If I could add to the discussion and understand a bit more from it, Does Scott mean that when the structure is kind of unknown or is disordered then one follows the approach practiced by Abhijeet. Whereas when one has a crystalline system - there is no merit in fixing the parameters of the first shell and adding more paths to it. If this is the case then I would like to agree with Scott based on my experience in analyzing data on Ni2MnGa type alloys in austenitic phase and martensitic phase.
Kaustubh
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. Kaustubh R. S. Priolkar
Department of Physics,
Goa University
Taleigao Plateau,
Goa 403 206 India
Phone (O): 91-832-6519340
(R): 91-832-2412235
Fax: 91-832-2451184
email: krp@unigoa.ac.in
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message ----
From: Matt Newville
To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit
Sent: Saturday, 11 April, 2009 2:25:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Ifeffit] High SO2
Scott,
I read Abhijeets's
But what I know about fitting is that we have to first fit the
first shell and then
keeping the first shell parameter constant , we go for the next shell
and Jeremy's
I typically perform the fitting as you suggest, at least in
complicated systems, one shell at a time.
to mean they fit one shell at a time, that is: when the second shell
is being fitted, the first is not and the fit R-range is changed for
the 2nd shell fit to not include (most of) the first shell. As you
say, there is very little value in having the R-range include the
first shell if you're not actually adjusting parameters that affect
that part of the spectrum.
--Matt
_______________________________________________
Ifeffit mailing list
Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov
http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ifeffit
Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
