i. The global findings of this study include the demonstration that SEEBIC imaging is an attractive alternative to electron tomography (ET) for investigating the morphology of nanoparticles. SEEBIC imaging offers shorter acquisition and processing times

i. The global findings of this study include the demonstration that SEEBIC imaging is an attractive alternative to electron tomography (ET) for investigating the morphology of nanoparticles. SEEBIC imaging offers shorter acquisition and processing times compared to ET, while providing superior spatial resolution compared to scanning electron microscopy (SEM). ii. The primary analytical achievement of this study is the validation of SEEBIC imaging as a viable technique for high-resolution visualization of nanoparticle morphology. By showcasing its ability to provide topographical information with high spatial resolution and shorter throughput times compared to ET, the study advances the field by offering a more time-efficient method for nanoparticle characterization. iii. The samples were prepared for analysis by synthesizing gold nanoparticles (Au NPs) with different shapes, such as triangular platelets and Ino decahedra. Considerations when handling the samples included ensuring the cleanliness of the surfaces to avoid contamination and ensuring the samples were securely mounted for imaging. iv. SEEBIC imaging utilized secondary electron detectors, which are capable of detecting the electrical current arising from holes generated by the emission of secondary electrons (SEs) from the sample. The quantitative analysis involved mapping the detected signal pixel-by-pixel to produce an image dependent on the SE yield for each scan position. v. The conditions used for the analysis of the samples included utilizing scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) mode, with appropriate voltage and dwell times optimized for SEEBIC imaging. vi. The composition of the sample was verified through imaging and comparison with known standards. Additionally, the electrical properties of the materials, such as conductivity and work function, were assessed to verify the composition. vii. The stability of the sample under the analysis conditions was ensured by carefully controlling the experimental parameters, such as voltage and dwell times, to minimize sample damage or degradation during imaging. viii. The stability of the sample following sample preparation and analysis was verified through imaging consistency and comparison with known standards. Any changes in sample morphology or composition were carefully monitored. ix. Potential environmental factors that could influence the results of this study include variations in temperature, humidity, and electromagnetic interference, which could affect imaging quality and stability. x. Assumptions made in the conclusions drawn from this study may include assumptions about the uniformity of the sample composition and morphology, as well as assumptions about the accuracy and precision of the imaging technique. Limitations in the measurements could lead to assumptions being required, such as incomplete data or uncertainties in quantitative analysis. xi. The main limitations of this study may include potential artifacts in the SEEBIC imaging due to sample geometry or surface features, as well as limitations in the spatial resolution or sensitivity of the detectors used. Additionally, the study may be limited by the specific types of nanoparticles analyzed and the generalizability of the findings to other nanoparticle systems. xii. If repeating this study, considerations may include optimizing experimental parameters for enhanced imaging quality and sensitivity, conducting additional control measurements to validate results, and exploring alternative imaging techniques or analytical methods to complement SEEBIC imaging. xiii. A follow-up study could focus on applying SEEBIC imaging to a wider range of nanoparticle systems to further validate its applicability and effectiveness. Additionally, integrating complementary techniques such as energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDXS) or electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) could provide additional insights into the composition and electronic properties of nanoparticles. xiv. A future analysis technique that could be proposed is the development of a hybrid technique combining SEEBIC imaging with atomic force microscopy (AFM). This hybrid technique could offer simultaneous high-resolution imaging of surface morphology and topography, providing comprehensive characterization of nanoparticles with enhanced spatial resolution and sensitivity. Additionally, customized tooling could be developed to enable in situ SEEBIC imaging under controlled environmental conditions, allowing for real-time monitoring of nanoparticle behavior under various stimuli.