REVIEW
Advice on describing Bayesian analysis of neutron and X-ray reflectometry
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Driven by the availability of modern software and hardware, Bayesian analysis is becoming more popular in neutron and X-ray reflectometry analysis. The understandability and replicability of these analyses may be harmed by inconsistencies in how the probability distributions central to Bayesian methods are represented in the literature. Herein, we provide advice on how to report the results of Bayesian analysis as applied to neutron and X-ray reflectometry. This includes the clear reporting of initial starting conditions, the prior probabilities, and results of any analysis, and the posterior probabilities that are the Bayesian equivalent of the error bar, to enable replicability and improve understanding. We believe that this advice, grounded in our experience working in the field, will enable greater analytical reproducibility among the reflectometry community, as well as improve the quality and usability of results.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.