Best-rotation follow-up

teaching-model

The Closed Reading Room: knowing the catalog card without pretending to have read the pages

This is a source-literacy story, not the paper's content. The 1978 article's author, pages, and DOI are verified, but no lawfully reviewable full text is local, so this page teaches how to stay within the evidence boundary.

1. Chapter 1: the catalog card is real

   The librarian can verify the author, journal, year, pages, and record number, so those facts may responsibly enter the catalog.

   Decoded paper language: The verified record is Kabsch, Acta Cryst. A 34, 827–828 (1978), with a resolvable DOI. This establishes identity only.

   Verified bibliography: DOI 10.1107/S0567739478001680.

2. Chapter 2: a locked door does not reveal the furniture

   The reader knows the room exists but lacks lawful access. The honest action is not to guess its contents, but to mark the access limit.

   Decoded paper language: This collection makes no unverified claim about the 1978 paper's formulas, corrections, or limitations.

   Local access record: full text unavailable.

3. Chapter 3: learn next door without swapping labels

   The 1976 room next door is open, so the reader may learn optimal rotation there, but may not relabel that material as the 1978 paper.

   Decoded paper language: The site routes technical experimentation to Kabsch 1976 and keeps 1978 as a bibliographic entry. This is evidence separation, not a claim that the papers are identical.

   Project source policy; Kabsch 1976 is cited separately.

Three steps for understanding what cannot yet be claimed

The learning outcome is not a formula, but the distinction among verified facts, unavailable content, and unsupported inference.

1. 1. Record only verified bibliography

   Author, journal, pages, year, and DOI can be checked against the publication record.

   Keep only this: Knowing which paper it is does not mean knowing what it says.

2. 2. Preserve the unknown

   Without lawful full text, do not infer formulas or corrections from the title, the 1976 predecessor, or secondary summaries.

   Keep only this: An explicit blank is more useful than false certainty.

3. 3. Learn verifiable concepts from adjacent sources

   To learn optimal rotation with known correspondences, use the available 1976 paper and its lab.

   Keep only this: Keep 1976 and 1978 separate when citing.

Check understanding

1. What can currently be verified about the 1978 article?

   • Bibliography and DOI
   • Every formula derivation
   • Its complete method limitations

   Local evidence verifies the article's identity, not its full technical content.

2. May the 1976 formulas be relabeled as 1978 content?

   • No; the two papers must be cited separately
   • Yes, because the author is the same
   • Yes, if page numbers are omitted

   Shared authorship and topic do not erase source boundaries.

3. What is the responsible next step for learning optimal rotation?

   • Use the verifiable Kabsch 1976 page and lab
   • Ask the site to invent the unread 1978 content
   • Treat the DOI as the full text

   An adjacent primary source can teach the concept while retaining the correct label.

Completion task: Write one sentence each for what is verified, what remains unknown, and the next lawfully readable source.

bibliography

What can be stated responsibly

The author, journal, volume, pages, year, and DOI are verified; this collection has no lawfully reviewable full text.

Until a lawful full text is available, this page does not describe formulas, corrections, or limitations. Use the 1976 lab to learn the best-rotation problem with known matches.

Interactive lab

Interactive lab loads when JavaScript is available.

Sources and limits

• DOI / IUCr

• No unverified claim is made about this paper's formulas, corrections, or limits.