Comparison of LIBS with alternative techniques

As a rule, LIBS performs relatively worse than other, well-established techniques. Thus, the ICP technique (which, like LIBS, uses plasma for excitation and the light it emits as the basis for analysis) provides better limits of detection (in the sub-nanogram-per-millilitre region). The greatest difference between both techniques is that inductively coupled plasma (ICP) is highly stable and influenced by non-linear ablation processes. One other major difference is that the ICP technique is usually applied to homogenized liquid samples whereas LIBS is used mainly for direct solid analysis. 

The evaluation of LIBS and LIB-TOF-MS for in-depth analysis of layered materials has shown that both share advantages such as speed of analysis and negligible sample handling, but the absence of background contribution belongs to the latter only [191]. 

Based on the previous comparisons, the sensitivity of LIBS can be improved by overcoming the problems arising from plasma instability. Because this shortcoming is inherent in the technique, it can only be circumvented by proper characterization of the plasma. 

---