Wish List for PFE Features

[DavidAdams]

My wish is that when PfEPMA sets the default standards for the MAN calibration curves that it would not assign those standards to an individual curve that have an assigned overlapping element. For example if Br is the analyzed element and Al is an assigned overlap then PfEPMA will not add any standard that has reported Al concentrations.

Hi Dave,
It's a good idea but hard to implement because the MAN assignments are global, but the interference assignments are on a sample basis. If we think of a way to do it, we will add it.

At least spectral interferences (and/or contamination) in the standards show up nicely in the MAN plots, so they can be removed from the assignments!

They do show up really well! It's interesting to see when there's an interference that one might have missed.

Is there some way to implement a global setup option in a project? For example if I want to a universal setup for a set of different silicate minerals that use the same instrument setup but the analyst would just disable elements for specific mineral setup samples.

[BenjaminWade]

Hi John
Yes you are correct I was thinking of individual spot age errors based on counting statistics. I have attached a spreadsheet which is a cutdown version of a speadsheet we used to use a long time ago. It had other worksheets in it and a macro to perform the iterative age calculation. I am not sure who created the original sheet, it was just handed down from person to person.

Captured in the cut down worksheet I have attached, is how the individual 1 sigma errors were calculated based on Pk/Bg counts, count times, contributions from U/Th isotopes etc. It doesn't contain any of the original macro for age calculation, but I assume you don't need that as you already have that in your software. All you need are Pk/Bg counts, count times, decay constants, and the "proportions" or contribution of Pb from the different isotopes to calculate the 1 sigma.

Unfortunately I am not an expert of chemical dating (or microprobe!) so I cannot say whether this is the correct way to calculate the 1 sigma errors for chemical probe dating...perhaps Mike or Julien could comment, but it appears logical to me. Anyway I understand its potentially a lot of work for little public demand so understand if you are reticent to put it in.

Cheers

[Probeman]

Is there some way to implement a global setup option in a project? For example if I want to a universal setup for a set of different silicate minerals that use the same instrument setup but the analyst would just disable elements for specific mineral setup samples.

Hi Dave,
Not sure exactly what you mean.

If you mean you'd like to have a "mother of all samples" with all the elements tuned up that one might want to acquire for all minerals, and then just disable the acquisition of elements you don't need for a particular mineral then yes, you can do that using the Disable Acq check box for each element in the Elements/Cations dialog for that element. Is that what you mean?
john

[DavidAdams]

Is there some way to implement a global setup option in a project? For example if I want to a universal setup for a set of different silicate minerals that use the same instrument setup but the analyst would just disable elements for specific mineral setup samples.

Hi Dave,
Not sure exactly what you mean.

If you mean you'd like to have a "mother of all samples" with all the elements tuned up that one might want to acquire for all minerals, and then just disable the acquisition of elements you don't need for a particular mineral then yes, you can do that using the Disable Acq check box for each element in the Elements/Cations dialog for that element. Is that what you mean?
john

Not exactly. I meant more that is there a way to do a "mother of all samples" for a project where what I was suggesting for the MAN curves would work.

Thanks!

[Probeman]

Hi Dave,
Do you mean where different samples would have different standards assigned to the MAN curves?
john

[DavidAdams]

Hi Dave,
Do you mean where different samples would have different standards assigned to the MAN curves?
john

Hi John,

Well, I was thinking more that there's a universal setup then one could make sub-setups for different analyses with various elements switched on or off and using the same standards assigned to the universal MAN curves for that .mdb. That way someone could setup a with everything they want, have the overlaps taken into account when assigning the MAN curves and not have to sift through the curves as much, then create sample setups with variations on the universal setup.

dave

[Probeman]

Hi Dave,
Do you mean where different samples would have different standards assigned to the MAN curves?
john

Hi John,

Well, I was thinking more that there's a universal setup then one could make sub-setups for different analyses with various elements switched on or off and using the same standards assigned to the universal MAN curves for that .mdb. That way someone could setup a with everything they want, have the overlaps taken into account when assigning the MAN curves and not have to sift through the curves as much, then create sample setups with variations on the universal setup.

dave

Hi Dave,
This feature will be in the Probe for EPMA "artificial intelligence" edition that I'm working on next!   

Seriously, this sounds like a bit of work, but if we can think of an easy way to implement it, maybe it is possible.  Let's talk about it over a beer or two! 
john

[Philipp Poeml]

Hi John,

I am trying to use the user specified output from PfE for some data, where I am only interested in the counts. So I did not measure any standards. The program is complaining that it cannot find standard counts...

Is it possible that if I select in user specified output only net counts and things like that PfE does not check for standards?

Cheers
Philipp

[John Donovan]

Hi Philipp,
The user specified output format is intended for quant output, but did you try the NIST output format?  It outputs raw intensities.
john

[Philipp Poeml]

Hi John,

also the NIST format is asking for standards. 

Just would like to export my data. But I do not have standard measurements for this project and it is a lot of work to measure fake standards for many elements and different HVs.

No way to use the user output for intensities without standards?

Cheers
Philipp

[John Donovan]

Hi Philipp,
Well you can just double-click the sample to see the raw data in the log window and Analyze! windows, and then use the Copy buttons in the Analyze! window to copy the intensities to the system clipboard and paste them into Excel.

https://probesoftware.com/smf/index.php?topic=227.msg1065#msg1065

john

[Philipp Poeml]

Hi John,
I am aware of the copy buttons. But this involves many clicks and lots of sources for errors. It is really not advisable.
So I will make myself some fake standards or something, just to get the data out. It would be really nice to have a tick box somewhere that allows to export unquantified data without the need of fake standards.
Thanks
Philipp

[John Donovan]

Hi Philipp,
I think I have an output solution that will work for you (I don't know why I didn't think of it before!).

Simply go to the Output | Output Standard and Unknown XY Plots menu and change the "output target" to Output Data to ASCII as seen here:



As long as you don't select one of the quantitative output types, it will just write your data to a tab delimited file, and optionally export it to Excel.  Please let me know if this works for you.
john

[Philipp Poeml]

Hi John,

good idea! I tried it and it worked. But I also have the 42 fake standards now (7 HVs * 6 elements). So not certain if it would throw an error.

But it looks like it does not try to read any standard data and just spits out the counts. Maybe you should mention this in the PfE tricks thread.

Thanks
Philipp

[John Donovan]

I think you should post about this output option and also your "fake standards" method also in the PFE Tips and Tricks topic.  Sounds like it could be useful.  How did you fake standards?  Did you use the simulation mode?
john