Dear Kay, do have any more information or would you mind explaining a bit more 
what changes in the XDS code led to these significantly different statistics in 
the different XDS versions?
Thanks,John



    On Wednesday, October 2, 2024 at 02:35:25 PM CDT, Kay Diederichs 
<kay.diederi...@uni-konstanz.de> wrote:  
 
 Dear Yimin,

similar shortcomings were observed with other datasets with XDS VERSION Jun 30, 
2024 that was posted on July 23 at 
https://xds.mr.mpg.de/html_doc/downloading.html . I am sorry for that! The 
testing of that version had not uncovered this problem.

Corrected binaries were posted today at that site, and my (admittedly limited) 
testing shows them to be as good as, or better than the old (2023) version. 
Please install and use these binaries.

That previous version was made available for comparison purposes as 
XDS_old.tar.gz, with expiration date 31 Mar 2025, for Linux; download link is 
at https://xds.mr.mpg.de/ .

Hope this helps,
Kay

On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 16:30:55 +0200, Yimin Hu <yimin...@tuebingen.mpg.de> wrote:

>Dear colleagues,
>
>I ran into a problem when I reprocessed a dataset after switching to XDS 
>VERSION Jun 30, 2024.
>
>Processing the dataset with the old XDS I ended up with these statistics:
>
>RESOLUTION    NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS    COMPLETENESS R-FACTOR  R-FACTOR 
>COMPARED I/SIGMA  R-meas  CC(1/2)  Anomal  SigAno  Nano
>  LIMIT    OBSERVED  UNIQUE  POSSIBLE    OF DATA  observed  expected           
>                           Corr
>    5.78      16747    1239      1253      98.9%      7.4%      8.5%    16745  
>29.13      7.6%    99.9*    2    0.740    465
>    4.10      29921    2220      2226      99.7%      8.9%      8.7%    29921  
>28.12      9.2%    99.8*    9    0.897    951
>    3.35      40065    2848      2849      100.0%      10.1%      9.3%    
>40065  23.84    10.4%    99.8*    3    0.841    1264
>    2.91      44213    3390      3390      100.0%      13.5%    13.0%    44213 
> 14.61    14.1%    99.8*  -10    0.717    1537
>    2.60      54235    3827      3827      100.0%      24.6%    28.4%    54235 
>   9.08    25.5%    99.5*  -15    0.611    1758
>    2.38      62062    4270      4270      100.0%      42.5%    57.6%    62062 
>   5.40    44.1%    98.8*  -10    0.565    1973
>    2.20      62076    4589      4589      100.0%      76.3%    111.3%    
>62076    3.06    79.2%    97.0*    -7    0.549    2138
>    2.06      67437    4941      4941      100.0%    116.7%    176.7%    67437 
>   2.03    121.3%    89.2*    -8    0.541    2311
>    1.94      70590    5226      5268      99.2%    232.1%    363.5%    70579  
>  0.93    241.2%    64.3*    -4    0.511    2451
>    total      447346  32550    32613      99.8%      12.7%    14.4%  447333   
> 9.30    13.2%    99.9*    -5    0.621  14848
>
>
>Reprocessing the dataset with the new version I ended up with the following 
>statistics though I kept the parameters essentially the same:
>
> RESOLUTION    NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS    COMPLETENESS R-FACTOR  R-FACTOR 
> COMPARED I/SIGMA  R-meas  CC(1/2)  Anomal  SigAno  Nano
>  LIMIT    OBSERVED  UNIQUE  POSSIBLE    OF DATA  observed  expected           
>                           Corr
>
>    5.80      16932    1220      1240      98.4%      7.2%      8.5%    16930  
>28.65      7.5%    99.9*  -39    0.502    459
>    4.12      29888    2207      2209      99.9%      9.9%      9.3%    29888  
>25.46    10.3%    99.7*    0    0.707    945
>    3.37      34817    2796      2836      98.6%      14.9%    11.7%    34817  
>17.63    15.5%    99.7*    15*  0.947    1244
>    2.92      42552    3268      3347      97.6%      24.5%    23.5%    42552  
>10.04    25.5%    99.6*  -12    0.583    1481
>    2.61      54120    3811      3816      99.9%      56.8%    69.2%    54120  
>  6.14    58.9%    98.2*  -14    0.543    1750
>    2.38      60922    4173      4221      98.9%    358.4%    464.1%    60922  
>  2.93    371.4%    93.7*  -18    0.421    1897
>    2.21      52076    3861      4566      84.6%    -99.9%    -99.9%    52076  
>  0.00    -99.9%    66.9*  -37    0.306    1566
>    2.06      40823    3045      4911      62.0%    -99.9%    -99.9%    40823  
>  0.00    -99.9%    33.3*  -39    0.196    1047
>    1.95      34764    2526      5227      48.3%    -99.9%    -99.9%    34764  
>  0.00    -99.9%    14.7*  -48    0.072    585
>    total      366894  26907    32373      83.1%      28.2%    29.1%  366892   
> 7.57    29.2%    99.8*  -16    0.493  10974
>
>I tried to tweak several parameters, especially for background subtraction, 
>but it didn't really help. It would be great if you could give me some 
>suggestions. Thank you in advance!
>
>Best,
>Yimin
>
>
>--
>Yimin Hu 
>(Pronouns: she/her)
>PhD Student
>Department of Protein Evolution
>Max Planck Institute for Biology, Tübingen
>
>########################################################################
>
>To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>
>This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing 
>list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at 
>https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list 
hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at 
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
  

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list 
hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at 
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

Reply via email to