2017
DOI: 10.1107/s1600577517013327
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The slip-and-slide algorithm: a refinement protocol for detector geometry

Abstract: Geometry correction is performed with separation of Euclidean and non-Euclidean movements with respect to the sample, refined against independent target functions derived from the data. This leads to substantial improvements in indexing rates and data quality indicators and refines to convergence.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indexing was done for both data sets applying CrystFEL v.0.6.3 to peaks found by Cheetah using the indexing packages MOSFLM 42 , DirAx 43 and asdf 26 . Since detector panel locations were not measured to adequate precision before the experiment, lithium titanate powder diffraction rings were used for rough detector panel alignment followed by fine refinement from HEWL and CTX-M-14 diffraction data using geoptimiser 44 and Slip-n-slide 45 . Combined with a 1% uncertainty in photon energy and uncertainty in the detector-to-sample distance, final indexing involved an iterative process with refinement of all unknown values using geoptimiser 44 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indexing was done for both data sets applying CrystFEL v.0.6.3 to peaks found by Cheetah using the indexing packages MOSFLM 42 , DirAx 43 and asdf 26 . Since detector panel locations were not measured to adequate precision before the experiment, lithium titanate powder diffraction rings were used for rough detector panel alignment followed by fine refinement from HEWL and CTX-M-14 diffraction data using geoptimiser 44 and Slip-n-slide 45 . Combined with a 1% uncertainty in photon energy and uncertainty in the detector-to-sample distance, final indexing involved an iterative process with refinement of all unknown values using geoptimiser 44 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, like hit finding and detector-readout intensity calibration, creating and refining a geometry file for a complicated multipanel detector is a daunting task, and is itself the subject of entire papers (Yefanov et al, 2015;Ginn & Stuart, 2017;Brewster et al, 2014). Some example geometry files are distributed with CrystFEL, which can be used as templates, including examples for the CSPAD detector at LCLS in two different datafile layouts (see Fig.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…xfel (Hattne et al, 2014), geoptimiser (Yefanov et al, 2015) in CrystFEL, DIALS (Waterman et al, 2016;Brewster et al, 2018) and cppxfel (Ginn & Stuart, 2017). In ClickX, we focus on refining parameters associated with single-panel detectors (or multi-panel detectors with well determined metrology) using powder diffraction signals, including the photon energy (), detector distance (D), beam center (c x ; c y ) and detector tilting angles ( t ; t ).…”
Section: Geometry Calibrationmentioning
confidence: 99%