21
edits
R-factors: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Enclosed the equations in dashed boxes to make things clearer - let me know if this doesn't work well!
(Enclosed the equations in dashed boxes to make things clearer - let me know if this doesn't work well!) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
=== Data quality indicators === | === Data quality indicators === | ||
In the following, all sums over hkl extend only over unique reflections with more than one observation! | In the following, all sums over hkl extend only over unique reflections with more than one observation! | ||
* R<sub>sym</sub> and R<sub>merge</sub> | * R<sub>sym</sub> and R<sub>merge</sub> - the formula for both is: | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
R = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | R = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
where <math>\langle I_{hkl}\rangle</math> is the average of symmetry- (or Friedel-) related observations of a unique reflection. | where <math>\langle I_{hkl}\rangle</math> is the average of symmetry- (or Friedel-) related observations of a unique reflection. | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
It can be shown that this formula results in higher R-factors when the redundancy is higher. In other words, low-redundancy datasets appear better than high-redundancy ones, which obviously violates the intention of having an indicator of data quality! | It can be shown that this formula results in higher R-factors when the redundancy is higher. In other words, low-redundancy datasets appear better than high-redundancy ones, which obviously violates the intention of having an indicator of data quality! | ||
* Redundancy-independant version of the above: | * Redundancy-independant version of the above: | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
R_{meas} = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{n}{n-1} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | R_{meas} = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{n}{n-1} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
which unfortunately results in higher (but more realistic) numerical values than R<sub>sym</sub> / R<sub>merge</sub> | which unfortunately results in higher (but more realistic) numerical values than R<sub>sym</sub> / R<sub>merge</sub> | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
for intensities use | for intensities use | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
R_{p.i.m.} (or R_{mrgd-I}) = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | R_{p.i.m.} (or R_{mrgd-I}) = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert I_{hkl,j}-\langle I_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}I_{hkl,j}} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
and similarly for amplitudes: | and similarly for amplitudes: | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
R_{mrgd-F} = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert F_{hkl,j}-\langle F_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}F_{hkl,j}} | R_{mrgd-F} = \frac{\sum_{hkl} \sqrt \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^{n} \vert F_{hkl,j}-\langle F_{hkl}\rangle\vert}{\sum_{hkl} \sum_{j}F_{hkl,j}} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
with <math>\langle F_{hkl}\rangle</math> defined analogously as <math>\langle I_{hkl}\rangle</math>. | with <math>\langle F_{hkl}\rangle</math> defined analogously as <math>\langle I_{hkl}\rangle</math>. | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
=== Model quality indicators === | === Model quality indicators === | ||
* R and R<sub>free</sub> : the formula for both is | * R and R<sub>free</sub> : the formula for both is | ||
<math> | <math> | ||
R=\frac{\sum_{hkl}\vert F_{hkl}^{obs}-F_{hkl}^{calc}\vert}{\sum_{hkl} F_{hkl}^{obs}} | R=\frac{\sum_{hkl}\vert F_{hkl}^{obs}-F_{hkl}^{calc}\vert}{\sum_{hkl} F_{hkl}^{obs}} | ||
</math> | </math> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||