On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 12:29 +0100, Roberto Battistutta wrote:
> Does anyone know the origin or the theoretical basis of this "I/sigmaI
> >3.0" rule for an appropriate resolution?
There is none. Did editor ask you to follow this "suggestion"? I
wonder if there is anyone among the subscribers of this bb who would
come forward and support this "I/sigmaI >3.0" claim.
What was your I/sigma, by the way? I almost always collect data to
I/sigma=1, which has the downside of generating somewhat higher
R-values. Shall I, according to this reviewer, retract/amend every
single one of them? What a mess.
Cheers,
Ed.
--
"I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling."
Julian, King of Lemurs
