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
|