It is hard for us to rise above these cultural differences, so perhaps the adoption of a third, precisely-defined, and neutral term is indeed warranted. MPR seems a good start, but it forces us to think about what we mean by measurement. My feeling is that a diffraction spot can be measured in many ways: the summation integration and profile-fitted intensities are separate measurements, are they not? Also, one can measure the background intensity, the position, spot skewness and an inexhaustible number of other quantities from a single observed Bragg spot. So perhaps Observations Per Reflection (OPR) is better, but is there really a difference between observation and measurement? Perhaps each reflection is already a separate event, in which case Reflections Per Miller Index (RPMI) looks better. However, what about the term "reflection" itself, is that precise enough for us...?
-- David On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 19:52, James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> wrote: > > Sorry to take this thread on a detour/diversion: What I was attempting to > point out below, perhaps unclearly, is that the different interpretations > of the word "redundant" are a cultural difference. As a student of > multiple English languages perhaps I can explain: > > Few US English speakers know that in UK/European/Australian English the > word "redundant" has a strong negative connotation. I, for one, was > surprised to learn that the phrase "made redundant" is used in the UK to > describe loss of employment. That is, a layoff, firing or perhaps a > furlough. So, I think it important to spell out for my fellow US English > speakers that the emotional ties to this negative connotation can be strong > ones. > > Conversely, many UK English speakers do not know that in US English the > word "redundant" has a strong positive connotation. We never use the > phrase "made redundant" to describe a lost job. Most Americans I think > would be confused by such a turn of phrase. If a US English speaker was > told their jobs was "made redundant" they would most likely think that a > new hire was onboarded to back them up. This would imply that their job > was so important that the company wanted at least two people doing it, just > in case you got hit by a bus. This strong positive connotation also has > emotional roots. > > Personally, I prefer the positive connotation. Perhaps that is my cultural > bias, or perhaps I just generally believe that positivity is better than > negativity. Maybe I'm just a "nice" guy. The meaning of the word "nice" has > changed enormously over the last few hundred years, and I don't think we're > going to change that any more than we are going to change the meaning of > "redundant" in these two major forms of English. > > However, just because a word has slightly different meanings in two > slightly different languages does not mean we should abandon it. Are we > going to stop eating "chips" just because we are not sure if our fried > potato will come as sliced wedges or thin crispy wafers? If you are unhappy > with your meal, is it the fault of the culture you are visiting? or the > customer for forgetting where they are? Context is everything. > > So, for those unfamiliar with one or more of the major English-speaking > cultures, here are a few other important differences to be aware of: > "Football" may not be the game you think it is. > If you are offered a "biscuit" in the US, do not expect it to be sweet. > If you want to leave a building you should take the "lift" to the "ground > floor", but if you take an "elevator" get off on the "1st floor". > A "dummy" is a pacifier for a baby in the UK/Australia, but in the US it > only means an unintelligent person, or a plastic replica of one. > "please" and "thank you" are considered baseline politeness in some > English cultures, but their excessive use in others, such as the US, can be > seen as rude. > A "tap" in the US dispenses beer, water comes out of a "faucet". > A "flat" in the US is not a place to live, but rather where we test rocket > cars. > "Gas" can be a liquid in the US. > "Rubber" is a substance in both languages, but in the US a lump of it > meant for erasing pencil marks is an "eraser". Do not ask for a "rubber" at > the shop unless you are sure which country you are in. > A "holiday" in the US is a special day on the calendar when everyone gets > off work, not just when an individual takes a "vacation". > If you go walking down the "pavement" you are risking getting hit by a car > in the US, because that is what we call the road bed, not the "sidewalk". > A "torch", is a handheld electric light in the UK, but in the US it is a > flaming stick of wood. > A "queue" is a line of people in the UK, but in the US it is known only to > computer scientists submitting jobs on a cluster. > > Then there are words like "capillary", which means the same thing in both > languages but the alternate pronunciations never fail to enrage someone. It > is perhaps odd that since US English and UK English are spoken with many > different accents we pronounce essentially every word at least slightly > differently, but for some reason "capillary" makes people angry. Same with > "schedule". Equally emotional responses arise from how you pronounce the > letter "z". Go figure. > > Similar ire is risen for spelling. My favourite/favorite is > aluminum/aluminium, but equally divisive are colour/color, tire/tyre, > cheque/check, gray/grey, theatre/theater, pyjamas/pajamas, and many others. > > It is at this stage when you will find people of another culture trying to > "correct" you on how to speak or write your own language. This can be > confusing because you will probably not be corrected for calling a > "courgette" a "zucchini", especially if you are Italian. However, a native > Hindi speaker might feel compelled to correct your pronunciation of > "shampoo". I am not singling out any one culture here, we have all given > in to the temptation to "correct" someone, perhaps even while visiting > their home. Ahh, the errors of my youth. > > All that said, I don't think this forum is the place to discuss cultural > differences. This is especially true once we start using words like > "correct"/"incorrect" and "right"/"wrong", as these tend to generate far > more heat than light. However, I do think it important to identify and > describe cultural differences when they start to impede scientific > discussion. It is OK to disagree. But let it be over interpretation of > complete information that both parties possess, not preconceived notions > nor ignorance of the complete picture. If we understand WHY another person > thinks in a way we find disagreeable, then perhaps we have a better chance > of moving forward and enjoying the upcoming celebrations of > Independence/GoodRiddanceUngratefulColonials Day. > > Whatever you call it, an eggplant or an an aubergine, its odour/odor and > flavour/flavor are the same. I apologize/apologise to my > neighbours/neighbors across the Lake/Pond for my behaviour/behavior if you > are not enamoured/enamored with my endeavour/endeavor at humor/humour. It > is not my specialty/speciality. fullstop/period. > > -James Holton > MAD Scientist > > > On 6/29/2020 3:36 PM, Bernhard Rupp wrote: > > I think it is time to escalate that discussion to crystallographic > definition purists like Massimo or to a logical consistency proponent like > Ian who abhors definitional vacuum 😊 > > > > Cheers, BR > > > > *From:* CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> > <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> *On Behalf Of *Andreas Förster > *Sent:* Monday, June 29, 2020 15:24 > *To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > *Subject:* Re: [ccp4bb] number of frames to get a full dataset? > > > > I like to think that the reflections I carefully measured at high > multiplicity are not redundant, which the dictionary on my computer defines > as "not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous" and the American > Heritage Dictionary as "exceeding what is necessary or natural; > superfluous" and "needlessly repetitive; verbose". > > > > Please don't use the term Needless repetitivity in your Table 1. It sends > the wrong message. Multiplicity is good. > > > > All best. > > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:03 AM James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov> wrote: > > I have found that the use of "redundancy" vs "multiplicity" correlates > very well with the speaker's favorite processing software. The Denzo/HKL > program scalepack outputs "redundancy", whereas scala/aimless and other > more Europe-centric programs output "multiplicity". > > At least it is not as bad as "intensity", which is so ambiguous as to be > almost useless as a word on its own. > > -James Holton > MAD Scientist > > On 6/24/2020 10:27 AM, Bernhard Rupp wrote: > > > Oh, and some of us prefer the word 'multiplicity' ;-0 > > Hmmm…maybe not. ‘Multiplicity’ in crystallography is context sensitive, > and not uniquely defined. It can refer to > > 1. the position multiplicity (number of equivalent sites per unit > cell, aka Wyckoff-Multiplicity), the only (!) cif use of multiplicity > 2. the multiplicity of the reflection, which means the superposition > of reflections with the same *d* (mostly powder diffraction) > 3. the multiplicity of observations, aka redundancy. > > While (a) and (b) are clearly defined, (c) is an arbitrary experimental > number. > > How from (a) real space symmetry follows (b) in reciprocal space > (including the epsilon zones, another ‘multiplicity’) is explained here > > https://scripts.iucr.org/cgi-bin/paper?a14080 > > and also on page 306 in BMC. > > Too much multiplicity might create duplicity… > > Cheers, BR > > > > Jon Cooper > > > > On 23 Jun 2020 22:04, "Peat, Tom (Manufacturing, Parkville)" < > tom.p...@csiro.au> wrote: > > I would just like to point out that for those of us who have worked too > many times with P1 or P21 that even 360 degrees will not give you 'super' > anomalous differences. > > I'm not a minimalist when it comes to data- redundancy is a good thing to > have. > > cheers, tom > > > > Tom Peat > Proteins Group > Biomedical Program, CSIRO > 343 Royal Parade > Parkville, VIC, 3052 > +613 9662 7304 > +614 57 539 419 > tom.p...@csiro.au > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on behalf of > 00000c2488af9525-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk < > 00000c2488af9525-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk> > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 24, 2020 1:10 AM > *To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> > *Subject:* Re: [ccp4bb] number of frames to get a full dataset? > > > > Someone told me there is a cubic space group where you can get away with > something like 11 degrees of data. It would be interesting if that's > correct. These minimum ranges for data collection rely on the crystal being > pre-oriented, which is unheard-of these days, although they can help if > someone is nagging you to get off the beam line or if your diffraction > fades quickly. Going for 180 degrees always makes sense for a well-behaved > crystal, or 360 degrees if you want super anomalous differences. Hope this > helps a bit. > > Jon Cooper > > > > On 23 Jun 2020 07:29, Andreas Förster <andreas.foers...@dectris.com> > wrote: > > Hi Murpholino, > > > > in my opinion (*), the question is neither number of frames nor degrees. > The only thing that matters to your crystal is dose. How many photons does > your crystal take before it dies? Consequently, the question to ask is How > best to use photons. Some people have done exactly that. > > https://doi.org/10.1107/S2059798319003528 > > > All best. > > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > (*) Disclaimer: I benefit when you use PILATUS or EIGER - but I want you > to use them to your advantage. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:04 AM Murpholino Peligro <murpholi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi. > Quick question... > > I have seen *somewhere* that to get a 'full dataset we need to collect n > frames': > > at least 180 frames if symmetry is X > > at least 90 frames if symmetry is Y > > at least 45 frames if symmetry is Z > > Can somebody point where is *somewhere*? > > > > ...also... > > what other factors can change n... besides symmetry and radiation damage? > > > > Thanks > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > > > > -- > > Andreas Förster, Ph.D. > > Application Scientist Crystallography, Area Sales Manager Asia & Pacific > > Phone: +41 56 500 21 00 | Direct: +41 56 500 21 76 | Email: > andreas.foers...@dectris.com > > DECTRIS Ltd. | Taefernweg 1 | 5405 Baden-Daettwil | Switzerland | > www.dectris.com > > > > > > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > *Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the use of the > named recipient(s)* <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > *and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are > not the intended* <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > *recipient, please contact the sender and delete the message. Any > unauthorized use of* <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > *the information contained in this message is prohibited.* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > ------------------------------ > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > *https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1* > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/5067919> > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
