Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis

Abstract The long-debated question in analytical chemistry of which of the area ratio or the intensity ratio is the more precise has yielded no definitive analytical conclusion. To address this issue theoretically, we derived analytical solutions for the lower limits of estimation precision for spec...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yuuki Hagiwara, Tatsu Kuwatani
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2024-10-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71653-3
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850275687798145024
author Yuuki Hagiwara
Tatsu Kuwatani
author_facet Yuuki Hagiwara
Tatsu Kuwatani
author_sort Yuuki Hagiwara
collection DOAJ
description Abstract The long-debated question in analytical chemistry of which of the area ratio or the intensity ratio is the more precise has yielded no definitive analytical conclusion. To address this issue theoretically, we derived analytical solutions for the lower limits of estimation precision for spectral parameters, including the intensity ratio and area ratio, based on the Cramér–Rao lower bound (CRLB) framework for a Gaussian spectrum. The precisions of spectral parameter estimations from the analytical solutions were consistent with results obtained from Monte Carlo simulations. Our theoretical and simulation results revealed that the precision of estimating the area ratio surpassed that of the intensity ratio by a factor of $$\sqrt{2}$$ 2 . Additionally, our experimental results aligned well with both theoretical predictions and simulation outcomes, further validating our approach. This increased precision of the area ratio is due to negative covariance between intensity and bandwidth, rather than the area containing more intensity information, as often misinterpreted. Consequently, and quite counter intuitively, prior bandwidth and intensity related information does not improve the area ratio precision: it worsens it. The analytical solution we derived represents the fundamental limits of spectral parameter measurement precision. Thus, it can be used as an alternative method for estimating the minimum error when experimental measurement uncertainty cannot be determined.
format Article
id doaj-art-91cffe8b0e124c9fa9f7b2c5eeaf56e8
institution OA Journals
issn 2045-2322
language English
publishDate 2024-10-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Scientific Reports
spelling doaj-art-91cffe8b0e124c9fa9f7b2c5eeaf56e82025-08-20T01:50:38ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222024-10-0114111110.1038/s41598-024-71653-3Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysisYuuki Hagiwara0Tatsu Kuwatani1Research Institute for Marine Geodynamics, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyResearch Institute for Marine Geodynamics, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyAbstract The long-debated question in analytical chemistry of which of the area ratio or the intensity ratio is the more precise has yielded no definitive analytical conclusion. To address this issue theoretically, we derived analytical solutions for the lower limits of estimation precision for spectral parameters, including the intensity ratio and area ratio, based on the Cramér–Rao lower bound (CRLB) framework for a Gaussian spectrum. The precisions of spectral parameter estimations from the analytical solutions were consistent with results obtained from Monte Carlo simulations. Our theoretical and simulation results revealed that the precision of estimating the area ratio surpassed that of the intensity ratio by a factor of $$\sqrt{2}$$ 2 . Additionally, our experimental results aligned well with both theoretical predictions and simulation outcomes, further validating our approach. This increased precision of the area ratio is due to negative covariance between intensity and bandwidth, rather than the area containing more intensity information, as often misinterpreted. Consequently, and quite counter intuitively, prior bandwidth and intensity related information does not improve the area ratio precision: it worsens it. The analytical solution we derived represents the fundamental limits of spectral parameter measurement precision. Thus, it can be used as an alternative method for estimating the minimum error when experimental measurement uncertainty cannot be determined.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71653-3Cramér–Rao lower boundFisher informationMonte Carlo simulationIntensity ratioArea ratioVariance–covariance matrix
spellingShingle Yuuki Hagiwara
Tatsu Kuwatani
Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
Scientific Reports
Cramér–Rao lower bound
Fisher information
Monte Carlo simulation
Intensity ratio
Area ratio
Variance–covariance matrix
title Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
title_full Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
title_fullStr Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
title_full_unstemmed Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
title_short Precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
title_sort precision comparison of intensity ratios and area ratios in spectral analysis
topic Cramér–Rao lower bound
Fisher information
Monte Carlo simulation
Intensity ratio
Area ratio
Variance–covariance matrix
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71653-3
work_keys_str_mv AT yuukihagiwara precisioncomparisonofintensityratiosandarearatiosinspectralanalysis
AT tatsukuwatani precisioncomparisonofintensityratiosandarearatiosinspectralanalysis