The luminescence sensitivity of a sample is the luminescence intensity measured in response to unit radioactive dose. Sensitivity is by no means a stable parameter, it might change during measurements, or in nature as well. The primary or natural magnitude of luminescence sensitivity is basically determined by mineralogical background (number of crystal impurities) and sedimentary prehistory (repeated exposure of the sediment to sunlight).

In the present study we have investigated the luminescence properties and sensitivity of coarse-grain (90–150 μm) quartz samples related to four major rivers of the Carpathian Basin (River Danube, Tisza, Szamos and Maros). In case of each region of interest 5 previously dated Late Pleistocene and/or Holocene samples were selected, each representing similar sedimentary environments, i.e. coarse grain channel deposits related to point bars and medial bars. Sensitivity was investigated using CW-OSL, LM-OSL and TL techniques using a multi-grain approach. By determining the normalised luminescence response to the same regeneration dose administered after bleaching, sensitivity base values were obtained for each sample. Using repeated cycles of dosing laboratory sensitivity change was also recorded. The base values and sensitivity change of the 20 investigated samples were then compared on a regional basis to identify potential differences, which might be used later for fingerprinting the sediments of the investigated rivers.

When considering mean sensitivity base values, calculated from several aliquots of the same sample, Danube related, mostly Alpine origin sediments exhibited 50–60% lower values compared to those with a Carpathian origin, and even at the considerable standard deviation obtained (coefficient of variation being 25–60%) they could be clearly separated using any of the measured luminescence sensitivity parameters. The discrimination of fluvial sediments with a Carpathian origin, but representing different catchments, is less straightforward, though, plotting against different sensitivity parameters can offer an opportunity to define fairly distinct groups of sample mean values. From this aspect total LM-OSL and fast component ratio seemed to be the best candidates, however, at the characteristic standard deviation and standard error separation can be unclear. No clear relationship was found in terms of sensitivity change, however some samples, related to River Maros showed practically no change during the laboratory sensitisation process. When plotting OSL ages against quartz sensitivity clear trends could be recognised, which can partly be explained by geomorphological reasons. Results in all, point to the possibility to differentiate Carpathian Basin fluvial sediments on the basis of their quartz luminescence sensitivity, a parameter that can be assessed easily during the routine dating process.

样品的发光灵敏度是响应于单位放射性剂量而测得的发光强度。灵敏度绝不是一个稳定的参数，它可能在测量过程中或在自然界中发生变化。发光敏感性的主要或自然大小基本上由矿物学背景（晶体杂质的数量）和沉积史前史（沉积物反复暴露在阳光下）决定。

在本研究中，我们研究了与喀尔巴阡盆地四条主要河流（多瑙河，蒂萨河，萨莫斯河和马洛斯河）有关的粗粒石英（90-150μm）石英样品的发光特性和灵敏度。在每个感兴趣区域的情况下，选择5个以前约会的晚更新世和/或全新世样品，每个样品代表相似的沉积环境，即与点状条和中间条有关的粗粒河道沉积物。使用CW-OSL，LM-OSL和TL技术使用多颗粒方法研究了敏感性。通过确定对漂白后施用的相同再生剂量的归一化发光响应，获得了每个样品的灵敏度基础值。使用重复的给药周期，还记录了实验室的敏感性变化。

考虑由同一份样品的几等份计算得出的平均灵敏度基准值时，与多瑙河有关的，大部分为阿尔卑斯山起源的沉积物的值比喀尔巴阡山脉的沉积物低50–60％，甚至在获得相当大的标准偏差（变异系数）的情况下也是如此。为25％至60％），可以使用任何测量的发光灵敏度参数将它们清楚地分开。尽管区分不同的敏感度参数可以提供定义相当不同的样本均值组的机会，但对喀尔巴阡山脉起源但代表不同流域的河流沉积物的判别就不那么容易了。从这个角度来看，总的LM-OSL和快速的成分比率似乎是最佳的选择，在特性上标准偏差和标准误差分离可能不清楚。在灵敏度变化方面没有发现明确的关系，但是，与马洛斯河有关的一些样品在实验室敏化过程中几乎没有变化。在绘制OSL年龄与石英灵敏度的关系图时，可以识别出清晰的趋势，这在一定程度上可以由地貌原因来解释。总体而言，结果表明，根据喀尔巴阡盆地河流沉积物的石英发光敏感性（在常规测年过程中可以轻松评估该参数），可以区分这些沉积物。在绘制OSL年龄与石英灵敏度的关系图时，可以识别出清晰的趋势，这在一定程度上可以由地貌原因来解释。总体而言，结果表明，根据喀尔巴阡盆地河流沉积物的石英发光敏感性（在常规测年过程中可以轻松评估该参数），可以区分这些沉积物。在绘制OSL年龄与石英灵敏度的关系图时，可以识别出明显的趋势，这可以部分由地貌原因来解释。总体而言，结果表明，根据喀尔巴阡盆地河流沉积物的石英发光敏感性（在常规测年过程中可以轻松评估该参数），可以区分这些沉积物。