At the risk of asking a question to which I should already know the answer:
do partials "count" as "redundancy"?
That is, in SCALA, is the number of "observations" the number of
recorded spots? Or is it the number of recorded spots after adding
partials? If it is the latter, what happens if you collect more than
360 degrees of data? Does the second pass through a given unmerged hkl
index count as "more partials" or is it now somehow upgraded to an
"independent" observation?
Then again, in Eastern English the word "redundancy" has a negative
connotation, and the output of SCALA actually uses the word
"multiplicity". I wonder if that makes unmerged partials "redundant"?
-James Holton
MAD Scientist
On 7/15/2011 8:09 AM, Ed Pozharski wrote:
On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 09:26 +0100, Phil Evans wrote:
Ed. You could count them from the unmerged output as you say, or I
could make you a special version of SCALA or Aimless maybe next week
Phil,
that would be fantastic! Hope there is broader interest in such option
(beyond Robbie and myself). I'll try unmerged output in the meantime.
Ed.
