Modify strategy B with little easy on weights.
________________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Keller, Jacob <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 3:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ccp4bb] R values Vs Geometry
Dear Crystallographers,
I seem to have an artistic situation on my hands: the decision between R and geometry.
Refinement strategy A:
R/Rfree: 0.084/0.156
RMSbonds: 0.025
RMSlengths: 2.1995
Refinement strategy B:
R/Rfree: 0.136/0.177
RMSbonds: 0.003
RMSlengths: 0.338
RSRZ scores or similar are not available in B, but there are 0 outliers in A.
Do I just flip a coin? I am inclined to go for B, since the data are twinned and are therefore somewhat less information-rich than normal, so should perhaps be guided by the geometrical book values more than normal, but the Rfree is fully 2% lower in A. Also, the R/Rfree gap is probably too big in A. Any advice/input on how to decide? Having been chastened by the recent "questionable structure" thread and the vitriol against PDB pollution, I am trying to be especially vigilant.
Jacob Keller
*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller, PhD
Looger Lab/HHMI Janelia Research Campus
19700 Helix Dr, Ashburn, VA 20147
email: [log in to unmask]
*******************************************
The information contained in this transmission contains privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
CAUTION: Intended recipients should NOT use email communication for emergent or urgent health care matters.
|