2014
DOI: 10.1107/s1600576713032342
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Integration techniques for surface X-ray diffraction data obtained with a two-dimensional detector

Abstract: This article proposes two integration methods to determine the structure factors along a surface diffraction rod measured with a two‐dimensional detector. The first method applies the classic way of calculating integrated intensities in angular space. This is adapted to work efficiently with two‐dimensional data. The second method is based on integration in reciprocal space. An intensity map is created by converting the detected intensity pixel by pixel to the reciprocal space. The integration is then performe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The total uncertainty on the experimental structure factors is dominated by the systematic error estimated to be 6.1%, according to Ref. 16; the statistical error being everywhere smaller than 1 %.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The total uncertainty on the experimental structure factors is dominated by the systematic error estimated to be 6.1%, according to Ref. 16; the statistical error being everywhere smaller than 1 %.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16. PyRod was also used to simulate the structure factors using the model described below, and to refine the structural parameters of this model with the help of a least squares fit of the simulation to the data.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advent of pixel‐resolved area detectors in the 2000s accelerated the measurement of crystal truncation rods by simultaneously measuring the entire signal and background. [ 59,61,66 ] Such detectors act as cameras that can resolve X‐ray photons over a range of angles determined by the detector size, slit size, and the sample‐detector distance. A typical modern area detector at a distance of 1 m from the sample could subtend several degrees in each direction with each pixel resolving ≈0.01°.…”
Section: Theory and Measurement Of Ctrsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…XRPD data were refined by means of full-profile Rietveld algorithm, using the EXPO2014 software [26]. The removal of the diffuse scattering, introduced by the presence of the water inside the electrochemical cell, has been operated by fitting the background of the signals with polynomials (first order for the l-scans and 18 terms Chebyshev polynomial for the ␦-scans) [27].…”
Section: Reciprocal Space Mapping Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These latter were obtained as Root Mean Square (RMS) of the background. It is worth to notice that the data sets have been projected on the hkl space with a resolution of 0.001 rlu [26,27]. …”
Section: Single Line Profile Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%