Comparison of methods for rapid evaluation of lifetimes of exponential decays
Comparison of methods for rapid evaluation of lifetimes of exponential decays
复制标题
DOI：
10.1366/000370204774103444
复制
发表时间：
2004-05-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
DeGraff, BA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Moore, C;Chan, SP;DeGraff, BA
对于评估指数发光衰减，有各种计算快速积分方法的基础上的衰减在不同的分箱间隔的面积。使用Monte Carlo方法和实验光子计数数据，我们比较了标准的快速寿命测定方法（SRLD），优化的快速寿命测定方法（ORLD），最大似然估计方法（MLE），和相平面方法（PPM）。不同的技术进行了比较方面的精密度，准确度，灵敏度分箱范围，基线干扰的影响。最大似然估计提供了最佳的总体精度，但需要10个面元，并且对非常小的未校正基线敏感。ORLD仅使用两个箱就提供了几乎同样好的精度，并且对未补偿基线的免疫力更强。PPM比MLE需要更多的箱，并且具有系统误差，但在很大程度上抵抗基线问题。因此，根据数据采集方法和可以容易使用的箱数，ORLD和MLE是合理信噪比的首选方法。
For evaluating exponential luminescence decays, there are a variety of computational rapid integral methods based on the areas of the decay under different binned intervals. Using both Monte Carlo methods and experimental photon counting data, we compare the standard rapid lifetime determination method (SRLD), optimized rapid lifetime determination methods (ORLD), maximum likelihood estimator method (MLE), and the phase plane method (PPM). The different techniques are compared with respect to precision, accuracy, sensitivity to binning range, and the effect of baseline interference. The MLE provides the best overall precision, but requires 10 bins and is sensitive to very small uncorrected baselines. The ORLD provides nearly as good precision using only two bins and is much more immune to uncompensated baselines. The PPM requires more bins than the MLE and has systematic errors, but is largely resistant to baseline issues. Therefore, depending on the data acquisition method and the number of bins that can be readily employed, the ORLD and MLE are the preferred methods for reasonable signal-to-noise ratios.