-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06/14/2013 11:43 AM, Dirk Kostrewa wrote: > [...] The recommended procedure to include small resolution > increments in refinement to decide the high resolution cutoff is > very time-consuming. ... and very subjective: noise can look very unnoisy if you "know" what you are looking for!
Best, Tim > Am 13.06.13 17:15, schrieb Andrea Edwards: >> Hello group, I have some rather (embarrassingly) basic questions >> to ask. Mainly.. when deciding the resolution limit, which >> statistics are the most important? I have always been taught that >> the highest resolution bin should be chosen with I/sig no less >> than 2.0, Rmerg no less than 40%, and %Completeness should be as >> high as possible. However, I am currently encountered with a set >> of statistics that are clearly outside this criteria. Is it >> acceptable cut off resolution using I/sig as low as 1.5 as long >> as the completeness is greater than 75%? Another way to put >> this.. if % completeness is the new criteria for choosing your >> resolution limit (instead of Rmerg or I/sig), then what >> %completeness is too low to be considered? Also, I am aware that >> Rmerg increases with redundancy, is it acceptable to report Rmerg >> (or Rsym) at 66% and 98% with redundancy at 3.8 and 2.4 for the >> highest resolution bin of these crystals? I appreciate any >> comments. -A > - -- - -- Dr Tim Gruene Institut fuer anorganische Chemie Tammannstr. 4 D-37077 Goettingen GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFRuuj8UxlJ7aRr7hoRAqsUAKDzjvv7cwsdqr3r3sPWy5efUQrpTwCgyC+k K9UZDrAIwwRN01kAF+dKCGw= =HbRH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
