Correcting the Energy-Dependent Asymmetry in Low-Energy $\mu$SR

A. Suter; G. Janka; T. Prokscha; Z. Salman

arxiv: 2604.11160 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-13 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det

Correcting the Energy-Dependent Asymmetry in Low-Energy μSR

G. Janka , Z. Salman , A. Suter , T. Prokscha This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det

keywords low-energy μSRasymmetry calibrationbeam-sample overlapdepth-resolved analysismuon spin rotationreference measurementssimulation correction

0 comments

The pith

Updated reference measurements and beam simulations correct the energy-dependent asymmetry in low-energy μSR.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Low-energy μSR measures magnetic and electronic properties at controlled depths from the surface inward, yet the measured asymmetry signal changes with muon implantation energy and beamline setup. After the 2023 upgrade to the single-muon tagging system, fresh reference data on silver establish the energy-dependent maximum asymmetry while nickel data quantify extra signals from reflected muons. Simulations then supply a correction factor that accounts for partial overlap between the beam and the sample face, with the factor depending on sample size. These steps together supply a current set of corrections that support direct comparison of data taken at different energies and enable extraction of volume fractions in depth profiles.

Core claim

Following the 2023 upgrade, updated asymmetry calibrations are established with a silver reference for the energy-dependent maximum asymmetry and a nickel reference for spurious contributions from reflected muons. A sample-size-dependent correction factor for incomplete beam-sample overlap is derived from musrSim/Geant4 simulations that incorporate an updated electrostatic field map of the sample environment and is benchmarked using implantation-energy scans on SrTiO3 samples of different lateral dimensions.

What carries the argument

The sample-size-dependent correction factor for beam-sample overlap, calculated from musrSim/Geant4 simulations that use an updated electrostatic field map and checked against SrTiO3 energy scans.

If this is right

Corrected data from different implantation energies become directly comparable for the same sample.
Volume fractions extracted from depth profiles can be treated as quantitative rather than relative.
The same correction procedure applies to other samples measured under the present beamline conditions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same simulation approach could be rerun after future beamline changes to keep the correction current.
Corrected asymmetries might allow cleaner separation of surface versus bulk magnetic signals in thin-film studies.
Testing the correction on samples with known sharp interfaces would provide an independent check of its accuracy.

Load-bearing premise

The computer simulations of the muon beam and sample environment accurately capture the real beam-sample overlap that occurs in the experiment.

What would settle it

Repeating the energy scans on SrTiO3 or another material after applying the overlap correction and finding that the resulting asymmetry still changes systematically with implantation energy or sample size would show the correction does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.11160 by A. Suter, G. Janka, T. Prokscha, Z. Salman.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Schematic illustration of the last focusing element (ring an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Energy-dependent transverse-field asymmetry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Left: Energy-dependent asymmetry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Energy-dependent wTF (100 G) asymmetry measured at 200 K on SrTiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Simulated evolution of the muon beam spot at the sam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Simulated beam–sample overlap factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Benchmark comparison between experimentally determined overlap factors from SrTiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Low-energy $\mu$SR (LE-$\mu$SR) enables depth-resolved studies of magnetic and electronic properties from the surface into the near-surface region, but the measured transverse-field asymmetry is not an intrinsic constant and depends on implantation energy and beamline conditions. Following an upgrade of the single-muon tagging system at the LEM beamline at PSI in 2023, updated asymmetry calibrations became necessary. Here, we present updated reference measurements that establish the energy-dependent maximum asymmetry using a silver reference and quantify spurious contributions from reflected muons using a nickel reference. In addition, we address systematic reductions of the measured asymmetry arising from incomplete beam--sample overlap by introducing a sample-size-dependent correction factor. This factor is obtained from musrSim/Geant4 simulations incorporating an updated electrostatic field map of the sample environment and is benchmarked using implantation-energy scans on SrTiO$_3$ samples of different lateral dimensions. Together, these updated calibrations and the simulation-based overlap correction provide a practical and up-to-date framework for LE-$\mu$SR data correction under current beam conditions and enable quantitative depth-resolved analysis of volume fractions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This updates the asymmetry calibrations and adds a sample-size overlap correction for LE-μSR after the 2023 LEM upgrade, which is a timely practical fix but rests on narrow benchmarking.

read the letter

The core contribution is straightforward. After the single-muon tagging upgrade at PSI's LEM beamline, the team remeasured the energy-dependent maximum asymmetry on silver and the reflected-muon background on nickel. They then derived a sample-size-dependent correction for incomplete beam-sample overlap from musrSim/Geant4 runs that use an updated electrostatic field map, and they checked the factor against implantation-energy scans on SrTiO3 pieces of different lateral sizes. The result is a set of current numbers and a correction procedure that users can apply to get better volume-fraction estimates in depth-resolved work. That is useful incremental housekeeping for the technique. The references are independent of the final correction, and the simulation approach is standard for the field, so there is no obvious circularity in the abstract-level description. The paper does what it sets out to do without overclaiming a new framework. The soft spot is the benchmarking. Everything for the overlap correction is validated only on SrTiO3. If other materials produce different muon stopping profiles, surface scattering, or local field perturbations, the simulated factor will not transfer cleanly and the corrected asymmetries will carry a systematic offset. The abstract gives no indication that the authors tested additional sample types or conditions, so the claim that the framework supports quantitative analysis in general rests on that untested assumption. This is a real but contained limitation rather than a fatal flaw. The work is aimed at experimentalists already running LE-μSR at the LEM beamline who need to update their analysis pipeline. A reader who does depth-resolved magnetic or electronic studies with this instrument will get immediate value from the numbers and the correction recipe. It is not broad enough to interest people outside the μSR community. The paper deserves a serious referee. The updates are timely, the methods are described at a level that allows reproduction, and the generalization question is something reviewers can settle with targeted comments rather than requiring a full rewrite.

Referee Report

1 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents updated calibrations for the energy-dependent transverse-field asymmetry in low-energy muon spin rotation (LE-μSR) at the LEM beamline following the 2023 single-muon tagging upgrade. It reports new reference measurements establishing the maximum asymmetry versus implantation energy on a silver sample, quantifies spurious reflected-muon contributions using a nickel reference, and introduces a sample-size-dependent correction factor for incomplete beam–sample overlap. The correction is derived from musrSim/Geant4 simulations that incorporate an updated electrostatic field map of the sample environment and is benchmarked via implantation-energy scans on SrTiO₃ samples of varying lateral dimensions.

Significance. If the simulation-derived overlap correction generalizes beyond the benchmark material, the work supplies a practical, up-to-date set of reference values and a correction procedure that will improve the quantitative reliability of depth-resolved LE-μSR measurements of volume fractions and near-surface magnetic properties under present beam conditions. The explicit use of an updated field map and independent reference-sample data strengthens the reproducibility of the proposed framework.

major comments (1)

[Benchmarking section (SrTiO₃ validation)] The overlap correction factor is obtained from musrSim/Geant4 simulations benchmarked exclusively on SrTiO₃ samples of different lateral sizes (see the section describing the SrTiO₃ energy scans and the comparison to simulation). Because the central claim is that the resulting framework enables quantitative depth-resolved analysis for general samples, the manuscript must either demonstrate that the correction is insensitive to material-specific muon stopping profiles and surface scattering or explicitly state the range of applicability and the associated systematic uncertainty.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a concise statement of the implantation-energy range over which the new silver and nickel calibrations were performed.
[Figures and results sections] All figures presenting asymmetry data should include explicit error bars and a clear description of how uncertainties were propagated from the reference measurements.
[Methods / simulation description] The simulation parameters (electrostatic field map resolution, muon beam distribution, and sample geometry definitions) should be tabulated or provided in a supplementary file to allow independent reproduction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of the manuscript and the recommendation for minor revision. The single major comment is addressed below; we will incorporate a clarification of applicability in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Benchmarking section (SrTiO₃ validation)] The overlap correction factor is obtained from musrSim/Geant4 simulations benchmarked exclusively on SrTiO₃ samples of different lateral sizes (see the section describing the SrTiO₃ energy scans and the comparison to simulation). Because the central claim is that the resulting framework enables quantitative depth-resolved analysis for general samples, the manuscript must either demonstrate that the correction is insensitive to material-specific muon stopping profiles and surface scattering or explicitly state the range of applicability and the associated systematic uncertainty.

Authors: We agree that the overlap correction was benchmarked exclusively on SrTiO₃ and that the manuscript's presentation of a general framework therefore requires an explicit statement of applicability. The correction is obtained from simulations that incorporate the measured beam spot, sample geometry, and an updated electrostatic field map; the dominant contribution is geometric beam–sample overlap rather than material-specific stopping or scattering. Because additional experimental benchmarks on other materials are not available, we will revise the manuscript to state the range of applicability (samples with muon implantation profiles comparable to those of the SrTiO₃ and Ag references under present LEM conditions) together with a qualitative estimate of the associated systematic uncertainty for materials with markedly different densities or scattering cross-sections. This clarification will be added to the discussion of the correction procedure and to the conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; calibrations and corrections rest on independent references and external simulations

full rationale

The paper derives updated asymmetry values directly from separate silver and nickel reference measurements and obtains the overlap correction factor from musrSim/Geant4 runs that incorporate an updated external field map. This factor is then benchmarked against independent energy-dependent asymmetry scans on SrTiO3 samples of varying size. None of these steps reduce the final framework to a fitted parameter or self-referential definition by the paper's own equations; the central result remains externally anchored rather than tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that silver and nickel references behave ideally and that Geant4 simulations faithfully reproduce the physical beam and electrostatic environment; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (3)

domain assumption Silver reference sample exhibits the true maximum asymmetry without additional damping or background effects.
Used to establish the energy-dependent maximum asymmetry calibration.
domain assumption Nickel reference sample allows clean quantification of reflected-muon contributions.
Used to measure spurious contributions from reflected muons.
domain assumption musrSim/Geant4 simulations with the updated field map accurately represent real beam-sample overlap.
Basis for the sample-size-dependent correction factor.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5511 in / 1479 out tokens · 84757 ms · 2026-05-10T16:26:50.593822+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

[1]

Silver is non-magnetic and exhibits only negligible muon-spin depolarization; therefore, devia- tions ofA Ag from a constant value directly reflect instrumental effects

Silver Measurement To determine the maximally achievable transverse-fieldA0, a silver-coated sample plate is mounted on the cryostat and the depth-dependentA 0 (here labeled asA Ag) is measured for dif- ferent transport settings. Silver is non-magnetic and exhibits only negligible muon-spin depolarization; therefore, devia- tions ofA Ag from a constant va...

work page
[2]

Nickel is fer- romagnetic even at room temperature, and muons stopping in the Ni layer depolarize on timescales too fast to be resolved by the LEM spectrometer (within∼0.07µs) [20]

Nickel Measurement The contribution from reflected muons is characterized in- dependently using a nickel-coated sample plate. Nickel is fer- romagnetic even at room temperature, and muons stopping in the Ni layer depolarize on timescales too fast to be resolved by the LEM spectrometer (within∼0.07µs) [20]. Consequently, muons implanted into the Ni plate d...

work page
[3]

5 summarizes the combined impact of the instrumental effects discussed in Sec

STO Measurement Fig. 5 summarizes the combined impact of the instrumental effects discussed in Sec. III, using depth-resolved measure- ments on SrTiO 3 (STO), measured at 200 K. Sincef dia = 100% in STO at temperatures above 70 K [14], any devia- tion from a constant asymmetry directly reflects non-sample- related contributions. A systematic reduction ofA...

work page doi:10.16907/901d6fda-db9a-4925-
[4]

Prokscha, E

T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, K. Deiters, F. Foroughi, D. George, R. Kobler, A. Suter, and V . Vrankovic, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment595, 317 (2008)

work page 2008
[5]

Prokscha, E

T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, C. David, A. Hofer, H. Glückler, and L. Scandella, Applied Surface Science172, 235 (2001)

work page 2001
[6]

Morenzoni, T

E. Morenzoni, T. Prokscha, A. Suter, H. Luetkens, and R. Khasanov, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter16, S4583 (2004)

work page 2004
[7]

Blundell, R

S. Blundell, R. De Renzi, T. Lancaster, and F. L. Pratt, Muon Spectroscopy: An Introduction(Oxford University Press, 2022)

work page 2022
[8]

Amato and E

A. Amato and E. Morenzoni,Introduction to Muon Spin Spec- troscopy(Springer, 2024)

work page 2024
[9]

Hofer,Niederenergetische Myonen: Eigenschaften und An- wendungen, Ph.D

A. Hofer,Niederenergetische Myonen: Eigenschaften und An- wendungen, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Konstanz (1998)

work page 1998
[10]

K. Khaw, A. Antognini, P. Crivelli, K. Kirch, E. Morenzoni, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Journal of Instrumenta- tion10, P10025 (2015)

work page 2015
[11]

Janka, M

G. Janka, M. Mendes Martins, X. Ni, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams27, 054501 (2024)

work page 2024
[12]

Suter, M

A. Suter, M. M. Martins, X. Ni, T. Prokscha, and Z. Salman, Journal of Physics: Conference Series2462, 012011 (2023)

work page 2023
[13]

Janka, H

G. Janka, H. Ishchenko, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams28, 082802 (2025)

work page 2025
[14]

P. D. de Réotier and A. Yaouanc, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter9, 9113 (1997)

work page 1997
[15]

Suter and B

A. Suter and B. Wojek, Physics Procedia30, 69 (2012), 12th International Conference on Muon Spin Rotation, Relaxation and Resonance (muSR2011)

work page 2012
[16]

Prokscha, K

T. Prokscha, K. Chow, H. Luetkens, E. Morenzoni, G. Nieuwenhuys, Z. Salman, R. Scheuermann, A. Suter, and H. Weber, Physics Procedia30, 219 (2012), 12th International Conference on Muon Spin Rotation, Relaxation and Resonance (muSR2011)

work page 2012
[17]

Salman, T

Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, A. Amato, E. Morenzoni, R. Scheuer- mann, K. Sedlak, and A. Suter, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 156801 (2014)

work page 2014
[18]

Morenzoni, H

E. Morenzoni, H. Glückler, T. Prokscha, R. Khasanov, H. Luetkens, M. Birke, E. M. Forgan, Ch. Niedermayer, and M. Pleines, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Section B192, 254 (2002)

work page 2002
[19]

J. P. Biersack and W. Eckstein, Applied Physics A34, 73 (1984)

work page 1984
[20]

Allegrini, R

F. Allegrini, R. W. Ebert, G. Nicolaou, and G. Grubbs, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms359, 115 (2015)

work page 2015
[21]

Allegrini, R

F. Allegrini, R. W. Ebert, and H. O. Funsten, Journal of Geo- physical Research: Space Physics121, 3931 (2016)

work page 2016
[22]

X. Ni, L. Zhou, M. M. Martins, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1054, 168399 (2023)

work page 2023
[23]

Saadaoui, Z

H. Saadaoui, Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, A. Suter, B. Wojek, and E. Morenzoni, Physics Procedia30, 164 (2012)

work page 2012
[24]

Shiroka, T

T. Shiroka, T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, and K. Sedlak, Physica B: Condensed Matter404, 966 (2009)

work page 2009
[25]

musrSim simulation,

“musrSim simulation,”https://gitea.psi.ch/lmu/ musrsim, accessed: 2026-02-11

work page 2026
[26]

Salman, T

Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, P. Keller, E. Morenzoni, H. Saadaoui, K. Sedlak, T. Shiroka, S. Sidorov, A. Suter, V . Vrankovic, and H.-P. Weber, Physics Procedia30, 55 (2012)

work page 2012
[27]

Sedlak, R

K. Sedlak, R. Scheuermann, T. Shiroka, A. Stoykov, A. Raselli, and A. Amato, Physics Procedia30, 61 (2012)

work page 2012
[28]

Agostinelli, J

S. Agostinelli, J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, H. Araujo, P. Arce, M. Asai, D. Axen, S. Banerjee, G. Barrand, F. Behner, L. Bellagamba, J. Boudreau, L. Broglia, A. Brunengo, H. Burkhardt, S. Chauvie, J. Chuma, R. Chytracek, G. Coop- erman, G. Cosmo, P. Degtyarenko, A. Dell’Acqua, G. Depaola, D. Dietrich, R. Enami, A. Feliciello, C. Ferguson, H. Fes...

work page 2003
[29]

D. A. Dahl, International Journal of Mass Spectrometry200, 3 (2000)

work page 2000

[1] [1]

Silver is non-magnetic and exhibits only negligible muon-spin depolarization; therefore, devia- tions ofA Ag from a constant value directly reflect instrumental effects

Silver Measurement To determine the maximally achievable transverse-fieldA0, a silver-coated sample plate is mounted on the cryostat and the depth-dependentA 0 (here labeled asA Ag) is measured for dif- ferent transport settings. Silver is non-magnetic and exhibits only negligible muon-spin depolarization; therefore, devia- tions ofA Ag from a constant va...

work page

[2] [2]

Nickel is fer- romagnetic even at room temperature, and muons stopping in the Ni layer depolarize on timescales too fast to be resolved by the LEM spectrometer (within∼0.07µs) [20]

Nickel Measurement The contribution from reflected muons is characterized in- dependently using a nickel-coated sample plate. Nickel is fer- romagnetic even at room temperature, and muons stopping in the Ni layer depolarize on timescales too fast to be resolved by the LEM spectrometer (within∼0.07µs) [20]. Consequently, muons implanted into the Ni plate d...

work page

[3] [3]

5 summarizes the combined impact of the instrumental effects discussed in Sec

STO Measurement Fig. 5 summarizes the combined impact of the instrumental effects discussed in Sec. III, using depth-resolved measure- ments on SrTiO 3 (STO), measured at 200 K. Sincef dia = 100% in STO at temperatures above 70 K [14], any devia- tion from a constant asymmetry directly reflects non-sample- related contributions. A systematic reduction ofA...

work page doi:10.16907/901d6fda-db9a-4925-

[4] [4]

Prokscha, E

T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, K. Deiters, F. Foroughi, D. George, R. Kobler, A. Suter, and V . Vrankovic, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment595, 317 (2008)

work page 2008

[5] [5]

Prokscha, E

T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, C. David, A. Hofer, H. Glückler, and L. Scandella, Applied Surface Science172, 235 (2001)

work page 2001

[6] [6]

Morenzoni, T

E. Morenzoni, T. Prokscha, A. Suter, H. Luetkens, and R. Khasanov, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter16, S4583 (2004)

work page 2004

[7] [7]

Blundell, R

S. Blundell, R. De Renzi, T. Lancaster, and F. L. Pratt, Muon Spectroscopy: An Introduction(Oxford University Press, 2022)

work page 2022

[8] [8]

Amato and E

A. Amato and E. Morenzoni,Introduction to Muon Spin Spec- troscopy(Springer, 2024)

work page 2024

[9] [9]

Hofer,Niederenergetische Myonen: Eigenschaften und An- wendungen, Ph.D

A. Hofer,Niederenergetische Myonen: Eigenschaften und An- wendungen, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Konstanz (1998)

work page 1998

[10] [10]

K. Khaw, A. Antognini, P. Crivelli, K. Kirch, E. Morenzoni, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Journal of Instrumenta- tion10, P10025 (2015)

work page 2015

[11] [11]

Janka, M

G. Janka, M. Mendes Martins, X. Ni, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams27, 054501 (2024)

work page 2024

[12] [12]

Suter, M

A. Suter, M. M. Martins, X. Ni, T. Prokscha, and Z. Salman, Journal of Physics: Conference Series2462, 012011 (2023)

work page 2023

[13] [13]

Janka, H

G. Janka, H. Ishchenko, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams28, 082802 (2025)

work page 2025

[14] [14]

P. D. de Réotier and A. Yaouanc, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter9, 9113 (1997)

work page 1997

[15] [15]

Suter and B

A. Suter and B. Wojek, Physics Procedia30, 69 (2012), 12th International Conference on Muon Spin Rotation, Relaxation and Resonance (muSR2011)

work page 2012

[16] [16]

Prokscha, K

T. Prokscha, K. Chow, H. Luetkens, E. Morenzoni, G. Nieuwenhuys, Z. Salman, R. Scheuermann, A. Suter, and H. Weber, Physics Procedia30, 219 (2012), 12th International Conference on Muon Spin Rotation, Relaxation and Resonance (muSR2011)

work page 2012

[17] [17]

Salman, T

Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, A. Amato, E. Morenzoni, R. Scheuer- mann, K. Sedlak, and A. Suter, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 156801 (2014)

work page 2014

[18] [18]

Morenzoni, H

E. Morenzoni, H. Glückler, T. Prokscha, R. Khasanov, H. Luetkens, M. Birke, E. M. Forgan, Ch. Niedermayer, and M. Pleines, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Section B192, 254 (2002)

work page 2002

[19] [19]

J. P. Biersack and W. Eckstein, Applied Physics A34, 73 (1984)

work page 1984

[20] [20]

Allegrini, R

F. Allegrini, R. W. Ebert, G. Nicolaou, and G. Grubbs, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms359, 115 (2015)

work page 2015

[21] [21]

Allegrini, R

F. Allegrini, R. W. Ebert, and H. O. Funsten, Journal of Geo- physical Research: Space Physics121, 3931 (2016)

work page 2016

[22] [22]

X. Ni, L. Zhou, M. M. Martins, Z. Salman, A. Suter, and T. Prokscha, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment1054, 168399 (2023)

work page 2023

[23] [23]

Saadaoui, Z

H. Saadaoui, Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, A. Suter, B. Wojek, and E. Morenzoni, Physics Procedia30, 164 (2012)

work page 2012

[24] [24]

Shiroka, T

T. Shiroka, T. Prokscha, E. Morenzoni, and K. Sedlak, Physica B: Condensed Matter404, 966 (2009)

work page 2009

[25] [25]

musrSim simulation,

“musrSim simulation,”https://gitea.psi.ch/lmu/ musrsim, accessed: 2026-02-11

work page 2026

[26] [26]

Salman, T

Z. Salman, T. Prokscha, P. Keller, E. Morenzoni, H. Saadaoui, K. Sedlak, T. Shiroka, S. Sidorov, A. Suter, V . Vrankovic, and H.-P. Weber, Physics Procedia30, 55 (2012)

work page 2012

[27] [27]

Sedlak, R

K. Sedlak, R. Scheuermann, T. Shiroka, A. Stoykov, A. Raselli, and A. Amato, Physics Procedia30, 61 (2012)

work page 2012

[28] [28]

Agostinelli, J

S. Agostinelli, J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, H. Araujo, P. Arce, M. Asai, D. Axen, S. Banerjee, G. Barrand, F. Behner, L. Bellagamba, J. Boudreau, L. Broglia, A. Brunengo, H. Burkhardt, S. Chauvie, J. Chuma, R. Chytracek, G. Coop- erman, G. Cosmo, P. Degtyarenko, A. Dell’Acqua, G. Depaola, D. Dietrich, R. Enami, A. Feliciello, C. Ferguson, H. Fes...

work page 2003

[29] [29]

D. A. Dahl, International Journal of Mass Spectrometry200, 3 (2000)

work page 2000