Hi
I've heard of a tool from the Golden State which could (potentially)
be used for forging diffraction images... I believe it's called
"mlfsom".
On 18 Mar 2009, at 17:50, Felix Frolow wrote:
One convincing argument I have:
We will be able to catch fraud ultimately. Fraud is a devastation
for structural biology.
...Unless they will be smart enough to forge diffraction data
images, not a big deal.
The second one - in the case of a controversy of the deposited
results (possible thing) we can try to re-interpret the space group
and Bravais lattice
And one more, when we have time we can show that we know better to
process and to refine ;-)
Dr Felix Frolow
Professor of Structural Biology and Biotechnology
Department of Molecular Microbiology
and Biotechnology
Tel Aviv University 69978, Israel
Acta Crystallographica D, co-editor
e-mail: mbfro...@post.tau.ac.il
Tel: ++972 3640 8723
Fax: ++972 3640 9407
Cellular: ++972 547 459 608
On Mar 18, 2009, at 6:41 PM, Garib Murshudov wrote:
Dear all
Before going into and trying to find a technical solution to the
problem it would be good if decide if we need images. As far as I
know if we face with a problem to solve and we know that it is
necessary to solve then we find technical solution to the problem
(either from other fields or we find our own solution with some
elements of reinvention of new MX wheels).
Do we need images to store? What kind of information we can
extract from images that we cannot from amplitudes, intensities
(even unmerged)? Does anybody have a convincing argument for
favour of images?
regards
Garib
On 18 Mar 2009, at 16:32, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
Actually the radiologists who manage CT and PET scans of brains
do have
a solution, called DICOM, see http://medical.nema.org/. If we work
together as a community we should be able to do as well as the
rocket scientists and the brain surgeons' radiologists, perhaps even
better. -- Herbert
=====================================================
Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
+1-631-244-3035
y...@dowling.edu
=====================================================
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Jacob Keller wrote:
Apparently it DOES take a rocket scientist to solve this
problem. Maybe the brain surgeons also have a solution?
JPK
*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller
Northwestern University
Medical Scientist Training Program
Dallos Laboratory
F. Searle 1-240
2240 Campus Drive
Evanston IL 60208
lab: 847.491.2438
cel: 773.608.9185
email: j-kell...@northwestern.edu
*******************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Klaas Decanniere"
<klaas.decanni...@vub.ac.be>
To: <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:36 AM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] images
Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
Other sciences have struggled with this and seem to have found
an answer.
Have e.g. a look at http://heasarc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/fits.html
kind regards,
Klaas
This is a good time to start a major crystallogrpahic image
archiving effort. Money may well be available now that will
not be
avialable six month from now, and we have good, if not perfect,
solutions available for many, if not all, of the technical issues
involved. Is it really wise to let this opportunity pass us by?
The deposition of images would be possible providing some
consistent
imagecif format was agreed.
This would of course be of great use to developers for certain
pathological cases, but not I suspect much value to the user
community - I down load structure factors all the time for test
purposes but I probably would not bother to go through the data
processing, and unless there were extensive notes associated
with
each set of images I suspect it would be hard to reproduce
sensible
results.
Harry
--
Dr Harry Powell, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, MRC Centre, Hills
Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QH
