2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2012.09.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of natural- and laboratory-generated dose response curves for quartz optically stimulated luminescence signals from Chinese Loess

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
110
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 166 publications
(117 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
7
110
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They conclude that that D e estimates above this value are likely to be underestimated. The available dataset of three SAR-OSL measurements of this study does not allow to construct a reliable natural DRC but the L n /T n values range between 3.6 ± 0.14 (1A9H2), 4.0±0.37 (1A6H2B) and 4.0±0.12 (1B2H2), indicating no increase with increasing natural dose, whereas the laboratory-generated dose response curve shows a constant increase up to 1240 Gy, as observed by Chapot et al (2012) (see also Sect. 7).…”
Section: Sar-oslmentioning
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…They conclude that that D e estimates above this value are likely to be underestimated. The available dataset of three SAR-OSL measurements of this study does not allow to construct a reliable natural DRC but the L n /T n values range between 3.6 ± 0.14 (1A9H2), 4.0±0.37 (1A6H2B) and 4.0±0.12 (1B2H2), indicating no increase with increasing natural dose, whereas the laboratory-generated dose response curve shows a constant increase up to 1240 Gy, as observed by Chapot et al (2012) (see also Sect. 7).…”
Section: Sar-oslmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…They also report on the slow growing dose response curve beyond 400 Gy, which is represented by a linear component. Chapot et al (2012) have analysed this problem by comparing a natural dose response curve, which was constructed from the test dose normalized natural OSL signals of seven samples from a Chinese loess record, and the laboratory generated dose response curves (DRC). They observed a continuous increase of the laboratory generated normalized OSL signal above 500 Gy but no growth in the equivalent natural DRC at these Table 3.…”
Section: Sar-oslmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All OSL ages were in stratigraphic agreement and provided ages between 20 and 50 kiloyears (ka). D e values remained below 150 Gy and do not fall in a region for which methodological problems have been reported (Chapot et al, 2012;Lai, 2010;Lowick et al, 2010;Timar et al, 2010). Therefore these ages are considered reliable.…”
Section: Osl Dating and Age Modelmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…From the viewpoint of the obtained results we should also consider whether the luminescence results obtained for quartz can be underestimated in connection with the quartz luminescence properties. In the literature, several workers have reported age underestimation in OSL dating (Lowick et al, 2010;Timar-Gabor et al, 2011, Chapot et al, 2012 for high D e doses (more than 150 Gy). In the S1 unit, for all samples the equivalent doses (D e 's) show a clear change with depth for all fractions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%