At 10:02 15/03/2004, Armel Le Bail wrote:
The preferred orientation (PO)
problem is recurrent at the rietveld_l.
This is normal since PO is one of the biggest problem...
Given that a neutron experiment is very expensive, some
recommendations should be inside of the powder
neutron...
Armel is righ
> Like Rp, Rwp, Chi2, RB are respectively from 3.96, 5.33, 2.68, 5.80
> to 3.35, 4.42, 1.85, 3.07.
This should pass a test of statistical significance.
The preferred orientation (PO) problem is recurrent at the rietveld_l.
This is normal since PO is one o
zhijian fan wrote:
*> Like Rp, Rwp, Chi2, RB are respectively from 3.96, 5.33, 2.68, 5.80
> to 3.35, 4.42, 1.85, 3.07.
This should pass a test of statistical significance. *
I made a hypothesis testing. H0: It needs not PO correction.
The model with PO correction:
G1=sum[wi
Title: Message
Dear all,
When dealing with pref. orientation (PO),
like with structure, it should make physical sense. For example if you have
needle-like crystals pref. orientation coefficient should be greater than 1
(not less as in your case) and PO axis should be aligned
---From: zhijian fan
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 3:40
PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Is it really preferred
orientation problem?
Dear all,
I was making a Rietvled analysis of a neutron powder
diffraction patters from intermetallic compound LaNi4.25Al0.75
> Like Rp, Rwp, Chi2, RB are respectively from 3.96, 5.33, 2.68, 5.80
> to 3.35, 4.42, 1.85, 3.07.
This should pass a test of statistical significance. That does not mean
it really is preferred orientation, but if it is not preferred
orientation, then you
Dear all,
I was making a Rietvled analysis of a neutron powder
diffraction patters from intermetallic compound LaNi4.25Al0.75.
If not using preferred orientation correction, the agreement
indices are a little higher than those when using it.
Like Rp, Rwp, Chi2, RB are respectively from
