Hello Santhosh-- > > @Gabriel : The percent deviation seems like a good indicator for most of > the > RDC values except those very small RDC values. I am not sure if thats the > right metric over-all. In almost all the RDC's I am using, there seems to > be > 1-2 RDC's of this small magnitude. > > it depends on the molecule and alignment tensor, some proteins have dozens > very > small RDCs (e.g. if a helix is oriented at magic angle relative to the longest > alignment tesnor axis) > > @Charles : Can you please elaborate a bit more about semi-quantitative > errors, |err| .. Is that the experimental observation errors ? or the RMS > between Experimental and calculated RDC's. > > [err] must be experimental errors, they are generally inversely proportional > to > the S/N
Of course, Gabriel is correct. > > And also I have questions about modelling errors in RDC's. In the work you > have did, you used 0.26 HZ as the standard deviation for NH for synthetic > data, but when you have experimental data of magnitude 0.03 [less than the > standard deviation used in error modelling], is this approach still valid? > I'm not exactly certain to what you refer to. In the past, the RDC errors were not used for much of anything. That is changing. In particular, by default, SARDC pot uses a chi^2 target function. best regards-- Charles _______________________________________________ Xplor-nih mailing list Xplor-nih@cake.cit.nih.gov http://cake.cit.nih.gov/mailman/listinfo/xplor-nih
