Dear Nasser Afify,
the problem is due to the fact that in the first case you are using a
strong physical constraint, the nanocrystalline approximation. In the
second one there are no restraints; the number of degrees of freedom
are much more and you will always get a better fit.
The real problem
> Nanocrystalline phase in films deposited on silica glass substrate:
> After normalization and subtraction of experimentally measured
> substrate pattern, the Rietveld fitting (GSAS) of the
> Nanocrystalline phase becomes worst than the case of mathematically
> modelled background.
>
> Which is t
Nanocrystalline phase in films deposited on silica glass substrate: After
normalization and subtraction of experimentally measured substrate
pattern, the Rietveld fitting (GSAS) of the Nanocrystalline phase
becomes worst than the case of mathematically modelled
background.
Which is the best way
