The Parameter Comparison tool enables scientists to quickly and easily access and compare their experimental acquisition parameters.
Staying in control of the amounts of data and their settings is quite a challenge
One of the challenges of running numerous spectroscopic experiments over time is keeping an overview of experiments, together with their different acquisition settings and parameters. Experiment optimizations can require a lot of adjustments, and acquisition parameters and experimental settings are usually not easily or quickly accessible. When faced with a high number of experiments acquired over years of time, it can be impossible to reconstruct the scientific process without an adequate tool.
Access and compare acquisition parameters easily with LOGS
With the ‘Compare Parameters’ LOGS feature, we provide a tool that enables scientists to easily maintain a clear and transparent overview of experimental data. Researchers should get insight into the settings easily, and in the process be able to compare acquisition parameters of experiments quickly. The LOGS comparison tool is straightforward: By selecting the datasets in question and clicking the ‘Compare Parameters’ button, an interface displaying two tables will appear. The upper table lists all differing values, while the lower table provides an overview of all common values.
From personal experience..
From my personal experience I know how helpful such a tool can be. During my PhD program, our we were trying to optimize what is called x-filtered NMR experiments in order to investigate the binding of a potential anti-cancer drug and its target protein domain. We acquired numerous experiments with different e.g. mixing times. Going back a couple of months later for data evaluation and also for writing up my PhD thesis, I had to gain an overview on what experiments were run using which parameter settings, and which experiments were run for good or only initiated for testing. In order to learn about the acquisition parameters, I had to access each dataset, but was missing the optimized pulse program, which was saved to the spectrometer computer only, and not on my local hardware. The pulse programs are necessary to look into the acquisition parameters, and I had to tediously find and transfer each pulse program to my computer, which turned out to be a lot of work. Once the pulse programs were transferred, I still had to look up each dataset and its settings in order to gain an overview. Looking back, it probably took me three days just to get a detailed overview on my x-filtered experiments, something that I would no accomplish with a few clicks, using LOGS.