<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    At present it uses actual map given at input, not map coefficients.
    Several people requested to add a functionality so that it can use
    map coefficients too, I will add this once I get a chance.<br>
    <br>
    Pavel<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/19/15 5:27 AM, Smith Liu wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
      cite="mid:616a1e7b.11303.14d6c24e60f.Coremail.smith_liu123@163.com"
      type="cite">
      <div
        style="line-height:1.7;color:#000000;font-size:14px;font-family:Arial">
        <div>Dear Pavel,</div>
        <div> </div>
        <div>Can phenix.map_comparison be used to compare CCP4 map and
          mtz map? How to input map files in order to use this command?</div>
        <div> </div>
        <div>Smith</div>
        <div><br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
        </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        At 2015-05-19 13:25:28, "Pavel Afonine" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pafonine@lbl.gov">&lt;pafonine@lbl.gov&gt;</a>
        wrote:<br>
        <blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;
          border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px;
          border-left-style: solid;" id="isReplyContent"> Yes:
          phenix.map_comparison .<br>
          <br>
          Pavel<br>
          <br>
          <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/16/15 12:28 PM, Murpholino
            Peligro wrote:<br>
          </div>
          <blockquote
cite="mid:CAMdBu0WEuXgc+yGmJn=cABpkHgLbfAZyHJkr60efy1zAhRQx4Q@mail.gmail.com"
            type="cite">
            <div dir="ltr">So...Is there a tool/program/formula to get
              equivalent sigma levels between maps so they can be
              compared?<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
              <div class="gmail_quote">2015-05-15 11:37 GMT-05:00 Pavel
                Afonine <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a
                    href="mailto:pafonine@lbl.gov" target="_blank"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">pafonine@lbl.gov</a>&gt;</span>:<br>
                <blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;
                  padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204,
                  204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style:
                  solid;" class="gmail_quote">Hi Mohamed,<br>
                  <br>
                  this is not a simple topic.. Two texts I suggest to
                  have a look at are listed below I'm sure there are
                  more). They may not give you a quick solution but
                  perhaps will explain the issues.<br>
                  <br>
                  Acta Cryst. (2014). D70, 2593-2606<br>
                  Metrics for comparison of crystallographic maps<br>
                  <br>
                  Acta Cryst. (2015). D71, 646-666.<br>
                  FEM: feature-enhanced map<br>
                  <br>
                  In a very nutshell,<br>
                  <br>
                  - "1 sigma (or any other x sigma) level for one map
                  may not be the same as 1 sigma (or any other x sigma)
                  level for another map";<br>
                  - Think of "global vs local". Somehow you need to
                  quantify map quality locally.<br>
                  - Map correlation (RSCC or map CC, for alternative
                  names) may be a misleading metric is used without
                  care: for example, two poor but similar map may give
                  you high CC.<br>
                  <br>
                  All the best,<br>
                  Pavel
                  <div>
                    <div class="h5"><br>
                      <br>
                      On 5/15/15 9:10 AM, mohamed noor wrote:<br>
                      <blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;
                        padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204,
                        204, 204); border-left-width: 1px;
                        border-left-style: solid;" class="gmail_quote">
                        Dear all<br>
                        <br>
                        Is there a single (or a few) metrics that can be
                        used to quantitatively assess map quality
                        instead of looking at each one in Coot? For
                        example, I want to compare the effect of having
                        low completeness in the low resolution shells.<br>
                        <br>
                        Thanks.<br>
                      </blockquote>
                      <br>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                  _______________________________________________<br>
                  phenixbb mailing list<br>
                  <a href="mailto:phenixbb@phenix-online.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phenixbb@phenix-online.org</a><br>
                  <a
                    href="http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb</a><br>
                  Unsubscribe: <a
                    href="mailto:phenixbb-leave@phenix-online.org"
                    target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">phenixbb-leave@phenix-online.org</a><br>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <br>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
          <br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      <br>
      <span title="neteasefooter"><span id="netease_mail_footer"></span></span>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>