The Origin Forum
File Exchange
Try Origin for Free
The Origin Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ | Send File to Tech support
 All Forums
 Origin Forum
 Origin Forum
 A curve fitting problem of surface plasmon

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Anti-Spam Code:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkUpload FileInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

 
Check here to subscribe to this topic.
   

T O P I C    R E V I E W
hjskofficial Posted - 02/20/2024 : 10:28:13 AM
Origin Ver. and Service Release (Select Help-->About Origin): 2018
Operating System: Windows 10

I would like to fit a reflectance spectrum generated by surface plasmons in order to determine the dip value and full width at half minimum. The curve exhibits a non-symmetric dip, meaning that the left and right parts of the reflection dip are markedly different. Traditionally, surface plasmon-generated curves have been fitted using Gaussian or Lorentzian functions. However, in this case, neither Gaussian nor Lorentzian functions adequately capture the original curve. I also considered using the Fano function for fitting, but it can only be applied to spectra under conditions of mode coupling. The raw data for the curve can be downloaded via the following link. Does anyone know of an appropriate solution? Thank you.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xZVUTApTBJVJV8i5J4Ej-GyznJKN_65D/view?usp=sharing
6   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
hjskofficial Posted - 02/26/2024 : 10:09:06 PM
Hi James,

I see. Thank you very much for your explanation.

HJS

quote:
Originally posted by YimingChen

1. The curve exhibits some noise. I set the Local Points to 20 so that only one peak is detected.

2. Connecting the end points with a straight line is one approach to define baseline. But the choice of method may vary depending on the nature of the peak, and you may consider alternative approaches.

James

YimingChen Posted - 02/22/2024 : 08:34:31 AM
1. The curve exhibits some noise. I set the Local Points to 20 so that only one peak is detected.

2. Connecting the end points with a straight line is one approach to define baseline. But the choice of method may vary depending on the nature of the peak, and you may consider alternative approaches.

James
hjskofficial Posted - 02/22/2024 : 04:11:45 AM
I see. Thank you very much for your reply. I have two more questions. First, why did the Local Points set to 20? And second, why did the baseline mode set to straight line?

HJS

quote:
Originally posted by YimingChen

Here the FWHM is not obtained by fitting the peak. It's the peak width at half the peak's maximum value.

James


YimingChen Posted - 02/21/2024 : 08:28:08 AM
Here the FWHM is not obtained by fitting the peak. It's the peak width at half the peak's maximum value.

James
hjskofficial Posted - 02/21/2024 : 04:58:55 AM
Hi James,

Thank you very much for your solution. Additionally, could you please explain how the Quick Peak gadget determines the FWHM? I ask this question because there are differences between the left and right parts of the curve.

Best regards,

HJS

quote:
Originally posted by YimingChen

If you just want to obtain the peak height and FWHM values, you may use the Quick Peak gadget.


James

YimingChen Posted - 02/20/2024 : 12:13:10 PM
If you just want to obtain the peak height and FWHM values, you may use the Quick Peak gadget.


James

The Origin Forum © 2020 Originlab Corporation Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000