temperature on the weathering of gasoline 4 , and even examining potential interference of body products and substrates to the identification of ILRs on worn clothing 10. However, differences in the chromatographic conditions and columns can lead to variations in retention times for ILRs from one laboratory to another, making inter-laboratory comparisons of GC-MS profiles challenging. Furthermore, GC-MS is time consuming, which hinders the rapid information collection for arson investigators. Therefore, many novel analytical methods have been developed for the fast and accurate investigation of ILRs in fire debris 3,11-16. Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) has been employed for real time in-situ analysis and depth profiling, which can provide valuable information about fire debris that is complementary to the classification of the original sample components and combustion residues 11. However, the laser-based spectroscopic techniques require expensive and complicated laser devices, which limits the utility of LIBS in practical applications at fire scenes. Headspace-mass spectrometry electronic nose (E-Nose) was proposed for the analysis of ILRs, including the investigation of fire suppression agents and weathering process on ILs with fast determination capabilities, no solvent and absorbent requirement, and easy operation 12-14,17,18. To solve the problem of GC-MS being time-consuming, a new method using direct analysis in real-time mass spectrometry (DART-MS) without extraction was developed for the fast identification of ILs from substrates 15. Recently, an alternative approach based on the ion mobility spectrometry sum spectrum (IMSSS) from headspace analysis was developed to analyze ILRs in fire debris 16. The results show that IMSSS is capable of fast, objective, and easy interpretation of fire debris data, real-time monitoring, and operation at the fire scene because the devices are portable. However, the fire debris samples have to be kept in the auto-sampler oven for agitation and heating for 20 min leading to time-consuming headspace processing step. Sample preparation is a critical component in the analysis of samples. It is a step that is often scrutinized and challenged by the courts. Along with the analytical methods mentioned above, there are generally sample preparation procedures for extracting and concentrating volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from ILRs with complicated substrate materials in fire debris 3,6. The passive headspace concentration with activated charcoal specified by the ASTM E1412 standard is currently the most commonly used method in the United States to isolate and concentrate VOCs from ILRs in fire debris because it is sensitive, easy to conduct, and non-destructive 19. Solid-phase micro-extraction (SPME) using Tenax as a sorbent is another commonly used sample preparation technique 8,20. Many new sample preparation techniques have been established, such as headspace single-drop microextraction (HS-SDME) 21 , negative pressure dynamic headspace concentration 22 , and ...