalline magnets with electron magnetic circular dichroism. Nat. Commun. 5, 3138, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4138 (2014)

    2014 doi

  23. [31]

    & Schönström, L

    Hou, V . & Schönström, L. Timed Image Recorder (2009)

    2009

  24. [32]

    Drift Tube Scan (2008)

    Hou, V . Drift Tube Scan (2008)

    2008

  25. [33]

    Mitchell, D. R. Drift Tube Scanning (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    & Keast, V

    Bosman, M. & Keast, V . J. Optimizing EELS acquisition.Ultramicroscopy 108, 837–846, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ultramic.2008.02.003 (2008)

    2008 doi

  27. [35]

    & Jonas, P

    Schattschneider, P. & Jonas, P. Iterative reduction of gain variations in parallel electron energy loss spectrometry. Ultramicroscopy 49, 179–188, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3991(93)90224-L (1993)

    1993 doi

  28. [36]

    & Buydens, L

    Witjes, H., van den Brink, M., Melssen, W. & Buydens, L. Automatic correction of peak shifts in Raman spectra before PLS regression. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 52, 105–116, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7439(00)00085-X (2000)

    2000 doi

  29. [37]

    Guizar-Sicairos, M., Thurman, S. T. & Fienup, J. R. Efficient subpixel image registration algorithms. Opt. Lett., OL 33, 156–158, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.33.000156 (2008)

    2008 doi

  30. [38]

    Witjes, H. et al. Automatic Correction for Phase Shifts, Frequency Shifts, and Lineshape Distortions across a Series of Single Resonance Lines in Large Spectral Data Sets. J. Magn. Reson. 144, 35–44, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jmre.2000.2021 (2000). 16/17

    2000

  31. [39]

    Witjes, H., Pepers, M., Melssen, W. J. & Buydens, L. M. C. Modelling phase shifts, peak shifts and peak width variations in spectral data sets: its value in multivariate data analysis. Anal. Chimica Acta 432, 113–124, DOI: https: //doi.org/10.1016/S0003-2670(00)01349-0 (2001)....

    2001 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.