Comparison of Spectral Analysis Software Programs

<p>The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has purchased two spectral analysis programs RobWin and RSEMCA to support arms control efforts. This thesis explored which program performed better for nuclear weapon identification and verification. The initial hypothesis was that both programs would perform similarly with only small differences in visual displays and operating functions. The thesis investigated three areas in order to evaluate the software's capabilities. The first area studied the benefits offered by different detectors specifically the NaI and CZT detector. The second area analyzed the quantitative and qualitative capabilities of each program and the third area reviewed the software's ability to detect weapon grade plutonium (WGPu). The results of the study show that RobWin performed better then RSEMCA. Only RobWin is capable of supporting DTRA's needs in treaty verification. RSEMCA is incapable of identifying WGPu due to a mathematical error associated with the peak count calculations. The detectors used in this thesis the CZT and NaI also failed to support DTRA's needs. Neither detector was capable of acquiring the necessary spectrum for identifying WGPu. Because of this thesis recommendations were made for future work with CZT detectors nuclear weapon detection and software development.</p><p>This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore you will see the original copyright references library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world) and other notations in the work.</p><p>This work is in the public domain in the United States of America and possibly other nations. Within the United States you may freely copy and distribute this work as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.</p><p>As a reproduction of a historical artifact this work may contain missing or blurred pages poor pictures errant marks etc. Scholars believe and we concur that this work is important enough to be preserved reproduced and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.</p><br>