On 09/18/2014 08:20 AM, HOON Kim wrote:
I'd like to be more specific about my obtained results,
At reference state (that means without any applied current), the amplitude reduction factor was 0.77 At 20% charge, it was 0.67 40% charge = 0.66 60% charge = 0.63 80% charge = 0.68 full charge = 0.67
My other comment on this thread is that you are not being specific enough. Without error bars, it is not possible to interpret those numbers in any physically meaningful way. Similarly, without knowing the uncertainty, it is hard for us to comment substantively on your question. I would imagine that, given the likely size of your error bars, 0.63 and 0.68 are not different results. In fact, it is possible that 0.63 and 0.77 are not different in any defensible way. That may be yet more likely given the possibility of systematic error due to changes in morphology -- which would not be properly captured in the statistical error bars -- as I mentioned in my last post. Remember: ALWAYS cite error bars with numbers from a fit! B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel@bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS --- Beamlines U7A, X24A, X23A2 Building 535A Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: http://bruceravel.github.io/home/ Software: https://github.com/bruceravel Demeter: http://bruceravel.github.io/demeter/