Replies: 5 comments
-
Why not just use |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I guess because Adding another concept of |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I agree that there are already a number things called |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
But it is a theory, right? We have experimental data to which we fit our theoretical description of the system. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Grudgingly accepted consensus. For technique-specific implementations we would derive from |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Another discussion easyscience/EasyDiffractionLib#97 goes into design details of the
Phase
class, used to manipulate the atomistic object, with properties likeatoms
,cell
,background
etc.This is a good picture for diffraction and spectroscopy (and Bragg Edge), where the underlying model is a system composed of atoms.
However, for techniques like reflectometry, this isn't the case. Here, the system is a set of layers and surfaces.
For QENS this is even more simple, with the model being a set of simple functions.
This means the base class for this descriptor should be a bit simpler than the
Phase
we discussed.For starters, it can't be called
Phase
. How about calling this aTheory
? Or specificallyBaseTheory
, considering those are models we use to generate the theory curve to compare/fit to the experiment.Diffraction would use it as a base class for
Phase
, refl forLayer
etc.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions