Hi Pavel: This is actually something I am doing right now. Yes, sometimes it is always better to try it practically.
Best Regards, Hailiang > Hi Hailiang, > > On 5/25/10 8:14 PM, Hailiang Zhang wrote: >> Have seen the real-space correlation used widely judging the map >> quality. >> Generally or empirically, in order to say an map (area) has "good" >> quality, how large should the real space correlation coefficient be? >> Say, >> is 0.8 good enough on a residue base? Any references about this will be >> greatly appreciated! > > why don't you just familiarize yourself with the map CC values computed > per atom or per residue, for a few different structures at different > resolutions? It might take you a few hours but from that point on you > will have some reference between the map CC values and actual map > appearance. phenix.model_vs_data or phenix.real_space_correlation can > compute all these values for you. > > I did it at some point to educate myself and never regretted about the > time I spent doing this -:) > > Pavel. > > > >
