{"title":"Assessment of performance rates on the elemental comparison of small and irregular glass fragments using µ-XRF and LIBS","authors":"Oriana Ovide , Ruthmara Corzo , Tatiana Trejos","doi":"10.1016/j.forc.2024.100567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study describes a systematic assessment of the performance rates when analyzing small and irregular glass fragments using micro-X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (µ-XRF) and Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS). One hundred glass fragments were collected from the inner and outer panes of a vehicle windshield to assess the false exclusion rates. Additionally, 100 glass fragments originating from different vehicle windshields were used to evaluate the discrimination capabilities. To compare the effects of fragment size on the performance rates, half of the collected fragments were small (longest length between 0.4 mm and < 1 mm, and thickness greater than 0.4 mm for LIBS and 0.1 mm for μ-XRF), and the other half were full-thickness fragments (2 mm and greater). The study shows that precision deteriorates for small/irregular fragments and comparison items must have a similar size, shape, and thickness to minimize error rates. Thus, comparisons between full-thickness and small/irregular fragments should be avoided, regardless of the analytical method. Although this general concept is well known for µ-XRF, this effect was not previously reported as a concern for LIBS. Moreover, this study provides new sampling and comparison recommendations when using modern silicon drift detectors (SDD) and reduced fragment size. Using a 3 s (3 %RSD) comparison interval reduces the false exclusion rates to < 12 % for µ-XRF, and to < 4 % for LIBS when using either a 3 s or 4 s (3 % RSD) criterion. At least 4 known fragments are recommended for full thickness fragments and 6 to 9 known fragments for the small/irregular comparisons.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":324,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Chemistry","volume":"38 ","pages":"Article 100567"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468170924000195","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study describes a systematic assessment of the performance rates when analyzing small and irregular glass fragments using micro-X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry (µ-XRF) and Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS). One hundred glass fragments were collected from the inner and outer panes of a vehicle windshield to assess the false exclusion rates. Additionally, 100 glass fragments originating from different vehicle windshields were used to evaluate the discrimination capabilities. To compare the effects of fragment size on the performance rates, half of the collected fragments were small (longest length between 0.4 mm and < 1 mm, and thickness greater than 0.4 mm for LIBS and 0.1 mm for μ-XRF), and the other half were full-thickness fragments (2 mm and greater). The study shows that precision deteriorates for small/irregular fragments and comparison items must have a similar size, shape, and thickness to minimize error rates. Thus, comparisons between full-thickness and small/irregular fragments should be avoided, regardless of the analytical method. Although this general concept is well known for µ-XRF, this effect was not previously reported as a concern for LIBS. Moreover, this study provides new sampling and comparison recommendations when using modern silicon drift detectors (SDD) and reduced fragment size. Using a 3 s (3 %RSD) comparison interval reduces the false exclusion rates to < 12 % for µ-XRF, and to < 4 % for LIBS when using either a 3 s or 4 s (3 % RSD) criterion. At least 4 known fragments are recommended for full thickness fragments and 6 to 9 known fragments for the small/irregular comparisons.
期刊介绍:
Forensic Chemistry publishes high quality manuscripts focusing on the theory, research and application of any chemical science to forensic analysis. The scope of the journal includes fundamental advancements that result in a better understanding of the evidentiary significance derived from the physical and chemical analysis of materials. The scope of Forensic Chemistry will also include the application and or development of any molecular and atomic spectrochemical technique, electrochemical techniques, sensors, surface characterization techniques, mass spectrometry, nuclear magnetic resonance, chemometrics and statistics, and separation sciences (e.g. chromatography) that provide insight into the forensic analysis of materials. Evidential topics of interest to the journal include, but are not limited to, fingerprint analysis, drug analysis, ignitable liquid residue analysis, explosives detection and analysis, the characterization and comparison of trace evidence (glass, fibers, paints and polymers, tapes, soils and other materials), ink and paper analysis, gunshot residue analysis, synthetic pathways for drugs, toxicology and the analysis and chemistry associated with the components of fingermarks. The journal is particularly interested in receiving manuscripts that report advances in the forensic interpretation of chemical evidence. Technology Readiness Level: When submitting an article to Forensic Chemistry, all authors will be asked to self-assign a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) to their article. The purpose of the TRL system is to help readers understand the level of maturity of an idea or method, to help track the evolution of readiness of a given technique or method, and to help filter published articles by the expected ease of implementation in an operation setting within a crime lab.