I don't know. Which reflections are missing? Strong ones, weak ones, near the rotation axis ... ?
Phil On 8 Jun 2010, at 14:27, Simon Kolstoe wrote: > Thanks Tim, Phil and Andrew for your answers. > > Just one further related question: > > Why is it that mosflm seems to report higher completeness than XDS on the > same data (I've seen this on about 50 datasets)? I always thought it was due > to mosflms peak extrapolation but it seems this isn't the answer if SCALA > throws those reflections out. > > Thanks, > > Simon > > On 7 Jun 2010, at 15:35, Phil Evans wrote: > >> Mosflm integrates them (profile-fitted overloads) but flags them. Pointless >> uses them for systematic absence tests. Scala by default ignores them, but >> you can include them if you want: this is not normally recommended since >> they are pretty inaccurate (look in the "Excluded data" tab of ccp4i/Scala) >> >> If you are merging strong & weak datasets it should do the right thing, I >> think. >> >> Phil >> >> >> On 7 Jun 2010, at 15:09, Simon Kolstoe wrote: >> >>> Dear CCP4bb, >>> >>> I was wondering if someone could tell me how mosflm and scala deal with >>> overloaded reflections. From my understanding mosflm extrapolates the >>> overloaded peaks but then scala throws them out completely - is this right? >>> >>> If so am I right to not worry about "contamination" from extrapolated peaks >>> when combining high and low resolution datasets from the same crystal? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Simon >
