Don’t Panic & Other Thoughts on Crystallographic Refereeing
Christine M Beavers

TL;DR
This paper discusses the challenges and experiences of being a crystallographic referee in small molecule and high-pressure crystallography.
Contribution
The paper shares personal insights and anecdotes from the author's experience as a crystallographic referee.
Findings
Crystallographic reviewing requires persistence and a detailed understanding of disorder modeling.
The author encountered a range of issues from good to bad practices in crystallographic submissions.
High-pressure crystallography presents unique challenges for referees.
Abstract
When one embarks on the journey of discovery that is crystallographic reviewing, one should prepare themselves properly; sometimes, not even a towel is enough. No, you may also require dogged persistence, a penchant for investigations, and a nigh-on-masochistic desire for properly modeled disorder. Maybe that last bit is a personal foible; your needs may vary. Please come and hear about the good, the bad and the ugly that has pounced upon me, during my wanderings as a crystallographic referee, mostly in the wilds of small molecule and high- pressure crystallography.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCrystallization and Solubility Studies
