On Nov 3 2007, Randy J. Read wrote:
> Depends on the purpose. From the LLG, I want to see that it is positive
> (negative means that I'm being too optimistic about the quality of the
> model, i.e. the RMS error is higher or the completeness lower than
> assumed), and I would like to see it increase as the solution becomes
> more complete (i.e. RF score increases with TF, which increases for RF on
> second molecule, and so on). But to assess the significance of a
> solution, I'd place more weight on the LLG.
Oops! Tassos just pointed out my slip here. I'd meant to say that to assess
the significance of a solution, I'd place more weight on the Z-score, not
the LLG.
Randy Read
|