Doesn't this just change the question to "what observation:parameter ratio is needed for my structure to be over-determined?"? As near as I'm aware, the answer to that one seems to be "as many observations as you get".
Pete -----Original Message----- From: CCP4 bulletin board on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 5/15/2008 11:11 AM To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] poll: cutoff for "high resolution" On 14 May, Mark Del Campo wrote: > At what refinement resolution or resolution ranges would you call a structure > "high resolution" vs. > "low resolution"? I realize that this may boil down to semantics (e.g. some > may classify structures as > "medium resolution"), but I wanted to get an opinion from the pros. A sensible definition of high resolution would be that resolution at which the structure is computationally over-determined, which is about 2 angstroms or better for a complete data set. This would also be a sensible definition for what is called atomic resolution, because the atoms are resolved as spheres or better, so that the position is over-determined. Regards, -- Michael L. Love Ph.D Department of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry School of Medicine Johns Hopkins University 725 N. Wolfe Street Room 608B WBSB Baltimore MD 21205-2185 Interoffice Mail: 608B WBSB, SoM office: 410-614-2267 lab: 410-614-3179 fax: 410-502-6910 cell: 443-824-3451 http://www.gnu-darwin.org/ Visit proclus realm! http://proclus.tripod.com/ -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GMU/S d+@ s: a+ C++++ UBULI++++$ P+ L+++(++++) E--- W++ N- !o K- w--- !O M++@ V-- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP-- t+++(+) 5+++ X+ R tv-(--)@ b !DI D- G e++++ h--- r+++ y++++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
