I’ve completed all the statistical analyses possible through QGIS, so now all that’s left to do is calculate errors and display it all in some pretty little plots.
In the meantime, I’m going to follow some advice given by Dr. Tornabene and take a step back and decide which craters are worth keeping for good and which ones I should just discard for good. Below are my crater files, for looking through; theoretically, those worth keeping will be ones with an obvious melt deposit (or if equally-sized deposits are equidistant from the RCL), with an obvious RCL, with good and reliable MDIS and topography imagery, and with good and reliable stats produced from QGIS.
From my initial look-through of these craters, all things considered, it looks to me like my catalog will shrink from its maximum of 36 to a not-so-impressive 20-or-so craters that meet the considerations well enough to be kept for further use. Still more than the 15-or-so venusian craters looked at in the Neish et al. (2017) paper, though!