@@ -7,15 +7,15 @@ First the glitches are taken off of the data then the moving average is calculat
To take off the glitches their positions are detected, to do so each point is compared to the previous point, if the jump in intensity is bigger than a certain percentage then it's considered to be the start or end of a glitch.
This technique works sufficiently well but it still makes mistakes. Here is an example of such a mistake. The following picture shows 3 glitches with an increasing loss of intensity:
And finally, the reason why this happened, the moving average dips where there is a glitch, it does exactly what it's not supposed to do (it is supposed to be the moving average of the curve with no glitches at all).
This is just one example illustrating that the fitting script can change the data and therefore needs to be improved upon.
In each python plot script that brings the curve back to the baseline, it is possible to comment and uncomment certain lines to see the moving average without the glitches that is supposed to be the curve with no glitches (in green) like the above picture shows. The above illustrates one example of a glitch that is not ignored but there are other instances of this happening (for example in the third range for the white light).
...
...
@@ -44,15 +44,15 @@ There doesn't seem to be an easy way to export the data off of the ssrl database
The glitch positioned at 7.265 keV on the SSRL glitch db data is also at that position for the "theory glitches" and the McXtrace glitches. But the SSRL digitized plots of the beamline 4-3 show it at 7.234 keV. It has shifted. The BL 2-3 glitch has also shifted, although to a lesser amount. They are no longer at the same 7.265 keV position seen in the first picture.
...
...
@@ -63,26 +63,26 @@ When the hkl 111 vector is pointing downwards, it's the plane 111 that reflects
To run instrument files showcasing this see the folder called "_questions/reversed_", the hkl debugger (see annex) will create a file showing which planes have been hit and how many times.
Taking into account the above information, here is a side view of the crystals and their frames chosen for the simulations. The x axis is directed towards the screen (direct trihedron).
There has to be a choice to orient the second crystal. Here is a view from above showing the choice taken. The crystal at the top is the crystal on the right in the above picture, and the crystal at the bottom is the crystal on the left in the above picture.
