[phenixbb] WAS: changing TLS groups mid refinement

Ed Pozharski epozh001 at umaryland.edu
Mon May 17 14:32:35 PDT 2010

On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 08:47 -0700, Pavel Afonine wrote:
> Do you have rock solid evidence that substituting missing (unmeasured)
> Fobs with 0 would be better than just using actual set (Fobs>0) in
> refinement? Or did I miss any relevant paper on this matter? I would
> appreciate if you point me out. Unless I see a clear evidence that
> this would improve things I wouldn't waste time on implementing it.
> Unfortunately I don't  have time right now for experimenting with this
> myself.


I don't think anyone (certainly not me) have ever suggested to replace
*missing* reflections with zeros.  On both occasions (now and last
December) the issue was the Fobs=0 reflections introduced by I->F
conversion of negative intensities. 


"I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling."
                               Julian, King of Lemurs

More information about the phenixbb mailing list