2,652
edits
FAQ: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→CORRECT
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
== CORRECT == | == CORRECT == | ||
=== Can one apply the corrections in CORRECT without deleting outliers (i.e. | |||
=== reducing WFAC1 below its default of 1 improves my data, right? === | |||
Actually, most likely not. Outlier rejection is a tricky business. Reducing WFAC1 ''will'' improve the numbers in the tables, but the merged (averaged) data will most likely be ''worse'' instead of better. In other words, the ''precision'' of the data (this is what the tables report!) may appear better, but the ''accuracy'' (this is what you want!) will degrade. | |||
To expand on this: The default of WFAC1=1 usually rejects about 1% of all observations. If even more should be rejected, you should be able to give very good reasons for this: for example ice rings or presence of multiple lattices. | |||
Personally, I have never reduced WFAC1 below 1, but often find that increasing it gives me better data. | |||
=== Can one apply the corrections in CORRECT without deleting outliers (i.e. preparing for a later program e.g. SCALA to do outlier rejection)? === | |||
you could set WFAC1 to a higher value, like 2 (default is 1). | you could set WFAC1 to a higher value, like 2 (default is 1). | ||