Hi, just scanned through the article on automatic weight adjustment. If I had to summarise figures 1 and 2, I'd have to conclude that the latest weight optimization only occasionally produces better results than not doing it (fig 2); and that therefore the old optimization was considerably worse than doing nothing at all. Or have I misinterpreted it? Cheers phx On 28/07/2011 19:59, Nigel Moriarty wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I am pleased to announce the publication of the third issue of the Computational Crystallography Newsletter:
http://www.phenix-online.org/newsletter/
A listing of the articles and short communications is given below. Please note that the newsletter accepts articles of a general nature of interest to all crystallographers. Please send any articles to me at [email protected] noting that there is a Word Template on the website to streamline production.
Articles --------
Improved target weight optimization in phenix.refine Mite-y lysozyme crystal and structure
Short communications --------------------
A lightweight, versatile framework for visualizing reciprocal-space data An extremely fast spotfinder for real-time beamline applications Hints for running phenix.mr_rosetta
Cheers Nigel