The results of the Round Robin data evaluation are available as a pre-submission manuscript here. The conclusion is that the awesome SAXS labs that participated produce data which is very representative, and that for the size-disperse 6 nm particles Claudia synthesized, we can be very reproducible at sizing indeed!
Additionally, through a lot of elbow grease from Andreas, we found out that the spread in results is somewhat affected by the choice of data analysis method. In hindsight this is logical: McSAS, with its minimum of assumptions allows for a wider spread, while GIFT or SASfit impose more constraints to the solution, leading to a smaller spread. Apropos, I’d be quite interested in knowing what the spread in McSAS, GIFT and SASfit results would be if we have the same dataset analysed by a range of users, i.e. which one is the most user-proof?