How to Determine the Goodness of Fit in Fluorescence Lifetime Measurements?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hanneman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chi
AI Thread Summary
To determine the goodness of fit in fluorescence lifetime measurements, the excitation pulse is convoluted with an exponential decay function, and the results are compared to the measured fluorescence curve. The reduced chi squared value is calculated during each iteration, with values above 2 indicating a poor fit and below 1.2 indicating a good fit. However, this method is based on Poisson statistics, which may not apply when using a PMT and a scope with a 1GHz bandwidth. Alternative approaches to assess goodness of fit, such as using a different scoring function based on actual distribution, are suggested. The discussion highlights the need for methods that accommodate specific equipment limitations.
Hanneman
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am trying to measure fluorescence lifetimes. Typically, the excitation pulse is measured and convoluted with an exponential decay function. This result is compared with the measured fluorescence curve in order to adjust the parameters in the decay function. The process is repeated until the calculated and measured fluorescence curves match well.

During each convolution iteration, the reduced chi squared value is computed to determine the goodness of fit between the calculated and measured fluorescence curves. A value greater than 2 indicates a poor fit while a value less than 1.2 indicates a good fit. The formula is:

Chi^2 = (1/N) * Sum_over_i [ ( Measured(i) - Calculated(i) ) / Measured(i) ]

N is the number of data points.

This only applies for Poisson statistics, which is valid for photon counting. But, we are using a PMT and a scope with a 1GHz bandwidth (until the cost of new equipment can be justified), so the above equation does not apply.

I have searched through older journals and have not found a different way to determine the goodness of fit. Does anyone have any ideas? Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could use the same scoring function, but figure out what it's actual distribution should be instead, either analytically, or through simulation.
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top