The Pile-Up Problem in Pulse Fluorometry

  • B. K. Selinger
  • C. M. Harris
Part of the NATO Advanced Science Institutes Series book series (NSSA, volume 69)

Abstract

In this first contribution we consider the single-photon counting experiment. This is followed by a discussion of the Poisson process. The most important function to be described is the zeroth pulse interval density, which corresponds to the experimental result. Only in the limit of a low mean photon count rate (as a ratio to pulse repetition rate), does this function correspond to the required true time-dependence of the fluorescence. In other cases either an electronic pile-up inspector must be used, or the zeroth pulse interval density function itself should be fitted. The distinction between electronics-limited (type E) pileup, and statistical TAC-limited (type S) pile-up is clearly made. Finally, (rather than earlier, where the issues are already confused enough), the nature and variety of dead times are considered in more detail.

Keywords

Poisson Process Dead Time Optical Field Ocular Response Poisson Generator 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    L. Mandel, Proc.Phys.Soc., 72 1037 (1958)Google Scholar
  2. L. Mandel, Proc.ibid 74 233 (1959)Google Scholar
  3. L. Mandel, Proc. in Progress in Optics, E. Wolf, ed., Volume 2, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1963.Google Scholar
  4. 2.
    L. Mandel, E.C.G. Sudarshan and E. Wolf, Proc.Phys.Soc., 84 435 (1964)Google Scholar
  5. 3.
    P.L. Kelley and W.H. Kleiner, Phys.Rev., 136A 316 (1964)Google Scholar
  6. V. Korenman, Phys.Rev., 138B 1012 (1967)Google Scholar
  7. R.H. Lemberg, Phys.Rev., 167 1152 (1968)Google Scholar
  8. 4.
    B. Saleh, Photoelectron Statistics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1978.Google Scholar
  9. 5.
    T.P. McLean and E.R. Pike, Phys.Lett., 15 318 (1965)Google Scholar
  10. 6.
    A.W. Smith and J.A. Armstrong, Phys.Lett., 19 650 (1966)Google Scholar
  11. 7.
    S.-D. Poisson in Recherches sur la PÌobabilite des Jugements, Paris, 1837.Google Scholar
  12. 8.
    R.A. Fisher, Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 9th Edition, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, 1944.Google Scholar
  13. 9.
    H. Bateman, Philos.Mag., 20 698 (1910)Google Scholar
  14. 10.
    L. Bortkiewicz, Die Radioaktive Strahlung als Gegenstand wahrscheinlichkei tstheoretischer Untersuchungen, Springer, Berlin, 1913, p. 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 11.
    E. Marsden and T. Barratt, Proc.Phys.Soc. (London), 23 367 (1911)Google Scholar
  16. 12.
    C.M. Harris and B.K. Selinger, Aust.J.Chem., 32 2111 (1979)Google Scholar
  17. 13.
    P.B. Coates, J.Phys.E., 5 148 (1972)Google Scholar
  18. 14.
    A. Kolin, Ann.Phys.(Leipzig), 21 813 (1934)Google Scholar
  19. F. Fürth, Ann.Phys.(Leipzig), 34 575 (1939)Google Scholar
  20. I. De Lotto and D. Dotti, Nucl.Instrum.Methods, 39 281 (1966)Google Scholar
  21. F.A. Johnson, R. Jones, T.P. McLean and E.R. Pike, Opt.Acta, 14 35 (1967).Google Scholar
  22. S.N. Fedotov and N.G. Volkov, Nucl.Instrum.Methods, 122 463 (1974)Google Scholar
  23. S.K. Srinivasan, Phys.Lett.A., 50 277 (1974)Google Scholar
  24. 15.
    L. Scheen, Physica (Utrecht) 10 224(1943)Google Scholar
  25. A. Ruark and L. Devol, Phys.Rev., 49 355 (1936)Google Scholar
  26. 16.
    F.A. Johnson, R. Jones, T.P. McLean and E.R. Pike, Phys.Rev Lett. 16 589 (1966)Google Scholar
  27. G. Bedard, Phys.Soc.(London), 90, 131 (1967)Google Scholar
  28. B.I. Cantor and M.C. Teich, J.Opt.Soc.Amer., 65 786 (1975)Google Scholar
  29. J.W. Muller, Nucl.Instrum.Methods, 112 47 (1973)Google Scholar
  30. 18.
    J.W. Muller, Nucl.Instrum.Methods, 117 401 (1974)Google Scholar
  31. 19.
    M.C. Teich and W.J. McGill, Phys.Rev.Lett. 36 754 (1976)Google Scholar
  32. M.C. Teich, L. Matin and B.I. Cantor, J.Opt.Soc.Amer., 68 386 (1978)Google Scholar
  33. 20.
    E. Rutherford and H. Geiger, Philos.Mag., 20 698 (1910)Google Scholar
  34. 21.
    R.A. Fisher, H.G. Thornton and W.A. Mackenzie, Ann.Appl.Biol. 9 325 (1922)Google Scholar
  35. 22.
    K.J.W. Craik, Brit.J.Psychol., 38 142 (1948)Google Scholar
  36. 23.
    C.E. Carrick, Honours Thesis in Psychology, Aust.Natl.Univ, 1979.Google Scholar
  37. 24.
    U. Lachmann and B.K. Selinger, unpublished data.Google Scholar
  38. 25.
    R. Schuyler and I. Isenberg, Rev.Sci.Instrum., 42 813 (1971) Th. Binkert, H.P. Tschanz and P.R. Zinsli, J.Lumin., 5 187 (1972)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. K. Selinger
  • C. M. Harris

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations