This study was undertaken to understand the extent and nature of problems in x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) data reported in the literature. It first presents an assessment of the XPS data in three high-quality journals over a six-month period. This analysis of 409 publications showing XPS spectra provides insight into how XPS is being used, identifies the common mistakes or errors in XPS analysis, and reveals which elements are most commonly analyzed. More than 65% of the 409 papers showed fitting of XP spectra. An ad hoc group (herein identified as “the committee”) of experienced XPS analysts reviewed these spectra and found that peak fitting was a common source of significant errors. The papers were ranked based on the perceived seriousness of the errors, which ranged from minor to major. Major errors, which, in the opinion of the ad hoc committee, can render the interpretation of the data meaningless, occurred when fitting protocols ignored underlying physics and chemistry or contained major errors in the analysis. Consistent with other materials analysis data, ca. 30% of the XPS data or analysis was identified as having major errors. Out of the publications with fitted spectra, ca. 40% had major errors. The most common elements analyzed by XPS in the papers sampled and researched at an online database, include carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and titanium. A scrutiny of the papers showing carbon and oxygen XPS spectra revealed the classes of materials being studied and the extent of problems in these analyses. As might be expected, C 1s and O 1s analyses are most often performed on sp²-type materials and inorganic oxides, respectively. These findings have helped focus a series of XPS guides and tutorials that deal with common analysis issues. The extent of problematic data is larger than the authors had expected. Quantification of the problem, examination of some of the common problem areas, and the development of targeted guides and tutorials may provide both the motivation and resources that enable the community to improve the overall quality and reliability of XPS analysis reported in the literature.

中文翻译：

---

科学文献中对错误X射线光电子能谱分析的频率和性质的评估

进行这项研究是为了了解文献报道的X射线光电子能谱（XPS）数据中问题的程度和性质。它首先介绍了六个月内三种高质量期刊对XPS数据的评估。对409个显示XPS光谱的出版物的分析可以深入了解XPS的使用方式，识别XPS分析中的常见错误或错误，并揭示最常分析的元素。409篇论文中超过65％的论文显示XP光谱符合要求。一个特设经验丰富的XPS分析人员小组（以下称为“委员会”）审查了这些光谱，发现峰拟合是造成严重误差的常见原因。根据错误的严重程度对论文进行排名，范围从小到大。重大错误，临时认为委员会可以使数据的解释变得毫无意义，发生在拟合协议忽略了基础的物理和化学或分析中包含重大错误时。与其他材料分析数据一致。XPS数据或分析中有30％被确定为存在重大错误。在具有合适光谱的出版物中，40％有重大错误。XPS在在线数据库中采样和研究的论文中，最常见的元素包括碳，氧，氮，硫和钛。对显示碳和氧XPS光谱的论文的审查揭示了所研究材料的类别以及这些分析中存在问题的程度。不出所料，C 1s和O 1s分析通常在sp ^2上执行型材料和无机氧化物。这些发现有助于集中处理与常见分析问题有关的一系列XPS指南和教程。有问题的数据的范围大于作者的预期。对问题进行量化，对一些常见问题区域的检查以及有针对性的指南和教程的开发，可能会提供动力和资源，使社区能够提高文献中报告的XPS分析的整体质量和可靠性。