On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 21:16 +0100, Frank von Delft wrote:
> the errors in our measurements apparently have no
> bearing whatsoever on the errors in our models
This would mean there is no point trying to get better crystals, right?
Or am I also wrong to assume that the dataset with higher I/sigma in the
highest resolution shell will give me a better model?
On a related point - why is Rmerge considered to be the limiting value
for the R? Isn't Rmerge a poorly defined measure itself that
deteriorates at least in some circumstances (e.g. increased redundancy)?
Specifically, shouldn't "ideal" R approximate 0.5*<sigmaI>/<I>?
Cheers,
Ed.
--
"I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling."
Julian, King of Lemurs
