1977
DOI: 10.1071/ch9772383
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the reliability of fluorescence decay data

Abstract: The confidence with which fluorescence decay data can be interpreted is dependent upon the accuracy and precision of these data. This dependence is especially critical when more than one exponential is involved in the decay.1,2 Unfortunately decay curve parameters have often been presented without any indication of either their accuracy or precision. An analysis is presented which suggests that the covariance ellipsoid is the most satisfactory statistic with which to define the precision.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The method of convolution used here has been shown to be the most successful of seven deconvolution techniques32 and the reliability of such an analysis has been discussed. 33 The lifetime results reported here are the mean and 95% confidence interval of at least six determinations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method of convolution used here has been shown to be the most successful of seven deconvolution techniques32 and the reliability of such an analysis has been discussed. 33 The lifetime results reported here are the mean and 95% confidence interval of at least six determinations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1024 1024 (17) We can define a likelihood function as the joint probability density function above: ( , ) = ( 1 , 2 , ⋯ , 1024 ). We substitute the expression for the probability as =̂/ to obtain:…”
Section: Maximum Likelihood Methods (Ml)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are several comparisons of the ML and RM techniques, but most of them have been limited to simulated data. In those cases where the techniques were applied to real experimental data, the comparisons were limited by several factors such as the exclusion of a real instrument response function (IRF), the bin size for the time channels of the histogram, the exclusion of a shift parameter that accounts for the wavelength difference between the instrument response function and the fluorescence signal, and, most importantly, not determining the minimum number of counts at which the respective techniques provide an acceptable result.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Analyzing data via RM and ML methods has, of course, been previously discussed. , With a few exceptions, ,,, these analyses were limited to simulated data. Our work has been stimulated by the efforts of Maus et al, who provided a careful and detailed comparison of the RM (to which they refer as LS, “least squares”) and ML methods using experimental data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%