PNNL

Abstract

Motivated by earlier observations, this study was undertaken to systematically examine the adequacy of reporting of information necessary (metadata) to understand X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) data collection and data analysis in the scientific literature. The information for this study was obtained from papers published in three high-quality journals over a six-month period in 2019 and throughout 2021. Each paper was evaluated to determine whether the authors had reported (percentages of the papers properly providing the information given in parentheses) the spectrometer (66%), fitting software (15%), X-ray source (40%), pass energy (10%), spot size (5%), synthetic peak shapes in fits (10%), backgrounds in fits (10%), whether the XPS data is shown in the main body of the paper or in the supporting information (or both), and whether fitted or unfitted spectra were shown (80% of published spectra are fit). The Shirley background and the Al Ka or Mg Ka X-ray sources are by far the most widely used. There is good agreement between the results gathered during the two years of the survey. There are some hints the situation may be improving. This study also provides a list of the information/parameters that should be reported when XPS is performed.