2,684
edits
MINIMUM ZETA: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
m (→An example) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
A high value (corresponding to a large blind region) is "safe" but produces lower completeness because more pixels of the detector are considered to be in the blind region. The default of 0.15 is on the safe side. I (Kay Diederichs) routinely use 0.05 now. | A high value (corresponding to a large blind region) is "safe" but produces lower completeness because more pixels of the detector are considered to be in the blind region. The default of 0.15 is on the safe side. I (Kay Diederichs) routinely use 0.05 now. | ||
Update March 2012: the default was changed to 0.05 (Version December 31, 2011) after changing the integration algorithm to deal better with reflections near the rotation axis - see [http://homes.mpimf-heidelberg.mpg.de/~kabsch/xds/html_doc/Release_Notes.html]. | |||
== How could I check if a low value of MINIMUM_ZETA is beneficial for my data reduction? == | == How could I check if a low value of MINIMUM_ZETA is beneficial for my data reduction? == | ||
| Line 19: | Line 21: | ||
We collected data at the SLS, beamline X06SA, on a MarCCD 225 detector. Below, I show the final output of CORRECT.LP and a mapping of R-factors on the surface of the detector (file rf.pck produced by XDSSTAT). | We collected data at the SLS, beamline X06SA, on a MarCCD 225 detector. Below, I show the final output of CORRECT.LP and a mapping of R-factors on the surface of the detector (file rf.pck produced by XDSSTAT). | ||
Using the default value of MINIMUM_ZETA= 0.15, one obtains in CORRECT.LP: | Using the former default value of MINIMUM_ZETA= 0.15, one obtains in CORRECT.LP (this is from a 2010 version of XDS): | ||
SUBSET OF INTENSITY DATA WITH SIGNAL/NOISE >= -3.0 AS FUNCTION OF RESOLUTION | SUBSET OF INTENSITY DATA WITH SIGNAL/NOISE >= -3.0 AS FUNCTION OF RESOLUTION | ||