116
edits
Xdsstat: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Tables
mNo edit summary |
(→Tables) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* statistics: for each frame: # reflections, # misfits, I, sigma(I), I/sigma(I), fraction of reflections observed, correlation with standard profiles, R_meas and # reflections used for R_meas, # unique reflections which ''only'' occur on this frame and would thus be lost if this frame were deleted from the dataset. These lines end with " L" which may be used for "grepping" them from XDSSTAT.LP: | * statistics: for each frame: # reflections, # misfits, I, sigma(I), I/sigma(I), fraction of reflections observed, correlation with standard profiles, R_meas and # reflections used for R_meas, # unique reflections which ''only'' occur on this frame and would thus be lost if this frame were deleted from the dataset. These lines end with " L" which may be used for "grepping" them from XDSSTAT.LP: | ||
grep ' L$' XDSSTAT.LP > L | grep ' L$' XDSSTAT.LP > L | ||
* R-factors as a function of frame number difference (R<math>_d</math> , see [ | * R-factors as a function of frame number difference (R<math>_d</math> , see [https://www.biologie.uni-konstanz.de/securedl/sdl-eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpYXQiOjE2ODEyNDc2OTgsImV4cCI6MTY4MTkzODg5OCwidXNlciI6MCwiZ3JvdXBzIjpbMCwtMV0sImZpbGUiOiJmaWxlYWRtaW4vYmlvbG9naWUvYWctZGllZGVyaWNocy9wZGZzL0RpZWRlcmljaHMyMDA2X0FjdGFDcnlzdEQucGRmIiwicGFnZSI6ODI4MTV9.qLxfuLL5h1TX0knHEiArN01YRaWbfyVewDl6bv-iHdk/Diederichs2006_ActaCrystD.pdf Diederichs K. (2006) Some aspects of quantitative analysis and correction of radiation damage. Acta Cryst D62, 96-101]). These lines end with " DIFFERENCE" which may be used for "grepping" them from XDSSTAT.LP: | ||
grep DIFFERENCE XDSSTAT.LP > D | grep DIFFERENCE XDSSTAT.LP > D | ||
* R_meas as a function of the percentage of expected profile available for [[INTEGRATE|integration]] ("PEAK"), and logarithm of intensity. This table is only available for reflection files written by XDS; the information needed for the table is not in the files written by XSCALE. This table is most relevant for high-mosaicity datasets, and for datasets with few frames. <br> A bit more explanation: the number PEAK is the same as partiality. For example, reflections with PEAK of 75 are "3/4 fullies". These are "scaled up" by CORRECT, for example reflections with PEAK=75 are simply multiplied by 4/3 to recover the "full" intensity (which is written to XDS_ASCII.HKL after scaling). The same scaling-up is done for the sigmas of the reflections.<br> Of course, the PEAK value is itself a bit uncertain, and this uncertainty should in principle be taken into account when scaling-up the sigmas. This is not done since the uncertainty of PEAK is unknown.<br> The table gives (by rows), for values of PEAK from MINPK to 100, the R_meas of the reflections with that value of PEAK. Weak reflections are in the leftmost columns, and the strongest reflections are in the rightmost colums. From column to column the cutoff rises by a factor of 2. The next line then reports the number of reflections of that PEAK and intensity.<br> The idea is that e.g. if you see that strong reflections at PEAK=75 give bad R_meas values, but reflections of the same intensity (same column) give good R_meas values starting at PEAK=80, then you should/can raise MINPK to 80. | * R_meas as a function of the percentage of expected profile available for [[INTEGRATE|integration]] ("PEAK"), and logarithm of intensity. This table is only available for reflection files written by XDS; the information needed for the table is not in the files written by XSCALE. This table is most relevant for high-mosaicity datasets, and for datasets with few frames. <br> A bit more explanation: the number PEAK is the same as partiality. For example, reflections with PEAK of 75 are "3/4 fullies". These are "scaled up" by CORRECT, for example reflections with PEAK=75 are simply multiplied by 4/3 to recover the "full" intensity (which is written to XDS_ASCII.HKL after scaling). The same scaling-up is done for the sigmas of the reflections.<br> Of course, the PEAK value is itself a bit uncertain, and this uncertainty should in principle be taken into account when scaling-up the sigmas. This is not done since the uncertainty of PEAK is unknown.<br> The table gives (by rows), for values of PEAK from MINPK to 100, the R_meas of the reflections with that value of PEAK. Weak reflections are in the leftmost columns, and the strongest reflections are in the rightmost colums. From column to column the cutoff rises by a factor of 2. The next line then reports the number of reflections of that PEAK and intensity.<br> The idea is that e.g. if you see that strong reflections at PEAK=75 give bad R_meas values, but reflections of the same intensity (same column) give good R_meas values starting at PEAK=80, then you should/can raise MINPK to 80. | ||