Instead of doing a bunch of peak fitting, try LSQ. Use CeO2 (bulk or nanos)
for one reference and some Ce(III) for the other. Consistency check: see that
the Ce(III) fraction is consistent over some set of Ce(III) references.
Ce(III) has an assymetric white line, so it doesn't really fit a single
gaussian. CeO2, unlike other Ce(IV), has a shoulder on the first peak, and the
first peak is shifted left a little with respect to other Ce(IV).
mam
On 12/7/2016 10:33 AM, Stephanie Laga wrote:
Dear all,
I am trying to extract the % Ce(III) from some CeO2 nanoparticle XAS data. I
have been using moved the peak fitting function in Athena to model the XANES
with an arctan background function and a series of gaussians.
Looking through the literature I haven't seen too many specifics to using this
approach (rationale for choosing the widths of peaks or how to define the
background function). Similarly, doesn't seem to be much rationale for choosing
a 4 vs 5 peak fit for the XANES.
My main question is then...1) Is there a rational for picking the background
function, specifically the height and width (can I let the height vary or
should I be keeping a constant arctan through all samples)?
Any advice is greatly appreciated!
Stephanie
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Unsubscribe: http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/ifeffit
