leonarski_fandClaude Opus 5
beae384bb7
Build Packages / Create release (push) Successful in 32s
Build Packages / build:viewer-tgz:cpu (push) Successful in 7m40s
Build Packages / build:rugnux:aarch64 (cross) (push) Successful in 6m54s
Build Packages / build:rugnux-tgz (x86_64) (push) Successful in 7m7s
Build Packages / build:viewer-tgz:cuda (push) Successful in 8m29s
Build Packages / build:windows:nocuda (push) Successful in 16m47s
Build Packages / build:windows:cuda (push) Successful in 19m18s
Build Packages / HDF5 consumer tests (DIALS, XDS) (push) Successful in 21m1s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky8_nocuda) (push) Successful in 11m53s
Build Packages / build:rpm (ubuntu2204_nocuda) (push) Successful in 14m3s
Build Packages / build:rpm (ubuntu2404_nocuda) (push) Successful in 12m48s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky9_nocuda) (push) Successful in 14m34s
Build Packages / build:rugnux:windows (push) Successful in 10m19s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky8_sls9) (push) Successful in 15m38s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky9_sls9) (push) Successful in 16m35s
Build Packages / Generate python client (push) Successful in 47s
Build Packages / Build documentation (push) Successful in 1m19s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky8) (push) Successful in 15m59s
Build Packages / build:rpm (ubuntu2204) (push) Successful in 15m34s
Build Packages / build:rpm (rocky9) (push) Successful in 16m26s
Build Packages / build:rpm (ubuntu2404) (push) Successful in 9m48s
Build Packages / Unit tests (push) Successful in 1h34m17s
The sweep-quality diagnostic says a range is weak; it cannot say whether that weakness costs anything. A 60 degree stretch of poor diffraction and a radiation damage tail look alike in scale and correlation, and on one dataset they measure -0.0758 +- 0.0005 and -0.0019: one is 150 sigma of real harm, the other is nothing once the corrections have done their work. So measure it, per batch of the sweep, as the change in CC1/2 when that batch is left out - Assmann, Brehm & Diederichs (2016) Acta Cryst. D72, 1071-1081. In the sigma-tau form, so no half-set is drawn and nothing depends on a seed; against the observed scatter of each reflection's own observations rather than the error model's sigmas, which would invert the sign and make a bad batch read as added precision; and on the 10 degree batch the damage monitor already uses, because a single frame is far below what the statistic can resolve - the precision goes as one over the root of the reflection count, and 0.1 degrees of rotation does not have the reflections. Report only. Nothing is dropped, no observation is weighted differently, and every existing key of every dataset tested is unchanged to the digit. The disposition column says merged for all of them; acting on it needs a frame attribution this code does not yet have, since a full is currently labelled with its peak frame rather than with the frames its partials came from. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011GxZqDiFP3KqriBhNdcR56