I agree. It cannot be said too often that the object of refinement is
not to minimise the R-factor!
(& while I'm at it, freeR has nothing to do with model bias (which is
largely imaginary anyway, only a problem with low resolution molecular
replacement))
Phil
On 19 Oct 2009, at 17:07, Ed Pozharski wrote:
>>> My resolution is 1.6A although I have cut it to 1.8A to bring the
>>> R-factor down. I've been performing restrained refinement in refmac5
>>> using the default settings. The solvent content is 40%
>
> This sounds fundamentally wrong. Even the "Rmerge reduction by
> cutting
> resolution" practice is questionable due to strong dependence of the
> Rmerge on redundancy, but to cut resolution to get better Rfactor in
> refinement... Nobody throws away the lower concentration (and thus
> noisier) data in Bradford assay, although I am sure that the
> appropriate
> "R-factor" would definitely go down.
|