ISa: Difference between revisions

4 bytes removed ,  15 February 2015
Line 15: Line 15:
If your crystal is good, then a and b will reflect the quality of the other components of the experimental setup (e.g. beamline stability).  
If your crystal is good, then a and b will reflect the quality of the other components of the experimental setup (e.g. beamline stability).  


ISa is well suited to judge the quality of the experimental setup, because its value does not depend on random error, whereas the low-resolution R<sub>meas</sub> does, and is thus influenced by crystal size and exposure. If you see a high value of the the low-resolution R<sub>meas</sub>, you don't know if it is high because the crystal diffracted weakly, or because the beamline was broken. Conversely, a low value of ISa indicates that something is broken, no matter how small the crystal is or how weakly it was exposed.
ISa is well suited to judge the quality of the experimental setup, because its value does not depend on random error, whereas the low-resolution R<sub>meas</sub> does, and is thus influenced by crystal size and exposure. If you see a high value of the low-resolution R<sub>meas</sub>, you don't know if it is high because the crystal diffracted weakly, or because the beamline was broken. Conversely, a low value of ISa indicates that something is broken, no matter how small the crystal is or how weakly it was exposed.


== Practical considerations ==
== Practical considerations ==
2,652

edits