Dear Chen, On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:05:05AM -0400, Chen Zhao wrote: > Thanks a lot for your reply! I am a little surprised to learn that the > centrosymmetry is always considered as a point groups symmetry component. > That might explain why all the anomalous data I have seen have higher Rmeas > than their native counterpart.
Somehow related: the fact that one can compute R-values ignoring anomalous or taking it into account can actually be a good thing. AIMLESS for example computes RmeasOv (ignoring anomalous) and Rmeas (keeping I+ and I- separate) - if I understand that correctly. You can use those two values as a function of resolution to see up to which resolution you have anomalous signal, ie where RmeasOv is still higher than Rmeas. It doesn't necessarily give you new information compared to CCanom or SigAno, but it is nice to have as another opinion I think. Cheers Clemens -- *************************************************************** * Clemens Vonrhein, Ph.D. vonrhein AT GlobalPhasing DOT com * * Global Phasing Ltd. * Sheraton House, Castle Park * Cambridge CB3 0AX, UK *-------------------------------------------------------------- * BUSTER Development Group (http://www.globalphasing.com) ***************************************************************
