Dear all,

After upgrading XDS from build date 20170601 to 20171218, I am experiencing 
severe degradation of apparent data quality reported by CORRECT for certain 
data sets. Following first indications of issues with a slightly problematic 
candidate, I went back to a previously very well-behaved test case with 
diffraction extending beyond 1.1 A. Using the same input with both program 
versions, statistics are not too different out to approx. 1.6 A, but become 
more and more divergent in outer shells. These are the values for the 
highest-resolution shell (1.10--1.16 A):

20170601:  I/sigI = 1.80; Rmeas = 59.9 %; CC(1/2) = 82.0 %
20171218:  I/sigI = 0.14; Rmeas = 506.4 %; CC(1/2) = 5.8 %

The refined cell constants are unreasonably different as well. Obviously, 
something is going awfully wrong here, presumably related to errors in geometry 
parameters (which are expected to become increasingly detrimental with 
decreasing dmin). As it turns out, geometry refinement behaves differently in 
the latest version of XDS: most notably, IDXREF no longer refines the detector 
distance by default. This is significant in this case, as in version 20170601 
the distance would shift by as much as 1.3 mm, resulting in successful 
integration and scaling. Unfortunately, re-adding POSITION refinement into 
REFINE(IDXREF) does not help, and even having it in all refinement scopes 
(IDXREF, INTEGRATE, CORRECT) only yields a limited improvement of CORRECT 
statistics.
It is worth noting that examination of a dataset from an unrelated crystal 
(dmin = 1.4 A) did not reveal such enormous differences -- in this case, 
however, the shift in detector distance applied in the old version of XDS was 
quite small (0.2 mm), which, together with the lower resolution, explains the 
absence of large discrepancies.

To sum up, I suspect that, due to recent changes to the XDS code, the 
refinement of geometry parameters is now overly restrained, resulting in 
drastic problems in cases where the detector distance is not as precise as 
desirable (and even more so at very high resolution). For such datasets, the 
new version appears to be essentially unusable (at least within the parameter 
space I have tested), and even in modest cases may often be inferior to the 
previous one. Is there an option to revert to the former behaviour?

Best regards
Oliver

================================================
  PD Dr. Oliver H. Weiergräber
  Institute of Complex Systems
  ICS-6: Structural Biochemistry
  Tel.: +49 2461 61-2028
  Fax: +49 2461 61-9540
================================================




------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
52425 Juelich
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir Dr. Karl Eugen Huthmacher
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Wolfgang Marquardt (Vorsitzender),
Karsten Beneke (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr.-Ing. Harald Bolt,
Prof. Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to