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.
>
>
>
>
|