Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

why is it _pd_proc.intensity_bkg_calc and not _pd_calc.intensity_bkg? #72

Open
rowlesmr opened this issue Jan 7, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@rowlesmr
Copy link
Collaborator

rowlesmr commented Jan 7, 2023

The description of _pd_proc.intensity_bkg_calc says that it

is intended to contain the background intensity for every data point where the background function has been fitted or estimated (for example, in all Rietveld and profile fits).

PD_CALC says that it

is used for storing a computed diffractogram trace ... such as ... computed intensities from a Rietveld refinement.

Should there be a _pd_calc.intensity_bkg instead/as well as?

_pd_calc.intensity_* is of purpose Number, and _pd_proc.intensity_bkg_calc is of purpose Measurand (and "Inclusion of s.u.'s for intensity_bkg_calc values is strongly recommended.") , so there is a probably a difference of intent here between the two data items.

@briantoby
Copy link
Collaborator

briantoby commented Jan 7, 2023 via email

@rowlesmr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mmm. There must have been some context and reasoning for the split.

The _pd_calc.intensity_* data items say that "values should be computed at the same locations as the processed diffractogram", so a _pd_calc.intensity_bkg item seems to be a drop in replacement for _pd_proc.intensity_bkg_calc, except for the "estimated" part of the definition.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants