2,684
edits
1Y13: Difference between revisions
→Could we do better?
| Line 665: | Line 665: | ||
== Could we do better? == | == Could we do better? == | ||
Yes, of course (as always). I can think of | Yes, of course (as always). I can think of four things to try: | ||
* an [[optimization]] round of running xds for the two datasets | * an [[optimization]] round of running xds for the two datasets | ||
* using a negative offset for STARTING_DOSE in XSCALE.INP, as documented in the [[XSCALE]] wiki article. | * using a negative offset for STARTING_DOSE in XSCALE.INP, as documented in the [[XSCALE]] wiki article. | ||
* use MERGE=TRUE in XDSCONV.INP. I tried it and this gives 20 solutions with CCall+CCweak > 25 out of 1000 trials, whereas MERGE=FALSE (the default) gives only 4 solutions! | |||
* adding the "secondparts" data assuming this is a longer wavelength | * adding the "secondparts" data assuming this is a longer wavelength | ||
But this time we learn that one has to take special care of the data in particular when they were measured by someone else who does not tell us everything we need to know. Second, zero-dose extrapolation made the day. | But this time we learn that one has to take special care of the data in particular when they were measured by someone else who does not tell us everything we need to know. Second, zero-dose extrapolation made the day. | ||