[phenixbb] test set count question
pafonine at lbl.gov
Wed Aug 8 11:34:39 PDT 2012
I've seen files with bare F SIGF DANO SIGDANO. Not sure what Filip has.
Yes, if instructions about how to reconstitute +/- reflections are
provided then that all right.
On 8/8/12 11:26 AM, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Pavel Afonine <pafonine at lbl.gov> wrote:
>> <Fobs> or "F/SigF and DF/SigDF" are derived from Fobs(+) and Fobs(-) with
>> some information lost. That is you cannot restore the original Fobs(+) and
>> Fobs(-) from <Fobs> or from "F/SigF and DF/SigDF". phenix.refine restores
>> Fobs(+) and Fobs(-) from "F/SigF and DF/SigDF" for internal use making an
>> arbitrary decision about the sign. phenix.refine cannot handle "F/SigF and
>> DF/SigDF" and has no reason to do this.
> Does XDS (or xdsconv) not include the ISYM column? In some files, we
> get a combination of columns like this:
> F SIGF DANO SIGDANO ISYM
> which is the same thing, but the ISYM column indicates how the DANO is
> applied to the Friedel mates, meaning that we can reconstruct the
> original F+ and F-. There's nothing wrong with using these data in
> Phenix - without ISYM, however, the DANO is useless.
> phenixbb mailing list
> phenixbb at phenix-online.org
More information about the phenixbb