Hi Pavel,
Now that Randy sent you a reference about the effect of very weak reflections will you include the changes in the refiment procedure?
I am wondering about that because I get different maps from the phenix refinement and from the refmac refinement. In one case I see the isoalloxazine ring of the FAD cofactor flat, in the other case this ring is bent. The same story with the densities for ligands. Is it about geometry restraints or effects of exclusion of very weak reflections?
Maia
----- Original Message -----
From: Pavel Afonine
To: PHENIX user mailing list
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: [phenixbb] refinement
Hi Pei-Chun,
the target function for coordinates refinement that is used in phenix.refine is following:
T = wxc_scale * wxc * Txray + wc * Trestraints
where: wxc is determined automatically, wc =1 by default, and wxc_scale = 0.5 by default. A user can adjust wxc_scale or wc.
Responding your question about "put much more weight on geometry restraints": you can do it either by decreasing wxc_scale or by increasing wc. I would try an array of values for wxc_scale to see which one gives the best result.
Please let me know if it's still not clear or if you have any other questions!
Pavel.
On 12/10/09 7:38 AM, Pei-Chun Lin wrote:
Hi,
When talking about "put much more weight on geometry restraints to avoid overfitting", what wxc and wxu value will you suggest to use for a 4A structure?
I am working on a 3.5A structure and have no experience of adjusting weight value before. Any suggestion will be very helpful to me.
PC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:12:29 -0800
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [phenixbb] refinement
Hi,
although I've seen cases like yours when SA in Cartesian space did miracles, in many of cases modeling at 4A resolution is a tough problem.
Since clearly SA didn't work out (given R/Rfree ~ 37/50% and the starting 48/50), I would try splitting your model into rigid domains and refine each as a rigid body. Plus, I would refine one isotropic B per residue or per domain (try both). This is a few minutes to try so why don't you do so.
Also, I would still combine it (rigid body and B-factor refinement) with Cartesian SA, but I would put much more weight on geometry restraints to avoid overfitting.
As you probably aware of, in phenix.refine you can run combined refinement jobs, for example, consisting of SA, rigid body, B-factor refinement and so on. So I would recommend playing with the above suggestions to see if it works. Plus, don't forget looking at the maps - may be you manage to fit something manually.
By the way, which R-factors you get if you run:
phenix.model_vs_data data.mtz model.pdb
(phenix.model_vs_data will account for twinning (if any) using Xtriage automatically) ?
Write us if you have questions.
Good luck,
Pavel.
On 12/8/09 7:02 PM, r n wrote:
Thanks a lot. I did download the new -dev249 and did cartesian SA, R goes down to 37 but R-free (50) did not.
Any suggestions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve