The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An assessment of the resolution limitation due to radiation-damage in X-ray diffraction microscopy
Open accessAbstract
X-ray diffraction microscopy (XDM) is a new form of x-ray imaging that is being practiced at several third-generation synchrotron-radiation x-ray facilities. Nine years have elapsed since the technique was first introduced and it has made rapid progress in demonstrating high-resolution three-dimensional imaging and promises few-nm resolution with much larger samples than can be imaged in the transmission electron microscope. Both life- and materials-science applications of XDM are intended, and it is expected that the principal limitation to resolution will be radiation damage for life science and the coherent power of available x-ray sources for material science. In this paper we address the question of the role of radiation damage. We use a statistical analysis based on the so-called “dose fractionation theorem” of Hegerl and Hoppe to calculate the dose needed to make an image of a single life-science sample by XDM with a given resolution. We find that for simply-shaped objects the needed dose scales with the inverse fourth power of the resolution and present experimental evidence to support this finding. To determine the maximum tolerable dose we have assembled a number of data taken from the literature plus some measurements of our own which cover ranges of resolution that are not well covered otherwise. The conclusion of this study is that, based on the natural contrast between protein and water and “Rose-criterion” image quality, one should be able to image a frozen-hydrated biological sample using XDM at a resolution of about 10 nm.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Potential for biomolecular imaging with femtosecond X-ray pulses
Neutze, R., Wouts, R., van der Spoel, D., Weckert, E., & Hajdu, J. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35021099 · Cited by 2,022
Cited by
X-ray ptychographic computed tomography at 16 nm isotropic 3D resolution
Holler, M., Diaz, A., Guizar-Sicairos, M., Karvinen, P., Färm, E., Härkönen, E., Ritala, M., Menzel, A., Raabe, J., & Bunk, O. (2014) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep03857 · Cited by 357
Multiwavelength Anomalous Diffraction at High X-Ray Intensity
Son, S.-K., Chapman, H. N., & Santra, R. (2011) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.107.218102 · Cited by 120
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Howells, M. R., Beetz, T., Chapman, H. N., Cui, C., Holton, J. M., Jacobsen, C. J., Kirz, J., Lima, E., Marchesini, S., Miao, H., Sayre, D., Shapiro, D. A., Spence, J. C. H., & Starodub, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 170
- Issue
- 1-3
- Pages
- 4-12
- ISSN
- 0368-2048 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137089455
- Cited by
- 524
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An assessment of the resolution limitation due to radiation-damage in X-ray diffraction microscopy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.elspec.2008.10.008
- The paper
- Howells, M. R., Beetz, T., Chapman, H. N., Cui, C., Holton, J. M., Jacobsen, C. J., Kirz, J., Lima, E., Marchesini, S., Miao, H., Sayre, D., Shapiro, D. A., Spence, J. C. H., & Starodub, D. (2009). An assessment of the resolution limitation due to radiation-damage in X-ray diffraction microscopy. Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elspec.2008.10.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.