This looks to me like a good attempt for GraphEnt. Give it a shot and you might
be positively surprised.
Jürgen
Sent from my iPad
On May 13, 2013, at 21:26, Dale Tronrud det...@uoxray.uoregon.edu wrote:
Sometimes a floppy bit of a protein is even more floppy in a
particular crystal form.
Dear Frank,
We did extensive testing of this approach at the beginning of this
millenium - see
Acta Cryst. D59 (2003) 393 and 688 - but never claimed that it was our idea.
Best wishes,
George
On 05/14/2013 06:50 AM, Frank von Delft wrote:
Hi, I'm meant to know this but I'm blanking, so I'll
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Frank,
I would not call it 'axiomatic' but 'statistics' to reduce the
(stochastic) error by several independent measurements. You can
probably give any statistics textbook as a reference.
In real life, though, you have to compromise with
It's not about multiplicity, it's about scaling. See quote I sent
earlier. phx.
On 14/05/2013 10:40, Felix Frolow wrote:
I guess that in a standpoint to reduce errors it is easy to improve
statistical errors by longer counting or by using multiple observations.
However the real enemy at the
We know that our scaling models do not completely describe and compensate for
all systematic errors, for various reasons including radiation damage (which is
hard to model). This can be seen by scaling together data collected about
different axes, where typically the merging statistics between
Precision does not trump accuracy is something Michael Blum told me.
Also Charles Wheelan wrote in his recently published Naked Statistics: “But
no amount of precision can make up for inaccuracy.”
I myself have been pleasantly surprised at how low multiplicity can be nowadays
and still do
George points out that the quote I referred to did not make it to the BB
-- here we go, read below and learn, it is a most succinct summary.
phx
Original Message
Subject:Re: [ccp4bb] reference for true multiplicity?
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 09:25:22 +0100
From: Frank
Yes, a good summary.
The use of the term redundancy (real or otherwise!) in crystallography is
potentially misleading as the normal usages means superfluous/ surplus to
requirements. The closest usage I can find from elsewhere is in information
theory where it is applied for purposes of error
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 01:58:06 pm Colin Nave wrote:
The use of the term redundancy (real or otherwise!) in crystallography
is potentially misleading as the normal usages means superfluous/ surplus
to requirements.
That may be true in the UK, but on this side of the pond redundancy
After an Ubuntu 13.04 reboot I noticed that all my ccp4i fonts looked very
jagged and illegible.
The preferences have the font assigned to be
-Adobe-Helvetica-Medium-R-Normal--*-120-*-*-*-*-*-*
Is there a way to have ccp4i use the Ubuntu fonts ?
Thanks for your help
Hari
The idea of RAID (redundant array of inexpensive disks) must seem
pretty silly to the Brits- disks may be inexpensive but they're
not free- why waste money on a redundant system?
Ethan Merritt wrote:
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 01:58:06 pm Colin Nave wrote:
The use of the term redundancy (real
In 12.04LTS I install X-fonts, and font servers e.g.,
sudo apt-get install xfonts-75dpi xfonts-100dpi xfs xfstt
This allows ccp4i to display the fonts I remember. X-fonts are not
installed by default in Ubuntu 12.04 and probably 13.04 as well. There may
be a more elegant way to customize ccp4i
12 matches
Mail list logo
