Repository navigation
Demonstrate the usage of "quality_of_fit" to assess the geometry - #2973
Merged
Merged
Conversation
|
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
t20100
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2026
Collaborator
|
Happy for you to merge, but I didn't 100% understand ("The deviation is normalized by the width of the peak itself, so the indicator is a reduced χ²: a value below 0.31 indicates a properly calibrated geometry.") The meaningful unit for me is usually the (obs-calc) in units of detector pixels. More than 1 is suggests a problem, less than 0.1 is very good. |
jonwright
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Discussed with the "High-speed azimuthal integration group" ...