Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37963228›Full record

ArticleAnalytical chemistry2023

Comparison of Tiling Artifact Removal Methods in Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry Images.

Sevvandi Kandanaarachchi, Wil Gardner, David L J Alexander, Benjamin W Muir, Philippe A Chouinard, Sheila G Crewther, David J Scurr, Mark Halliday, Paul J Pigram

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Application of a Hopfield neural network to extract essential spectral patterns from ToF-SIMS spectra of peptides.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Sevvandi KandanaarachchiCSIRO's Data61, Research Way, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0337-0395
Wil GardnerCentre for Materials and Surface Science and Department of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6903-1978
David L J AlexanderCSIRO's Data61, Research Way, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5028-9189
Benjamin W MuirCSIRO Manufacturing, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8858-3217
Philippe A ChouinardSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia.
Sheila G CrewtherSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia.
David J ScurrSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0859-3886
Mark HallidayAltos Laboratories, Cambridge Institute of Science, The Portway Building, Granta Park, Great Abington CB21 6GP, United Kingdom.
Paul J PigramCentre for Materials and Surface Science and Department of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7972-492X
La Trobe University · AUCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUCSIRO Manufacturing · AUGranta Design (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) imaging is used across many fields for the atomic and molecular characterization of surfaces, with both high sensitivity and high spatial resolution. When large analysis areas are required, standard ToF-SIMS instruments allow for the acquisition of adjoining tiles, which are acquired by rastering the primary ion beam. For such large area scans, tiling artifacts are a ubiquitous challenge, manifesting as intensity gradients across each tile and/or sudden changes in intensity between tiles. Such artifacts are thought to be related to a combination of sample charging, local detector sensitivity issues, and misalignment of the primary ion gun, among other instrumental factors. In this work, we investigated six different computational tiling artifact removal methods: tensor decomposition, multiplicative linear correction, linear discriminant analysis, seamless stitching, simple averaging, and simple interpolating. To ensure robustness in the study, we applied these methods to three hyperspectral ToF-SIMS data sets and one OrbiTrapSIMS data set. Our study includes a carefully designed statistical analysis and a quantitative survey that subjectively assessed the quality of the various methods employed. Our results demonstrate that while certain methods are useful and preferred more often, no one particular approach can be considered universally acceptable and that the effectiveness of the artifact removal method is strongly dependent on the particulars of the data set analyzed. As examples, the multiplicative linear correction and seamless stitching methods tended to score more highly on the subjective survey; however, for some data sets, this led to the introduction of new artifacts. In contrast, simple averaging and interpolation methods scored subjectively poorly on the biological data set, but more highly on the microarray data sets. We discuss and explore these findings in depth and present general recommendations given our findings to conclude the work.

Identifiers

PMID37963228
PMCPMC10688221
OpenAlexW4388665667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.