$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
General considerations for data preparation
Fitting TA data may appear at first glimpse to be relatively straightforward, and it might be expected that one clear correct "answer" should result for a given dataset. However, as highlighted in the protocol, there are many factors in the data acquisition, data preparation, and data analysis to carefully consider that can lead to uncertainty over which model or set of fitting parameters best describes the data. The goal of data preparation and fitting is to reduce as many of these extraneous factors as possible, while preserving the data for analysis. The task at hand might seem daunting to a beginner, as there is much to consider. To build intuition about the fitting process, the beginner is encouraged to try preparing the same data multiple times from scratch in slightly different ways to check how dramatically the data preparation steps impact the best fit. Additionally, two different researchers can prepare and fit the same data and compare results. This process may be time-consuming the first several times, however, doing so will allow the beginner to develop intuition on how to consistently prepare data for future samples. Like any skill, this data preparation and fitting will take time to develop, and the beginner is encouraged to be patient and disciplined when experimenting with and learning the process. The dataset used in this study is provided to give the beginner the chance to fit directly alongside the tutorial, and to directly compare results with those produced in the tutorial.
The data may contain background features that are present at all time delays (Supplementary Figure 2 and Supplementary Figure 3) such as scattering of the pump beam, and spontaneous emission of the sample. These unwanted features must be removed in order to isolate the transient absorption signal from the species of interest11. Removal of such features is done by choosing, averaging, and removing the contribution of a number of negative-time difference spectra. When selecting background spectra, it is important to ensure no features that might be part of the process of interest are included for removal. Background features arising from the solvent, such as absorption from impurities or the solvent itself, may also be observed in TA data. When the solvent produces a signal, a "blank" dataset containing only the solvent run under the exact same experimental conditions as the sample will need to be subtracted from the sample dataset. Details on this procedure are included in Supplementary File 3.
The chirp correction is another factor to consider carefully. Chirp occurs as the probe pulse travels to the sample and broadens due to imperfections in steering mirrors or by passing through dispersive optics such as lenses or filters. The end result is that lower energy photons in the probe pulse (i.e., the red side of the probe spectrum) arrive at the sample before higher energy photons (i.e., the blue side of the probe spectrum). This results in the "time zero" of the TA spectra being smeared out over several femtoseconds or picoseconds18, which manifests as a distinct curve in the raw dataset starting in the blue wavelengths and then flattening out as it approaches the red (Supplementary Figure 7). Chirp is most noticeable on shorter time scales such as those accessed by ultrafast TA. This wavelength-dependent time zero can be corrected as described in the protocol, but the application of this process can be tricky and subjective. Having a "blank" sample or measurement of the solvent Kerr response can minimize the subjective nature of hand-picking points for the chirp correction needed to generate the polynomial fit used to adjust and correct the chirp. The goal of the chirp correction is to remove the distinct "curve" of the time zero. It may take multiple attempts at fitting the chirp to obtain the best chirp-corrected data. The data can be fit several times with different chirp corrections applied in order to gain an understanding of the impact the chirp correction has on the values of the short TA lifetimes.
Artifacts that appear at "time zero"
Several artifacts can be observed close to "time zero" in TA data, including Rayleigh scattering, stimulated Raman scattering and cross-phase modulation. Rayleigh scattering of the pump beam is elastic scattering that results without a change in energy. This feature will appear at the same wavelength as the pump pulse. Stimulated Raman scattering may accompany the pump scattering signal19. Raman scattering, which results from inelastic scattering of a pump photon, produces peaks at both higher (anti-Stokes) and lower (Stokes) energy than the incident pump energy. In TA data, stimulated Raman scattering is observed due to the simultaneous irradiation of the sample with the pump and probe beams. When the probe beam interacts with the sample at the same time as the pump beam, it stimulates the Raman process. Therefore, the stimulated Raman scattering occurs around time zero and results in additional peaks in spectra within the first few hundred femtoseconds (Figure 6, observed in the darker blue spectrum in the highlighted region and Supplementary Figure 17). Cross-phase modulation originates from modulation of the solvent refractive index from interaction with the intense electric field of a pulse.
Stimulated Raman scattering may be distinguished from cross-phase modulation because the Raman peaks appear at specific frequencies that correspond to vibrational modes of the solvent. Because it is a Raman process, both Stokes and anti-Stokes lines on either side of the excitation can be observed. Chlorinated solvents like methylene chloride show very prominent Raman bands due to the large polarizability of chlorine. The spectral signatures of cross-phase modulation are unique to a solvent but are not as easily predicted as Raman scattering features.
Depending on the kinetics of the sample being measured, Rayleigh scattering, Raman scattering, and cross-phase modulation may overlap with early features of the TA data and can be challenging to remove from the data. In principle, these features can be seen in a neat solvent measurement and subtracted from the data, data analysis programs may have fitting functions to account for these features, but in practice, this can be difficult. When it is too difficult to subtract these artifacts without compromising the sample data, it may be better to crop out the compromised spectra around time zero to eliminate the artifacts. Doing so will have the unfortunate side effect of removing the first approximately 300 fs of data but will make fitting more reliable later on. Over the course of analyzing multiple datasets of the same and different samples, the beginner will gain intuition in achieving this balance of subtracting the background surface versus cropping out the initial 100-200 fs data.
General cropping may be necessary for portions of the spectra that contain low signal-to-noise. Instability in the probe beam at certain regions, low intensity of probe light, sample concentrations that are too high (thereby blocking much of the incident probe), low pump intensity, and the absorption cross-section of the sample are typical culprits of low signal-to-noise that can make fitting data challenging. In these cases, cropping the dataset on either side of the optical window in order to achieve a desired level of signal-to-noise can help the fitting process.
A dataset is ready for analysis once it has been sufficiently cropped to remove poor sections of the dataset, had the chirp corrected, and had background spectra averaged and subtracted. This procedure should result in data that contains only those portions most relevant to the photophysics and photochemistry of interest. Indeed, it is clear that there is some degree of subjectivity to this process. The goal in data preparation is to strike a balance of removing artifacts so they do not perturb the fitting, but not to remove so much that it compromises the integrity of the dataset, thereby hindering its interpretation. Finding this balance takes time and experience to build up the intuition for what is an artifact and what is data. Fitting (and re-fitting) the same set of data on multiple different days, or having two researchers fit the same data, can be a way to minimize human error and the subjectivity of data preparation and analysis.
General considerations for fitting and interpretation
After the raw TA spectra have been processed, they must be interpreted and modeled to extract information about the species and the dynamics present in the system of interest. This process can be described as a three-step procedure that includes initial spectral interpretation, quantitative modeling/fitting, and assignment of the spectral interpretation to the model/fitting.
Initial Spectral Interpretation: In the spectral interpretation step, the goal is to assign features present in the TA spectra to electronic states accessed in the photophysical or photochemical evolution of the system. To begin, various states should be identified. In this work, states refer to unique electronic states that are part of the photophysical or photochemical evolution of the system. A state, represented, for example, by one specific potential energy curve (PEC), possesses a set of characteristic peaks representing its absorption spectrum. A change that occurs within a single state is called a process. A photophysical process may appear in TA spectra as a peak shift or a change in the width of the spectrum. The key aspect of a process is that the population of the state stays the same (i.e., the process occurs within a given PEC); it is the distribution of energy within the state that changes. A change in the population of a state will be referred to as a transition. During a transition, the system evolves to another PEC (i.e., electronic state). Transitions may include internal conversion (IC), intersystem crossing (ISC), charge transfer, energy transfer, formation of new products, or return to the ground state. Guidelines for assigning states, processes, and transitions are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Assigning states
The first step in this process involves assigning spectral features to specific chemical species or states. The S1 state in TA should show a lifetime that matches the fluorescence lifetime taken using time-resolved emission spectroscopy. A triplet state can be verified if its lifetime is quenched by oxygen. If a radical anion or cation is suspected in the photophysical evolution, spectroelectrochemistry or chemical oxidation/reduction can be performed to generate the radical species, and an absorption spectrum of that species can be obtained and compared to the TA bandshape. Electron spin resonance (ESR) spectroscopy can be performed to verify the presence of free radicals. An excellent tutorial talk hosted by the ACS Division of Inorganic Chemistry gives an overview of TA and such considerations in assigning features20. After bands have been assigned to species, the next step in interpreting TA spectra is to qualitatively describe the dynamical processes occurring in the system. This step is vital as it gives the researcher an idea as to what models will be appropriate for describing their system and will give them a baseline to compare the fit parameters to.
Changes within a state
Vibrational cooling, geometric rearrangement, or solvation are extremely rapid processes (sub-ps to 10's ps) that can be observed with TA. Vibrational cooling is observed as rapid blue shifting of the TA spectrum on a several picosecond timescale21,22,23. Geometric rearrangement can occur on the 10's ps timescale. Solvation dynamics are observed as a redshift and narrowing of the spectrum over several picoseconds in conventional dipolar liquids, but high-viscosity solvents such as glycerol, polyethylene glycol (PEG), ionic liquids, and deep eutectic solvents can exhibit solvation dynamics occurring over the course of multiple nanoseconds24,25,26.
Changes in a state population
Reactions are characterized by a change in the intensity of a band, where a decrease in intensity is associated with a decrease in concentration of its chemical species and vice versa for an increase. In some cases, both the reactant and product species are visible in the spectra, whereas in others, the product states are too short-lived or too far red-shifted to be observed. Often state-to-state transitions can be observed by the presence of an isosbestic point in the spectra.
Quantitative modeling/Fitting: A model must then be fit to the data in order to extract quantitative information about the dynamics of the system. As previously described in the introduction, there is a vast array of models to use. This protocol focuses on two of the most common methods: single-wavelength fitting and global analysis. The single-wavelength method involves fitting individual wavelength traces from the spectra to some functional form, typically a sum of exponentials:
(2)
where ΔA(t) is the TA signal at a chosen wavelength, n is the number of exponential components, and ai is the amplitude of exponential component, i, with time constant τi. Several components can be added until the fit reproduces the experimental data. The goal of any fitting process is to model the data using enough lifetimes to reproduce the data well, but not overfit the data by including too many components. Hence, weighted goodness-of-fit parameters such as
, are used to help determine when the data are fit to within experimental uncertainties5.
After the decay is fitted satisfactorily, the parameters of the model can be used to characterize the dynamics of the system. The resulting time constants can then be extracted and interpreted. Unfortunately, the large number of overlapping features in TA spectra mean that a single wavelength in the spectrum may contain dynamics corresponding to different species whose spectral signatures overlap, meaning that the time constants extracted from a single wavelength fit may represent a composite of multiple coinciding processes. Additionally, any changes in bandshape and position will also influence the amplitudes and time constants extracted from single-wavelength fitting. These issues can be circumvented in some cases by a fitting method called 'bandshape analysis,' where one determines or assumes a functional form for the TA bands of each absorbing species in the system. These shapes are then weighted by time-dependent amplitudes and summed together in order to reproduce the observed spectrum. This procedure is commonly used in the analysis of time-resolved fluorescence spectra, but the more complicated shapes and overlapping components of TA bands make this method tenable in only a few simple cases, as detailed elsewhere10.
Another drawback of single-wavelength fitting is that it does not intrinsically take advantage of the broad spectral range afforded by modern TA experiments. One could, in principle, methodically fit each individual wavelength of the spectra, but such analysis is cumbersome, time-consuming, and computationally expensive. To combat this challenge, a method called 'global analysis' can be used to simultaneously fit an entire set of TA spectra to a set of shared dynamical parameters4. Global analysis, and a closely related method called target analysis, are successful and widely used methods, but they also come with their own unique set of drawbacks and limitations. As with any model, it is imperative to understand the assumptions that are used to create it as well as the limitations that they present.
In global analysis, TA spectra are represented by a m by n matrix, where m represents the number of wavelengths measured in each spectrum and n represents the number of time points collected. This matrix is then assumed to be decomposable into the product of two other matrices:
(3)
where C(t) is an n by k matrix and S(λ) is an m by k matrix. The value k represents the number of distinct spectral components used to reproduce the spectra. Each of these components represents an absorbing species with a unique spectral signature and dynamics. The S(λ) matrix represents the TA spectra of the k components and C(t) their time-dependent concentrations. In the simplest and most common implementation of global analysis, each component is assumed to have single-exponential kinetics (i = 1 in Equation 2, with each component assigned its own time constant). In summary, the full TA spectrum can be represented by the sum of k spectra components, each with its own characteristic absorption spectrum and single exponential decay.
When the TA spectra are fit, the user guesses how many components (i.e., a value for k) are needed and makes a guess at the time constant associated with a single-exponential decay of those species. The fitter then generates Cguess(t) and solves Equation 3 for Sfit(t). Next, Sfit(λ) and Cguess(t) are multiplied as in Equation 3 to create the fitted spectra, ΔA(λ,t)fit. Finally, the residuals, ΔA(λ,t)exp − A(λ,t)fit, are minimized and the optimal Sfit(λ) and time constants returned. The relative simplicity of global analysis, representing an entire set of spectra using a handful of time constants and fixed spectral components, makes it an attractive (and successful) method for untangling the complicated bandshapes and dynamics encountered in TA spectroscopy. However, care must be taken to ensure that global analysis is an appropriate model for the system at hand.
A key assumption in global analysis, illustrated in Equation 3, is the complete separability of the wavelength and time portions of the dynamics, a property called 'bilinearity'. This assumption requires that the component bandshapes are time-independent (i.e., they have a fixed spectral shape that does not vary or shift with time). The only thing that changes during the experiment is the relative populations of each component, represented by C(t). On long time scales, ~1 ns or so, this assumption typically holds and global analysis can be used without much concern. On the other hand, excited-state processes such as vibrational cooling and solvation dynamics, prominent on the ultrafast timescales accessible by femtosecond TA, result in time-dependent changes in the spectral signature of a species and a breakdown of bilinearity. This does not mean that global analysis cannot reproduce a dataset, in fact, it can always produce a satisfactory fit provided a sufficient number of components are used. The problem then lies in interpreting the component spectra and assigning the time constants to particular excited-state processes, as the components may no longer correspond to distinct absorbing species. Therefore, care must always be taken when applying global analysis to situations when bilinearity cannot be assumed.
Assigning the spectral interpretation to the model/fitting: Once a fit is obtained, the spectral interpretation must be mapped onto the lifetimes obtained in the fit. The lifetimes from the fit are assigned to both processes and reactions that were identified in the initial interpretation of the spectra. However, the initial assessment from the spectra and the number of fitted lifetimes obtained by the model might not immediately map onto each other. In this (common!) situation, the fitter needs to go back and assess the initial interpretation. Perhaps there was a vibrational cooling or other process that was missed in the initial assessment, but was identified in the modeling and fitting process. Or, perhaps two different sets of fit parameters could reproduce the data well and the initial interpretation can guide which set of fit parameters are chosen. In this final step, the fitter must go back and forth between the interpretation and fitting to find a description that leads to a plausible photophysical assignment of the species and dynamics of the system. Other fitting programs that include sequential fitting models, such as target analysis, can also be explored to complement the fits yielded by global analysis and the fitting software presented in this article4.
In summary, this protocol discusses the preparation and fitting of transient absorption data. Its aim is to highlight challenges associated with the process and to comment on ways to avoid or mitigate these challenges in a practical manner. Fitting TA data, like fitting most data encountered in technical fields, can be tricky and, at times, subjective. Therefore, being aware of the process and limitations of the data, the data preparation, and the mathematical tools used to model and assign meaning to the data are critical. Scientists must approach data and modeling with a critical eye.
One can attempt to mitigate the subjectivity of their fits. For example, the data can be prepared and fit from different starting points and on different days to ensure that the same fit is produced. Data taken on different days with different sample preparation can be compared. Multiple researchers can fit the same data and compare their results. Over time, researchers can build an intuition about the data they obtain (based on the specifics of their experimental setup and experimental parameters) that will allow them to be more confident in their fits.
There is a great deal to learn about TA data fitting and the details of the models discussed in this article. Several excellent review articles are enthusiastically recommended that delve deeply into this topic4,10,27. This protocol is meant to be a beginner's entryway into the analysis and fitting process that spurs interest in more deeply understanding the process.