Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Little difference for radiation damage or without it (2NIP, PMI + singFEL) #199

Open
rshopa opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@rshopa
Copy link

rshopa commented May 6, 2020

Greetings,

As far as I understood, radiation damage for SPI could be adjusted in parameters of XMDYNDemoPhotonMatterInteractor() and SingFELPhotonDiffractorParameters(), namely random_rotation, uniform_rotation, calculate_Compton.

I checked these options and found out that random_rotation deteriorates the image quite significantly. But I still cannot reproduce the difference (without and with radiation damage) as shown in earlier work (C Fortmann–Grote et al., Proceedings of SPIE (2017), in Figure 5), for the sample is the 2NIP protein.

Here's how it looks like in notebook for two cases:
image
image

The resulting images (for poissonize=False) are much more alike than shown in the article:
image

So, what did I miss? Maybe multiple diffraction patterns? Another parameters set in properties?

I also tried to comment/remove lines (e.g. calculate_Compton=False) and tested this on other proteins (5UDC, 3F70, 2I0J etc) and did not observe the difference.

@rshopa rshopa changed the title Little difference for radiation damage or not (2NIP, PMI + singFEL) Little difference for radiation damage or without it (2NIP, PMI + singFEL) May 6, 2020
@JunCEEE
Copy link
Collaborator

JunCEEE commented May 7, 2020

Hi,

calculate_Comption doesn't mean radiation damage, it only means to consider Compton scattering in the diffraction simulation.

For radiation damage, one has to run XMDYN simulation which was mentioned in the paper. The XMDYN executable can only be obtained by contacting the developers to get the licensing to institutes.

We are also exploring the possibility to include other possible open-source photon-mater-interaction codes in this framework. If you have any possible candidates in your mind and would to share it with us, please let us known.

@rshopa
Copy link
Author

rshopa commented May 7, 2020

@ejcjason, thank you for the explanation.

I share the idea of extending PMI beyond demo version of XMDYN, shall look for other modules.

Despite demo components of Xraypac included in SimEx, I initially assumed that the images presented in 2017 SPIE Proceedings by @CFGrote were obtained using solely the options from SingFELPhotonDiffractor.
Compton scattering is considered radiation damage, too: it ejects electrons hence ionising atoms.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants