reflection overlap, we should continue to use the method presently implemented
in TRUNCATE for the majority of routine structure determinations.
Cheers
-- Ian
> -Original Message-
> From: Marc SCHILTZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 10 September 2008 17:00
> To: Ian Tickle
Well, I was pointing to the Sivia & David (1994) paper because I thought
it might be helpful in the discussion about how to convert intensities
to amplitudes. The paper is probably not so well known in the PX
community, so I decided that I would advertise it on this BB. However,
since I am not one
erall
diffraction limits are roughly isotropic, in certain
resolution shells isotropy is still a bad assumption.
Phoebe
Original message
>Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:59:58 +0100
>From: Eleanor Dodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [SPAM:#] Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>To
For comparison I repeated my previous calculation using the flat
(non-Wilson) prior that you suggested (you would get the same results
using the F&W method in the limit of an infinite WDP). So now the
results are indeed totally independent of the WDP - but IMO the results
are also completely count
> -Original Message-
> From: Bart Hazes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 September 2008 23:44
> To: Ian Tickle
> Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>
>
> How a seemingly innocent question can explode ...
Well the
**
- Original Message -
From: "Ethan Merritt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
On Monday 08 September 2008 12:30:29 Phoebe Rice wrote:
Dear Experts,
At the risk o
> However, when you
> need amplitudes, truncate is the way to go.
Better is to buy a detector that records amplitudes rather then intensities:
http://shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de/SHELX/#FAQs%20smallmol
P
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08 September 2008 22:20
To: Jacob Keller
Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
I would also recommend reading of the following paper:
D.S. Sivia & W.I.F. David (1994), Acta Cryst. A50, 703-714. A
Bayesi
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 September 2008 22:20
> To: Jacob Keller
> Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>
> I would also recommend reading of the following paper:
>
> D.S. Sivia & W.I
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 September 2008 22:20
> To: Jacob Keller
> Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>
> I would also recommend reading of the following paper:
>
> D.S. Sivia & W.I.F.
> I believe also that in an earlier posting Peter Zwart said he thought
> that CNS doesn't take account of the Wilson distribution when doing its
> version of the correction; if this is true (and I have no independent
> evidence that it is since I'm not a CNS user), then the above argument
> i
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Wright
> Sent: 08 September 2008 21:29
> To: Borhani, David
> Cc: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>
> Borhani, David wrote:
> >
"Ethan Merritt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
On Monday 08 September 2008 12:30:29 Phoebe Rice wrote:
Dear Experts,
At the risk of exposing excess ignorance, truncate makes me
very nervous because I do
On Monday 08 September 2008 13:29:24 Jon Wright wrote:
> Borhani, David wrote:
> > ...
> > but I think pretty much everyone has converged on using it for the
> > past many years.
>
> Many small molecule crystallographers seem to refine on intensity and so
> avoid need this procedure.
I would ra
]
***
- Original Message -
From: "William Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jacob Keller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
It is A34: 517
htt
Borhani, David wrote:
...
but I think pretty much everyone has converged on using it for the
past many years.
Many small molecule crystallographers seem to refine on intensity and so
avoid need this procedure. Towards the end of the recent thread "Wilson
plot from truncated.mtz" it had seeme
Message - From: "Ethan Merritt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
On Monday 08 September 2008 12:30:29 Phoebe Rice wrote:
Dear Experts,
At the risk of exposing excess ignorance, truncate makes me
very n
: 847.491.2438
cel: 773.608.9185
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
- Original Message -
From: "Ethan Merritt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
On Monday 08 September 2008
On Monday 08 September 2008 12:30:29 Phoebe Rice wrote:
> Dear Experts,
>
> At the risk of exposing excess ignorance, truncate makes me
> very nervous because I don't quite get exactly what it is
> doing with my data and what its assumptions are.
>
> From the documentation:
> ==
08, 2008 3:30 PM
> To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: [ccp4bb] truncate ignorance
>
> Dear Experts,
>
> At the risk of exposing excess ignorance, truncate makes me
> very nervous because I don't quite get exactly what it is
> doing with my data and wha
Dear Experts,
At the risk of exposing excess ignorance, truncate makes me
very nervous because I don't quite get exactly what it is
doing with my data and what its assumptions are.
>From the documentation:
... the "truncate" procedure (ke
21 matches
Mail list logo
