Global DIC-based sample-detector geometry refinement for accurate EBSD indexing

Claire Griesbach; Dennis M. Kochmann

arxiv: 2604.25869 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Global DIC-based sample-detector geometry refinement for accurate EBSD indexing

Claire Griesbach , Dennis M. Kochmann This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 15:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords EBSD indexinggeometry refinementdigital image correlationpattern center calibrationpseudosymmetryorientation accuracyKikuchi patternssample-detector geometry

0 comments

The pith

A DIC-based method refines the full sample-detector geometry to produce one consistent EBSD map.

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

The paper develops a refinement technique that uses digital image correlation to identify pattern shifts that stay the same across an entire EBSD map. These consistent shifts are attributed to errors in the global geometry parameters rather than to local crystal orientations. The approach simultaneously corrects the pattern center and the sample and detector tilt angles. Demonstrations on single-crystal silicon and on barium titanate with six pseudosymmetric variants show tighter orientation consistency and clearer variant separation than conventional optimization routines.

Core claim

We present a DIC-based geometry refinement method that obtains a single map-consistent sample-detector geometry, refining both the pattern center and sample/detector angles. We effectively decouple the local orientation changes from the global geometry effects on the Kikuchi patterns by calculating the consistent map-wide simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts associated with global geometry parameter errors. Using single-crystal silicon and barium titanate as model materials, we demonstrate improved map-wide orientation consistency and more robust discrimination of pseudosymmetric variants than the Nelder-Mead and Differential Evolution optimization strategies.

What carries the argument

Map-wide consistent simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts extracted by digital image correlation and used to optimize the full set of global geometry parameters.

If this is right

A single set of geometry parameters applies uniformly to every pattern in the map.
Orientation indexing becomes more accurate without separate local corrections.
Pseudosymmetric variants become easier to distinguish because geometry-induced pattern distortions are removed.
The method works with existing EBSD data sets and requires no additional hardware.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Routine EBSD mapping of low-symmetry or pseudosymmetric phases could become more reliable in industrial settings.
The same shift-consistency idea might be adapted to refine geometry in transmission Kikuchi diffraction or 3-D EBSD reconstructions.
Combining the refinement with faster indexing algorithms could support real-time high-resolution microstructure analysis.

Load-bearing premise

Map-wide pattern shifts can be attributed to global geometry errors while remaining independent of local orientation variations.

What would settle it

Refined geometry parameters fail to reduce the measured orientation spread on a known single-crystal specimen or fail to improve variant discrimination in a pseudosymmetric material.

read the original abstract

Electron backscatter diffraction is a powerful tool for mapping crystallographic microstructures. However, the primary crux to improving orientation accuracy and applying the technique to challenging materials lies in the correct calibration of the sample-detector geometry. Many approaches have aimed at overcoming this barrier through various pattern center calibration strategies, but the pattern center only defines part of the sample-detector geometry. Here, we present a DIC-based geometry refinement method that obtains a single map-consistent sample-detector geometry, refining both the pattern center and sample/detector angles. We effectively decouple the local orientation changes from the global geometry effects on the Kikuchi patterns by calculating the consistent map-wide simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts associated with global geometry parameter errors. Using single-crystal silicon and barium titanate (a material possessing six pseudosymmetric variants) as model materials, we demonstrate improved map-wide orientation consistency and more robust discrimination of pseudosymmetric variants than the Nelder-Mead and Differential Evolution optimization strategies.

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

DIC-based global EBSD geometry refinement is a practical idea but its core decoupling assumption lacks the controlled checks needed to confirm it works when local variations are present.

read the letter

The paper introduces a DIC method that finds one map-wide sample-detector geometry by minimizing consistent simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts, refining both pattern center and angles at once while holding local orientations fixed. This is the main new piece: treating the entire map as sharing a single geometry set rather than calibrating locally or just the center. On single-crystal silicon and pseudosymmetric BaTiO3 it reports visibly better orientation consistency and variant discrimination than Nelder-Mead or differential evolution runs. That is useful for people who already do EBSD on materials where small calibration errors compound with indexing ambiguity. The demonstrations are concrete and the global-consistency constraint is a clear step beyond standard optimizers. The soft spot is the assumption that residual shift fields after initial indexing come only from global geometry and are orthogonal to local orientation gradients or undetected strain. The paper does not show a controlled test that injects known local rotations and checks whether the optimizer still recovers the true geometry, so it is not yet clear how much the method might absorb misindexing instead of correcting it. Quantitative error metrics and direct comparisons of improvement size are also thin in the available description. This is for EBSD users who need tighter map-wide calibration on real microstructures. It deserves peer review because the approach is well-motivated and the pseudosymmetry test case is relevant, though the validation section will need more rigorous checks on the orthogonality claim before the claims can be taken as settled.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a DIC-based method for refining the global sample-detector geometry (pattern center plus sample/detector angles) in EBSD mapping. It computes a single map-consistent geometry by minimizing consistent simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts across the entire dataset while treating local orientations as fixed, thereby decoupling global geometry effects from local orientation variations. Demonstrations on single-crystal silicon and pseudosymmetric BaTiO3 claim improved map-wide orientation consistency and more robust variant discrimination relative to Nelder-Mead and differential evolution optimizers.

Significance. If the orthogonality between global geometry errors and local orientation/strain effects holds, the approach could improve EBSD indexing accuracy for materials with pseudosymmetry or subtle misorientations by replacing per-pattern or local calibrations with a single robust geometry. The DIC-based shift extraction is a technically sound choice that lends itself to reproducibility; however, the absence of quantitative metrics in the provided description limits assessment of practical impact.

major comments (3)

[§3] §3 (method description): The central claim that map-wide residual shifts after initial indexing can be attributed solely to global geometry errors (and are orthogonal to local orientation gradients) is load-bearing but untested. No synthetic validation—e.g., maps with injected known local rotations or strain while holding true geometry fixed—is described to confirm recovery of the input geometry parameters.
[§4] §4 (results): The superiority over Nelder-Mead and differential evolution is stated qualitatively but without quantitative metrics (e.g., mean angular deviation, misorientation histograms, or variant discrimination rates with error bars), convergence statistics, or details on how the comparison was performed, undermining the cross-optimizer claim.
[Abstract] Abstract and §4: No error analysis, uncertainty quantification on the refined geometry parameters, or cross-validation (e.g., hold-out map regions) is provided, leaving the robustness of the single map-consistent geometry unquantified.

minor comments (2)

[§2] Notation for the DIC shift vector field and the geometry parameter vector should be defined explicitly at first use and used consistently.
[Figure 2] Figure captions for the Si and BaTiO3 maps should report the number of patterns, map dimensions, and any binning or filtering applied to the shift fields.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review. The comments highlight important areas where additional validation and quantification will strengthen the manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: §3 (method description): The central claim that map-wide residual shifts after initial indexing can be attributed solely to global geometry errors (and are orthogonal to local orientation gradients) is load-bearing but untested. No synthetic validation—e.g., maps with injected known local rotations or strain while holding true geometry fixed—is described to confirm recovery of the input geometry parameters.

Authors: We agree that explicit synthetic validation of the orthogonality assumption would provide stronger support for the method. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection to §3 that presents synthetic EBSD maps in which known local rotations and strains are injected while the true sample-detector geometry is held fixed. We will show that the DIC-based refinement recovers the input geometry parameters to within the expected numerical tolerance, thereby confirming that local orientation/strain variations do not systematically bias the global solution. revision: yes
Referee: §4 (results): The superiority over Nelder-Mead and differential evolution is stated qualitatively but without quantitative metrics (e.g., mean angular deviation, misorientation histograms, or variant discrimination rates with error bars), convergence statistics, or details on how the comparison was performed, undermining the cross-optimizer claim.

Authors: We accept that the current presentation of the optimizer comparison is insufficiently quantitative. In the revised §4 we will report mean angular deviation across each map, full misorientation histograms with summary statistics, pseudosymmetric variant discrimination rates (including standard deviations from repeated runs), and explicit details of the optimization settings, iteration counts, and convergence criteria used for the DIC-based, Nelder-Mead, and differential-evolution approaches. revision: yes
Referee: Abstract and §4: No error analysis, uncertainty quantification on the refined geometry parameters, or cross-validation (e.g., hold-out map regions) is provided, leaving the robustness of the single map-consistent geometry unquantified.

Authors: We will add a new subsection on uncertainty quantification. This will include (i) parameter uncertainties derived from the Hessian of the objective function at the converged solution and (ii) a cross-validation experiment in which the map is partitioned into independent regions; the geometry is refined on one subset and then applied to the hold-out regions to demonstrate consistency of the recovered parameters. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper introduces a DIC-based refinement procedure that computes a single map-consistent sample-detector geometry by minimizing consistent simulated-to-experimental pattern shifts across the map while holding local orientations fixed. This procedure is presented as a new method with direct comparisons to Nelder-Mead and Differential Evolution optimizers on silicon and BaTiO3 data; no equations or steps reduce by construction to prior fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatzes imported from the authors' own prior work. The central claim rests on the decoupling assumption and external validation rather than tautological re-labeling of inputs, satisfying the criteria for an independent derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard EBSD assumptions about pattern simulation accuracy and the separability of global geometry effects from local orientation variations; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

sample-detector geometry parameters
Pattern center coordinates and sample/detector angles are the quantities being refined by the DIC optimization to achieve map consistency.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Kikuchi patterns can be accurately simulated from known orientations and geometry parameters
Required for generating the reference patterns used in shift matching.
domain assumption Geometry-induced pattern shifts remain consistent across the map independent of local crystal orientations
Core premise enabling decoupling of global errors from local variations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5464 in / 1321 out tokens · 39388 ms · 2026-05-07T15:39:04.535128+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

[1]

Kunze, S.I

K. Kunze, S.I. Wright, B.L. Adams, D.J. Dingley, Advances in Automatic EBSP Single Orientation Measurements, Texture, Stress, and Microstructure 20 (1993) 589659. https://doi.org/10.1155/TSM.20.41

work page doi:10.1155/tsm.20.41 1993
[2]

High -resolution elastic strain measurement from electron backscatter diffraction patterns: New levels of sensitivity

A.J. Wilkinson, G. Meaden, D.J. Dingley, High -resolution elastic strain measurement from electron backscatter diffraction patterns: New levels of sensitivity, Ultramicroscopy 106 (2006) 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2005.10.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2005.10.001 2006
[3]

Wallis, L.N

D. Wallis, L.N. Hansen, T.B. Britton, A.J. Wilkinson, High -Angular Resolution Electron Backscatter Diffraction as a New Tool for Mapping Lattice Distortion in Geological Minerals, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 124 (2019) 6337 –6358. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JB017867

work page doi:10.1029/2019jb017867 2019
[4]

Sneddon, P.W

G.C. Sneddon, P.W. Trimby, J.M. Cairney, Transmission Kikuchi diffraction in a scanning electron microscope: A review, Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports 110 (2016) 1 –12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2016.10.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.mser.2016.10.001 2016
[5]

Chen, S.U

Y .H. Chen, S.U. Park, D. Wei, G. Newstadt, M.A. Jackson, J.P. Simmons, M. De Graef, A.O. Hero, A Dictionary Approach to Electron Backscatter Diffraction Indexing, Microsc Microanal 21 (2015) 739–752. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927615000756

work page doi:10.1017/s1431927615000756 2015
[6]

Foden, D.M

A. Foden, D.M. Collins, A.J. Wilkinson, T.B. Britton, Indexing electron backscatter diffraction patterns with a refined template matching approach, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019) 112845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112845

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112845 2019
[7]

Lenthe, S

W.C. Lenthe, S. Singh, M.D. Graef, A spherical harmonic transform approach to the indexing of electron back -scattered diffraction patterns, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112841

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112841 2019
[8]

Hielscher, F

R. Hielscher, F. Bartel, T.B. Britton, Gazing at crystal balls: Electron backscatter diffraction pattern analysis and cross correlation on the sphere, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112836

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112836 2019
[9]

Pang, P.M

E.L. Pang, P.M. Larsen, C.A. Schuh, Resolving pseudosymmetry in tetragonal ZrO 2 using EBSD with a modified dictionary indexing approach, (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.04476

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2003.04476 2003
[10]

Demirel, B.S

M.C. Demirel, B.S. El -Dasher, B.L. Adams, A.D. Rollett, Studies on the Accuracy of Electron Backscatter Diffraction Measurements, in: A.J. Schwartz, M. Kumar, B.L. Adams (Eds.), Electron Backscatter Diffraction in Materials Science, Springer US, Boston, M A, 2000: pp. 65 –74. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3205-4_6

work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3205-4_6 2000
[11]

Humphreys, Grain and subgrain characterisation by electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 36 (2001) 3833–3854

F.J. Humphreys, Grain and subgrain characterisation by electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 36 (2001) 3833–3854. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017973432592

work page doi:10.1023/a:1017973432592 2001
[12]

Britton, C

T.B. Britton, C. Maurice, R. Fortunier, J.H. Driver, A.P. Day, G. Meaden, D.J. Dingley, K. Mingard, A.J. Wilkinson, Factors affecting the accuracy of high resolution electron backscatter diffraction when using simulated patterns, Ultramicroscopy 110 (2010 ) 1443 –1453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.08.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.08.001 2010
[13]

Ernould, B

C. Ernould, B. Beausir, J.-J. Fundenberger, V . Taupin, E. Bouzy, Global DIC approach guided by a cross-correlation based initial guess for HR -EBSD and on-axis HR-TKD, Acta Materialia 191 (2020) 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.026

work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.026 2020
[14]

Q. Shi, S. Roux, F. Latourte, F. Hild, Estimation of elastic strain by integrated image correlation on electron diffraction patterns, Ultramicroscopy 199 (2019) 16 –33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.02.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.02.001 2019
[15]

Vermeij, J.P .M

T. Vermeij, J.P.M. Hoefnagels, A consistent full-field integrated DIC framework for HR -EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 191 (2018) 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.05.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.05.001 2018
[16]

Ruggles, G.F

T.J. Ruggles, G.F. Bomarito, R.L. Qiu, J.D. Hochhalter, New levels of high angular resolution EBSD performance via inverse compositional Gauss –Newton based digital image correlation, Ultramicroscopy 195 (2018) 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.08.020

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.08.020 2018
[17]

F. Ram, S. Wright, S. Singh, M. De Graef, Error analysis of the crystal orientations obtained by the dictionary approach to EBSD indexing, Ultramicroscopy 181 (2017) 17 –26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2017.04.016

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2017.04.016 2017
[18]

Burch, C.M

M.J. Burch, C.M. Fancher, S. Patala, M. De Graef, E.C. Dickey, Mapping 180° polar domains using electron backscatter diffraction and dynamical scattering simulations, Ultramicroscopy 173 (2017) 47–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.013

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.013 2017
[19]

Howell, M.D

J.A. Howell, M.D. Vaudin, R.F. Cook, Orientation, stress, and strain in an (001) barium titanate single crystal with 90° lamellar domains determined using electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 49 (2014) 2213–2224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7915-3

work page doi:10.1007/s10853-013-7915-3 2014
[20]

Lassen, J.B

N.C.K. Lassen, J.B. Bilde -Sørensen, Calibration of an electron back -scattering pattern set -up, Journal of Microscopy 170 (1993) 125–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03331.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03331.x 1993
[21]

Krieger Lassen, Source point calibration from an arbitrary electron backscattering pattern, Journal of Microscopy 195 (1999) 204–211

N.C. Krieger Lassen, Source point calibration from an arbitrary electron backscattering pattern, Journal of Microscopy 195 (1999) 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2818.1999.00581.x

work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-2818.1999.00581.x 1999
[22]

Hjelen, R

J. Hjelen, R. Ørsund, E. Hoel, P. Runde, T. Furu, E. Nes, EBSP, Progress in Technique and Applications, Texture, Stress, and Microstructure 20 (1993) 536014. https://doi.org/10.1155/TSM.20.29

work page doi:10.1155/tsm.20.29 1993
[23]

Mingard, A

K. Mingard, A. Day, C. Maurice, P. Quested, Towards high accuracy calibration of electron backscatter diffraction systems, Ultramicroscopy 111 (2011) 320 –329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.01.012

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.01.012 2011
[24]

Dingley, K

D.J. Dingley, K. Baba-Kishi, Use of Electron Back Scatter Diffraction Patterns for Determination of Crystal Symmetry Elements, (n.d.)

work page
[25]

Basinger, D

J. Basinger, D. Fullwood, J. Kacher, B. Adams, Pattern Center Determination in Electron Backscatter Diffraction Microscopy, Microanal 17 (2011) 330 –340. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927611000389

work page doi:10.1017/s1431927611000389 2011
[26]

Pang, P.M

E.L. Pang, P.M. Larsen, C.A. Schuh, Global optimization for accurate determination of EBSD pattern centers, Ultramicroscopy 209 (2020) 112876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112876

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112876 2020
[27]

C. Zhu, C. Kurniawan, M. Ochsendorf, D. An, S. Zaefferer, M. De Graef, Orientation, pattern center refinement and deformation state extraction through global optimization algorithms, Ultramicroscopy 233 (2022) 113407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113407

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113407 2022
[28]

Winkelmann, G

A. Winkelmann, G. Nolze, G. Cios, T. Tokarski, P. Bała, Refined Calibration Model for Improving the Orientation Precision of Electron Backscatter Diffraction Maps, Materials 13 (2020) 2816. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13122816

work page doi:10.3390/ma13122816 2020
[29]

Tanaka, A.J

T. Tanaka, A.J. Wilkinson, Pattern matching analysis of electron backscatter diffraction patterns for pattern centre, crystal orientation and absolute elastic strain determination – accuracy and precision assessment, Ultramicroscopy 202 (2019) 87 –99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.04.006

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.04.006 2019
[30]

Alkorta, Limits of simulation based high resolution EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 131 (2013) 33–38

J. Alkorta, Limits of simulation based high resolution EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 131 (2013) 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.03.020

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.03.020 2013
[31]

Griesbach, T

C. Griesbach, T. Scharsach, M. Trassin, D.M. Kochmann, Ferroelectric polarization mapping through pseudosymmetry -sensitive EBSD reindexing, (2026). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.09627

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.09627 2026
[32]

Q. Shi, L. Jiao, D. Loisnard, C. Dan, Z. Chen, H. Wang, S. Roux, Improved EBSD indexation accuracy by considering energy distribution of diffraction patterns, Materials Characterization 188 (2022) 111909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2022.111909

work page doi:10.1016/j.matchar.2022.111909 2022
[33]

Shi, Tomasi, Good features to track, in: 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1994: pp

J. Shi, Tomasi, Good features to track, in: 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1994: pp. 593–600. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.1994.323794

work page doi:10.1109/cvpr.1994.323794 1994
[34]

Lucas, T

B. Lucas, T. Kanade, An Iterative Image Registration Technique with an Application to Stereo Vision, in: Proceedings of Imaging Understanding Workshop, 1981: pp. 121–130

work page 1981

[1] [1]

Kunze, S.I

K. Kunze, S.I. Wright, B.L. Adams, D.J. Dingley, Advances in Automatic EBSP Single Orientation Measurements, Texture, Stress, and Microstructure 20 (1993) 589659. https://doi.org/10.1155/TSM.20.41

work page doi:10.1155/tsm.20.41 1993

[2] [2]

High -resolution elastic strain measurement from electron backscatter diffraction patterns: New levels of sensitivity

A.J. Wilkinson, G. Meaden, D.J. Dingley, High -resolution elastic strain measurement from electron backscatter diffraction patterns: New levels of sensitivity, Ultramicroscopy 106 (2006) 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2005.10.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2005.10.001 2006

[3] [3]

Wallis, L.N

D. Wallis, L.N. Hansen, T.B. Britton, A.J. Wilkinson, High -Angular Resolution Electron Backscatter Diffraction as a New Tool for Mapping Lattice Distortion in Geological Minerals, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 124 (2019) 6337 –6358. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JB017867

work page doi:10.1029/2019jb017867 2019

[4] [4]

Sneddon, P.W

G.C. Sneddon, P.W. Trimby, J.M. Cairney, Transmission Kikuchi diffraction in a scanning electron microscope: A review, Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports 110 (2016) 1 –12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2016.10.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.mser.2016.10.001 2016

[5] [5]

Chen, S.U

Y .H. Chen, S.U. Park, D. Wei, G. Newstadt, M.A. Jackson, J.P. Simmons, M. De Graef, A.O. Hero, A Dictionary Approach to Electron Backscatter Diffraction Indexing, Microsc Microanal 21 (2015) 739–752. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927615000756

work page doi:10.1017/s1431927615000756 2015

[6] [6]

Foden, D.M

A. Foden, D.M. Collins, A.J. Wilkinson, T.B. Britton, Indexing electron backscatter diffraction patterns with a refined template matching approach, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019) 112845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112845

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112845 2019

[7] [7]

Lenthe, S

W.C. Lenthe, S. Singh, M.D. Graef, A spherical harmonic transform approach to the indexing of electron back -scattered diffraction patterns, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112841

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112841 2019

[8] [8]

Hielscher, F

R. Hielscher, F. Bartel, T.B. Britton, Gazing at crystal balls: Electron backscatter diffraction pattern analysis and cross correlation on the sphere, Ultramicroscopy 207 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112836

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112836 2019

[9] [9]

Pang, P.M

E.L. Pang, P.M. Larsen, C.A. Schuh, Resolving pseudosymmetry in tetragonal ZrO 2 using EBSD with a modified dictionary indexing approach, (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.04476

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2003.04476 2003

[10] [10]

Demirel, B.S

M.C. Demirel, B.S. El -Dasher, B.L. Adams, A.D. Rollett, Studies on the Accuracy of Electron Backscatter Diffraction Measurements, in: A.J. Schwartz, M. Kumar, B.L. Adams (Eds.), Electron Backscatter Diffraction in Materials Science, Springer US, Boston, M A, 2000: pp. 65 –74. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3205-4_6

work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3205-4_6 2000

[11] [11]

Humphreys, Grain and subgrain characterisation by electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 36 (2001) 3833–3854

F.J. Humphreys, Grain and subgrain characterisation by electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 36 (2001) 3833–3854. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017973432592

work page doi:10.1023/a:1017973432592 2001

[12] [12]

Britton, C

T.B. Britton, C. Maurice, R. Fortunier, J.H. Driver, A.P. Day, G. Meaden, D.J. Dingley, K. Mingard, A.J. Wilkinson, Factors affecting the accuracy of high resolution electron backscatter diffraction when using simulated patterns, Ultramicroscopy 110 (2010 ) 1443 –1453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.08.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.08.001 2010

[13] [13]

Ernould, B

C. Ernould, B. Beausir, J.-J. Fundenberger, V . Taupin, E. Bouzy, Global DIC approach guided by a cross-correlation based initial guess for HR -EBSD and on-axis HR-TKD, Acta Materialia 191 (2020) 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.026

work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.026 2020

[14] [14]

Q. Shi, S. Roux, F. Latourte, F. Hild, Estimation of elastic strain by integrated image correlation on electron diffraction patterns, Ultramicroscopy 199 (2019) 16 –33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.02.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.02.001 2019

[15] [15]

Vermeij, J.P .M

T. Vermeij, J.P.M. Hoefnagels, A consistent full-field integrated DIC framework for HR -EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 191 (2018) 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.05.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.05.001 2018

[16] [16]

Ruggles, G.F

T.J. Ruggles, G.F. Bomarito, R.L. Qiu, J.D. Hochhalter, New levels of high angular resolution EBSD performance via inverse compositional Gauss –Newton based digital image correlation, Ultramicroscopy 195 (2018) 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.08.020

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2018.08.020 2018

[17] [17]

F. Ram, S. Wright, S. Singh, M. De Graef, Error analysis of the crystal orientations obtained by the dictionary approach to EBSD indexing, Ultramicroscopy 181 (2017) 17 –26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2017.04.016

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2017.04.016 2017

[18] [18]

Burch, C.M

M.J. Burch, C.M. Fancher, S. Patala, M. De Graef, E.C. Dickey, Mapping 180° polar domains using electron backscatter diffraction and dynamical scattering simulations, Ultramicroscopy 173 (2017) 47–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.013

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2016.11.013 2017

[19] [19]

Howell, M.D

J.A. Howell, M.D. Vaudin, R.F. Cook, Orientation, stress, and strain in an (001) barium titanate single crystal with 90° lamellar domains determined using electron backscatter diffraction, J Mater Sci 49 (2014) 2213–2224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-013-7915-3

work page doi:10.1007/s10853-013-7915-3 2014

[20] [20]

Lassen, J.B

N.C.K. Lassen, J.B. Bilde -Sørensen, Calibration of an electron back -scattering pattern set -up, Journal of Microscopy 170 (1993) 125–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03331.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03331.x 1993

[21] [21]

Krieger Lassen, Source point calibration from an arbitrary electron backscattering pattern, Journal of Microscopy 195 (1999) 204–211

N.C. Krieger Lassen, Source point calibration from an arbitrary electron backscattering pattern, Journal of Microscopy 195 (1999) 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2818.1999.00581.x

work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-2818.1999.00581.x 1999

[22] [22]

Hjelen, R

J. Hjelen, R. Ørsund, E. Hoel, P. Runde, T. Furu, E. Nes, EBSP, Progress in Technique and Applications, Texture, Stress, and Microstructure 20 (1993) 536014. https://doi.org/10.1155/TSM.20.29

work page doi:10.1155/tsm.20.29 1993

[23] [23]

Mingard, A

K. Mingard, A. Day, C. Maurice, P. Quested, Towards high accuracy calibration of electron backscatter diffraction systems, Ultramicroscopy 111 (2011) 320 –329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.01.012

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.01.012 2011

[24] [24]

Dingley, K

D.J. Dingley, K. Baba-Kishi, Use of Electron Back Scatter Diffraction Patterns for Determination of Crystal Symmetry Elements, (n.d.)

work page

[25] [25]

Basinger, D

J. Basinger, D. Fullwood, J. Kacher, B. Adams, Pattern Center Determination in Electron Backscatter Diffraction Microscopy, Microanal 17 (2011) 330 –340. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927611000389

work page doi:10.1017/s1431927611000389 2011

[26] [26]

Pang, P.M

E.L. Pang, P.M. Larsen, C.A. Schuh, Global optimization for accurate determination of EBSD pattern centers, Ultramicroscopy 209 (2020) 112876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112876

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112876 2020

[27] [27]

C. Zhu, C. Kurniawan, M. Ochsendorf, D. An, S. Zaefferer, M. De Graef, Orientation, pattern center refinement and deformation state extraction through global optimization algorithms, Ultramicroscopy 233 (2022) 113407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113407

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113407 2022

[28] [28]

Winkelmann, G

A. Winkelmann, G. Nolze, G. Cios, T. Tokarski, P. Bała, Refined Calibration Model for Improving the Orientation Precision of Electron Backscatter Diffraction Maps, Materials 13 (2020) 2816. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13122816

work page doi:10.3390/ma13122816 2020

[29] [29]

Tanaka, A.J

T. Tanaka, A.J. Wilkinson, Pattern matching analysis of electron backscatter diffraction patterns for pattern centre, crystal orientation and absolute elastic strain determination – accuracy and precision assessment, Ultramicroscopy 202 (2019) 87 –99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.04.006

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.04.006 2019

[30] [30]

Alkorta, Limits of simulation based high resolution EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 131 (2013) 33–38

J. Alkorta, Limits of simulation based high resolution EBSD, Ultramicroscopy 131 (2013) 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.03.020

work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.03.020 2013

[31] [31]

Griesbach, T

C. Griesbach, T. Scharsach, M. Trassin, D.M. Kochmann, Ferroelectric polarization mapping through pseudosymmetry -sensitive EBSD reindexing, (2026). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.09627

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.09627 2026

[32] [32]

Q. Shi, L. Jiao, D. Loisnard, C. Dan, Z. Chen, H. Wang, S. Roux, Improved EBSD indexation accuracy by considering energy distribution of diffraction patterns, Materials Characterization 188 (2022) 111909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchar.2022.111909

work page doi:10.1016/j.matchar.2022.111909 2022

[33] [33]

Shi, Tomasi, Good features to track, in: 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1994: pp

J. Shi, Tomasi, Good features to track, in: 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1994: pp. 593–600. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.1994.323794

work page doi:10.1109/cvpr.1994.323794 1994

[34] [34]

Lucas, T

B. Lucas, T. Kanade, An Iterative Image Registration Technique with an Application to Stereo Vision, in: Proceedings of Imaging Understanding Workshop, 1981: pp. 121–130

work page 1981