Thank You Pierluigi Traverso for the links.

The trend to directly interpret EIS spectra using physical models based on the perception of the user, puts the physical interpretation before the actual fitting of data. This results are complex commercial applications that researcher is required to choose an ECM and that promote automated fitting algorithms. The necessity of choosing a ECM confuses the novice user and creates diverse interpretations by experienced users. Automated fitting routines, although capable, require blind trust of the user.

In contrast, I am promoting to first fit the spectra with an expandable model where the number of responses (e.g a parallel combination of series R-CPE legs) are based number of parameters the data can support. Once this is determined, then physical models can be explored. This approach is focused on how the instrument responds to a perturbation, rather user perception.

I have published articles on LinkedIn and am in the process of updating a software program called PEDRA (Parallel Electrical Debye Response Analysis) running within IGOR Pro. This approach offers a simpler, focused application with incredible graphics capability and open source code. The advantages of the PEDRA approach are: 1) simplifies choice of ECM, 2) identifies the number of responses (i.e. parameters) that the data can support, 3) used a iterative, user involved, fitting process.

I also uploaded a poster I presented at the Fall Material Research Symposium, December 2024. (I retired from CNL, Canadian National Laborites, in 2012).

I wish you well in your endeavors.

The trend to directly interpret EIS spectra using physical models based on the perception of the user, puts the physical interpretation before the actual fitting of data. This results are complex commercial applications that researcher is required to choose an ECM and that promote automated fitting algorithms. The necessity of choosing a ECM confuses the novice user and creates diverse interpretations by experienced users. Automated fitting routines, although capable, require blind trust of the user.

In contrast, I am promoting to first fit the spectra with an expandable model where the number of responses (e.g a parallel combination of series R-CPE legs) are based number of parameters the data can support. Once this is determined, then physical models can be explored. This approach is focused on how the instrument responds to a perturbation, rather user perception.

I have published articles on LinkedIn and am in the process of updating a software program called PEDRA (Parallel Electrical Debye Response Analysis) running within IGOR Pro. This approach offers a simpler, focused application with incredible graphics capability and open source code. The advantages of the PEDRA approach are: 1) simplifies choice of ECM, 2) identifies the number of responses (i.e. parameters) that the data can support, 3) used a iterative, user involved, fitting process. I also uploaded a poster I presented at the Fall Material Research Symposium, December 2024.