Being more precise, again

Dr. Stuart Wright, Senior Scientist, Gatan/EDAX

In my last blog posting, I was excited to show results from version 9 of EDAX OIM Analysis™ for refining EBSD orientation measurements. However, two questions have been gnawing at me since that post. (1) How much does the size of the patterns affect the results? and (2) How sensitive is the refinement to noise in the patterns? To explore these two questions, I will use data from the same silicon single crystal I used in my previous post – a 1 x 1 mm scan with a 30 µm step size. The patterns were 480 x 480 pixels and of excellent quality.

I added two levels of Poisson noise to the patterns, as shown in Figure 1, and will term these noise levels 1 and 2 for the subsequent analysis.

Si single crystal patterns processed with adaptive histogram equalization [1]. (a) initial pattern, (b) pattern after a moderate level of added noise, and (c) pattern after a significant level of added noise.

Figure 1. Si single crystal patterns processed with adaptive histogram equalization [1]. (a) initial pattern, (b) pattern after a moderate level of added noise, and (c) pattern after a significant level of added noise.

The next step was to bin the patterns, index them using spherical indexing, and then apply orientation refinement as implemented in version 9 of EDAX OIM Matrix™. To perform the experiments, I binned the patterns to 360 × 360, 240 × 240, 160 × 160, 120 × 120, 96 × 96, 80 × 80, 60 × 60, and 48 × 48. After binning, I re-indexed them using spherical indexing and then calculated kernel average misorientations (KAM). I used the average KAM value as a measure of precision and plotted that against the binned pattern size for all three noise levels (0, 1, and 2). Figure 2 shows the results of the experiments.

Figure 2. Plot of average KAM values vs. pattern width for all three noise levels.

I have a couple of observations from these results.

  • In general, the first level of noise has only a minimal impact on the precision, whereas the higher level of noise has a more significant impact.
  • For noise levels 0 and 1, the average KAM values remain relatively constant until the pattern size dips below 120 × 120 pixels. Surprisingly, good results can be obtained until the smallest size of 48 × 48 pixels is reached. For noise level 2, the precision drops off significantly at a pattern size of 96 × 96. Those using Velocity cameras have probably noticed that the default pattern size is 120 × 120 pixels. Similar results to those I’ve presented here lead us to choose 120 × 120 pixels as the default. These results confirm the soundness of that choice.

I hope these results can guide the expectations for what orientation refinement can achieve in your samples. We will announce the official release of EDAX OIM Analysis 9 in the next few weeks. We hope you are excited to apply it to your materials. The orientation refinement tools are part of EDAX OIM Matrix, which is an add-on module. While you wait for your copy of version 9, make sure you save the patterns you plan to apply orientation refinement measurements to. No, I’m not getting paid by the hard drive manufacturers 😉.

Figure 3. Screenshot of EDAX APEX showing where the check-box to save patterns is located within the software.

[1] Pizer, S.M., Amburn, E.P., Austin, J.D., Cromartie, R., Geselowitz, A., Greer, T., ter Haar Romeny, B., Zimmerman, J.B. and Zuiderveld, K., 1987. Adaptive histogram equalization and its variations. Computer vision, graphics, and image processing 39: 355-368.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply