inconsistency of Molprobity results between RealSpaceRefine and ValidationCryoEM

I notice inconsistencies in the Molprobity results reported for the same structure from RealSpaceRefine and from ValidationCryoEM. As an example, for bond angle restraints, RSR reports that there are four >4sigma outliers (but does not list the outliers), while ValidationCryoEM reports 0. RSR CryoEMValidation Number of restraints 13228 13228 RMS(deviation) 0.509 0.51 Max. deviation 9.997 9.998 Min. deviation 0 0 Number of outliers > 4sigma 4 0 Browsing through the .geo file, I don’t see any >4 sigma deviations among the highest residual angles, so I think this is an error. I also see small discrepancies in Ramachandran favored, rotamer outliers, and clash score which seem to come down to minuscule differences in measurements at the margins. This is for Phenix 1.21.2-5419. Happy to share files offline. -- Kevin Jude, PhD Structural Biology Research Specialist, Garcia Lab Howard Hughes Medical Institute Stanford University School of Medicine Beckman B177, 279 Campus Drive, Stanford CA 94305

Kevin
All of this arises from a simple miscommunication. The default restraints
for refinement in Phenix is the Conformation Dependent Library. It
basically changes the ideal values for the protein backbone based on the
phi/psi.angles. While Moprobity in Phenix uses the same libraries, it
appears the communication has broken so it's not using the CDL but rather
the single value restraints. As a result, .geo file (which is the gold
standard) is correct and the Molprobity is slightly wrong. As a power user
(you look in the .geo file), I suggest you check the .geo file until I
correct this.
Cheers
Nigel
---
Nigel W. Moriarty
Building 91, Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Berkeley, CA 94720-8235
Email : [email protected]
Web : CCI.LBL.gov
ORCID : orcid.org/0000-0001-8857-9464
On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 12:20 PM Kevin M Jude
I notice inconsistencies in the Molprobity results reported for the same structure from RealSpaceRefine and from ValidationCryoEM. As an example, for bond angle restraints, RSR reports that there are four >4sigma outliers (but does not list the outliers), while ValidationCryoEM reports 0.
RSR CryoEMValidation Number of restraints 13228 13228 RMS(deviation) 0.509 0.51 Max. deviation 9.997 9.998 Min. deviation 0 0 Number of outliers > 4sigma 4 0
Browsing through the .geo file, I don’t see any >4 sigma deviations among the highest residual angles, so I think this is an error.
I also see small discrepancies in Ramachandran favored, rotamer outliers, and clash score which seem to come down to minuscule differences in measurements at the margins.
This is for Phenix 1.21.2-5419. Happy to share files offline.
--
Kevin Jude, PhD
Structural Biology Research Specialist, Garcia Lab
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Stanford University School of Medicine
Beckman B177, 279 Campus Drive, Stanford CA 94305 _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Unsubscribe: phenixbb-leave@%(host_name)s

Hi Kevin, additionally, check to see if this behavior persists in the latest Phenix, say in 2.0-5824. You are using an 'ancient' version and I had an impression that I was fixing something relevant to this some time ago. Also, Nigel's CDL vs no CDL would reasoning can explain differences for bond/angle deviations but still does not explain discrepancies in other metrics (Ramachandran, clashes, rotamers). Pavel On 9/25/25 11:37, Nigel Moriarty wrote:
Kevin
All of this arises from a simple miscommunication. The default restraints for refinement in Phenix is the Conformation Dependent Library. It basically changes the ideal values for the protein backbone based on the phi/psi.angles. While Moprobity in Phenix uses the same libraries, it appears the communication has broken so it's not using the CDL but rather the single value restraints. As a result, .geo file (which is the gold standard) is correct and the Molprobity is slightly wrong. As a power user (you look in the .geo file), I suggest you check the .geo file until I correct this.
Cheers
Nigel
--- Nigel W. Moriarty Building 91, Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720-8235 Email : [email protected] Web : CCI.LBL.gov ORCID : orcid.org/0000-0001-8857-9464
On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 12:20 PM Kevin M Jude
wrote: I notice inconsistencies in the Molprobity results reported for the same structure from RealSpaceRefine and from ValidationCryoEM. As an example, for bond angle restraints, RSR reports that there are four >4sigma outliers (but does not list the outliers), while ValidationCryoEM reports 0.
RSR CryoEMValidation Number of restraints 13228 13228 RMS(deviation) 0.509 0.51 Max. deviation 9.997 9.998 Min. deviation 0 0 Number of outliers > 4sigma 4 0
Browsing through the .geo file, I don’t see any >4 sigma deviations among the highest residual angles, so I think this is an error.
I also see small discrepancies in Ramachandran favored, rotamer outliers, and clash score which seem to come down to minuscule differences in measurements at the margins.
This is for Phenix 1.21.2-5419. Happy to share files offline.
--
Kevin Jude, PhD
Structural Biology Research Specialist, Garcia Lab
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Stanford University School of Medicine
Beckman B177, 279 Campus Drive, Stanford CA 94305 _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Unsubscribe: phenixbb-leave@%(host_name)s
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Unsubscribe: phenixbb-leave@%(host_name)s

Thanks Nigel!
From: Nigel Moriarty
participants (3)
-
Kevin M Jude
-
Nigel Moriarty
-
Pavel Afonine