Hi all,

I have just installed the new CCP4I package for Windows, and refined a 
structure I was working on using an older version (CCP4I 6.0.2), and the 
refinement statistics are significantly worse when using the same input files.  
Under Refmac 5.2 the details were:

$$
      Ncyc   Rfact   Rfree     FOM         LLG  rmsBOND  rmsANGLE rmsCHIRAL $$
$$
         0   0.150   0.189    0.886      481182.9    0.011    1.208    0.147
         1   0.147   0.188    0.887      480211.9    0.010    1.170    0.147
         2   0.147   0.188    0.887      480049.6    0.010    1.152    0.147
         3   0.147   0.188    0.887      479927.9    0.010    1.147    0.147
         4   0.147   0.188    0.887      479847.2    0.010    1.144    0.147
         5   0.147   0.188    0.887      479805.5    0.010    1.143    0.148
 $$

Where Refmac 5.5 gives:

$$
    Ncyc    Rfact    Rfree     FOM      -LL     -LLfree  rmsBOND  zBOND rmsANGL 
 zANGL rmsCHIRAL $$
$$
       0   0.1738   0.2163   0.874    465814.   25317.2   0.0106  0.439   1.208 
 0.519   0.147
       1   0.1723   0.2158   0.875    465007.   25296.4   0.0102  0.410   1.178 
 0.510   0.147
       2   0.1716   0.2155   0.875    464584.   25285.4   0.0102  0.403   1.158 
 0.506   0.147
       3   0.1711   0.2155   0.875    464297.   25278.2   0.0101  0.401   1.145 
 0.503   0.146
       4   0.1708   0.2155   0.875    464090.   25271.8   0.0101  0.399   1.137 
 0.501   0.146
       5   0.1706   0.2155   0.876    463961.   25269.1   0.0101  0.398   1.131 
 0.500   0.146
 $$

I have been through the header of both files to check that all of the settings 
are the same.  One thing I did notice is that the Estimated number of 
reflections is now 111528, where Refmac 5.2 had this value at 101968.  I don't 
know whether this is relevant to the problem I'm seeing, but it does seem 
suspicious.  The new Refmac has also apparently read one more reflection than 
the old (84317 vs 84316).

Has anyone else seen this problem, and is there anything I can do to fix it (I 
was liking my old statistics!)?

Thanks in advance,
Sean

Reply via email to