The zone verdict that arbitrates a refused promotion read its zone absolutely, against the
centric and acentric Wilson expectations, and an absolute reading is only as good as the
normalisation under it. On two refused 622 promotions - a 6/m crystal and a 312 one, whose added
operators disagreed at 4.7x and 5.2x the parent's H and merged to an R_meas of 0.34 under the
higher group - every class read centric: a 67 A^2 anisotropy, isotropically normalised in bins
of 100, spread one shell's expected intensity over a factor of 15 between its directions, and
the acentric control read 1.00 against its 0.74. The zone read the same as the control, +0.10
nats per reflection, and +124 nats over 947 reflections rescued a twin law.
Two things change. The anisotropy is fitted on the acentric reflections of the shells read
(ln I = c + s^T Q s, by least squares) and its deviatoric part taken out of every intensity
before anything is normalised; that alone brings the controls of the crystals measured to
0.73-0.77. What no normalisation removes, the control then certifies: an acentric population
reads -0.130 nats per reflection when the normalisation is right, a twinned one reads below
that, so whatever the control reads above it is the normalisation's - anisotropy, a
pseudo-translation, a pseudo-centring, noise all inflate every class towards centric alike -
and the zone, normalised the same way, carries the same per reflection; the calibrated evidence
has it taken off, and that is what the verdict reads. The two rescued twin laws now read -130
and -78 nats and stay refused, with the law named; the genuine promotions measured read +137 to
+580 (a pseudo-centred orthorhombic crystal whose control reads 0.99 still +334); the trigonal
and hexagonal partial twins -129 to -420 as before. The report prints the control's excess and
the calibrated evidence beside the raw one.
The metric-lattice re-ask carried a second copy of the two-arm rule without the zone: a P31
partial twin whose 32 the main rule had refused on the zone was promoted by that ask's
Lorentz-filtered arm. It now puts the same verdict to a refusal the other arm would outvote.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013nW6FNRP1bBJJ8pfHiByAT
leonarski_fandClaude Fable 5.1
40874c2c2d
