%0 Figure %A Leray, Aymeric %A Padilla-Parra, Sergi %A Roul, Julien %A Héliot, Laurent %A Tramier, Marc %D 2013 %T Comparison of the performance of the non-fitting strategies as a function of the total number of photons for three distinct fractions of interacting donor fD: 0.25 (A), 0.5 (B) and 0.75 (C). %U https://plos.figshare.com/articles/figure/_Comparison_of_the_performance_of_the_non_fitting_strategies_as_a_function_of_the_total_number_of_photons_for_three_distinct_fractions_of_interacting_donor_f_D_0_25_A_0_5_B_and_0_75_C_/748291 %R 10.1371/journal.pone.0069335.g004 %2 https://plos.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/1122461 %K Biochemistry %K proteins %K Protein interactions %K biotechnology %K Bioengineering %K Biomedical Engineering %K Molecular cell biology %K signal processing %K Image processing %K biophysics %K Condensed-matter physics %K optics %K non-fitting %K strategies %K photons %K fractions %K interacting %X

The polar approach is indicated in black, the moments method in blue and the mfD in red. For all methods, we have reported the estimated fD and the estimated mfD value in the left part of the figure. The estimated donor lifetime in presence of the acceptor τF, and the estimated mean lifetime <τ> are reported in the right part. In all cases, medians are indicated with markers and error bars correspond to the interquartile ranges of 4096 simulated histograms whose parameters are: τF = 1.5 ns, τD = 2.5 ns and Nch = 64 channels (TCSPC simulations) and the simulated values are indicated in dotted lines.

%I PLOS ONE