ReviewBeilstein journal of nanotechnology2020
A review of demodulation techniques for multifrequency atomic force microscopy.
Review in Beilstein journal of nanotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards automated molecular detection through simulated generation of CMOS-based rotational spectroscopy.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Recent Trends in Magnetic Polymer Nanocomposites for Aerospace Applications: A Review.Polymers · 2022Review
- Pulsed Optically Pumped Magnetometers: Addressing Dead Time and Bandwidth for the Unshielded Magnetorelaxometry of Magnetic Nanoparticles.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Data acquisition and imaging using wavelet transform: a new path for high speed transient force microscopy.Nanoscale advances · 2021Article
- Gradient Estimator-Based Amplitude Estimation for Dynamic Mode Atomic Force Microscopy: Small-Signal Modeling and Tuning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article compares the performance of traditional and recently proposed demodulators for multifrequency atomic force microscopy. The compared methods include the lock-in amplifier, coherent demodulator, Kalman filter, Lyapunov filter, and direct-design demodulator. Each method is implemented on a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) with a sampling rate of 1.5 MHz. The metrics for comparison include the sensitivity to other frequency components and the magnitude of demodulation artifacts for a range of demodulator bandwidths. Performance differences are demonstrated through higher harmonic atomic force microscopy imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.