1,332
edits
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Question on CCP4BB (slightly edited): | == Question on CCP4BB (slightly edited): == | ||
The data I am working on has a strong translation vector. | The data I am working on has a strong translation vector (this can be found out e.g. using [http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/dist/html/sfcheck.html sfcheck]). | ||
On the cumulative intensity distribution plot, the theor and obser curves | On the cumulative intensity distribution plot, the theor and obser curves | ||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
What does this mean? | What does this mean? | ||
Answer (slightly edited): | == Answer (slightly edited): == | ||
A normal data set has a unimodal intensity distribution with a predictable shape (for formulas and plots, see [[Centric and acentric reflections]]). When there is twinning the distribution remains unimodal but becomes sharper and this is picked up in the twinning analysis. When there is pseudo-translational symmetry, as you indicate you have, then the intensity distribution becomes bimodal with one set of reflections systematically strengthened and another systematically weakened. This makes the whole distribution broader, just the opposite of what twinning does, and therefore shows up as "negative twinning" in the analysis. | A normal data set has a unimodal intensity distribution with a predictable shape (for formulas and plots, see [[Centric and acentric reflections]]). When there is [[twinning]] the distribution remains unimodal but becomes sharper and this is picked up in the twinning analysis. When there is pseudo-translational symmetry, as you indicate you have, then the intensity distribution becomes bimodal with one set of reflections systematically strengthened and another systematically weakened. This makes the whole distribution broader, just the opposite of what twinning does, and therefore shows up as "negative twinning" in the analysis. |