Errata: New approach to obtain the correct chemical compositions by absorption correction using analytical transmission electron microscopy

The following is erratum for the original article entitled “New approach to obtain the correct chemical compositions by absorption correction using analytical transmission electron microscopy” by Kiyoshi FUJINO, Naotaka TOMIOKA, Hiroaki OHFUJI (Vol. 118, 013, 2023).

Replace the sentences starting from line 2 of the left column in page 8 ‘These contrasting contents of Si and other elements between systems A and B originate from the differences of the k-factors between systems A and B. The k-factors at thickness 0, $k_{i\textit{si}}^{0}$, for the pyrope in system A (Table 5) are smaller than those for system B, except for Fe. These differences of the k-factors between systems A and B led to the decrease in the atomic percentages of ions other than Si and the increase in the atomic percentage of Si in system A compared with system B. When the slightly larger values are chosen as k-factors at thickness 0 in system A, the minimum SSR for the Oxide mode will further reduce to the lower value than that for the Oxygen Independent mode. Although the atomic percentage of Fe³⁺ was not correctly estimated by the SSR using the ATEM data for pyrope, the atomic percentages of other ions were fairly correctly estimated, particularly for system B, as the Fe content was not large.’ with the following sentences.

‘However, the $k_{i\textit{si}}^{0}$ values of the grossular used for system A, which are the same values of pyrope, give the correct composition of the grossular for system A as seen in Table 3. This indicates that the pyrope sample for system A was slightly contaminated with Si. As described before for the quantitative chemical analyses, the pyrope sample for system A was thinned by Ar-ion milling, while the grossular sample for system A and all the samples for system B were thinned by Ga-ion using FIB. Further, the foils for system A were not plasma-cleaned before the X-ray intensity measurements, while all the foils for system B were plasma-cleaned just before the X-ray intensity measurements. The effects of these differences seem to be reflected in the above results.

Although the atomic percentage of Fe³⁺ in pyrope was not correctly estimated by the SSR using the ATEM data of pyrope for system B, the atomic percentages of other ions were fairly correctly estimated, as the Fe content was not large.’

Authors would like to appreciate the readers to consider the above errata, which basically do not alter any of conclusions reached in the article.