Ordinary Low Alpha Proportional Counter with Low Cost Commercial Data Acquisition System

C. H. Chen; Huan Niu; Tung Yuan Hsiao

arxiv: 1906.10385 · v1 · pith:CBJFXKTWnew · submitted 2019-06-25 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det · hep-ex

Ordinary Low Alpha Proportional Counter with Low Cost Commercial Data Acquisition System

Tung Yuan Hsiao , C. H. Chen , Huan Niu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 16:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det hep-ex

keywords low alpha counterproportional counterdata acquisition systemelectromagnetic interferencevibration rejectionground loopalpha detection

0 comments

The pith

A low-cost commercial DAQ paired with a simple physical model lets ordinary proportional counters reject electromagnetic interference and vibration signals.

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

The paper shows that a standard low alpha proportional counter can be paired with an inexpensive commercial data acquisition system. With the aid of a basic physical model applied to the recorded waveforms, signals from electromagnetic interference and mechanical vibration can be identified and excluded. This removes the need for extra shielding hardware and allows reliable operation even in labs with poor grounding. A reader would care because it lowers the cost and complexity of low-level alpha measurements that are otherwise hampered by environmental noise.

Core claim

By recording pulses from an ordinary low alpha proportional counter with a low-cost commercial DAQ and applying a simple physical model to the data, true alpha events can be separated from those produced by electromagnetic interference or vibration, improving performance without hardware modifications.

What carries the argument

The simple physical model that classifies recorded pulses according to their time and amplitude characteristics to distinguish alpha signals from interference.

If this is right

The counter can operate without dedicated electromagnetic shielding.
Measurements become feasible in laboratories with significant ground-loop problems.
The method increases the practical capability of unmodified commercial proportional counters.
Data can be acquired and processed at lower cost than with specialized systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same DAQ-plus-model approach might extend to other gas-filled detectors that suffer similar noise issues.
If the model signatures prove stable across different counters, it could allow retrofitting of existing equipment rather than new purchases.
Calibration with known interference sources would be a direct next step to quantify rejection rates.

Load-bearing premise

The simple physical model is sufficient to correctly identify and exclude signals caused by electromagnetic interference and vibration without additional hardware shielding.

What would settle it

A test that introduces controlled electromagnetic interference or vibration while the counter is exposed to a known alpha source and shows that the model either accepts noise pulses as valid events or rejects true alpha events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.10385 by C. H. Chen, Huan Niu, Tung Yuan Hsiao.

read the original abstract

In this study, we present a low cost and commercially available data acquisition system (DAQ) for an ordinary low alpha proportional counter. By employing this DAQ system and aid of a simple physical model, we can easily rule out the common disadvantage of proportional type low alpha counters, such as sensitive to electromagnetic interference and vibration. The obtained results demonstrated that this method has improved the capability of an ordinary low alpha counter and even makes it easier to operate in a worse ground-loop laboratory.

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 is a short instrumentation note on pairing a cheap commercial DAQ with a standard low-alpha proportional counter and using a simple model to reject EMI and vibration, but the text supplies no data, metrics, or validation of the model.

read the letter

The paper's core point is that an off-the-shelf DAQ plus a basic physical model can let an ordinary proportional counter run without special shielding even in a noisy ground-loop lab. That is the one practical claim to take away. It is not a new detector principle or a first-principles derivation; it is an application of existing hardware to a known problem in alpha counting. The authors correctly note that EMI and vibration are long-standing headaches for these counters and that a low-cost route around them would be useful for smaller labs. That is the part that is actually new in the narrow sense of showing one concrete, inexpensive implementation. The approach is straightforward and the intent is clear: keep the counter hardware unchanged and handle the interference in the data stream. That is a reasonable engineering stance and worth recording if the method holds up. The main weakness is that the abstract (and the supplied text) gives no quantitative evidence. There are no spectra, no efficiency numbers, no false-positive rates for the model, and no description of how the model was tested against controlled interference sources. Without those, the assertion that the method “easily rule[s] out” the disadvantages stays untested. The stress-test concern is therefore on target: the sufficiency of the simple model is assumed rather than demonstrated. This paper is aimed at people who build or maintain low-alpha counters on limited budgets and are looking for practical work-arounds. A reader already working in that niche might find the hardware choice interesting, but anyone outside that small group will get little from it. The work does not rise to the level that justifies sending it to referees in its current form; the central claim needs supporting measurements before it can be evaluated. I would not bring it to a reading group and would not cite it.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a low-cost commercial data acquisition system (DAQ) for an ordinary low alpha proportional counter. It claims that this DAQ, combined with a simple physical model, rules out the usual disadvantages of such counters (sensitivity to electromagnetic interference and vibration), thereby improving performance and enabling operation in laboratories with poor ground loops.

Significance. If the physical model were shown through controlled tests to reliably discriminate EMI- and vibration-induced events, the approach could reduce the need for specialized shielding and make proportional counters more practical for routine low-alpha measurements in standard lab settings.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that 'the obtained results demonstrated that this method has improved the capability' supplies no data, error analysis, quantitative metrics (e.g., rejection efficiency or false-positive rate), or description of the physical model, so the central claim cannot be evaluated.
[Abstract] Abstract / main text: the 'simple physical model' is invoked to identify and exclude EMI/vibration signals but is never specified (no equations, discrimination criteria, or calibration procedure against known interference sources), leaving its sufficiency unverified.
[Results] Results (implied): no comparisons are reported under controlled ground-loop or vibration conditions, nor any metrics showing that the method removes the need for hardware shielding, so the claim that the disadvantages are 'easily rule[d] out' remains unsupported.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a one-sentence outline of the physical model even at this level of detail.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We agree that the manuscript requires additional quantitative details, explicit specification of the physical model, and controlled comparisons to support the claims. We will revise accordingly to address each point.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that 'the obtained results demonstrated that this method has improved the capability' supplies no data, error analysis, quantitative metrics (e.g., rejection efficiency or false-positive rate), or description of the physical model, so the central claim cannot be evaluated.

Authors: We agree the abstract and main text lack quantitative metrics such as rejection efficiency, false-positive rates, and error analysis. In the revised manuscript we will add these metrics from our data, along with a concise description of the physical model, to allow proper evaluation of the central claim. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract / main text: the 'simple physical model' is invoked to identify and exclude EMI/vibration signals but is never specified (no equations, discrimination criteria, or calibration procedure against known interference sources), leaving its sufficiency unverified.

Authors: We acknowledge that the physical model was not specified with equations, discrimination criteria, or calibration details in the submitted version. The revised manuscript will include these elements (pulse-shape and timing criteria derived from the proportional counter response) in the methods section, together with the calibration procedure used against known interference sources. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results (implied): no comparisons are reported under controlled ground-loop or vibration conditions, nor any metrics showing that the method removes the need for hardware shielding, so the claim that the disadvantages are 'easily rule[d] out' remains unsupported.

Authors: We agree that the absence of controlled comparisons under ground-loop and vibration conditions leaves the claim unsupported. The revised results section will incorporate new data from such controlled tests, including quantitative metrics on event rejection and the reduced need for hardware shielding. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; experimental claims rest on setup and results

full rationale

The paper describes an experimental apparatus using a commercial DAQ plus a simple physical model to discriminate against EMI and vibration in a proportional counter. No equations, parameter fits, predictions derived from fitted inputs, or self-citations appear in the abstract or described method. The central claim is an empirical demonstration that the combination improves operation; it does not reduce by construction to any author-defined quantity or prior self-citation chain. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the paper invokes an unspecified 'simple physical model' whose assumptions are not stated. No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are enumerated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5601 in / 1057 out tokens · 32040 ms · 2026-05-25T16:14:25.929460+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

13 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

[1]

There are two primary radiation sources that cause SER

Introduction Over the last two decades, the sensitivity of electronics to ionization radiation has been of increased interest as ionization processes dominate the soft-error rate (SER) of electronics, for example, a type of error where a state of storage elements was changed. There are two primary radiation sources that cause SER . One is alpha -particles...

work page
[2]

As mention previously, this kind of alpha counter is sensitive to electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise and vibration

Methods and Results In th is study, we use an ordinary alpha counter (Model 1950 -1000), which bought from Alpha Science Inc (Now it is part of XIA LLC) [7]. As mention previously, this kind of alpha counter is sensitive to electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise and vibration. However, with the improvement of electronic devices and microprocessors, now ...

work page 1950
[3]

Discussions Preamplifiers have been used when radiation is detected a s a series of pulses of current, and these pulses are current flow into (or out of) the preamplifier. The feedback resistor 𝑅𝑓 (in parallel with the feedback capacitor) slowly discharges (resets) the 5 feedback capacitor 𝐶𝑓 , producing an exponential decay of each pulse with a time cons...

work page
[4]

In the meantime, this method also could be applied to remove low energy noise from the spectrum and the modification of DAQ cost as low as 100 USD

Conclusions In this study, we have demonstrated that with the aid of digita l pulse shape discrimination, the noise could efficiently suppress, which arises from EMI or vibration. In the meantime, this method also could be applied to remove low energy noise from the spectrum and the modification of DAQ cost as low as 100 USD. Acknowledgment: This work is ...

work page
[5]

Srinivasu Kunuku for his valuable inputs

We also thank Dr. Srinivasu Kunuku for his valuable inputs. Reference:

work page
[6]

Gordon, D.F

M.S. Gordon, D.F. Heidel, K.P . Rodbell, B. Dwyer -McNally, W.K. Warburton, An Evaluation of An Ultralow Background Alpha -Particle Detector, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 56 (2009) 3381-3386

work page 2009
[7]

Gordon, K.P

M.S. Gordon, K.P . Rodbell, D.F. Heidel, C.E. Murray, H.H.K. Tang, B. Dwyer-McNally, W.K. Warburton, Alpha -Particle Emission Energy Spectra From Materials Used for Solder Bumps, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 57 (2010) 3251-3256

work page 2010
[8]

Gordon, K.P

M.S. Gordon, K.P . Rodbell, C.E. Murray, S.M. Sri-Jayantha, B.D. McNally, The Role of Static Charge in Ultra-Low Alpha Particle Emissivity Measurements, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 62 (2015) 3020-3026

work page 2015
[9]

Gordon, Challenges in Ultra -low Emissivity Alpha Particle Detection, Council on Ionizing Radiation Measurements and Standards 23rd Annual Meeting, 2015

M.S. Gordon, Challenges in Ultra -low Emissivity Alpha Particle Detection, Council on Ionizing Radiation Measurements and Standards 23rd Annual Meeting, 2015

work page 2015
[10]

Hsiao, C.H

T.Y . Hsiao, C.H. Chen, H. Niu, Improve ordinary low alpha particle detector by digital filter signal processing, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 409 (2017) 76-80

work page 2017
[11]

Niu, J.H

H. Niu, J.H. Chao, C.L. Tseng, L.J. Yuan, S.C. Wu, A novel method for alpha -source preparation using recoil implantation, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 196 (2002) 169-173

work page 2002
[12]

Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, 3rd edition, 2000

G.F. Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, 3rd edition, 2000

work page 2000
[13]

Ahmed, Physics and Engineering of Radiation Detection, Elsevier2007

S.N. Ahmed, Physics and Engineering of Radiation Detection, Elsevier2007. 7 FIGURE CAPTIONS: Figure 1. The resistive feedback charges sensitive preamplifier. Figure 2. The counting result in one hour. 8 Figure 3. The comparison of background between raw data and filtered data. Figure 4. The energy information of background between raw data and filtered da...

work page

[1] [1]

There are two primary radiation sources that cause SER

Introduction Over the last two decades, the sensitivity of electronics to ionization radiation has been of increased interest as ionization processes dominate the soft-error rate (SER) of electronics, for example, a type of error where a state of storage elements was changed. There are two primary radiation sources that cause SER . One is alpha -particles...

work page

[2] [2]

As mention previously, this kind of alpha counter is sensitive to electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise and vibration

Methods and Results In th is study, we use an ordinary alpha counter (Model 1950 -1000), which bought from Alpha Science Inc (Now it is part of XIA LLC) [7]. As mention previously, this kind of alpha counter is sensitive to electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise and vibration. However, with the improvement of electronic devices and microprocessors, now ...

work page 1950

[3] [3]

Discussions Preamplifiers have been used when radiation is detected a s a series of pulses of current, and these pulses are current flow into (or out of) the preamplifier. The feedback resistor 𝑅𝑓 (in parallel with the feedback capacitor) slowly discharges (resets) the 5 feedback capacitor 𝐶𝑓 , producing an exponential decay of each pulse with a time cons...

work page

[4] [4]

In the meantime, this method also could be applied to remove low energy noise from the spectrum and the modification of DAQ cost as low as 100 USD

Conclusions In this study, we have demonstrated that with the aid of digita l pulse shape discrimination, the noise could efficiently suppress, which arises from EMI or vibration. In the meantime, this method also could be applied to remove low energy noise from the spectrum and the modification of DAQ cost as low as 100 USD. Acknowledgment: This work is ...

work page

[5] [5]

Srinivasu Kunuku for his valuable inputs

We also thank Dr. Srinivasu Kunuku for his valuable inputs. Reference:

work page

[6] [6]

Gordon, D.F

M.S. Gordon, D.F. Heidel, K.P . Rodbell, B. Dwyer -McNally, W.K. Warburton, An Evaluation of An Ultralow Background Alpha -Particle Detector, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 56 (2009) 3381-3386

work page 2009

[7] [7]

Gordon, K.P

M.S. Gordon, K.P . Rodbell, D.F. Heidel, C.E. Murray, H.H.K. Tang, B. Dwyer-McNally, W.K. Warburton, Alpha -Particle Emission Energy Spectra From Materials Used for Solder Bumps, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 57 (2010) 3251-3256

work page 2010

[8] [8]

Gordon, K.P

M.S. Gordon, K.P . Rodbell, C.E. Murray, S.M. Sri-Jayantha, B.D. McNally, The Role of Static Charge in Ultra-Low Alpha Particle Emissivity Measurements, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 62 (2015) 3020-3026

work page 2015

[9] [9]

Gordon, Challenges in Ultra -low Emissivity Alpha Particle Detection, Council on Ionizing Radiation Measurements and Standards 23rd Annual Meeting, 2015

M.S. Gordon, Challenges in Ultra -low Emissivity Alpha Particle Detection, Council on Ionizing Radiation Measurements and Standards 23rd Annual Meeting, 2015

work page 2015

[10] [10]

Hsiao, C.H

T.Y . Hsiao, C.H. Chen, H. Niu, Improve ordinary low alpha particle detector by digital filter signal processing, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 409 (2017) 76-80

work page 2017

[11] [11]

Niu, J.H

H. Niu, J.H. Chao, C.L. Tseng, L.J. Yuan, S.C. Wu, A novel method for alpha -source preparation using recoil implantation, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 196 (2002) 169-173

work page 2002

[12] [12]

Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, 3rd edition, 2000

G.F. Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, 3rd edition, 2000

work page 2000

[13] [13]

Ahmed, Physics and Engineering of Radiation Detection, Elsevier2007

S.N. Ahmed, Physics and Engineering of Radiation Detection, Elsevier2007. 7 FIGURE CAPTIONS: Figure 1. The resistive feedback charges sensitive preamplifier. Figure 2. The counting result in one hour. 8 Figure 3. The comparison of background between raw data and filtered data. Figure 4. The energy information of background between raw data and filtered da...

work page