Tim,
my personal preference always was I/sigI=1. In my Scalepack days, I
always noticed that ~30% of the reflections in the I/sigI=1 shells had
I/sigI>2, and formed an unverified belief that there should be some
information there.
In my experience, CC1/2=0.5 would normally yield I/sigI~1, not 2. This
is based predominantly on Scala/Aimless.
Cheers,
Ed.
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 18:20 +0200, Tim Gruene wrote:
>
> On 06/13/2013 06:16 PM, Ed Pozharski wrote:
> > [...] With that said, I am pretty sure that in vast majority of
> > cases structural conclusions derived with I/s=2 vs CC1/2=0.5 vs
> > DR=0 cutoff will be essentially the same.
>
> Hi Ed,
> in my experience, CC(1/2) > 0.7 corresponds quite well to I/sigI > 2.0
> rather than CC(1/2) > 0.5 (again, with the default resolution shells
> from xprep that also plots CC(1/2) vs. resolution. Are above numbers
> based on experience, too? If so, which program do you usually use to
> look at these statistics?
>
> Tim
>
>
--
I don't know why the sacrifice thing didn't work.
Science behind it seemed so solid.
Julian, King of Lemurs
