The cumulative intensity depends on correctly estimating weak
reflections, so it is a bit vulnerable to the integration procedures.
I prefer the 4th moment of E - 2nd moment of I. Providing there is no
pseudo-translation they are pretty reliable indicators of twinning
Eleanor
Bryan W. Lepore wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Iain Kerr wrote:
>> The cumulative intensity distribution plot from crystal A did suggest
>> partial twinning (attached, doesn't look too bad though..)
>
> notwithstanding other plots/statistics, does the cum. intens. dist.
> plot (e.g. from truncate) really show a continuum from untwinned to
> twinned?
>
> i.e, if the plots are 'overlapped in the middle', no question -
> twinned. but, if the plots are 'a little off, but not in the middle'
> can this result (alone) really mean the data is - as we want to say -
> partially twinned? i.e. is the plot robust only for the detection of
> perfect twinning?
>
> -bryan
>
>
|