Sorry, I meant "optimeze x-ray/stereochemistry weight" (I ran both stereochemistry and ADP at one point to see what the effect would be).
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Mario Sanches <mariosan@gmail.com> wrote:Did you mean to type "Optimize X-ray/Stereochemistry weight" instead?
> I am refining a low resolution structure (2.9A) using phenix.refine. As I
> continue the refinement Rwork/Rfree are dropping but my geometry
> statistics in general are very bad. My clashscore is getting worst and the
> RMS(angle) is really high. I have tried to play with the "wxc_scale"
> parameter and also ran phenix selecting the "Optimize X-ray/ADP weight"
> option. All attempts end with a RMS(angle) of ~3.8 and a Clashscore of
> ~190.
That is the option you want to use in these situations; it usually
results in much better geometry, with two caveats:
1) If the input geometry is already poor, this may result in a poor
initial guess for the weight, and the optimization will not sample the
right range.
2) Severe clashes are hard to fix automatically - the structure needs
to be repacked to fix them, which is beyond the power of our
minimizer.
One tip: always run real-space refinement in Coot when rebuilding your
model. Getting the input geometry as good as possible seems to help
phenix.refine (or any other refinement program) converge on acceptable
values.
-Nat
_______________________________________________
phenixbb mailing list
phenixbb@phenix-online.org
http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb