chern at ualberta.ca
Tue May 5 14:14:19 PDT 2009
Thank you Nat, Pavel,
Actually, the NCS approaches a 3-fold crystallographic symmetry axis
with 3 types of protein molecules plus 2 restraint groups for DNA molecules.
The result is the same with "optimize_wxc=true optimize_wxu=true"
options, Rfree is going up without NCS by ~1.5%. Rwork is practically
Should I increase the test set (now it's 5%)? or should I leave NCS=true
for the final pdb?
Nathaniel Echols wrote:
> On May 4, 2009, at 6:48 PM, Maia Cherney wrote:
>> The resolution is 2.15 A. The NCS was always on during the refinement
>> until we got low R factors (19.2% and 21.2%). Then the NCS was turned
>> off for the final refinement and the R factors increased, which is
>> strange as they should be going down when you apply less restraints.
> This isn't necessarily true - regardless of which program you use to
> refine, R-work isn't actually the refinement target, and minimization
> algorithms aren't foolproof either. When you remove the restraints
> you are effectively decreasing the observation:parameter ratio, which
> increases the risk of overfitting. If nothing else I would expect the
> gap between Rwork and Rfree to increase, but I've also seen both
> increase when NCS restraints were removed.
> It may be possible that the NCS restraints are biasing your test set,
> leading to the suspiciously low Rfree-Rwork gap, but I thought this
> only applied when the NCS approached crystallographic symmetry, and
> there's no such thing as fivefold crystallographic symmetry.
> Hopefully someone else on the list can clarify this.
> Nathaniel Echols
> Lawrence Berkeley Lab
> NEchols at lbl.gov
> phenixbb mailing list
> phenixbb at phenix-online.org
More information about the phenixbb