***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***


If you filled a whole resolution bin with zeroes, refmac divides by zero
on calculating the R-value for that bin, doesn't it?

--
Tim Gruene
Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
Tammannstr. 4
D-37077 Goettingen

GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A


On Fri, 28 Apr 2006, James Holton wrote:

> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
>
>
>
> Okay, this discussion has gone beyond Rmerge, but it does inspire an old
> question of mine that I have never been able to find a good answer to:
>
> Does zero-filling help crystallographic refinement?
> [...]
> I once tried filling the outer shells of a data set with zeroes and fed
> it to refmac.  This caused refmac (4.0) to crash, and I never did get
> back to that project.
>
> Garib?
>
> -James Holton
> MAD Scientist
>
>
> Vaheh Oganesyan wrote:
>
> > The intensity of the reflection (hkl) being zero is a piece of
> > information, provided there are other reflections in that resolution
> > shell that are not zero (above sigma). If all of the reflections in
> > the resolution shell are essentially zero (<< sigma), then the
> > resolution cut-off is too optimistic.
> >
> > /_There are two somewhat separate questions here:  (1) what data to
> > use in refinement and (2) how to define a "nominal resolution"
> > _/
> > How do you see those questions being separate? Let say you collected
> > data to resolution A (edge or corner of detector), then refined to
> > resolution B. You probably looked at the data and considered that the
> > data beyond B are either compromised by experimental setup or just
> > absent. Why would anyone consider calling the resolution of the
> > refined model or resolution of the presented structure other than B?
> > One may state in the main body of the paper that the crystal actually
> > diffracted to much higher resolution A but for such and such reasons
> > we were able to use the data only till resolution B.
> >
> >
> >
> >> that will give the outside world a good idea of how far out the data
> >> extended, which needs some vague sort of uniform standard.  I'd
> >> suggest the answers are (1) any datum you believe you really did
> >> measure should be thrown into the pot and (2) the reported nominal
> >> resolution should be where I/sigI falls below 2, perhaps with the
> >> output statistics from scalepack or whatever was used included as
> >> supplementary material to show that the sigmas are not grossly
> >> mis-estimated.  Unfortunately this creates logistical problems with
> >> deposting coordinates, etc. if you want to call the official
> >> "resolution" something other than that of the farthest-out fly speck
> >> you refined against.
> >>
> >> At 09:29 AM 4/28/2006, Bart Hazes wrote:
> >>
> >>> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
> >>> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This is an interesting conceptual question. A reflection with an
> >>> intensity of virually zero does not contribute to your electron
> >>> density map, so can it be data? If it is can I claim to have a 0.02
> >>> Angstrom structure although all intensities beyond 2 Angstrom are
> >>> virtually zero?
> >>>
> >>> The answer to question 1 is YES it can be data
> >>> The answer to question 2 is NO KEEP DREAMING
> >>>
> >>> A very weak reflection does not contribute to your map so leaving it
> >>> out doesn't hurt since missing a reflection is equivalent to
> >>> assuming it is zero, not a bad approximation. However, a lot of our
> >>> maps are of the 2Fo-Fc and Fo-Fc types. Similarly refinement a
> >>> depends on |Fobs-Fcalc|. Thus, if Fcalc is big and you measured it
> >>> as being near zero then the discrepancy is large and the reflection
> >>> has a large contribution to refinement and these kinds of maps. Had
> >>> you not measured the reflection then its contribution would be
> >>> ignored (equivalent to Fo-Fc being zero).
> >>>
> >>> The difference at the high resolution limit is that Fcalc starts to
> >>> approach zero as well as Fobs. So now both Fobs and Fo-Fc are
> >>> virtually zero and small relative to the errors in Fo and Fc. So
> >>> this time there really is no information left to speak of.
> >>>
> >>> Bart
> >>>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
> >>>> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
> >>>>
> >>>> What is "observable data"? If I observe a reflection by passing it
> >>>> through
> >>>> the Ewald sphere I can measure its intensity
> >>>> Phil
> >>>>
> >>>>> Here's what Acta Cryst has to say about resolution-
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From the "Notes for authors 2006" from Acta Cryst D:
> >>>>> http://journals.iucr.org/d/issues/2006/02/00/me0308/index.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "11.1. Resolution
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The effective resolution should be described clearly. Values of the
> >>>>> internal
> >>>>> agreement of the data, Rmerge, together with the multiplicity, the
> >>>>> mean
> >>>>> value
> >>>>> of I/ and the percentage completeness of the data are required for
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> overall
> >>>>> data set and the highest resolution shell together with the limits
> >>>>> of that
> >>>>> shell in Å. For high-quality data obtained with synchrotron
> >>>>> radiation,
> >>>>> values
> >>>>> of Rmerge  <  20%, completeness  >  93% and observable data  >
> >>>>> 70% should
> >>>>> be
> >>>>> achievable for the highest resolution shell. A complete table
> >>>>> listing the
> >>>>> above
> >>>>> criteria as a function of resolution should also be submitted, but
> >>>>> will
> >>>>> normally
> >>>>> be included in the supplementary material..."
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Phoebe A. Rice
> >> Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
> >> The University of Chicago
> >> phone 773 834 1723
> >> fax 773 702 0439
> >> http://bmb.bsd.uchicago.edu/index.html
> >> http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia06064.html
> >>
>

Reply via email to