Elemental Analysis and Forensic Comparison of Soils by Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) and Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The elemental analysis of soil is useful in forensic and environmental sciences. Methods were developed and optimized for two laser-based multi-element analysis techniques: laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) and laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS). This work represents the first use of a 266 nm laser for forensic soil analysis by LIBS. Sample preparation methods were developed and optimized for a variety of sample types, including pellets for large bulk soil specimens (470 mg) and sediment-laden filters (47 mg), and tape-mounting for small transfer evidence specimens (10 mg). Analytical performance for sediment filter pellets and tape-mounted soils was similar to that achieved with bulk pellets. An inter-laboratory comparison exercise was designed to evaluate the performance of the LA-ICP-MS and LIBS methods, as well as for micro X-ray fluorescence (μXRF), across multiple laboratories. Limits of detection (LODs) were 0.01-23 ppm for LA-ICP-MS, 0.25-574 ppm for LIBS, 16-4400 ppm for µXRF, and well below the levels normally seen in soils. Good intra-laboratory precision (≤ 6 % relative standard deviation (RSD) for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 8 % for µXRF; ≤ 17 % for LIBS) and inter-laboratory precision (≤ 19 % for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 25 % for µXRF) were achieved for most elements, which is encouraging for a first inter-laboratory exercise. While LIBS generally has higher LODs and RSDs than LA-ICP-MS, both were capable of generating good quality multi-element data sufficient for discrimination purposes. Multivariate methods using principal components analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were developed for discriminations of soils from different sources. Specimens from different sites that were indistinguishable by color alone were discriminated by elemental analysis. Correct classification rates of 94.5 % or better were achieved in a simulated forensic discrimination of three similar sites for both LIBS and LA-ICP-MS. Results for tape-mounted specimens were nearly identical to those achieved with pellets. Methods were tested on soils from USA, Canada and Tanzania. Within-site heterogeneity was site-specific. Elemental differences were greatest for specimens separated by large distances, even within the same lithology. Elemental profiles can be used to discriminate soils from different locations and narrow down locations even when mineralogy is similar.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".