[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [sdpd] Re: Publish or not publish dirty structures from powder data

Dear Armel

As a young guy, in case that some minor diffractions cannot be fitted with expected structure, i prefer publish or openly document them in a local region, saying preprints, mail groups, forums or blog etc. Such informal publication, i believe, can also cause impact and contribution to the science. 

Faithfully
Jun Lu
----------
Lst. Prof. Lijie Qiao
Department of Materials Physics and Chemistry
University of Science and Technology Beijing
100083 Beijing
P.R. China
http://www.instrument.com.cn/ilog/handsomeland/
 
Lst. Prof. Loidl and Lunkenheimer
Experimental Physics V
Center for Electronic Correlations and Magnetism (EKM)
University of Augsburg
Universitaetsstr. 2
86159 Augsburg
Germany
http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/exp5
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: L_Solovyov 
  To: sdpd...@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 8:35 AM
  Subject: [sdpd] Re: Publish or not publish dirty structures from powder data





  Dear Armel,

  When I encounter unindexed peaks I, normally, ask the chemists to repeat the synthesis at slightly different conditions. If the unindexed peaks correspond to impurities, their intensities must behave oppositely to those of the main phase. After this test I may be more or less sure that the sample is dirty but the structure is clean.
  My personal opinion: let's postpone publishing dirty structures till they become clean.

  Among the numerous sections of Acta Cryst one might have been devoted to Dirty structures, what a shame the Acta Cryst D is occupied already :-)

  Best,
  Leonid

  --- In sdpd...@yahoogroups.com, Armel Le Bail <armel.le_bail...@...> wrote:
  >
  > Hi,
  > 
  > Probably you have several such samples in your drawers,
  > samples that are not pure (up to 1-3 impurities or more),
  > indexed (but is it so sure ?), and a crystal structure model
  > more or less established in a space group not absolutely
  > certain.
  > 
  > You are tired to try to obtain them pure, they resist
  > to your attempts to make suitably large single crystals,
  > and it is not your fault if b ~ a x 1.732 so that the
  > cell looks haxagonal but is much probably orthorhombic (etc,
  > multiple possibilities here).
  > 
  > Finally you think that it would be a pity to not try to publish,
  > even if some points of the manuscript can be criticized.
  > After all, this work represents some advancement, there
  > is a dirty structure model at least and this is better than
  > nothing or false indexing in the PDF.
  > 
  > But will you dare to submit that dirty paper ? How many
  > of them have you put back in the drawer ?
  > 
  > ;-)
  > 
  > Armel
  > 
  > PS - Close to the end of my career, I am trying to
  > bring to the light some dirty but interesting old things...
  >



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sdpd/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sdpd/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:sdpd-digest...@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:sdpd-fullfeatured...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    sdpd-unsubscribe...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/