Maybe we could invent an R_Schrodinger that hovers in a quantum state untill we peek :)
J William Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > If R-sleep is to be the "real" validation R-factor, why not just > sequester > each of R-sleep and the current R-free, each as a randomly-chosen (but > mutually exclusive) set of reflections, and then proceed as normally with > the other (eg) 80% of the data until the very end of the refinement, > using > the R-free set to optimize weightings for geometries, NCS symmetry > averaging, and so forth, and then simply add those back in at the > penultimate step of refinement. In the end, you have R-sleep and the > Rfactor corresponding to the rest of the data, just like before, and you > can have the additional statistic reporting the difference between > R-sleep > and and R-free, which we could call something like the R-i-didn't-peak. > > > Peter Adrian Meyer wrote: >> This raises a slightly tangential question though - how do we know how >> what obs/param ratio is good enough? -- Professor James Whisstock NHMRC Principal Research Fellow / Monash University Senior Logan fellow Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Monash University, Clayton Campus, PO Box 13d, VIC, 3800, Australia +613 9905 3747 (Phone) +613 9905 4699 (Fax) +61 418 170 585 (Mobile)
