{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02512998266897747, 'fraction_numerical': 0.036395147313691506, 'mean_word_length': 4.579710144927536, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Monte Carlo Study of Quantitative Electron Probe Microanalysis of Monazite with a Coating Film: Comparison of 25 nm Carbon and 10 nm Gold at E0= 15 and 25 keV

Carbon (25–30 nm in thickness) is the most common coating material used in the electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) of geological samples. A gold coating is also used in special cases to reduce the surface damage by electron bombardment. Monte Carlo simulations have been performed for monazite with a 25 nm carbon and a 10 nm gold coating to understand the effect of a coating film in quantitative EPMA at E0= 15 keV and 25 keV. Simulations showed that carbon‐coated monazite gave the same depth distribution of the generated X‐rays in the monazite as uncoated monazite, whilst gold‐coated monazite gave a distorted depth distribution. A 10 nm gold coating was 1.06 (15 keV) and 1.05 (25 keV) times higher in k‐ratio between monazite and pure thorium than a 25 nm carbon coating at an X‐ray take‐off angle of 40 degrees. Thus, a 10 nm gold coating is a possible factor contributing to inaccuracy in quantitative EPMA of monazite, while a 25 nm carbon coating does not have a significant effect.