Hi Shaofeng,
Thanks for providing a thorough description of what you did in the Word file—it
makes it much easier to comment!
I wouldn’t say that sigma2 is not important, in this case. I would say,
instead, that your fits have not yet successfully distinguished between the
different proposed m
Hi Raj,
The kind of thing I gather you did for #1 is almost always a bad idea. Guessing
parameters in one fit and then setting them to the results for that fit in
subsequent fits without further justification is asserting a certainty about
those parameters that you do not possess. Occasionally
Dear Scott and demter users,
I also tried to use BaHAsO4 crystallographic data as the initial model for
fitting of the EXAFS data. Please see the attached file. It was found the
sigma2 was around 0.0012-0.0014. The Hamilton tests also show the improvement
was not significant (> >0.05). But thea
