CC1/2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "Examples for citations from papers using (possibly among other criteria) CC<sub>1/2</sub> and/or the paired refinement method (reference below) for finding the high-resolution...") |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
P.A. Karplus and K. Diederichs (2012) Linking Crystallographic Model and Data Quality. Science ''336'', 1030-1033 | [http://science.sciencemag.org/content/336/6084/1030.full P.A. Karplus and K. Diederichs (2012) Linking Crystallographic Model and Data Quality. Science ''336'', 1030-1033] | ||
Revision as of 08:28, 23 April 2016
Examples for citations from papers using (possibly among other criteria) CC1/2 and/or the paired refinement method (reference below) for finding the high-resolution cutoff.
- "In choosing our highest-resolution cutoff we chose shells, which still fulfil CC1/2 (ref. 57) >25% and I/σ(I)greater than or equal to 0.5 and which were supported by our results from the paired refinement method (ref. 57). Choosing a lower resolution cutoff did not improve the overall quality of the maps." Models were refined at 6.0 and 3.4 Å, respectively [1].