On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:28:05PM +0530, Shipra Bijpuria wrote: > I would first look at the dataset stats and define a resolution range > mainly based on I/sigI >1 and cc1/2 >0.5. Based on this, would take the > good resolution datasets only.
Some probably obvious word of caution here: these (quite sensible) suggestions will depend hugely on factors like (1) binning, (2) definition of a particular data quality metric and sometimes (3) the treatment of Friedel pairs in computing these values. When comparing seemingly identical metrics (as labelled) from different programs/pipelines you have to be careful and aware of the various differences in implementation. If one is sure that these values are computed in the same way with the same binning, comparisons will be possible, yes. Also, a lot (most?) datasets are poorly described with a single resolution value, even it it is rather convenient for sorting ;-) Just thought to add this for the record for future generations of ccp4bb-archive searching crystallographers ;-) Clemens ######################################################################## 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/
