Dear all, I have merged multiple datasets obtained from the same crystals, different spots of course, it certainly increases the signal/noise ratio and makes the resolution go higher a little bitter. But, the con is, the redundancy is increased to ~20 after I merged 6 datasets. Whereas the individual dataset has the redundancy around 3~5. Is this acceptable? Thanks! *************************************************** CPMAS Chen Research Associate University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Department of Anesthesiology ******************************************************
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:49 PM, CPMAS Chen
I have merged multiple datasets obtained from the same crystals, different spots of course, it certainly increases the signal/noise ratio and makes the resolution go higher a little bitter. But, the con is, the redundancy is increased to ~20 after I merged 6 datasets. Whereas the individual dataset has the redundancy around 3~5. Is this acceptable?
Higher redundancy is considered better, not worse. The alternative label "multiplicity" is less perjorative, and arguably more accurate. A multiplicity of 20 is unusually high, but there's nothing wrong with that, especially if it improves the quality of the data. (I think it tends to lead to an increase in R-merge, but this by itself isn't necessarily bad.) -Nat
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 14:58 -0700, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
The alternative label "multiplicity" is less perjorative, and arguably more accurate.
Except for the potential confusion with the point group multiplicity -- Oh, suddenly throwing a giraffe into a volcano to make water is crazy? Julian, King of Lemurs
participants (3)
-
CPMAS Chen -
Ed Pozharski -
Nathaniel Echols