Thanks Kay and Graeme for inputs.
I should, nevertheless, go deeper into this. I should say that, in my experience, in some cases the effect is small, but in some others, I would consider significative. I will try to be more systematic when possible to devise situations, specially for the latter.
Yours,

Jorge

On 02/21/2017 05:00 AM, Kay Diederichs wrote:
I've also experienced this, but since the improvement is small, I did not pay much attention, and did not investigate. My hypothesis why this occurs agrees with yours. Nothing should prevent you to make use of this effect!
best,
Kay

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 08:24:58 -0300, Jorge Iulek <jiu...@gmail.com> wrote:

<html>
 <head>
   <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
     charset=ISO-8859-1">
 </head>
 <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
   <font size="+1"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Dear all,<br>
       <br>
       &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have been noticing, with many datasets, processed the duet
       xds/scale, that when one integrates to a resolution limit which
       is (a little) higher than the one used for scaling/merging, the
       statistics (and here I mean R-symm, R-meas, &lt;I/sigI&gt; and
       even CC1//2) get better (I might also advance that, in many
       cases, completeness gets a little better too).<br>
       &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Just to make clear, suppose I want to process to resolution
       x (according to any criteria/index I decide) ; suppose y is a
       little (how much is yet another good discussion) higher
       resolution, id est, numerically, x &gt; y, I get better
       statistics when I integrate up to y and scale/merge to x, rather
       than using x in both cases, therefore, its seems to be advisable
       to integrate up to y and then to scale/merge up to x. &nbsp; <br>
       &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; So the question is: why does this happen? Would this be
       related this the fact that the spot profiles gets more well
       defined? In this case, is it fair to do this and to obtain
       better data (and, I suppose, a better structural model)? In
       principle, I suppose this might be legitimate, as even CC1/2
       gets better. Has anyone else ever observed such behavior, maybe
       with other processing duets? <br>
       &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br>
       Jorge<br>
     </font></font>
 </body>
</html>
.


Reply via email to