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

New "best cell" attribute for the Crystal model #142

Closed
dagewa opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

New "best cell" attribute for the Crystal model #142

dagewa opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@dagewa
Copy link
Member

dagewa commented Feb 18, 2020

Following dials/dials#670 we would like a "best cell" attribute on the Crystal model, which can be set by post-integration refinement by a program like dials.two_theta_refine. It will be useful to keep this separate from the Crystal's existing static A matrix, because that will have been used for spot prediction, whereas in the context of dials.two_theta_refine, the "best cell" will not have been refined jointly with crystal orientations U and therefore should not be used for spot prediction.

I'm not completely happy with the name best_cell (is it really "best"?) and would welcome any alternatives.

@dagewa dagewa self-assigned this Feb 18, 2020
@dagewa
Copy link
Member Author

dagewa commented Mar 19, 2020

I'm looking at this now and don't think we need any new methods or public attributes in Crystal. Rather, accessors can have an extra parameter to choose between the usual cell used for prediction and a postrefined=True cell. This second option would not have been used for prediction for integration, but may be determined by some post-integration refinement algorithm, like dials.two_theta_refine. The parameter name postrefined seems more appropriate to me than best.

@dagewa
Copy link
Member Author

dagewa commented Mar 30, 2020

fixed by b9d6bb2

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant