[ phenix 1.6.4-486 ] [ ALSO : tlsanl, refmac, etc. from ccp4 6.1.3 ] [ molscript/povscript ] the one-liner : i have some TLS tensors that sometimes do not compare at all well with refmac/anisoanl tensors. sometimes, the principal axes of a TLS tensor refines *very* far away from the center of mass(=center of reaction), or the axes from tlsanl are exceptionally small as if not scaled properly. the eigenvalues are really small too. see [*] for troubleshooting and strategy used. i suspect i am missing something. i also understand this might not be a phenix question. -bryan [*] i compared another .def that gave sensible TLS results with a different dataset/model, and my {} are all good AFAIK. anisoanl/refmac/parvati results are reasonable. the phenix refinement appears well behaved. these are all using tlsextract to get the eigenvalues/origins, and molscript to check the axes/centers of mass. input B factors are Beq unless i made an error. the tls group selections can vary - however, simple groups also can give these results. in general, using strategy (excerpt) : refine { strategy = *individual_sites individual_sites_real_space rigid_body \ *individual_adp group_adp *tls *occupancies *group_anomalous sites { individual = None torsion_angles = None rigid_body = None } adp { individual { isotropic = None anisotropic = None } group_adp_refinement_mode = *one_adp_group_per_residue \ two_adp_groups_per_residue group_selection group = None tls = "chain A and (resid 1:41 or resid 42:159 or resid 195:237 or resid 263:420)" tls = "chain A and resid 160:194" tls = "chain A and resid 245:252" } [...cut off ... ] example output of an ill-behaved S tensor from tlsanl : SCREW ROTATION AXIS ABSOLUTE POSITION (A) PITCH (A) X Y Z 1 70.667 154.197 308.627 -144.435 2 977.334 819.588******** 6222.947 3 640.7191431.084 471.341 269.382
Hi, Bryan, Do not going into details of TLS, the very first remark is that the center of reaction that characterizes the MOVEMENT of the group is NOT AT ALL the center of mass that characterizes the GROUP as it is independently of any its movement. They should not be confused. Sacha -----Message d'origine----- De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de Bryan Lepore Envoyé : mercredi 20 octobre 2010 00:01 À : [email protected] Objet : [phenixbb] refine : peculiar TLS tensors [ phenix 1.6.4-486 ] [ ALSO : tlsanl, refmac, etc. from ccp4 6.1.3 ] [ molscript/povscript ] the one-liner : i have some TLS tensors that sometimes do not compare at all well with refmac/anisoanl tensors. sometimes, the principal axes of a TLS tensor refines *very* far away from the center of mass(=center of reaction), or the axes from tlsanl are exceptionally small as if not scaled properly. the eigenvalues are really small too. see [*] for troubleshooting and strategy used. i suspect i am missing something. i also understand this might not be a phenix question. -bryan [*] i compared another .def that gave sensible TLS results with a different dataset/model, and my {} are all good AFAIK. anisoanl/refmac/parvati results are reasonable. the phenix refinement appears well behaved. these are all using tlsextract to get the eigenvalues/origins, and molscript to check the axes/centers of mass. input B factors are Beq unless i made an error. the tls group selections can vary - however, simple groups also can give these results. in general, using strategy (excerpt) : refine { strategy = *individual_sites individual_sites_real_space rigid_body \ *individual_adp group_adp *tls *occupancies *group_anomalous sites { individual = None torsion_angles = None rigid_body = None } adp { individual { isotropic = None anisotropic = None } group_adp_refinement_mode = *one_adp_group_per_residue \ two_adp_groups_per_residue group_selection group = None tls = "chain A and (resid 1:41 or resid 42:159 or resid 195:237 or resid 263:420)" tls = "chain A and resid 160:194" tls = "chain A and resid 245:252" } [...cut off ... ] example output of an ill-behaved S tensor from tlsanl : SCREW ROTATION AXIS ABSOLUTE POSITION (A) PITCH (A) X Y Z 1 70.667 154.197 308.627 -144.435 2 977.334 819.588******** 6222.947 3 640.7191431.084 471.341 269.382 _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
Hi Sacha, ( appreciate the off-list info ) thanks for the correction - that makes sense. let me try a simpler question : do the TLS results need to be transformed or scaled somehow so they are on the same basis as the ones from refmac/tlsanl/anisoanl (i know this is partially a ccp4 question)? AFAIK the L and non-interecting S axes are scaled relative to the mean-squared amplitudes. i.e. i cannot explain why i can see e.g. a clear libration or non-intersecting screws from the other programs, but not from phenix. maybe consider this tlsanl output from (practically) the same input: phenix : TLS RANGE 'A 245.' 'A 252.' ALL ORIGIN 14.019 -10.476 -35.068 T 0.2961 0.2533 0.2969 -0.0097 0.0111 0.0205 L 0.0006 0.0005 0.0006 0.0006 -0.0002 -0.0001 S 0.0058 -0.0026 -0.0027 0.0035 -0.0017 0.0011 -0.0052 0.0027 TLS CENTRE OF REACTION WRT ORTHOGONAL AXES (A) : -606.636-734.593 -54.324 refmac : TLS RANGE 'A 245.' 'A 252.' ALL ORIGIN 14.019 -10.476 -35.068 T 0.4974 0.0372 0.3453 0.0674 0.2984 0.0431 L 21.5463 29.5753 20.7545 39.3304 9.2958-11.5975 S 0.6432 1.0787 -0.1449 1.2672 2.1065 1.5489 -1.1854 -0.0349 TLS CENTRE OF REACTION WRT ORTHOGONAL AXES (A) : 13.571 -13.884 -36.275 -bryan p.s: new subscription address : slow to appear on bulletin board...?
Hi Bryan,
let me try a simpler question : do the TLS results need to be transformed or scaled somehow so they are on the same basis as the ones from refmac/tlsanl/anisoanl (i know this is partially a ccp4 question)?
I wrote most (if not all) TLS related code in phenix. Unfortunately, I can't answer your questions because I do not know which transformations the above programs do, which units, origins and scales they use, and even what they do (speaking of the last two). So, I afraid I'm useless here... I'm sure there must be a thing or a number of things somewhere like a scale factor such as units for L (degrees**2 or radians**2), or 8*pi**2*something in U conversions, or different origin, etc ... I recall I had to figure out myriads of things like this before TLS started working in phenix.refine. Typically these "obvious" details are never mentioned in general papers as probably "too technical". This is why it is rarely not tricky to jump between the programs. It's probably like if you take two different cars (different makes and models) that both function well and sound, and then swap their engines without thinking too much, then the chances are that both will stop working. Let do something practical to address this... What I can do for you is: if you clearly explain me what exactly you are trying to achieve then I just simply add the corresponding functionality to PHENIX and then you (and potentially other PHENIX users) will be able to do what you want within one self-consistent framework, and avoiding jumping between units, conventions and other hidden meanings. Of course this might take some time - from a couple of days to a week, so you would need to wait a little bit, but then you will have a tool in hands to use any time you want. So, let me know.
p.s: new subscription address : slow to appear on bulletin board...?
Not sure what you mean ? Pavel.
Hi Bryan,
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Pavel Afonine
wrote: I'm sure there must be a thing or a number of things somewhere like a scale factor such as units for L (degrees**2 or radians**2) i can't seem to find these - what ARE the units of L?
units for TLS should be the same as in Refmac or TLSANAL, if I remember it correctly because at some point I was comparing the results and making sure I get similar ones for the cases with "known" answer. Sorry, I didn't put it into the documentation, so looking at the code is the only option -:) Pavel.
participants (3)
-
Alexandre OURJOUMTSEV
-
Bryan Lepore
-
Pavel Afonine