Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scaling needs the log residual, PR needs the linear one
|
|
The gradients are correct, the test way wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D'oh! This must have crept in during a big tidyup before a commit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's about a million times easier
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to refine
|
|
|
|
Reflections appearing and disappearing are problematic when trying to do a
least-squares refinement. Therefore, assume that reflections stay on
panel and keep them under consideration even if their partialities go to
zero (i.e. they drift off Bragg). This should stabilise both
refinements, and simplifies quite a lot of code.
Collateral "damage": the old "select_intersection()" is now gone.
|
|
|