Hello,
please allow me to use this prompt for my twinning-related question.
A recent version of xtriage prints this warning:

It might be worthwhile carrying out refinement with a twin specific target function.
Please note however that R-factors from twinned refinement cannot be directly
compared to R-factors without twinning, as they will always be lower when a
twin law is used. You should also use caution when interpreting the maps from
refinement, as they will have significantly more model bias.

Consider a case where specification of a twin law produces a “significant” reduction in the residuals, say between 5 and 10%-points. Maps have not revealed any additional features or model errors. Model geometry (such as fraction of residues in favored regions of the Ramachandran plot) has not improved. Should I specify the twin target during refinement?
How do my colleagues decide when to use twin refinement?
Best regards.
Wolfram Tempel

————— Forwarded message —————
From: Pavel Afonine pafonine@lbl.gov
Date: Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [phenixbb] ML with Twinning?
To: “Keller, Jacob” kellerj@janelia.hhmi.org, “phenixbb@phenix-online.org” phenixbb@phenix-online.org

Hi Jacob,

no.

There are formulas written out:

“Maximum likelihood refinement for twinned structures”:

http://phenix-online.org/newsletter/CCN_2011_01.pdf

some one needs to code it.

Pavel

---

phenixbb mailing list
phenixbb@phenix-online.org
http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
Unsubscribe: phenixbb-leave@phenix-online.org