I wouldn't call it numerical error, as such. Refmac doesn't
restrain/constrain the T, L or S values at all. In particular, the L
value can refine stably and accurately to a negative value. 

Refmac is refining a set of ADPs constrained to fit a certain functional
form with parameters T, L and S. That functional form is derived from a
rigid body model. If L goes negative, then the assumption of a rigid
body breaks down. But you still have a set of ADPs that describe your
data.

So with an L eigenvalue = -0.268 you can probably say that you are close
to a rigid body model with virtually no libration about one axis. The
rigid body model is only a rough assumption - you should have the same
caveats if you have L = +0.268

With L = -53.975, you may well have numerical instabilities, or you are
so far from a rigid body model that the results are meaningless. And
your individual ADPs are probably bad as well.

Cheers
Martyn

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 09:23 -0500, Richard Gillilan wrote:
> I failed to mention that this particular group is a small set of  
> terminal residues (48 atoms I think) that are part of a poorly- 
> resolved HIS tag, so it turns out not to be a meaningful part of the  
> model anyway. I was just surprised to see negative values reported.  
> The other body (different structure) that gives a negative value has  
> as the smallest mean-squared displacement -0.27. I take it that this  
> simply means that the mean-squared displacement is near zero and that  
> I am seeing numerical error. It seems strange to encounter a near- 
> zero displacement in some direction, but one of the examples in the  
> TLS documentation shows exactly this behavior as well. Here are the  
> parameters:
> 
> 
> AXES OF LIBRATION WRT TO          MEAN-SQUARE         ANGLE LIBRATION  
> AXES MAKE TO
> ORTHOGONAL AXES (IN ROWS)         DISPLACEMENT        ORTHOGONAL AXES  
> (DEG)
>                                     ABOUT AXES (DEG^2)      X        
> Y       Z
>      0.633   0.420   0.650             4.952               50.71    
> 65.17   49.45
>     -0.363   0.903  -0.230            -0.268              111.29    
> 25.44  103.27
>     -0.683  -0.091   0.724            10.899              133.12    
> 95.21   43.59
> 
> MEAN LIBRATION (TRACE/3)             5.194
> 
> On Feb 26, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Winn, MD (Martyn) wrote:
> 
> > I'd also comment that the absolute values are quite large. Well, I  
> > have no
> > knowledge what groups you've chosen, but for domain-sized groups,  
> > typical
> > values are 1-10 deg**2. Values can be larger for smaller TLS  
> > groups. This is
> > just a rule-of-thumb, but would make me suspicious whether the TLS  
> > refinement
> > was really stable in this case.
> >
> > Regards
> > Martyn
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CCP4 bulletin board on behalf of Richard Gillilan
> > Sent: Sun 2/25/2007 1:10 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [ccp4bb] TLSANL: negative mean-sq displacements?
> >
> > After TLS refinement (which seemed to be stable and produced nice
> > R_free values), I have analyzed the rigid body results with TLSANL.
> > I get negative mean-square displacements along the axes of libration
> > WRT to orthogonal axes!   Am I misunderstanding something here? The
> > units are (deg^2). I see this with two different structures. Here is
> > the output from TLSANL:
> >
> > AXES OF LIBRATION WRT TO    MEAN-SQUARE       ANGLE  LIBRATION AXES  
> > MAKE TO
> > ORTHOGONAL AXES (IN ROWS)   DISPLACEMENT      ORTHOGONAL AXES (DEG)
> >                             ABOUT AXES (DEG^2)     X       Y       Z
> >  0.842   0.197   0.502       -53.975            32.66   78.63   59.85
> > -0.494   0.657   0.570       193.421           119.60   48.97   55.24
> > -0.217  -0.728   0.650       -12.276           102.55  136.73   49.45
> >
> > MEAN LIBRATION (TRACE/3)      42.390
> >
> >
> > Anyone seen this happen before?
> >
> > Richard Gillilan
> > MacCHESS
> 

Reply via email to