- Ifeffit - millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov

Questions about fitting of EXAFS
by Fuxiang Zhang 04 Aug '16

04 Aug '16

Hi, Everyone, I have several detailed questions about EXAFS processing and fitting 1. Are there any physical meaning for DeltaE0 in the paths, why it should be less than 10eV 2. The cutting range of Kmax (FT transform parameters) has great effect on FTs of EXAFS, how do I know to use the best value of Kmax; 3. How to make refinement equation for multi-scattering paths? Such as in NiFe alloys (simple fcc structure), the path [Ni-FM-3m] Fe1.1 Ni1.4 Fe1.1., I use 0.67*Efe+0.33*Eni for DeltaE0, and 0.67*ssFe1+0.33*ssNi4 for sigma2, is that right? Many thanks Fuxiang Zhang

4 4

Applicable scope of delr=alpha*reff
by woschangqiang 03 Aug '16

03 Aug '16

Hi, everyone. delr=alpha*reff is very powerful in the fit of cubic system. And I want to know whether this function can be used in other crystal system. Thank for your patient answer.

4 4

Reference spectra for brookite, anatase, rutile, Amorphous TiO2 at Ti K-edge
by Samy Ould-Chikh 03 Aug '16

03 Aug '16

Dear, I received some data at Ti K-edge to analyse. The spectra corresponds to samples which are different mixture of titania allotropes. I started to do standard EXAFS fitting, but it doesn't seem relevant in this case. Probably, an attempt to do linear combination fitting with brookite, anatase, rutile, and amorphous titania references will be more useful. Unfortunately, the set of data I was given do not include those standards. Is there anyone who have the spectra corresponding to those titania compounds and willing to share with us the raw data ? If yes, would you mind to provide also the citation I should you use to acknowledge those standards ? Many thanks for your kind help. Best Regards, Samy Ould-Chikh KAUST Catalysis Center Bldg.3,Level 4, #4231 4700 King Abdullah University of Science & Technology Thuwal 23955-6900 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Tel: +966 12 8084486 E-mail: samy.ouldchikh(a)kaust.edu.sa Website: http://kcc.kaust.edu.sa/Pages/Home.aspx ________________________________ This message and its contents including attachments are intended solely for the original recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please notify me immediately and delete this message from your computer system. Any unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited. Please consider the environment before printing this email.

1 0

2016 Introduction to Synchrotron Radiation Course
by Carlo Segre 01 Aug '16

01 Aug '16

This fall semester I will be offering an introductory graduate level course entitled Introduction to Synchrotron Radiation at Illinois Tech. This course has been offered on a regular basis over the past 5 years and it is avilable as an online course through IIT/Online. Through a special arrangement with the Dean of the College of Science, online students can take this course as non-degree students at a 67% tuition discount. We have had students from Italy and Brazil in past sessions of this course. Registering for this course as a non-degree student requires a simple application which can be completed online and will be approved in only a few days. The course description is below. Please share this with interested parties and direct any questions to Carlo Segre <segre(a)iit.edu> Course Description: This is a graduate course which introduces students to the production, manipulation and use of synchrotron radiation in research. The course will include visits to, and possibly hands-on experience with, beamlines at the Advanced Photon Source (APS) at Argonne National Laboratory but is not specific to the APS. Students will be expected to give presentations and write a General User Proposal to the APS as their final projects. Graduate students in any science or engineering program are welcome to register as are undergraduates with senior standing and permission of instructor. It is particularly recommended for students wishing to make use of synchrotron radiation in their research. The class meets Mondays and Wednesdays 17:00-18:15 and the lectures are available online as an Internet section for students not on the IIT campus or even in the United States. Textbook: Elements of Modern X-Ray Physics, 2nd ed., Jen Als-Nielsen and Des McMorrow, (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2011). Topics Covered: X-rays and their interaction with matter Sources of x-rays Refraction and reflection from interfaces Kinematical Diffraction Diffraction by perfect crystals Photoelectric absorption Resonant scattering Small angle scattering Other topics as appropriate Course Organization: The grade will be based equally on homework assignments, student presentations and a draft General User Proposal to the Advanced Photon Source. There will be at least one field trip to the Advanced Photon Source for experiment demonstrations. For more information please contact Carlo Segre <segre(a)iit.edu> -- Carlo U. Segre -- Duchossois Leadership Professor of Physics Interim Chair, Department of Chemistry Director, Center for Synchrotron Radiation Research and Instrumentation Illinois Institute of Technology Voice: 312.567.3498 Fax: 312.567.3494 segre(a)iit.edu http://phys.iit.edu/~segre segre(a)debian.org

1 0

Tenure-track academic position advert
by Robert Dryfe 01 Aug '16

01 Aug '16

Dear Sir/Madam, I would be grateful if you could circulate the details of an academic vacancy for an expert in the application of X-ray synchrotron techniques to chemical systems. Details can be found here (please note the application deadline is soon): https://www.jobs.manchester.ac.uk/displayjob.aspx?jobid=11764 Informal inquiries are welcome. regards, Robert Dryfe (School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, UK)

1 0

Postdoc Position
by Jeff Terry 29 Jul '16

29 Jul '16

Hi All, I never remember what the rules are here for posting postdoc positions but I have one position available. You can see more information about the position here: http://mrmac.mr.aps.anl.gov/~jterry/postdoc.html Please let anyone who might be interested know. Thanks, Jeff Jeff Terry Professor, Department of Physics Illinois Institute of Technology Life Sciences Bldg Rm 166 3101 S. Dearborn St. Chicago IL 60616 630-252-9708

2 1

Multiple scattering path parameters
by Neil M Schweitzer 29 Jul '16

29 Jul '16

Are there standard ways of relating the parameters (deltaR and sigma^2) of multiple scattering paths to the parameters of the single scattering paths based on the type of MS path? For example, would deltaR_MS = deltaR_SS*2 if the MS was a "forward through" geometry? What about other geometries and paths that involve different types of atoms? Neil

3 2

Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters
by Neil M Schweitzer 27 Jul '16

27 Jul '16

Thanks to everyone for all the previous responses to my emails, I've learned a lot in the few weeks I've been on this list! I was hoping to build off of the last point Bruce made in message 3 below by asking another question. I am fitting a CeO2 reference from paths generated by feff from a cif file. Since this is my starting point, I made SO2 the same for every path (and used the coordination numbers from the cif file). If I am generating what looks to be a reasonable fit, but my SO2 is in the 0.55-0.7 range, what is my fit trying to tell me? Am I doing something wrong in my initial background subtraction in Athena? I'm asking about the background subtraction because I recently discovered that there is a CeO2 reference provided in Hephaestus. I exported the data, and tried to fit it in Artemis using a similar methodology I used for my own sample, and I got an even lower SO2. So I don't think the small SO2 value is an artifact of the way the experiment was run (although I might be wrong, I wasn't present when the data was actually collected). The observed difference seems real because the magnitude of the signal in E-space, k-space, and R-space is lower for the Hephaestus sample compared to my experimental sample (see attached image... One note, I'm not sure why the signals are off set in the Energy plot. The Eo's are the same, and if I plot the spectra together in E-space alone, they are not offset. Maybe a bug?). Neil -----Original Message----- From: Ifeffit [mailto:ifeffit-bounces@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov] On Behalf Of ifeffit-request(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 8:01 AM To: ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov Subject: Ifeffit Digest, Vol 161, Issue 20 Send Ifeffit mailing list submissions to ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__millenia.cars.aps.anl.g… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ifeffit-request(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov You can reach the person managing the list at ifeffit-owner(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Ifeffit digest..." Today's Topics: 1. demeter installation in OSX El Capitan (Ping, Yuan) 2. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Bruce Ravel) 3. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Bruce Ravel) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 05:37:10 +0000 From: "Ping, Yuan" <ping2(a)llnl.gov> To: "ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov" <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: [Ifeffit] demeter installation in OSX El Capitan Message-ID: <D3B5AD95.32BB2%ping2(a)llnl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Dear all, I recently upgraded my mac to OSX El Capitan, and tried to install demeter following the steps at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bruceravel.github.io_de… XQuartz 2.7.9 (xorg-server 1.17.4), Xcode 7.3.1, command line tools, ?sudo port -v self update?, ?port upgrade outdated? were all OK. When I tried ?sudo port install xorg-server demeter?, it showed: ---> Computing dependencies for xorg-server ---> Cleaning xorg-server ---> Computing dependencies for demeter ---> Dependencies to be installed: ifeffit libgcc cctools llvm-3.8 ---> libcxx libffi llvm_select gmp isl ld64 ld64-latest libmpc mpfr ---> pgplot gcc5 ... (a long list) Then after many attempts to fetch libcxx-3.7.1_0.darwin_15.x86_64.tbz2 from various websites, it showed: Error: org.macports.archivefetch for port libcxx returned: archivefetch failed for libcxx @3.7.1_0 Error: Failed to install libcxx Please see the log file for port libcxx for details: /opt/local/var/macports/logs/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_tarballs_ports_lang_libcxx/libcxx/main.log The log file is attached. What should I do to fix it? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. Yuan

5 9

Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters
by Neil M Schweitzer 27 Jul '16

27 Jul '16

Thanks for the responses. Seems like it is a problem without a simple solution, especially after the experiment has already been performed. When my users rerun the samples, I'll have to make sure they are very careful. In terms of the question about fitting the Hephaestus reference, when you plot it in Hephaestus it only shows out to ~50eV, but when you save the data file the data goes out much further. You can see from the plots I had included that the data goes out past k=10 A^-1. Neil -----Original Message----- From: Ifeffit [mailto:ifeffit-bounces@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov] On Behalf Of ifeffit-request(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 4:09 PM To: ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov Subject: Ifeffit Digest, Vol 161, Issue 39 Send Ifeffit mailing list submissions to ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__millenia.cars.aps.anl.g… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ifeffit-request(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov You can reach the person managing the list at ifeffit-owner(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Ifeffit digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Matthew Marcus) 2. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Bruce Ravel) 3. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Matthew Marcus) 4. Re: determining reasonable fitting parameters (Bruce Ravel) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:39:03 -0700 From: Matthew Marcus <mamarcus(a)lbl.gov> To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters Message-ID: <c2c71f99-44d9-f17f-ab52-399f53d8bb83(a)lbl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed I'm not sure I get your point about ion-chamber response. Shouldn't that normalize out in post-edge spline? If the I0 chamber gets less sensitive as a function of energy, then the post-edge background rises by the same amount as the wiggles get bigger, so it divides out. Similarly for probe-depth effects, depending on concentration. Another couple of possible sources of amplitude error: 1. The model for the pre-edge background is inaccurate, so that its extrapolation to the EXAFS region is incorrect. For instance, if there's a lot of elastic scatter getting into the fluorescence detector, then the pre-edge is curved, and if you model that with a straight line fitted near the edge, them you'll be off far from the edge. Similarly, in a long transmission scan, both pre- and post-edge are curved. My background-sub program has simple models for thse shapes which aren't perfect but help. This effect is really hard to control for because you have no real way to know what the 'right' answer is, most of the time. 2. Overabsorption will definitely reduce the amplitude of the wiggles, and I'm surprise Bruce didn't menntion it. It looks much like pinhole effect. Harmonics do similar things as well in transmission. I still haven't heard how you do EXAFS analysis using the short spectrum from Hepheastus. mam On 7/27/2016 1:23 PM, Bruce Ravel wrote: > On 07/27/2016 03:53 PM, Neil M Schweitzer wrote: >> Thanks to everyone for all the previous responses to my emails, I've >> learned a lot in the few weeks I've been on this list! I was hoping >> to build off of the last point Bruce made in message 3 below by >> asking another question. I am fitting a CeO2 reference from paths >> generated by feff from a cif file. Since this is my starting point, I >> made SO2 the same for every path (and used the coordination numbers >> from the cif file). If I am generating what looks to be a reasonable >> fit, but my SO2 is in the 0.55-0.7 range, what is my fit trying to >> tell me? Am I doing something wrong in my initial background >> subtraction in Athena? >> >> I'm asking about the background subtraction because I recently >> discovered that there is a CeO2 reference provided in Hephaestus. I >> exported the data, and tried to fit it in Artemis using a similar >> methodology I used for my own sample, and I got an even lower SO2. So >> I don't think the small SO2 value is an artifact of the way the >> experiment was run (although I might be wrong, I wasn't present when >> the data was actually collected). The observed difference seems real >> because the magnitude of the signal in E-space, k-space, and R-space >> is lower for the Hephaestus sample compared to my experimental sample >> (see attached image... One note, I'm not sure why the signals are off >> set in the Energy plot. The Eo's are the same, and if I plot the >> spectra together in E-space alone, they are not offset. Maybe a >> bug?). > > I don't remember much about the provenance of that CeO2 spectrum. I > don't remember how calibration was done (or even if it is reliable). > I don't remember much about the sample -- it was a pellet, but I have > no way of knowing if it was homogeneous or even if the particles were > of the size reported. > > I guess what I am trying to say is this -- if you trust your CeO2 > measurement, you should have more faith in that (or the one Matthew > just sent) than in the one from Hephaestus. > > As for your S02 question, here's some of the standard litany: > > + the mean free path used by feff was too long. > > + S02 and sigma^2 are highly correlated. > > + you did a lousy job normalizing the data (although it sure doesn't > look that way from your picture). > > + your sample had a lot of pinholes. > > + there is some source of loss in CeO2 that is neglected in Feff > (which is, practically speaking, the same as the mean free path > comment). You could try fixing S02 and floating an Ei parameter. > Or floating both S02 and Ei, although they will be highly > correlated. > > + There is also an energy response to the ionization chambers at such > a low energy -- that is, the absorption of the gas in the detector > is weaker at the end of the spectrum than at the beginning. In > fluorescence, that serves to attenuate the edge0step-normalized > spectrum in a way that looks like an enhancement to sigma^2. But > it's an attenuation, which could show up in S02. > > I should mention that in my favorite teaching example -- FeS2 -- by > the end of the lecture I have a S02 of something like 0.69. And I > just walk away from the lecture at that point :) The reason I do so is > that all the rest of the parameters are defensible and I chalk the > small S02 up to one of the points above (along with some enthusiastic > hand waving -- usually it's time for coffee or lunch by the time I've > finished the FeS2 demo!). > > B > > ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 16:45:26 -0400 From: Bruce Ravel <bravel(a)bnl.gov> To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters Message-ID: <e0a93edf-8a8b-97a5-aa14-f595fc385c31(a)bnl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed On 07/27/2016 04:39 PM, Matthew Marcus wrote: > I'm not sure I get your point about ion-chamber response. Shouldn't > that normalize out in post-edge spline? Athena edge-step normalizes (i.e. normalizes by a constant) by default. It does not do a functional (or energy dependent) normalization by default in the way you are suggesting. > If the I0 chamber gets less sensitive as a function of energy, then > the post-edge background rises by the same amount as the wiggles get > bigger, so it divides out. Similarly for probe-depth effects, > depending on concentration. Another couple of possible sources of > amplitude error: > 1. The model for the pre-edge background is inaccurate, so that its > extrapolation to the EXAFS region is incorrect. > For instance, if there's a lot of elastic scatter getting into the > fluorescence detector, then the pre-edge is curved, > and if you model that with a straight line fitted near the edge, > them you'll be off far from the edge. Similarly, in > a long transmission scan, both pre- and post-edge are curved. My > background-sub program has simple models for thse > shapes which aren't perfect but help. This effect is really hard > to control for because you have no real way to know > what the 'right' answer is, most of the time. > > 2. Overabsorption will definitely reduce the amplitude of the > wiggles, and I'm surprise Bruce didn't menntion it. It looks > much like pinhole effect. Harmonics do similar things as well in > transmission. My brain is really tiny and it's getting to be late in the afternoon here. It's amazing that many bullet points actually made it into the email! B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel(a)bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS-II Building 743, Room 114 Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bruceravel.github.io_ho… Software: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_bruceravel&… Demeter: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bruceravel.github.io_de… ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:56:41 -0700 From: Matthew Marcus <mamarcus(a)lbl.gov> To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters Message-ID: <3ee04494-5113-2994-3d96-e9e5bd2ebecc(a)lbl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Oh, so it assumes that chi(k) = (mu(E(k))-spline(k))/const.? Mine does (mu(E(k))-spline(k))/spline(k), which I guess has its own problems - any wiggles driven in the spline will multiply the EXAFS. I haven't seen any effect from this, though. Maybe the right thing is (mu(E(k))-spline(k))/smooth(E(k)) where smooth is a smooth post-edge background such as a polynomial or spline with fewer knots than the subtraction spline or even a tensioned spline. I'd be willing to bet that this refinement will make no detectable difference, especially if you do the reference data the same way. I've found that you can do the most amazingly bogus things and get away with it as long as you do them equally to your reference and unknown, especially if the reference is very similar to the unknown. Of course, you can't rely on that. mam On 7/27/2016 1:45 PM, Bruce Ravel wrote: > On 07/27/2016 04:39 PM, Matthew Marcus wrote: >> I'm not sure I get your point about ion-chamber response. Shouldn't >> that normalize out in post-edge spline? > > Athena edge-step normalizes (i.e. normalizes by a constant) by default. It does not do a functional (or energy dependent) normalization by default in the way you are suggesting. > >> If the I0 chamber gets less sensitive as a function of energy, then >> the post-edge background rises by the same amount as the wiggles get >> bigger, so it divides out. Similarly for probe-depth effects, >> depending on concentration. Another couple of possible sources of >> amplitude error: >> 1. The model for the pre-edge background is inaccurate, so that its >> extrapolation to the EXAFS region is incorrect. >> For instance, if there's a lot of elastic scatter getting into >> the fluorescence detector, then the pre-edge is curved, >> and if you model that with a straight line fitted near the edge, >> them you'll be off far from the edge. Similarly, in >> a long transmission scan, both pre- and post-edge are curved. My >> background-sub program has simple models for thse >> shapes which aren't perfect but help. This effect is really hard >> to control for because you have no real way to know >> what the 'right' answer is, most of the time. >> >> 2. Overabsorption will definitely reduce the amplitude of the >> wiggles, and I'm surprise Bruce didn't menntion it. It looks >> much like pinhole effect. Harmonics do similar things as well in >> transmission. > > My brain is really tiny and it's getting to be late in the afternoon here. It's amazing that many bullet points actually made it into the email! > > B > > ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 17:08:58 -0400 From: Bruce Ravel <bravel(a)bnl.gov> To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] determining reasonable fitting parameters Message-ID: <a632df68-e115-cda0-3ace-4c066230b85f(a)bnl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed On 07/27/2016 04:56 PM, Matthew Marcus wrote: > Oh, so it assumes that chi(k) = (mu(E(k))-spline(k))/const.? Mine > does (mu(E(k))-spline(k))/spline(k), which I guess has its own > problems Exactly. Both solutions have problems. The potential for trouble with "/const" seems less severe to me and easier to support (in the sense of supporting the use of a software package). So that's why Athena does what she does. B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel(a)bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS-II Building 743, Room 114 Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bruceravel.github.io_ho… Software: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_bruceravel&… Demeter: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bruceravel.github.io_de… ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Ifeffit mailing list Ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__millenia.cars.aps.anl.g… Unsubscribe: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__millenia.cars.aps.anl.g… ------------------------------ End of Ifeffit Digest, Vol 161, Issue 39 ****************************************

1 0

Re: [Ifeffit] Athena Question
by tyson 27 Jul '16

27 Jul '16

Thanks for the fast response.TAT Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Bruce Ravel <bravel(a)bnl.gov> Date: 7/27/2016 12:34 PM (GMT-06:00) To: "Tyson, Trevor A." <trevor.a.tyson(a)njit.edu> Cc: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit <ifeffit(a)millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov> Subject: Re: Athena Question On 07/27/2016 12:01 PM, Tyson, Trevor A. wrote: > Hi Bruce, > > I know that you are very busy building beaminles but I could not > resist adding more to your load. I have an Athena question. I have > aligned a large set of data to a reference. Now for each data set > Athena records the energy shift. Is it possible to export the list of > shifts? Thanks. > > Trevor > Hi Trevor, Hope you don't mind that I am CCing this to the Ifeffit mailing list. The question seems broadly interesting, so leaving an answer in a place that can be found by google seems like a good idea. There are a several ways of doing this: 1. Right click on the label that says "Energy shift". one of the options is "Show energy shifts of all groups". That will post a dialog like the one in the attached picture. Click the "Save" button to write the contents as a text file. 2. Click on the File menu, then on the Export submenu. Select "Excel report on marked groups". This will write an XLS file. You can open that up in Excel or any other spreadsheet program. Column E has the energy shifts. 3. For the sake of completeness, if you are a command line kinda guy, you can use the "dlsprj" program that gets installed when you install the rest of demeter: dlsprj myproject.prj --params=bkg_eshift,bkg_delta_eshift This will print the shifts and their uncertainties to the screen. B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel(a)bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS-II Building 743, Room 114 Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: http://bruceravel.github.io/home/ Software: https://github.com/bruceravel Demeter: http://bruceravel.github.io/demeter/

1 0