Phase measurement error in summation of electron holography series

  1. Get@NRC: Phase measurement error in summation of electron holography series (Opens in a new window)
DOIResolve DOI:
AuthorSearch for: ; Search for: ; Search for:
Journal titleUltramicroscopy
Pages3850; # of pages: 13
SubjectOff-axis electron holography; Transmission electron microscope; Complex circular random variables; Phase error; Phase resolution; Random-walk; Quantitative electron microscopy; TEM optimization; Specimen drift; Microscope instabilities
AbstractOff-axis electron holography is a method for the transmission electron microscope (TEM) that measures the electric and magnetic properties of a specimen. The electrostatic and magnetic potentials modulate the electron wavefront phase. The error in measurement of the phase therefore determines the smallest observable changes in electric and magnetic properties. Here we explore the summation of a hologram series to reduce the phase error and thereby improve the sensitivity of electron holography. Summation of hologram series requires independent registration and correction of image drift and phase wavefront drift, the consequences of which are discussed. Optimization of the electro-optical configuration of the TEM for the double biprism configuration is examined. An analytical model of image and phase drift, composed of a combination of linear drift and Brownian random-walk, is derived and experimentally verified. The accuracy of image registration via cross-correlation and phase registration is characterized by simulated hologram series. The model of series summation errors allows the optimization of phase error as a function of exposure time and fringe carrier frequency for a target spatial resolution. An experimental example of hologram series summation is provided on WS2 fullerenes. A metric is provided to measure the object phase error from experimental results and compared to analytical predictions. The ultimate experimental object root-mean-square phase error is 0.006rad (2π/1050) at a spatial resolution less than 0.615nm and a total exposure time of 900s. The ultimate phase error in vacuum adjacent to the specimen is 0.0037rad (2π/1700). The analytical prediction of phase error differs with the experimental metrics by +7% inside the object and -5% in the vacuum, indicating that the model can provide reliable quantitative predictions.
Publication date
AffiliationNational Research Council Canada (NRC-CNRC); Security and Disruptive Technologies
Peer reviewedYes
NPARC number21273057
Export citationExport as RIS
Report a correctionReport a correction
Record identifier2809ab9f-a8bb-4c9f-a01e-a5322d04ec92
Record created2014-12-10
Record modified2016-05-09
Bookmark and share
  • Share this page with Facebook (Opens in a new window)
  • Share this page with Twitter (Opens in a new window)
  • Share this page with Google+ (Opens in a new window)
  • Share this page with Delicious (Opens in a new window)