[phenixbb] R-factor difference between phenix and sftools
pafonine at lbl.gov
Mon Oct 13 14:16:23 PDT 2014
Interesting.. I use this formula to calculate R-factor between two data
sets when I cannot choose which one to call "Fobs" and which one to call
"Fcalc". But clearly, this is not exact what we call R-factor.
On 10/13/14 2:02 PM, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Nathaniel Echols <nechols at lbl.gov
> <mailto:nechols at lbl.gov>> wrote:
> In the default phenix.refine output MTZ, the "F-obs" column will
> not be scaled to F-model. My guess is that your input data have
> already been placed on an absolute scale based on the Wilson
> statistics, so the results are reasonably close, but when I tried
> using the same commands on an XFEL dataset I got an R-factor of 192.
> Okay, this statement is at least partially incorrect - your data are
> clearly on the correct scale in the phenix.refine output file, but the
> data in the file I used are not. (I'm going to blame this on the
> weirdness of certain XFEL data.)
> However, I did eventually figure out the problem: SFTOOLS is using a
> different formula for the R-factor. If you give it the command
> "correl help", it will include this:
> RFACT Rfactor in percent
> ( 200*Sum|col1-col2|/sum(col1+col2) )
> Which disagrees with our source code, and the Rupp textbook, and Kay's
> wiki, and Wikipedia, all of which use sum(col1) as the denominator
> (assuming col1 == F-obs, but in our code it's written more
> generally). In other words: the R-factors from SFTOOLS cannot be
> meaningfully compared to the R-factors from refinement.
> phenixbb mailing list
> phenixbb at phenix-online.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the phenixbb