Dear Kay,
Thanks for clarifying that! Indeed, I should have used a different word or put "rewarded" in quotation marks to make the ironic intent clearer!
Randy
> On 6 Jul 2016, at 14:05, Kay Diederichs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 09:13:22 +0100, Randy Read <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Zbyszek,
>>
>> I agree completely with your general point that there is a trend for an increasing number of people to adopt too-low symmetry, rewarded by lower R-factors in twinned refinement.
>
> Dear Randy,
>
> I wish you had not used the word "rewarded" - for Germans at least, it has no ironic or pejorative connotation. I hope people do not understand this as if you were endorsing this unfortunate practice. There are already too many structures being twin-refined "because it reduces the R-factors" (and I fell into this trap as well before reading Garib N. Murshudov (2011) "Some properties of crystallographic reliability index - Rfactor: effect of twinning" Appl. Comput. Math., V.10, N.2, 2011, pp.250-261 http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/refmac/papers/Rfactor.pdf ).
>
> best,
>
> Kay
>
>
>
------
Randy J. Read
Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge
Cambridge Institute for Medical Research Tel: + 44 1223 336500
Wellcome Trust/MRC Building Fax: + 44 1223 336827
Hills Road E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Cambridge CB2 0XY, U.K. www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk
|