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