Non-Poisson Counting Uncertainty, or “What`s this J Factor All About?”
Download
Report
Transcript Non-Poisson Counting Uncertainty, or “What`s this J Factor All About?”
Keith D. McCroan
US EPA National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory
NON-POISSON COUNTING
UNCERTAINTY, OR
“WHAT’S THIS J FACTOR ALL
ABOUT?”
Issue
Most rad-chemists learn early to estimate
“counting uncertainty” by square root of
the count C.
They are likely to learn that this works
because C has a “Poisson” distribution.
They may not learn why that statement is
true, but they become comfortable with it.
“The standard deviation of C
equals its square root. Got it.”
The Poisson distribution
What’s special about a Poisson
distribution?
What is really unique is the fact that its
mean equals its variance:
μ = σ2
This is why we can estimate the standard
deviation σ by the square root of the
observed value – very convenient.
What other well-known distributions have
this property? None that I can name.
The Poisson distribution in Nature
How does Nature produce a Poisson
distribution?
The Poisson distribution is just an
approximation – like a normal distribution.
It can be a very good approximation of
another distribution called a binomial
distribution.
Binomial distribution
You get a binomial distribution when you
perform a series of N independent trials of
an experiment, each having two possible
outcomes (success and failure).
The probability of success p is the same
for each trial (e.g., flipping a coin, p = 0.5).
If X is number of successes, it has the
“binomial distribution with parameters N
and p.”
X ~ Bin(N, p)
Poisson approximation
The mean of X is Np and the variance is
Np(1 − p).
When p is tiny, the mean and variance are
almost equal, because (1 − p) ≈ 1.
Example: N is number of atoms of a
radionuclide in a source, p is probability of
decay and counting of a particular atom
during the counting period (assuming halflife isn’t short), and C is number of counts.
Poisson counting
In this case the mean of C is Np and the
variance is also approximately Np.
We can treat C as Poisson:
C ~ Poi(Np)
Poisson – Summary
In a nutshell, the Poisson distribution
describes occurrences of relatively rare
(very rare) events (e.g., decay and
counting of an unstable atom)
Where significant numbers are observed
only because the event has so many
chances to occur (e.g., very large number
of these atoms in the source)
Violating the assumptions
Imagine measuring 222Rn and progeny by
scintillation counting – Lucas cell or LSC.
Assumptions for the binomial/Poisson
distribution are violated. How?
First, the count time may not be short enough
compared to the half-life of 222Rn.
The binomial probability p may not be small.
If you were counting just the radon, you
might need the binomial distribution and not
the Poisson approximation.
More importantly...
We actually count radon + progeny.
We may start with N atoms of 222Rn in the
source, but we don’t get a simple
“success” or “failure” to record for each
one.
Each atom might produce one or more
counts as it decays.
C isn’t just the number of “successes.”
Lucas 1964
In 1964 Henry Lucas published an
analysis of the counting statistics for 222Rn
and progeny in a Lucas cell.
Apparently many rad-chemists either
never heard of it or didn’t fully appreciate
its significance.
You still see counting uncertainty for these
measurements being calculated as
.
Radon decay
Slightly simplified decay chain:
A radon atom emits three α-particles and
two β-particles on its way to becoming
210Pb (not stable but relatively long-lived).
In a Lucas cell we count just the alphas –
3 of them in this chain.
Thought experiment
Let’s pretend that for every 222Rn atom
that decays during the counting period, we
get exactly 3 counts (for the 3 α-particles
that will be emitted).
What happens to the counting statistics?
Non-Poisson counting
C is always a multiple of 3 (e.g., 0, 3, 6, 9,
12, ...).
That’s not Poisson – A Poisson variable
can assume any nonnegative value.
More important question to us: What is the
relationship between the mean and the
variance of C?
Index of dispersion, J
The ratio of the variance V(C) to the mean
E(C) is called the index of dispersion.
Often denoted by D, but Lucas used J.
That’s why this factor is sometimes called a “J
factor”
For a Poisson distribution, J = 1.
What happens to J when you get 3 counts
per decaying atom?
Mean and variance
Say D is the number of radon atoms that
decay during the counting period and C is
the number of counts produced.
Assume D is Poisson, so V(D) = E(D).
C=3×D
So,
E(C) = 3 × E(D)
V(C) = 9 × V(D)
J = V(C) / E(C) = 3 × V(D) / E(D) = 3
Index of dispersion
So, the index of dispersion for C is 3, not 1
which we’re accustomed to seeing.
This thought experiment isn’t realistic.
You don’t really get exactly 3 counts for
each atom of analyte that decays.
It’s much trickier to calculate J.
Technique
Fortunately you really only have to
consider a typical atom of the analyte
(e.g., 222Rn) at the start of the analysis.
What is the index of dispersion J for the
number of counts C that will be produced
by this hypothetical atom as it decays?
Easiest approach involves a statistical
technique called conditioning.
Conditioning
Consider the possible ways the atom can
decay, and group them into mutually
exclusive alternative cases (“events”) that
together cover all the possibilities.
It is convenient to define the events in
terms of the states the atom is in at the
beginning and end of the counting period.
Calculate the probability of each event.
Conditioning - Continued
For each event, calculate the conditional
expected values of C and C2 given the
event (i.e., assuming the event occurs).
Next calculate the overall expected values
E(C) and E(C2) as probability-weighted
averages of the conditional values.
Calculate V(C) = E(C2) − E(C)2 .
Finally, J = V(C) / E(C).
Details left to the reader.
Radium-226
Sometimes you measure radon to quantify
the parent 226Ra.
Let J be the index of dispersion for the
number of counts produced by a typical
atom of the analyte 226Ra – not radon.
Technique for finding J (conditioning) is
the same, but the details are different.
Value of J is always > 1 in this case.
Bounds: 1 < J ≤ 1 + CF × 2 / 3
Thorium-234
If you beta-count a sample containing
234Th,
you’re counting both 234Th and the
short-lived decay product 234mPa.
With ~50 % beta detection efficiency, you
have non-Poisson statistics here too.
The counts often come in pairs.
The value of J doesn’t tend to be as large
as when counting radon in a Lucas cell or
LSC (less than 1.5)
Gross alpha/beta?
If you don’t know what you’re counting,
how can you estimate J?
You really can’t.
Probably most methods implicitly assume
J = 1.
But who really knows?
Testing for J > 1
You can test J > 1 with a χ2 test, but you
may need a lot of measurements.
Minimum Detectable J > 1
5.50
5.00
4.50
4.00
J
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
10
100
Number of measurements (log scale)
1000
Important points
Suspect non-Poisson counting if:
One atom can produce more than one count
as it decays through a series of short-lived
states
Detection efficiency is high
Together these effects tend to give you on
average more than one count per decaying
atom.
Questions